sfjp330's past comments

  • 0

    sfjp330

    HansaramJan. 17, 2015 - 04:04AM JST Cross examination doesn't make any sense because there aren't enough witnesses who are alive for one thing, and the surviving ones are elderly by now. Not to mention it happen very long time ago.

    There were many chances for cross examination in the 70's, but they didn't. In the early 70's, over 120 surviving comfort women, filed a lawsuit against their own South Korean government to reclaim, they say, human dignity and proper compensation. At that time, the suit came as embarrassment for the South Korean government. The women claim the South Korean government trained them and worked with pimps to run a sex trade through the 1960s and 1970s for U.S. troops, encouraged women to work as prostitutes and violated their human rights. The U.S. military in South Korea was aware of reports of the lawsuit. The South Korean government was desperate to keep U.S. troops in the 60's after war with North Korea and wanted the women to serve as patriots. These women were treated as marketable item used to boost a post-war economy. In the lawsuit, they claim Korean government ran classes for them in code of behavior and praised them for earning dollars when South Korea was poor.

    Posted in: Japan asks U.S. publisher to change 'sex slave' reference in textbook

  • 2

    sfjp330

    avigatorJan. 14, 2015 - 08:20AM JSTI agree with Smith snd Bertie. Without a sincere apology backed-up with concrete actions, there can be no progress.

    I suspect China will never be satisfied with any apology, and they are happy to keep rejecting apologies and pressing for new apologies because they can turn this position into a popular one among the people in their countries. While recognizing Japan’s guilt in this matter, we also need to recognize the political posturing on the parts of China, Korea, and others who want to keep this issue fresh and unresolved for the purpose of personal political gain.

    Posted in: China bristles at Japanese defense minister's remarks

  • -1

    sfjp330

    EthanWilber Jan. 14, 2015 - 07:55AM JST The reality is that Japan has neither the capabilities (weaponry and manpower) nor financial means to fight a war with its bigger neighbor.

    If your assumption is correct, both countries will be in no win situation. You have to remember that China and Japan has over $345 billion dollars in annual bilateral trade and they have alot to lose if they cannot figure out diplomatically. The Japan's current nationalism rise is more of a preception than a reality. In less than two decades, China will be importing 80 percent of her oil needs, and they will continue to have problems finding new source of energy. China with the energy shortage, will most likely be much more assertive around the East and South China Seas, and around the world, and conflicts will most likely happen unless China improve it's diplomacy.

    In the case of China, of course, the U.S. faces far less of a security threat than it did from the Soviet Union. Today, U.S. dwarfs China militarily in both nuclear and conventional forces. We all know that security conflicts continues to create serious tensions between the U.S. and China. However, China is the largest growth market in the world for U.S. goods and services. Trade with China, the U.S. export market has helped U.S. recovery from the financial crisis, and the future improve relations will remain top priority for both countries.

    Posted in: China bristles at Japanese defense minister's remarks

  • 5

    sfjp330

    HotmailJan. 14, 2015 - 07:30AM JST The 1965 treaty has no effect on SK's negative feelings when Japanese leaders and its people claim the sex slaves didn't exist.

    I wonder why. Korean people didn't even know that Japan paid millions back in 1965 until early 2000's. They didn't care for their own people. The conscripted Korean workers who were supposed to get the settlement money never received a dime from their own Korean goverment.

    Posted in: S Korea's Park says she is not opposed to talks with Abe

  • 4

    sfjp330

    If Korea had agreed back in 1965 for Japan to handle individual compensation, as Japan had first suggested, Japan would have immediately publicized, and given claimants a deadline by which to submit claims with substantiating evidence. Japan would have honored the claim. But based on the treaty, it was up to the South Korean government to set up these measures. the South Korean government did not take sufficient interests in its people such as comfort women who actually suffered from the colonial times, but that was the responsibility of their own goverment. Japan made reparations in good faith to the Korean government instead of to individuals because that’s the way the Korean government wanted it. The Korean government was supposed to pay the individual reparations. Even if comfort women reparation was included in the 1965 treaty, the Korean goverment would've kept the money anyway. It was not Japan’s fault that Park Chung-hee used the money for infrastructure instead. Many Koreans for years didn’t even know that Japan paid reparations.

    Posted in: S Korea's Park says she is not opposed to talks with Abe

  • 0

    sfjp330

    ICJ means nothing. Regardless if Japan or China went to ICJ, there is no guarantee that loser of the case will not follow the ruling that was not in their favor. Nobody is going to enforce the ruling anyway. So what does it matter? What is important the most for Japanese or Chinese politicians is the public opinion, and they will not respect the ruling that is not favorable on the sovereignty of Senkaku/Daiyou. So your back to square one.

    Posted in: China bristles at Japanese defense minister's remarks

  • 0

    sfjp330

    Senkaku/Daioyu islands were transferred to Japan in terms of “administrative rights.” The U.S. clearly avoided the term “sovereignty” when returning these islands in 1972. The phrase reflects in part the ambiguous status of the Senkaku/Daioyu Islands. The Senkaku/Daioyu Islands were not part of the Ryukyu Kingdom originally. In addition, given the political environment of the Cold War the special proximity of these islands to the PRC gave them a special status in the eyes of the U.S. Perhaps the U.S. wished to carve out a special political space for those islands. That phrase “administrative rights” with regards to the islands deserves careful consideration. One might ask what exactly the difference is between “administrative rights” and sovereignty or ownership. In what exact sense does an island belong to a nation and who, ultimately does that nation belong to?

    The question must be raised if it is equitable to apply western influenced methods to determine the ownership of the islands. The Chinese distrusts the modern concept of international law. For Chinese, the occupation of terra nullius in 1895 is regarded as a disguised way of aggression. Despite the Chinese stance of distrust, it may be known that China has assimilated their legal framework to almost all western titles of territory. Without a doubt, it was the Chinese who at first discovered the islands. The Japanese even do not dare to call into question this historical facts. The discovery has been sufficient for a title in the 16th century, one needs to adhere to the rules set up by the international tribunals.

    Posted in: China bristles at Japanese defense minister's remarks

  • -12

    sfjp330

    smithinjapan Jan. 10, 2015 - 09:18AM JST I find it sad how easily many Japanese politicians, so-called historians, and lawmakers, as well as people who have lapped up their garbage, will say that soldiers and women who have come forward are 'liars' and 'have no proof' and insist they themselves, who were never here, are correct (despite having no proof themselves except 'indepenedent research' or what have you).

    But why this was not a issue for South Korea for almost three decades from 1966 to early 1990's when most of these survivors were still alive? If the issue of comfort women was so important to them, don't you think the South Korean goverment would've acted much sooner and brought attention to Japan? Point is, South Korean goverment couldn't care less about these women for a long time, as long as Japanese goverment paid their millions. The fault also lies on the South Korean goverment, and Park should acknowledge this.

    Posted in: Ex-reporter files lawsuit over comfort women stories

  • 0

    sfjp330

    nigelboy Jan. 10, 2015 - 08:30AM JST China and South Korea are just two of over 40 Asian nations. They (the other Asian nations) moved on and their views of Japan is very positive.

    Japan bought some of the countries by making a payment. Sure, Japan has been the top ODA donor country to the Philippines since long time ago. But if you talk to many of the older generation, they still have bitterness toward the Japanese brutality. It's just that Philippines is a poor country, and they are bowing to handouts from Japan. It's about survival for them. If you remember over 1,000,000 Filipinos were killed during the WWII.

    Posted in: Abe says he will stick to past apologies in new WWII statement

  • 1

    sfjp330

    bass4funk Jan. 10, 2015 - 03:57AM JST I know for Dems they want huge tax increases and both parties haven't done a good job when it comes to this issue,

    The historical record shows, from economic growth and job creation to stock market performance and just about every other indicator of the health of American capitalism, the modern U.S. economy has almost always done better under Democratic presidents. Despite GOP mythology to the contrary, America generally gained more jobs and grew faster when taxes were higher (even much higher) and income inequality lower.

    Posted in: New Republican leader, Obama on course for showdowns

  • 1

    sfjp330

    nigelboy Jan. 10, 2015 - 06:52AM JST Germany lacks the bilateral/multi lateral treaties where such wartime compensation issues are still outstanding. (Greece, for example). Furthermore, Germany's 'issues' and monetary compensations are almost exclusively for the Holocause victims and very little is addressed to the war damage to other nations.

    Japan’s direct compensation payments both to war victims and their heirs have totaled only $1 billion. This contrasts remarkably with Germany’s record. The compensation figures from a decade ago, Germany’s payments to victims and their heirs had exceeded $70 billion. The contrast is all the more remarkable for the fact that Imperial Japan’s victims outnumbered those of the Nazis by at least three to one. The truth is that most of Japan’s victims, including millions in China, have not received a penny. And in the small minority of cases in which compensation has been paid, the sums have been laughable.

    Posted in: Abe says he will stick to past apologies in new WWII statement

  • 3

    sfjp330

    Heckleberry Jan. 09, 2015 - 07:18AM JST But no, every now and then he drops hints he thinks Japan did no wrong, were no worse than any other country, and that he thinks evidence of Japanese war crimes is unreliable etc.

    What this shows is just how little Japan has changed over the last 70 years. You don't see U.S. running around and pretending Hiroshima and Nagasaki never happened do you? Japan has never come to grips with its actions and has deliberately refused to face them. Germany, at least, went through such self examination after WWII, and indeed, repentance, that its Nazi past, though not erased, no longer strongly stains the nation of today. Indeed, Germans today have understood their special, historical obligation to face their past honestly. Japan is responsible for at least as many deaths as the Nazis. It's many years of atrocities: concentration camps, its bio-war experiments on Chinese civilians, its deliberate programs of starvation and murder of prisoners, the rapacious killings of conquered cities and their peoples. This and more all swept under the Japan's nationalist rug without even the barest pretense of acknowledgement that they ever occurred.

    The basic Japanese attitude towards the war seems to be, “Ok, we are super-peace-loving and were reluctantly forced into war, but only because the U.S. bullied us, and we had really good intentions for the rest of Asia. A few bad things happened, but that’s what happens in war, and did you know that Japan suffered a lot, too and even got nuked, and Japan's attitude is that "we are victims too". We’re sorry we fought the war, but anyway most of those atrocities probably didn’t happen or were exaggerated anyway so were not really all that sorry.” Following the lead from their political masters, Japan's education bureaucrats began to censor history books for schoolchildren to prevent them learning the truth about Japan's military aggression between 1931 to 1945, and the many horrifying atrocities that were committed by Japanese during the course of that military aggression.

    If Japanese schoolchildren are told anything at all about the Pacific War, it is usually in a false context where the U.S., Britain and the Netherlands are dishonestly accused of "forcing" Japan to wage a defensive war to obtain supplies of oil and rubber. The schoolchildren are not told in official history textbooks that oil and rubber were withheld from Japan in an effort to persuade Japan to halt its brutal and unprovoked war against China. The children are not permitted to learn in detail their goverment approved history books about the slaughter of millions of prisoners of war and captive civilians by the Japanese military.

    Posted in: Abe says he will stick to past apologies in new WWII statement

  • 1

    sfjp330

    nigelboy Jan. 09, 2015 - 07:11AM JST Better question is, why doesn't China build the gas field on the Japanese side of the median line is they were so confident of their claim?

    They don't need to. China built its drilling platforms on what Japan recognizes as Chinese-controlled waters, but they could suck up gas that sits under the Japanese side. If you didn't know, there is no boundaries below the ground.

    Posted in: Australians reject siding with Japan against China in island dispute: survey

  • 0

    sfjp330

    Kazuaki ShimazakiJan. 08, 2015 - 01:16PM JST @sfjp330 First, you seem to be drinking down the Chinese claim straight down.

    If Japan has definite ownership of Senkaku/Daioyu islands without doubt, why would Japan offer to explore resources jointly with China? If Japan owns it, they didn't need to ask China. It shows Japan has a weak claim and they know it. The solution to the competing claims emerged in 2008, when Japan and China reached a principled consensus on joint development of disputed area that includes the potentially gas-rich Chunxiao/Shirakaba field. However, the 2010 ramming of Japanese Coast Guard cutters by a Chinese fishing boat and the subsequent arrest of the Chinese captain by the Japanese, have halted all movement toward formalizing the 2008 consensus.

    Posted in: Australians reject siding with Japan against China in island dispute: survey

  • -1

    sfjp330

    nigelboy Jan. 08, 2015 - 10:42AM JST Of course they did. The mandatory draft system for the Korean peninsula was enacted in late 1944 and they saw no action. Prior to that, it was strictly voluntary.

    Korea was Japan's colony from 1910 to 1945. If you wanted to survive, Korean people had no choice but to follow the Japan military leaders words. You can call it voluntary, but if any Koreans spoke against Japan or not follow instructions, your gone. What choice did Koreans have at that time? Not much different than the Jews. There was 35 years of abuse and brutal killings. Why do you think anger at Japan still runs deep in Korea? The abuses by Japan during its colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula is well documented of atrocities including mass killings of Korean civilians and human experimentation.

    Posted in: Abe says he will stick to past apologies in new WWII statement

  • 1

    sfjp330

    Michelle Li Jan. 08, 2015 - 07:39AM JST Yes,Japan lost 200,000 people because of the bombing. Well,China lost 7million! Family members were separated and killed by the Japanese people back then,women were rapped,millions of people were buried Alive. Not just that, they Also shot people around the streets randomly, do experiment with a person alive. These were just some examples of what they did. United States and Japan teach all this in their textbook and yet China does.

    I realize Japan did many bad things during 1931-45 to their neighboring countries, especially China. However, do Chinese study their own history too? The fact remains that Mao's regime was responsible for death of over 50 million Chinese people.

    Posted in: Chinese ask: Why doesn’t Japan hate America for dropping the A-bombs?

  • -3

    sfjp330

    Kazuaki ShimazakiJan. 07, 2015 - 05:07PM JST Anybody that wants to write a thesis on the Senkaku Islands is strongly tempted to take China's side, because Japan's case is simple and grounded in Modern International Law - it would be over in a few pages, while reviewing China's countering attempt would cover countless documents which will expand the paper to a couple of hundred pages.

    Until 1900, Japan refer to the islands around Taiwan with Chinese names. Why suddenly Diaoyu/Senkaku became terra nullius after 1894 when Japan annexed Taiwan and other islands? Clearly, the exercise was to pre-empt any counterclaims by China or to legalize what they were stealing Japan surveyed the islands for 10 years and determined that they were uninhabited. That being the case, in 1895 it erected a sovereignty marker that formally incorporated the islands into Japanese territory.

    Before Japan defeated China in 1894, Japan went surveying the islands in the East China Sea. the Chinese named since Ming period as the Diaoyu centuries back. Therefore, in 1884 Japan took an interest on Diaoyu ten years before she defeated China in 1894 in the First Sino-Japanese War. China used it as a marker in its route from Fuzhou to Naha, now in present-day Okinawa, and where occasion demands, its fisherman would seek temporary refuge from the raging sea storms, thus its name Diaoyu means “Fishing Platform.”

    It just does not make sense that the Japanese, with nothing to gain, would spend ten years meticulously surveying the islands before 1894. Oil or gas had not been discovered or reported to be around the vicinity for Japan to be interested, at that point of time the need for fossil energy was not critical to Japan. Why would Japan embark on a non-viable survey for ten years to determine without any doubt that Diaoyu was terra nullius? If, as Japan claims, the ten years spent surveying the islands would mean they were likely to encounter Chinese fisherman taking shelter there in a storm and not actually terra nullius, would Japan have accepted that the islands were visited by Chinese fishermen?

    Then why Japan did not lay claim to Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands before 1894 the year Japan vanquished Qing China’s navy? Why wait until 1896 after Japan forced an unequal Treaty of Shimonoseki on China in 1895 to pass an imperial decree to make Diaoyu a Japanese territory? Surely it is obvious that Japan had not surveyed Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands to verify that it is no man’s land or uninhabited, because Japan could not as Japan knew the islands belong to China.

    That accounts why Japan could not claim to discover the islands unless by outright war of conquest, which Japan did in 1894, and issued an imperial decree in 1896 to make Diaoyu a part of the Japanese Empire after the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki. Thus it would appear to me Japan is disingenuous, as Japan well knew long before her 1894 defeat of China, the Senkaku Islands were named as Diaoyu, a fishing platform for Chinese fishermen to take refuge in storms and route markers. To say Japan surveyed ten years the islands she called Senkaku Islands was a pretence Japan did not hear of the name Diaoyu used by China centuries before Japan called it Senkaku Islands.

    The truth is very much lacking from Japan. Now, why terra nullius and not res nullius (a thing that has no owner)? To claim terra nullius is to say no one ever lived there before, and at the point of time, the discovery was made. Thus, having ‘proved’ terra nullius, Japan purported to land in Diaoyu and claims it as a discovery. That was what precisely Japan trying to legitimise their theft and answerable to no one with what is suspiciously a big lie.

    Posted in: Australians reject siding with Japan against China in island dispute: survey

  • 0

    sfjp330

    A Realist Jan. 07, 2015 - 04:33AM JST The Senkaku Islands were claimed by Japan in 1895 as "terra nullus" (unoccupied territory) with no objection from China or any other country.

    In the years from 1894 until 1900, Japan refer to the islands around Taiwan with Chinese names. Why suddenly Diaoyu/Senkaku became terra nullius after 1894 when Japan annexed Taiwan and other islands? Clearly, the exercise was to pre-empt any counterclaims by China or to legalize what they were stealing Japan surveyed the islands for 10 years and determined that they were uninhabited. That being the case, in 1895 it erected a sovereignty marker that formally incorporated the islands into Japanese territory.

    Before Japan defeated China in 1894, Japan went surveying the islands in the East China Sea. the Chinese named since Ming period as the Diaoyu centuries back. Therefore, in 1884 Japan took an interest on Diaoyu ten years before she defeated China in 1894 in the First Sino-Japanese War. China used it as a marker in its route from Fuzhou to Naha, now in present-day Okinawa, and where occasion demands, its fisherman would seek temporary refuge from the raging sea storms, thus its name Diaoyu means “Fishing Platform.”

    It just does not make sense that the Japanese, with nothing to gain, would spend ten years meticulously surveying the islands before 1894. Oil or gas had not been discovered or reported to be around the vicinity for Japan to be interested, at that point of time the need for fossil energy was not critical to Japan. Why would Japan embark on a non-viable survey for ten years to determine without any doubt that Diaoyu was terra nullius? If, as Japan claims, the ten years spent surveying the islands would mean they were likely to encounter Chinese fisherman taking shelter there in a storm and not actually terra nullius, would Japan have accepted that the islands were visited by Chinese fishermen?

    Then why Japan did not lay claim to Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands before 1894 the year Japan vanquished Qing China’s navy? Why wait until 1896 after Japan forced an unequal Treaty of Shimonoseki on China in 1895 to pass an imperial decree to make Diaoyu a Japanese territory? Surely it is obvious that Japan had not surveyed Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands to verify that it is no man’s land or uninhabited, because Japan could not as Japan knew the islands belong to China.

    That accounts why Japan could not claim to discover the islands unless by outright war of conquest, which Japan did in 1894, and issued an imperial decree in 1896 to make Diaoyu a part of the Japanese Empire after the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki. Thus it would appear to me Japan is disingenuous, as Japan well knew long before her 1894 defeat of China, the Senkaku Islands were named as Diaoyu, a fishing platform for Chinese fishermen to take refuge in storms and route markers. To say Japan surveyed ten years the islands she called Senkaku Islands was a pretence Japan did not hear of the name Diaoyu used by China centuries before Japan called it Senkaku Islands.

    The truth is very much lacking from Japan. Now, why terra nullius and not res nullius (a thing that has no owner)? To claim terra nullius is to say no one ever lived there before, and at the point of time, the discovery was made. Thus, having ‘proved’ terra nullius, Japan purported to land in Diaoyu and claims it as a discovery. That was what precisely Japan trying to legitimise their theft and answerable to no one with what is suspiciously a big lie.

    Posted in: China launches website on disputed islands

  • 0

    sfjp330

    Farmboy Jan. 06, 2015 - 08:14AM JST Nonsense. They will just spend differently, promoting even more arms, oil, coal, environmentally unfriendly drilling, etc., and saying all the while that the spending is a way of saving money. And then, the government will be reaching even more than now into your private life.

    Under Republican proposal, the tax breaks alone will save about 20 percent in health care cost for the average Americans. It will work similar to writing off interest on your home mortagage or property tax on your 1040. Compare to Democrats, the Republicans proposals includes tax breaks or credits to the uninsured to purchase coverage on the individuals and make it cheaper for those already with coverage. They also want to allow insurance companies to sell policies across state lines. Right now, insurance companies may not sell a policy in multiple states. Competition might reduce prices. Republicans also proposed changes in common law civil justice systems that would reduce litigation or damage regarding medical malpractice lawsuits that lead to frivolous claims and legal costs.

    For Democrats, the subject of 15 million illegal immigrants has not been clearly addressed for many years. Most use U.S. hospitals for their care without paying. They are draining the system. Not paying has become a normal procedure for illegals. If you live in any other country illegally, do you expect their goverment to take care of you? Maybe only in the U.S.

    Posted in: Obama tests power against Republican-run Congress

  • 16

    sfjp330

    As a government it is in their duties to acknowledge the wrongdoings of their forefathers and help prevent such things from occurring again. Unfortunately, the same history has countless, consistent denial by high-ranking Japanese officials denying that sadistic war time crimes ever took place. Japan has been unwavering in upholding as their national heroes, the war criminals of WWII, where their highest ranking officials pay offical hommage to. Japan is a different story of being the victim. Why did Abe visited Yasukuni shrine and over 150 representives of Japan goverment went to pray for 14 Class A convicted war criminals? Every year, and for many decades, visit by top Japanese goverment officials to Yasukuni has not changed. This is far from being apologetic, but a slap in the face of the neighboring countries with a clear expression of "I'm not that sorry." Making a statement, then following it up with actions that go directly against this statement, naturally will not be taken at face value.

    Posted in: Abe says he will stick to past apologies in new WWII statement

View all