Hiroshima mayor lashes out at U.S...again. Options

[Ogumo]

Hiroshima on Friday morning marked the 59th anniversary of the 1945 U.S. atomic bombing of the city. An estimated 40,000 people attended the ceremony that started at 8 a.m. at the Peace Memorial Park in the downtown part of the western Japan city that was devastated in the world's first nuclear attack Aug 6, 1945, three days before the atomic bombing of Nagasaki.

In his peace declaration, Hiroshima Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba voiced serious concern over the "egocentric worldview" of the United States and moves in Japan to revise the country's pacifist Constitution.

"The egocentric worldview of the U.S. government is reaching extremes," Akiba said, criticizing the United States for its nuclear policies.

"Ignoring the United Nations and international law, the United States has resumed research to make nuclear weapons smaller and more usable," Akiba said.

Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi also attended the memorial service.

Akiba demanded that the United States strive with other nuclear powers toward the total elimination of nuclear weapons.

In the declaration, he also demanded that the Japanese government reject moves to revise the war-renouncing Constitution.

"The Japanese government, as our representative, should defend the peace Constitution, of which all Japanese should be proud, and work diligently to rectify the trend toward open acceptance of war and nuclear weapons that is increasingly prevalent at home and abroad," he said. (I strongly disagree with this part of mr.akiba's ridiculous rant. The japanese government should only be obligated to do what is in the best interest of the japanese people. No one else. I see atricle nine of the contitution as a tool that will limit and ultimately harm the japanese people in the future. Happily many others are awaking to this fact. If japanese need to rectify anything it should rectify the american military presense in our country.)

"We demand that our government act on its obligation as the only nation to suffer atomic bombings," he said. (By setting in motion the revision of the constitution it is doing just that.)

Article 9 of the Constitution stipulates that the Japanese people "forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes." (This of course is a terrible thing that will only give our neighbors the advantage over us. Yoshida was a fool to so easily agree to this...)

The mayor is a former House of Representatives member of the opposition Social Democratic Party, which is against revision of the Constitution as well as Japan's dispatch of troops to Iraq for reconstruction work there after the U.S.-led war on the country.

U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage reportedly said last month that the article hinders the Japan-U.S. alliance. He apparently backtracked later, however, as the remark drew strong criticism from lawmakers in Japan.

The 59th anniversary comes at a time when concerns over nuclear issues have intensified globally.

Multilateral efforts are under way to deal with North Korea's nuclear ambitions, while Iran has come under pressure from the international community to allow inspections of nuclear facilities by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog.

While expressing hope for the success of the 2005 Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Hiroshima also expressed its intention of taking the initiative in achieving the complete abolition of nuclear weapons by bringing together cities, citizens and nongovernmental organizations from around the world. ( A waste of japanese money.)

The initiative, called the Emergency Campaign to Ban Nuclear Weapons, aims at adopting an action program incorporating an interim goal of "the signing in 2010 of a Nuclear Weapons Convention to serve as the framework for eliminating nuclear weapons by 2020," according to Akiba.

Among those attending the ceremony were Pakistani Ambassador Kamran Niaz and Russian Ambassador Alexander Losyukov.

U.N. Undersecretary General Nobuyasu Abe is also attending on behalf of U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan.

The city government of Hiroshima had asked seven nuclear nations — Britain, China, France, India, Pakistan, Russia and the United States — as well North Korea to send government delegates to the ceremony, but only Pakistan and Russia accepted. (Their lack of response simply shows how the efforts of these hibakusha are wasteful and foolish.)

The U.S. atomic bombing of Hiroshima and its aftereffects killed an estimated 140,000 people by the end of 1945.

This year, the names of 5,142 more people recognized as atomic-bomb victims by the city since Aug 6 last year were added to a memorial arch, bringing the total to 237,062. (Kyodo News)

http://japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=1&id=307853

[Jasel]

Eh I dont know. I wish U.S would leave Japan alone but when it comes to Hiroshima im kind of undecided on whether I support or denounce the action of it. Actually nm so many innocent ppl were killed I really wish ti hadnt of happened. Same with Pearl Harbor.

[Kang Xi]

The USA will never leave Japan alone, just that simple. With enough resources to construct 10000 nukes, no one, definitely not the USA would "free" them. We all know the USA has enough nukes to maintain world stability.

[Ogumo]

^ Exactly why japan needs it's own weapons.

[rudeboy]

I do wish for closer relationships between Japan and China in a closer Asian community, like how it is with the European Union. Then we can throw Yankee out. Maybe ASEAN shoul dbe expanded or a new org created. One day when China has developed enough maybe there can be free entry between the two nation's nationals, so that people can come and go freely and enjoy each other's culture and be Japanese or Chinese for a weekend . I enjoyed Japanese culture very much and I liked wearing the Japanese male sarong (I don't know what else to call it). It is very relaxing. One day I hope i can wear it China without any connotation of being a j@p-wannabe or traitor.

This post has been edited by rudeboy: Aug 28 2004, 09:16 AM

[Kang Xi]

But it won't happen. The Japanese island with never be anymore than a pseudo US colony. That's afraid of Kim Jong Il i might add.

[Ogumo]

But it won't happen. The Japanese island with never be anymore than a pseudo US colony. That's afraid of Kim Jong Il i might add.

The Japanese island with never be anymore than a pseudo US colony. That's afraid of Kim Jong Il i might add.

That all depends on japan's leader. If ishihara was ever to get elected as PM I am sure that we would see large results.

[Kang Xi]

Ishihara, for the sake of Asia I hope a man like him never resurfaces in japan.

I'd like a Chinese version of him though, with someone like him, China could reassert its military hegemony within Asia.

[Ogumo]

Ishihara, for the sake of Asia I hope a man like him never resurfaces in japan.

Yes it is scary isnt it? However I seriously doubt that ishihara would do anything foolish to any outside country. Though he would only act out of benefit to us. Not to mention that the old man has a hatred of the americans. All the more reason to vote him in.

I'd like a Chinese version of him though, with someone like him, China could reassert its military hegemony within Asia.

No need. It is only japan that require someone as crazy as ishihara. China has people in control that are looking out for the chinese people. Especially in the military spending area.

This post has been edited by Ogumo: Aug 29 2004, 09:22 AM

[lunksunkunk]

eh... i'm not exactly in support of Japan having nucleur weapons. The US has a reason to restrict nucleur arms production in Japan. The main reason, WWII. The US, the UN, and Japan agreed to the terms set forth in order for Japan to be re-admitted back to the UN and the redevelopedment of Japan. Those agreements have been appeased many times. Many times. Japanese is not supposed to have any sort of military power whatsoever but now Japan has a limited military thanks to appeasement. I think the US and UN have made many compromises to the Japanese government. But asking for nucleur weapons is a little too much.

[Ogumo]

eh... i'm not exactly in support of Japan having nucleur weapons. The US has a reason to restrict nucleur arms production in Japan. The main reason, WWII. The US, the UN, and Japan agreed to the terms set forth in order for Japan to be re-admitted back to the UN and the redevelopedment of Japan

The americans do not seem to care about the constitution that they imposed on japan over 50 years ago. They are really the ones telling japan to revise the constitution and have a larger role in asia security. I have a newer article on the topic that I will post tonight.

But asking for nucleur weapons is a little too much.

I disagree. To me it is reasonable. Especially with neighbors that have these very same weapons. Some even openly threaten japan with them. So no I would not say that it is too much.

[canopener]

The USA will never leave Japan alone, just that simple. With enough resources to construct 10000 nukes, no one, definitely not the USA would "free" them. We all know the USA has enough nukes to maintain world stability.

these are the same people that want to rid all nukes on earth. why is it that they can keep nukes while the rest of the world can't?

[Kang Xi]

these are the same people that want to rid all nukes on earth. why is it that they can keep nukes while the rest of the world can't?

Exactly. To maintain global hegemony, a simple explanation.

[Musashino]

I disagree. To me it is reasonable. Especially with neighbors that have these very same weapons. Some even openly threaten japan with them. So no I would not say that it is too much.

The americans do not seem to care about the constitution that they imposed on japan over 50 years ago. They are really the ones telling japan to revise the constitution and have a larger role in asia security. I have a newer article on the topic that I will post tonight.

Not likely. The Americans do care. I don't believe they would like it if Japan became confident enough to rely on her own defence (and therefore not have to bow whenever America whinges about Japan not doing her bit to support American war efforts).

But I do believe that one of the big reasons why Japan is closer than ever to getting rid of her pacifist position is because Koizumi and the SDF have earned enough support and praise for helping the Americans in Iraq. America is the one who's really pushing Japan to get cracking. If Koizumi did what Japan did back in the Gulf War, then he would be humiliated by Washington. However, he didn't. So getting America's "approval" really helped him push hard for Japan to get rid of Article 9 in her Constituion.

However, it's obvious America won't supports any nuclear development from Japan, which is why the U.S. stops short from saying they will fully support Japan's bid to get a permanent seat in the Security Council. They want an "ally", but not someone who'll bite their fingers when getting bossed around once too often.

I see it this way: Congress will grin once Japan throws away her pacifist policies. No more American money will be spent on building a fortress around Japan. But Congress will whinge when Japan starts getting confident with being independent and not having to bow whenever America does criticises Japanese economic activities.

As for Japan's "self-interest", I thought of a good one: I read in an article that Congress "asked" Japan to remove key investments in the Middle East because if American companies are banned from doing so (in Iraq), then the same goes for the Japanese companies as well. I guess America really does "value" Japan - as long as she obeys America.

I disagree. To me it is reasonable. Especially with neighbors that have these very same weapons. Some even openly threaten japan with them. So no I would not say that it is too much.

I see your point. Japan does not need nuclear missiles flying over her air space whenever other countries feel like it. She needs more experience with nuclear weaponry so she can build up her own defence. I personally do not like this whole idea about stocking/piling up on these things, but when your life is at stake, then I say, do what it takes to protect it.

China, America and Russia need nuclear weapons to keep each other out of their own affairs. Japan needs those weapons to make sure she doesn't get squashed between those 3.

Besides, I don't think America would consider wasting much American blood to protect Japan - another reason why Japan needs to push for her own defence.

This post has been edited by Musashino: Aug 29 2004, 10:31 PM

[Nam Quoc Son Ha]

^ Exactly why japan needs it's own weapons.

I don't think the US is a threat to Japan. If you want to know who's your true threat, look to the west of Japan.

[Ogumo]

[quote=Musashino,Aug 29 2004, 11:24 PM] [quote=Ogumo,Aug 29 2004, 11:06 AM] I disagree. To me it is reasonable. Especially with neighbors that have these very same weapons. Some even openly threaten japan with them. So no I would not say that it is too much. [/quote]
[quote=Ogumo]The americans do not seem to care about the constitution that they imposed on japan over 50 years ago. They are really the ones telling japan to revise the constitution and have a larger role in asia security. I have a newer article on the topic that I will post tonight. [/quote]

Not likely. The Americans do care. I don't believe they would like it if Japan became confident enough to rely on her own defence (and therefore not have to bow whenever America whinges about Japan not doing her bit to support American war efforts).

But I do believe that one of the big reasons why Japan is closer than ever to getting rid of her pacifist position is because Koizumi and the SDF have earned enough support and praise for helping the Americans in Iraq. America is the one who's really pushing Japan to get cracking. If Koizumi did what Japan did back in the Gulf War, then he would be humiliated by Washington. However, he didn't. So getting America's "approval" really helped him push hard for Japan to get rid of Article 9 in her Constituion.

However, it's obvious America won't supports any nuclear development from Japan, which is why the U.S. stops short from saying they will fully support Japan's bid to get a permanent seat in the Security Council. They want an "ally", but not someone who'll bite their fingers when getting bossed around once too often.

I see it this way: Congress will grin once Japan throws away her pacifist policies. No more American money will be spent on building a fortress around Japan. But Congress will whinge when Japan starts getting confident with being independent and not having to bow whenever America does criticises Japanese economic activities.

As for Japan's "self-interest", I thought of a good one: I read in an article that Congress "asked" Japan to remove key investments in the Middle East because if American companies are banned from doing so (in Iraq), then the same goes for the Japanese companies as well. I guess America really does "value" Japan - as long as she obeys America.

[quote=Ogumo]I disagree. To me it is reasonable. Especially with neighbors that have these very same weapons. Some even openly threaten japan with them. So no I would not say that it is too much.[/quote]

I see your point. Japan does not need nuclear missiles flying over her air space whenever other countries feel like it. She needs more experience with nuclear weaponry so she can build up her own defence. I personally do not like this whole idea about stocking/piling up on these things, but when your life is at stake, then I say, do what it takes to protect it.

China, America and Russia need nuclear weapons to keep each other out of their own affairs. Japan needs those weapons to make sure she doesn't get squashed between those 3.

Besides, I don't think America would consider wasting much American blood to protect Japan - another reason why Japan needs to push for her own defence. [/quote]
[quote]Not likely. The Americans do care. I don't believe they would like it if Japan became confident enough to rely on her own defence (and therefore not have to bow whenever America whinges about Japan not doing her bit to support American war efforts).[/quote]

This is also true. I really wonder what response the americans would give japan if the desire for WMD came up.


[quote]But I do believe that one of the big reasons why Japan is closer than ever to getting rid of her pacifist position is because Koizumi and the SDF have earned enough support and praise for helping the Americans in Iraq.[/quote]

Then he played his hand the proper way in the end.

[quote]America is the one who's really pushing Japan to get cracking.[/quote]

Ironic. However this is all part of the american plan to hold onto it's domination of the asia and limit china.

[quote]If Koizumi did what Japan did back in the Gulf War, then he would be humiliated by Washington. [/quote]

Indeed.

[quote]However, he didn't. So getting America's "approval" really helped him push hard for Japan to get rid of Article 9 in her Constituion.[/quote]

Well America had been pushing japan since 2000. Though only recently are they at this level. It is a good thing.

[quote]However, it's obvious America won't supports any nuclear development from Japan, which is why the U.S. stops short from saying they will fully support Japan's bid to get a permanent seat in the Security Council. They want an "ally", but not someone who'll bite their fingers when getting bossed around once too often. [/quote]

Well my thoughts on it were that they would accept such a thing eventually. Just so long as they were not able to hit america. This is the american mind set after all. "Destroy what you will. If it is our enemy even better. Just leave us alone". Then again it may simply be wishful thinking on my part.

[quote]I see it this way: Congress will grin once Japan throws away her pacifist policies. No more American money will be spent on building a fortress around Japan.But Congress will whinge when Japan starts getting confident with being independent and not having to bow whenever America does criticises Japanese economic activities. [/quote]

It was never about protecting the japanese people. It was about having a air base to destroy their enemies. America said they would support termination of article nine of the japanese constitution. They have never once claim they will reduce their forces in japan. Even if they did it was probably a lie.

[quote]As for Japan's "self-interest", I thought of a good one: I read in an article that Congress "asked" Japan to remove key investments in the Middle East because if American companies are banned from doing so (in Iraq), then the same goes for the Japanese companies as well. I guess America really does "value" Japan - as long as she obeys America.[/quote]

Even then america does not value japan. They simply love using japanese land to kill their enemies. Nothing more.


[quote]I see your point. Japan does not need nuclear missiles flying over her air space whenever other countries feel like it. She needs more experience with nuclear weaponry so she can build up her own defence. [/quote]

Most reasonable people would indeed agree.

[quote] I personally do not like this whole idea about stocking/piling up on these things, but when your life is at stake, then I say, do what it takes to protect it.[/quote]

With NK out there and possibly china in the future. Japan is indeed in danger. As for stocking up. I do not believe that japan would need a ridiculous amount. Like 4000. 900-1000 would ensure japan's survival or the mutually assured destruction of our enemy.

[quote]China, America and Russia need nuclear weapons to keep each other out of their own affairs. Japan needs those weapons to make sure she doesn't get squashed between those 3.[/quote]

Hopefully this will be how the japanese government explains it to the public in the future.

[quote]Besides, I don't think America would consider wasting much American blood to protect Japan - another reason why Japan needs to push for her own defence. [/quote]

Even if america did. It would do a half @$$ job. Thousands of japanese would die. Hell japan is actually even in more danger with crazy uncle sam on our land. Their enemy would have to attack japanese land just to defeat american troops. Japan would become a battlefield for a war that is not our own. We don't need japanese people dieing for the american tyrant.