QUOTE(HaoHaoHao @ Jul 31 2006, 01:00 AM) [snapback]2107651[/snapback]
The Americans government wished China did the Rape of Kyoto on Japan. In that case they would use it to go to war.
And if pink pigs had yellow wings and monkeys wore hats.... what???? I think this is a serious discussion about history and Yasukuni, not an episode of Pokemon or "What if in Final Fantasy Land." Do you know about the sinking of the Panay, a US ship sunk and passengers killed by the Japanese in 1938 during the massacre of Nanking? This is why the Nanking massacre got such attention around the world, generated sympathy for the Chinese in the US, and made the US think the Japan was out of control. This is not a comic book - this is history, and how the US got pulled into the Pacific War when it just wanted to stay out of all world wars -- this was the attitude of the US before Pearl Harbor.
American mistaken involvement with wars in other countries (trying to be "the boss of the world") began AFTER that, and was mostly about Cold War politics. Americans supported China before 1948, but falsely thought Chang Kai Shek was a good leader, and did not appreciate the real appeal to the Chinese of the communists. The US also totally blundered in Korea in 1945-1950, dividing the country in a chess game with Russia and choosing sides (anti-Japanese Koreans vs. pro-Japanese Koreans, Communists vs. Non Communists) when the US knew nothing about Korea, and we all know the terrible result.
Since then, the US has turned a blind eye to the problems that divide Japanese from Korean and Chinese, and almost always tends to support Japan, because they use Japan as their US forward military base, again a situation that is a result of cold war politics.
But the cold war is over. What I am saying is:
1) Yes, the US has acted very badly in the region since 1945, but times have changed, so it is no longer good for anyone for the US to act like that, especially for the US. Time for the US to change its actions. Do you disagree with that?
2) Yes, Bush has completely destroyed good will towards the US in the eyes of other nations, many in the US say that loud and clear now, and they say they the US needs to change US behavior in the world by being a partner and not a bully, do you disagree with that?
3) The US has a real military alliance with both Japan and South Korea that neither of these countries are going to give up (be realistic), but the US ignores the problems that divide its two allies, like Yasukuni. This means the three can not work together as equal partners on real, important issues.
Do you disagree with that?
4) Even though the US fought against Japan in a war Japan started against China and the US, and Yasukuni says both China and the US were not victims but the cause of the war, which is crap, the US ignores the Yasukuni issue because it favors Japan over China and South Korea post war, do you disagree with that?
Do you disagree that (4) is completely hypocritical of the US? If you think the US is just a selfish bully that only cares about its own interests, wouldn't the USA saying "The Japanese Prime Minister going to Yasukuni is WRONG" be a great way to start to prove it is changing its ways?
Would Chinese and Koreans think this is so terrible, if the US says Yasukuni is wrong? Or would they applaud the US? As for the Japanese, they are divided on Yasukuni, 50-50. More importantly, the leadership of the Japanese ruling party, the LDP, is divided on the issue. If the US just said quietly to the government of all countries, "If the Japanese Prime Minister keeps insisting on going to Yasukuni, we will have to go very public about our opposition," and Japanese politicians like Abe will stop going. Loud mouth Japanese politicians can bark all they want, but I think they are very afraid the US will actually come out and oppose Yasukuni, which will totally undermine their position. I think most Japanese will just settle down and be happy they don't have to debate this so hotly in Japan in public anymore, and individual citizens can go to Yasukuni if they want to or not. But the government will stay out.
kunomchu rightfully asks me --
As for blaming Americans? I don't agree. Japanese constantly want to stand on their own ground by becoming a respectable world power. If they had balls, they would end this debacle themselves. Americans aren't the bosses of the world you know. They also aren't the best mediators.
Yes, the American government aren't the best mediators, and Bush has destroyed America's ability to be a fair mediator, but Clinton was starting to fix that before Bush screwed everything all up and made the reputation of America in the world dirt. But even Clinton had his faults, I will agree. Now more people are beginning to see the light in the US, not just because, as you say, Americans ARE not the boss of the world, but because the US is UNABLE be the boss of the world all by itself-- its not realistic. All the countries are connected in a world wide economy, and North Korea is not just one country's problem.
As for the Japanese who "want to stand on their own ground by becoming a respectable world power" without the US, this is all just talk-talk-talk by the politicians. The Japanese Defense Force experts know that a Japanese military independent and separated from US deterrent power is just a pipe dream of the politicians. And look at the biggest advocates of that, like Koizumi -- he still acts like a childish lap dog with Bush, long after both US citizens and the world see Bush as a completely wrong and destructive bully.
Also you fail to see the contradiction in your own statement -- To people like Koizumi, Abe, and others, going to Yasukuni (what you call the debacle) and building up an independent Japanese military that can act more aggressively (standing on their own ground, "having balls") are not two separate issues, but two parts of the SAME issue. All of the biggest Hawks in Japan are Yasukuni supporters. What's going on? They are trying to imitate the US neocons like Bush and Cheney, but they have failed to see that these kinds of policies have brought nothing but disaster and grief to the US and other countries, just like Japan's actions in WWII brought nothing but grief and disaster to Japan and other countries.
Also, Economic greed by Japan does not justify their action as an act of national security.
Again this constant artificial separation. Go to the history books. Everytime Japan unjustly invaded a country after the start of the Meiji period, especially after 1904, it always said, "we have to do this protect our rights and interests," in other words, their economic interests, and their national security. If you can not understand that economic exploitation and military expansion are two equal heads of the ugly beast called imperialism, you have failed to understand non-marxist history, marxist history, and the only history you understand is the way of thinking Yasukuni promotes, but you just want to blame Japan and not another.
EVERY time one country invades another, it always claims national security as the reason, true or not. Take Iraq -- the US (falsely) claimed national security as the reason. If we gave every country a green light to invade another just because they said, "we have to do this for national security" we would all be stuck in a neverending war.
And BTW, you can talk all you want about the Yuan Dynasty or whatever, but if China keeps going on about "national security" to justify any and all actions, China will end up with the same reputation the US has now. When the major think tank in China claimed that the ancient Korean kingdom of Koguryo was a Chinese country, it made Koreans furious and suspicious of China, right when Koreans thought they could build a better relationship with China to balance out a more "bossy" Japan and US. This is not helpful, nor is Yasukuni, and it gives Japanese Hawks the excuse to keep patronizing Yasukuni.