The Rise of China

[DanTheManInJapan]

m0nckywrench[/url]":1psoatqj]Obvious theater to entertain the stupid.

I'll grant you the rest of your points, but for those of us that are sitting on the proverbial ground zero, it's a bit more difficult to brush off.

 

[skylarjones]

Kaiser Sosei[/url]":22xd8i45]Holy crap this is still going on? I posted this 13 months ago.

Kaiser Sosei[/url]":22xd8i45] Until actual shooting takes place this is mostly a bunch of posturing.

I still stand by it. Neither country wants war, but it looks good in their respective papers.

I think the idea is to pay attention and make sure we don't get there. It'll be really bad if we only start paying attention once someone fires a shot.

 

[pauli]

DanTheManInJapan[/url]":2wkr722f]

m0nckywrench[/url]":2wkr722f]Obvious theater to entertain the stupid.

I'll grant you the rest of your points, but for those of us that are sitting on the proverbial ground zero, it's a bit more difficult to brush off.

Front row seats at a Gallagher show.

 

[cf18]

Nekojin[/url]"gcikght]

9600man[/url]"gcikght]

On Saturday, China's defence ministry responded saying: "If Japan does resort to enforcement measures like shooting down aircraft, that is a serious provocation to us, an act of war.

"We will undertake decisive action to strike back, with every consequence borne by the side that caused the trouble," spokesman Geng Yansheng said on the ministry's website.

This sounds more like the saber-rattling of a warmonger than anything Abe's done recently...

Actually, it sounds less like saber-rattling, and more like China's trying to cook up a reason for going to war with Japan.

It's called selective quoting, all media east and west are master of.

See another link:

"Chinese aircraft have never infringed on other countries' airspace, and China never allows other countries' aircraft to infringe on China's airspace," state-run Xinhua news agency quoted Geng as saying.

Why do you think BBC only quote the "bad-ass" part? Do they have a byte size quoter?

 

[Karnak]

cf18[/url]":1et6e9pk]See another link:

"Chinese aircraft have never infringed on other countries' airspace, and China never allows other countries' aircraft to infringe on China's airspace," state-run Xinhua news agency quoted Geng as saying.

Why do you think BBC only quote the "bad-ass" part? Do they have a byte size quoter?

Given what China considers to be its airspace that statement isn't really useful. In this context both China and Japan consider the airspace in question to be theirs.

 

[skylarjones]

And the ROC considers that same airspace to be their's.

 

[Nekojin]

Wait, are all these quotes in relation to the Senkaku islands, not the Japanese mainland?

 

[cf18]

Nekojin[/url]":2qb8u13v]Wait, are all these quotes in relation to the Senkaku islands, not the Japanese mainland?

Of course.

 

[skylarjones]

Nekojin[/url]":3ljp909q]Wait, are all these quotes in relation to the Senkaku islands, not the Japanese mainland?

Aren't the Senkaku's part of the Japanese mainland? Or not? There's the rub.

 

[Nekojin]

skylarjones[/url]":238wrvxe]

Nekojin[/url]":238wrvxe]Wait, are all these quotes in relation to the Senkaku islands, not the Japanese mainland?

Aren't the Senkaku's part of the Japanese mainland? Or not? There's the rub.

That's not really much of a debate point. Observe this map (courtesy of Wikipedia):

The islands are further from the Japanese mainland than they are from either China or Taiwan. The reasons for their respective claims are convoluted, and have been covered several times in the thread already.

 

[skylarjones]

Nekojin[/url]":36ow0433]That's not really much of a debate point. Observe this map (courtesy of Wikipedia):

[snip]image[/snip]

The islands are further from the Japanese mainland than they are from either China or Taiwan. The reasons for their respective claims are convoluted, and have been covered several times in the thread already.

That's not the point, it's beyond that point.

edit: If distance was a barometer, Okinawa shouldn't be a part of Japan either.

 

[GaoZu]

It sure as hell is the point. The main argument for some people here for the Paracel/Spratley Islands is that it is so far from China.

 

[Lee Vann]

And, they are closer to the Ryukyu Islands ( Okinawa Prefecture , Japan ) than China. And, about the same distance between them and Taiwan and Yonaguni island. They were last inhabited (no one lived on them before that) by Japanese and the only reason they are not now is because Chinas pissing and moaning like a little baby.

 

[Nekojin]

skylarjones[/url]":34ucx0vf]

Nekojin[/url]":34ucx0vf]That's not really much of a debate point. Observe this map (courtesy of Wikipedia):

[snip]image[/snip]

The islands are further from the Japanese mainland than they are from either China or Taiwan. The reasons for their respective claims are convoluted, and have been covered several times in the thread already.

That's not the point, it's beyond that point.

edit: If distance was a barometer, Okinawa shouldn't be a part of Japan either.

If that's not the point, then why did you make the point of whether or not they were part of the "Japanese Mainland"?

I personally don't really give a shit one way or the other who owns these islands; no matter who controls them, they will continue to be a point of contention between all three governments. The only reason that I refer to them as the "Senkaku Islands" than any of the other names being used is because that's how I was first introduced to the matter.

All three governments are being childish here, but it seems pretty clear that Japan has the most recent recognized, legal claim on the islands. Ultimately, all of this just serves pointless, petty nationalism and saber-rattling for all sides.

 

[skylarjones]

Nekojin[/url]":3rn5p3l5]If that's not the point, then why did you make the point of whether or not they were part of the "Japanese Mainland"?

The point is who owns it, not how far it is from any one government. Occupation is half part of ownership, IMO. It's why Okinawa is part of Japan today, it was conquerored by the Shimazu Clan way back in, I believe, the 16th or 17th century. Before that, it was independent with strong influences by both the Han and the Yamato. That the Senkakus have never been occupied is what really complicates things.

 

[Nutrimentia]

Didn't see this posted yet, apologies if I missed it or it isn't otherwise relevant. Interesting (and well presented) article about the Philippines and China in the South China Sea.

 

[skylarjones]

Nutrimentia[/url]":12b7s177]Didn't see this posted yet, apologies if I missed it or it isn't otherwise relevant. Interesting (and well presented) article about the Philippines and China in the South China Sea.

The scholar Huang Jing put it another, more organic way. “The Chinese expand like a forest, very slowly,” he said. “But once they get there, they never leave.”

That's Chinese history to a tee.

 

[Lee Vann]

It is telling when you compare the different actions taken by each side in the different disputes Japan has over islands.

Take for instance the Liancourt Rocks. Japan has a strong internationally recognized claim to them. Yet Korea occupies them and garrisons them. Japan generally refrains from escalating tensions and has offered to let the ICJ deiced the issue. Japan has taken no steps to land personnel on the islands or change the status quo.

Compare this to the Senkaku Islands. China has a weak claim, has landed personnel, has continuously violated the air and sea space, and generally been belligerent. Japan has taken steps to prevent nationalist escalation. Has forbidden its own people from repopulating the islands, even when the islands were owned privately.

It seems to me that Japan is behaving like a grown up and the other two like spoilt children.

Spoiler

 

[Nekojin]

Just for clarification's sake - that image is showing that Yonakuni and Sakishima are part of the Okinawa prefecture, correct?

 

[Lee Vann]

Yes, and it shows the disputed islands just a bit north of them.

They are approximately 16 Km closer to permanently inhabited Japanese islands (170 Km) than to Taiwan (186Km). Taiwan has a military base on Pengjia Islet about 140Km away from them that is not labeled on that map

 

[cf18]

Lee Vann[/url]":wcysph3r]It is telling when you compare the different actions taken by each side in the different disputes Japan has over islands.

Take for instance the Liancourt Rocks. Japan has a strong internationally recognized claim to them. Yet Korea occupies them and garrisons them. Japan generally refrains from escalating tensions and has offered to let the ICJ deiced the issue. Japan has taken no steps to land personnel on the islands or change the status quo.

Hay I can post propaganda too.
http://www.japanfocus.org/-mark-selden/3520
http://en.dokdo.go.kr/eng/swf/sunrise_e ... e_eng.html
http://dokdo-research.com/page4.html

One story from Korean was during the Korean war, Japan made multiple attempts to land on the island, and one Korean war hero with an old machine gun drove off. I have no idea how true is that, but there were definitely some shooting and ship sinking around that time.

Compare this to the Senkaku Islands. China has a weak claim, has landed personnel,

False. Only Chinese civilian activists have attempted to land on the disputed islands, not government agents. The Japanese police that was there to arrest them was, as you say "landed personnel" from their government.

has continuously violated the air and sea space, and generally been belligerent. Japan has taken steps to prevent nationalist escalation. Has forbidden its own people from repopulating the islands, even when the islands were owned privately.

You made it sounds like Japan treated the island as some sort of neutral zone, but they didn't.

For decades, Japan had been slowly increasing their military present in the area and harassing fishermen from Taiwan. In 2012 Japanese prime minister Yoshihiko Noda allowed the government purchase of the island, nullify the agreement when PRC-Japan diplomatic relations were established in 1972, when both agreed not to touch the hot potato. Japan danced first, simple fact. Beats me why Japan escalate, ignoring warning from US. Time was on their side.

 

[Dystopia]

cf18[/url]":wwbuxw0w]

Compare this to the Senkaku Islands. China has a weak claim, has landed personnel,

False. Only Chinese civilian activists have attempted to land on the disputed islands, not government agents. The Japanese police that was there to arrest them was, as you say "landed personnel" from their government.

You mean the Japanese police arrested people breaking Japanese law in Japanese territory? That's completely unprincipled thuggery and no civilised country would have a bar of it!

Alternatively your point is moronic.

 

[arcite]

Who are these groups of self-empowered state sanctioned 'Chinese civilian activists', what a laugh.

I see that yesterday New Zealand formerly resumed ties with the US military, lifting a ban on nuclear vessels in their territorial waters in place since the 80's. This is another good sign to strengthen US long term shift to Asia. Similarly, Philippines is finalizing a deal to allow greater access to US ships as well.

 

[Lee Vann]

cf18[/url]":wcw5otwo]

Lee Vann[/url]":wcw5otwo]It is telling when you compare the different actions taken by each side in the different disputes Japan has over islands.

Take for instance the Liancourt Rocks. Japan has a strong internationally recognized claim to them. Yet Korea occupies them and garrisons them. Japan generally refrains from escalating tensions and has offered to let the ICJ deiced the issue. Japan has taken no steps to land personnel on the islands or change the status quo.

Hay I can post propaganda too.

That is about all the pro china people ever post is regurgitated propaganda, so that is expected.

http://www.japanfocus.org/-mark-selden/3520
http://en.dokdo.go.kr/eng/swf/sunrise_e ... e_eng.html
http://dokdo-research.com/page4.html

Your first link is a hack opinion piece that breaks down to Koreans are pissed at Japan for the 1910 occupation and annexation so should get the islands as compensation. Your second link is a crappy flash site with no redeeming features. And, the third link is some crap about how the islands have always been Korea's and Japan should stop being a big meanie, oh and they should give up Tsushima as well.

One story from Korean was during the Korean war, Japan made multiple attempts to land on the island, and one Korean war hero with an old machine gun drove off. I have no idea how true is that, but there were definitely some shooting and ship sinking around that time.

Unsourced, unverified bunk.

Compare this to the Senkaku Islands. China has a weak claim, has landed personnel,

False. Only Chinese civilian activists have attempted to land on the disputed islands, not government agents. The Japanese police that was there to arrest them was, as you say "landed personnel" from their government.

The "landed" was in reference to Japan not sending boatloads of activist to the Liancourt Rocks, something China tries regularly with the Senkaku Islands.

has continuously violated the air and sea space, and generally been belligerent. Japan has taken steps to prevent nationalist escalation. Has forbidden its own people from repopulating the islands, even when the islands were owned privately.

You made it sounds like Japan treated the island as some sort of neutral zone, but they didn't.

For decades, Japan had been slowly increasing their military present in the area and harassing fishermen from Taiwan. In 2012 Japanese prime minister Yoshihiko Noda allowed the government purchase of the island, nullify the agreement when PRC-Japan diplomatic relations were established in 1972, when both agreed not to touch the hot potato. Japan danced first, simple fact. Beats me why Japan escalate, ignoring warning from US. Time was on their side.

Your position is a complete distortion of reason and fact, so separated from reality as to be almost fictional in its entirety.

What you call harassing can best be descried as standard policing of territorial waters.

As we have covered several times before, Noda purchased the islands from their private owners to stop an ultra nationalist from doing so and escalating tensions. The government of Japans actions were to preserve the status quo. Do you honestly believe China would have preferred Ishihara Shintarō to be in control of them? Or would they have used that as an excuse to throw just as big hissy fit?

Furthermore there never was any formal agreements about not nationalizing the islands. The only agreement Japan has made formally has been to allow RoC and PRC fishing boats to use the Exclusive Economic Zone waters for fishing. That has not changed. If you have a valid citation of such an agreement I would like to see it.

In conclusion China and Korea needs to grow up , wipe their tears, and put on their big boy pants.

 

[GaoZu]

Heh so many close minded people. Whoa! Is that a point supporting the Chinese view? Alright how about I don't try to understand it, instead I will write it off as Red China propaganda.

 

[skylarjones]

arcite[/url]":s8hy1ug6]Who are these groups of self-empowered state sanctioned 'Chinese civilian activists', what a laugh.

They're folk from mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. It's one of the few times you'll see the PRC flag being carried along with the ROC flag.

Lee Vann[/url]":s8hy1ug6]It is telling when you compare the different actions taken by each side in the different disputes Japan has over islands.

Take for instance the Liancourt Rocks. Japan has a strong internationally recognized claim to them. Yet Korea occupies them and garrisons them. Japan generally refrains from escalating tensions and has offered to let the ICJ deiced the issue. Japan has taken no steps to land personnel on the islands or change the status quo.

Compare this to the Senkaku Islands. China has a weak claim, has landed personnel, has continuously violated the air and sea space, and generally been belligerent. Japan has taken steps to prevent nationalist escalation. Has forbidden its own people from repopulating the islands, even when the islands were owned privately.

It seems to me that Japan is behaving like a grown up and the other two like spoilt children.

Spoiler

Japan also spent the last century massacring their neighbors to expand their territory, any aggressive action by Japan will likely unite all of Asia (okay, most) against it. It's kind of like why Germany has some of the harshest anti-racist laws in Europe, they're over compensating for the aggression and atrocities that they committed in the last century. The West has a tendency to White Wash the atrocities that the Japanese committed. Those wounds hurt Asians as much as Nazi Germany hurts the Jews, however, while Hitler is dead, Hirohito's son is still the Emperor of Japan. And a lot of Japanese politicians still pay their respect to the WWII dead. Can you imagine the reaction from the Jewish community if German leaders today visited a church to pay their respects that also included Hitler, or at the least, Goebbels?

 

[arcite]

skylarjones[/url]":3s2r5e2l]

arcite[/url]":3s2r5e2l]Who are these groups of self-empowered state sanctioned 'Chinese civilian activists', what a laugh.

Japan also spent the last century massacring their neighbors to expand their territory, any aggressive action by Japan will likely unite all of Asia (okay, most) against it. It's kind of like why Germany has some of the harshest anti-racist laws in Europe, they're over compensating for the aggression and atrocities that they committed in the last century. The West has a tendency to White Wash the atrocities that the Japanese committed. Those wounds hurt Asians as much as Nazi Germany hurts the Jews, however, while Hitler is dead, Hirohito's son is still the Emperor of Japan. And a lot of Japanese politicians still pay their respect to the WWII dead. Can you imagine the reaction from the Jewish community if German leaders today visited a church to pay their respects that also included Hitler, or at the least, Goebbels?

Empty excuses, Mao killed 30 million of his own people, what about Pol Pot? What about Vietnam? Burma? There is no shortage of atrocities to account for in the past century. Japan is a staunch ally of the US, as is most of South, SE Asia, and Pacific - in direct competition with China, that is all that matters now.

 

[skylarjones]

arcite[/url]":8e8i8r5z]

skylarjones[/url]":8e8i8r5z]

arcite[/url]":8e8i8r5z]Who are these groups of self-empowered state sanctioned 'Chinese civilian activists', what a laugh.

Japan also spent the last century massacring their neighbors to expand their territory, any aggressive action by Japan will likely unite all of Asia (okay, most) against it. It's kind of like why Germany has some of the harshest anti-racist laws in Europe, they're over compensating for the aggression and atrocities that they committed in the last century. The West has a tendency to White Wash the atrocities that the Japanese committed. Those wounds hurt Asians as much as Nazi Germany hurts the Jews, however, while Hitler is dead, Hirohito's son is still the Emperor of Japan. And a lot of Japanese politicians still pay their respect to the WWII dead. Can you imagine the reaction from the Jewish community if German leaders today visited a church to pay their respects that also included Hitler, or at the least, Goebbels?

Empty excuses, Mao killed 30 million of his own people, what about Pol Pot? What about Vietnam? There is no shortage of atrocities to account for in the past century. Japan is a staunch ally of the US, as is most of South, SE Asia, and Pacific - in direct competition with China, that is all that matters now.

Mao did kill his own people, as did Chiang. Japan killed Koreans, Chinese (Han and Manchurians), Filipinos, Americans, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Laotians, Burmese... it goes on and on. Are you suggesting we forget about that? Do those lives not matter?

 

[cf18]

Who are these groups of self-empowered state sanctioned 'Chinese civilian activists', what a laugh.

They are indeed independent activists and the government had been trying to restrict their activity by various means. I have a hard time finding any recent English source so here is a Japanese report on how Hong Kong police stopping an activist ship.
http://www.jiji.com/jc/zc?k=201310/2013101300056

Older one, in English:
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/0 ... u-islands/

They operated more freely from Hong Kong before China take over at 1997.

That is about all the pro china people ever post is regurgitated propaganda, so that is expected.

I still want to see your "strong internationally recognized claim" over the Liancourt Rocks.

but there were definitely some shooting and ship sinking around that time.

Unsourced, unverified bunk.

Only on Japanese side of wiki for some reason.

Furthermore there never was any formal agreements about not nationalizing the islands. The only agreement Japan has made formally has been to allow RoC and PRC fishing boats to use the Exclusive Economic Zone waters for fishing. That has not changed. If you have a valid citation of such an agreement I would like to see it.

Former LDP elder: Kakuei Tanaka said Senkaku issue shelved in 1972.
Timeline:
Japan: We nationalize the island.
China: Hay we agreed to not touching it!
Japan's foreign minister: "There are no facts that point to an agreement for shelving the issue or maintaining the status quo. There is also no issue that has to be shelved."
Nonaka, 87, a former chief Cabinet secretary: Wait we did have an agreement with China.

The Abe government has been stonewalling since then and refuse to acknowledge that there is some sort of dispute.

 

[skylarjones]

The PRC has no fishing rights in the Senkaku's, only the ROC.

 

[arcite]

skylarjones[/url]":3hpmghkf]

Mao did kill his own people, as did Chiang. Japan killed Koreans, Chinese (Han and Manchurians), Filipinos, Americans, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Laotians, Burmese... it goes on and on. Are you suggesting we forget about that? Do those lives not matter?

Of course it matters, in a historic sense. But if you're suggesting that present day Governments set policy according to their interpretation of events that happened 50-100 years ago, that is nothing more than a recipe for propaganda.

 

[GaoZu]

arcite[/url]":3uu04m54]

skylarjones[/url]":3uu04m54]

arcite[/url]":3uu04m54]Who are these groups of self-empowered state sanctioned 'Chinese civilian activists', what a laugh.

Japan also spent the last century massacring their neighbors to expand their territory, any aggressive action by Japan will likely unite all of Asia (okay, most) against it. It's kind of like why Germany has some of the harshest anti-racist laws in Europe, they're over compensating for the aggression and atrocities that they committed in the last century. The West has a tendency to White Wash the atrocities that the Japanese committed. Those wounds hurt Asians as much as Nazi Germany hurts the Jews, however, while Hitler is dead, Hirohito's son is still the Emperor of Japan. And a lot of Japanese politicians still pay their respect to the WWII dead. Can you imagine the reaction from the Jewish community if German leaders today visited a church to pay their respects that also included Hitler, or at the least, Goebbels?

Empty excuses, Mao killed 30 million of his own people, what about Pol Pot? What about Vietnam? Burma? There is no shortage of atrocities to account for in the past century. Japan is a staunch ally of the US, as is most of South, SE Asia, and Pacific - in direct competition with China, that is all that matters now.

BAHAHAHAHA How about, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Burma, the now independent yet sino-centric Singapore? How about Indonesia? Just because America will get a base in the Phillippines doesn't mean America has "staunch allies" in SE Asia.

 

[GaoZu]

arcite[/url]"i019466]

skylarjones[/url]"i019466]

Mao did kill his own people, as did Chiang. Japan killed Koreans, Chinese (Han and Manchurians), Filipinos, Americans, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Laotians, Burmese... it goes on and on. Are you suggesting we forget about that? Do those lives not matter?

Of course it matters, in a historic sense. But if you're suggesting that present day Governments set policy according to their interpretation of events that happened 50-100 years ago, that is nothing more than a recipe for propaganda.

really. God those fucking Israelies must be such assholes for still asking for reparations from Germany, while at the same time STILL hunting of Nazis. Those Germans must also be imbecilic for implementing anti-racist laws. I mean shit, it has been what 60-70 years ago.

 

[eXceLon]

skylarjones[/url]":3kaqzzmi]Can you imagine the reaction from the Jewish community if German leaders today visited a church to pay their respects that also included Hitler, or at the least, Goebbels?

Yasukuni Shrine honors all veterans who died as part of their service. Germany has holidays and memorials to honor those soldiers who lost their lives during the World Wars, and manage to do so without glorifying war criminals.

 

[skylarjones]

eXceLon[/url]":2wfzplxf]

skylarjones[/url]":2wfzplxf]Can you imagine the reaction from the Jewish community if German leaders today visited a church to pay their respects that also included Hitler, or at the least, Goebbels?

Yasukuni Shrine honors all veterans who died as part of their service. Germany has holidays and memorials to honor those soldiers who lost their lives during the World Wars, and manage to do so without glorifying war criminals.

Yes, all veterans, including the ones that committed atrocities. The answer is simple, move the architects of the war crimes out of Yasukuni Shrine and bury them someplace else. But, Japan refuses.

 

[eXceLon]

skylarjones[/url]":bgkm510d]

eXceLon[/url]":bgkm510d]

skylarjones[/url]":bgkm510d]Can you imagine the reaction from the Jewish community if German leaders today visited a church to pay their respects that also included Hitler, or at the least, Goebbels?

Yasukuni Shrine honors all veterans who died as part of their service. Germany has holidays and memorials to honor those soldiers who lost their lives during the World Wars, and manage to do so without glorifying war criminals.

Yes, all veterans, including the ones that committed atrocities. The answer is simple, move the architects of the war crimes out of Yasukuni Shrine and bury them someplace else. But, Japan refuses.

No one is buried in the shrine... it's a list of names. Similar to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

 

[skylarjones]

eXceLon[/url]":3ru498vv]

skylarjones[/url]":3ru498vv]
Yes, all veterans, including the ones that committed atrocities. The answer is simple, move the architects of the war crimes out of Yasukuni Shrine and bury them someplace else. But, Japan refuses.

No one is buried in the shrine... it's a list of names. Similar to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

Ah, I was thinking of former President Kim Dae-jung's words about moving them. Well, that's even easier then, strike the names of the war criminals from the shrine.

edit: I can't believe I have to defend the action of not lionizing Class A War Criminals, would I have to do so if the war criminals were named Hitler, Goebbels, Goring, Bormann, Speer, etc?

 

[eXceLon]

It's the explicit policy of the shrine that there is no discrimination in who is listed, and at any rate it's not government owned or operated anyways. It's operated by a private religious order.

 

[GaoZu]

Just in case you want to know...

those war criminal were buried here...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...s-worshipping-at-temple-to-war-criminals.html

 

[skylarjones]

eXceLon[/url]":1jp54860]It's the explicit policy of the shrine that there is no discrimination in who is listed, and at any rate it's not government owned or operated anyways. It's operated by a private religious order.

It's privately owned and that's fine and you're right, as a private institution they can include whom they wish. All the Chinese, Koreans and many Taiwanese ask is that Japanese politicians stop visiting it. Who would accept it if Merkel went to a memorial that included the names of Class A Nazi Germany war criminals? I'm noticing a double standard.