Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

nomsheep wrote:Most people who hae legit reason to bear a grudge are at the very least in their seventies.

Nom

I know young Koreans, Philipinos, and Chinese that still hate the Japanese. From what I understand, it's not a small group in these countries, either, that carry these emotions.
On the flip side, my friends and room mates from back in my younger days that are Japanese knew nothing of Korean comfort women or Nanking until they saw some specials on the news while we were sitting around our place.
They were fairly horrified and were asking me what I knew about it. It really rattled them badly.

I think a lot of Westerners are pretty ignorant about exactly what went down in WW2 in the Pacific Theater in regard to the bad behavior of the Japanese.

True dat.

The depth of feeling there can be a little surprising sometimes. A Chinese friend of mine was probably one of the kindest, least prejudiced people I've met...until the subject of the Japanese came up. I really didn't see it coming. And then she told me some stories that her grandmother told her about things the Japanese soldiers did...wow.

Note that I don't mean to single out the Japanese, because basically every army is guilty of some bad things during wartime. Just saying there are some serious and deep grudges involved in that particular case.

Mannahnin wrote:True dat.

Word is bond.

Though I don't know if it's really the average person's fault. They don't really teach it in school, generally.

I was surprised traveling in the south pacific how quickly folks could get fired up about Japan from WWII. What disturbed me was how it would be phrased. "Japan has yet to pay......", or "Japan will pay for......". Perhaps it was just posturing, an attempt to impress the locals. Anyway, with how taxed the US military is right now I think it is wise for Japan to become less defense dependent. Does anyone know when our (the US) defense obligation to Japan is up?

Insurgency Walker wrote:I was surprised traveling in the south pacific how quickly folks could get fired up about Japan from WWII. What disturbed me was how it would be phrased. "Japan has yet to pay......", or "Japan will pay for......". Perhaps it was just posturing, an attempt to impress the locals. Anyway, with how taxed the US military is right now I think it is wise for Japan to become less defense dependent. Does anyone know when our (the US) defense obligation to Japan is up?

about 5 years ago Japan was able to start having a military again, I might just be thinking of their self defense forces getting an air craft carrier. I think the ban on japan having a military per say was only for 50 years. But the US has yet to leave a country its fought in, there's no telling how long our bases will remain. one of two things would have to happen to get our troops out of japan. Ron Paul would have to get elected president and keep his word, or Japan would have to kick us out.

Monster Rain wrote:
Though I don't know if it's really the average person's fault. They don't really teach it in school, generally.

We covered it, but I'm fairly certain it was in honors history, so it might not have been in the normal class.

That said, the majority of the information was about the Japanese treatment of American POWs, not the treatment of the Chinese, Koreans, etc.

Manchu wrote:

Insurgency Walker wrote:Long term....they should build more KIA's (or VW Beatles).

Kia, huh? Hmm.
.

Well, successful entry level export products. I was going to say Datsuns, (because I would love me a new 240z) but who remembers those.
Just think of how kick butt a Japanese built Kia Velostar would be (If you liked that kind of thing).

Back on topic. So the thing blows up, and we say "no soup for you". Talk about a double slap.

Insurgency Walker wrote:I was surprised traveling in the south pacific how quickly folks could get fired up about Japan from WWII. What disturbed me was how it would be phrased. "Japan has yet to pay......", or "Japan will pay for......". Perhaps it was just posturing, an attempt to impress the locals.

Well, look at this way. After losing WWII, a war in which Japan committed numerous atrocities, it rose to become the dominant Asian economy, with first world living conditions and democratic governance. Compare this to the majority of Southeast Asia, and the sentiment seems fairly understandable.

sirlynchmob wrote:

Insurgency Walker wrote:I was surprised traveling in the south pacific how quickly folks could get fired up about Japan from WWII. What disturbed me was how it would be phrased. "Japan has yet to pay......", or "Japan will pay for......". Perhaps it was just posturing, an attempt to impress the locals. Anyway, with how taxed the US military is right now I think it is wise for Japan to become less defense dependent. Does anyone know when our (the US) defense obligation to Japan is up?

about 5 years ago Japan was able to start having a military again, I might just be thinking of their self defense forces getting an air craft carrier. I think the ban on japan having a military per say was only for 50 years. But the US has yet to leave a country its fought in, there's no telling how long our bases will remain. one of two things would have to happen to get our troops out of japan. Ron Paul would have to get elected president and keep his word, or Japan would have to kick us out.

Ron Paul is however an obligations man, and we have or had an obligation to defend Japan. Certainly the Japanese would like to kick us off of some parts, but we are an economic boon wherever we put a base. Half the reason some were built.

Insurgency Walker wrote:I was surprised traveling in the south pacific how quickly folks could get fired up about Japan from WWII. What disturbed me was how it would be phrased. "Japan has yet to pay......", or "Japan will pay for......". Perhaps it was just posturing, an attempt to impress the locals. Anyway, with how taxed the US military is right now I think it is wise for Japan to become less defense dependent. Does anyone know when our (the US) defense obligation to Japan is up?

I found some good info about it.
http://www.cfr.org/japan/japan-its-military/p10439

dogma wrote:

Insurgency Walker wrote:I was surprised traveling in the south pacific how quickly folks could get fired up about Japan from WWII. What disturbed me was how it would be phrased. "Japan has yet to pay......", or "Japan will pay for......". Perhaps it was just posturing, an attempt to impress the locals.

Well, look at this way. After losing WWII, a war in which Japan committed numerous atrocities, it rose to become the dominant Asian economy, with first world living conditions and democratic governance. Compare this to the majority of Southeast Asia, and the sentiment seems fairly understandable.

Good point.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

sirlynchmob wrote:

Insurgency Walker wrote:I was surprised traveling in the south pacific how quickly folks could get fired up about Japan from WWII. What disturbed me was how it would be phrased. "Japan has yet to pay......", or "Japan will pay for......". Perhaps it was just posturing, an attempt to impress the locals. Anyway, with how taxed the US military is right now I think it is wise for Japan to become less defense dependent. Does anyone know when our (the US) defense obligation to Japan is up?

I found some good info about it.
http://www.cfr.org/japan/japan-its-military/p10439

Thanks
Forgot is was part of the constitution, without a time line for changes.

Japan's had a Defense Force for donkey's years.

With regards to perceived eagerness to defend Japan in this thread; I really think that Westerners have a skewed view because the Japanese are 'our friends'. That nice country we were able to conquer and Westernise effectively and a pretty firm bastion (arguably as a quasi-puppet) out in the East where so many hostile powers were present.

We shouldn't gloss over what they did, though. It may seem a far cry away from what Japanese society is capable of today (they seem pretty turned off war) but they've not come to terms with it - or even accepted it, themselves.

The fact that we've already had one poster suggest that Nanking didn't happen just goes to show the disparity in our own considerations of atrocities: I think if a poster were to suggest that Katyn or Auschwitz were orchestrated setups, they'd have their male parts removed.

We have to get past our images of modern day Japan and accept that it was a totally different country before the American occupation.

Henners91 wrote:Japan's had a Defense Force for donkey's years.

One that the US has helped train and supply...

CptJake wrote:

Henners91 wrote:Japan's had a Defense Force for donkey's years.

One that the US has helped train and supply...

Not really surprising as I'd imagine that Japan hadn't exactly caught up with contemporary military practices...

The used to send (and still may but I don't know) their HAWK missile guys to live fire at Ft Bliss every year for example.

I would be happier if North Korea is left alone. China is enough to keep them in check.

All this talk about 'condemnation by rest of world' really means, this is a regime the US and Europe arent supporting. The rest of the world actually doesn't care.

North Korea actually benefits from its current status. We cut off trade, they think: good, that means no western interference in their affairs. Anything they actually need they get from China, without all the western commercialisation and marketing many countries find invasive.

Frankly the more the west complains the more we do the regime a favour.

Yes, it was rather nasty, but it isn't any more, and is extremely unlikely to become so nasty again.

Also, on the topic of Nanking, I am not denying that the Japanese military committed atrocities, nor am I defending those atrocities. My point was purely regarding Nanking. Many, many of the photos supposedly from the massacre have been proven to be fakes. This ranged from the subtle, with pictures of what were supposed to be Japanese soldiers wearing the wrong uniforms and holding weapons completely wrong (Japanese soldiers were very well trained in sword combat, and would never hold their swords the way shown in the photographs, which was actually the sword stance the Chinese used) to the outrageously obvious, such as pictures so poorly mashed together that people standing next to each other had shadows pointing in different directions. Also, most of the "evidence" comes from "personal experiences" which could have easily been from people paid or forced to deliver them. Combine this with the fact that until after China was relying on Japan for economic support the Chinese happily glossed over Nanking, and the evidence for the massacre becomes very shaky. On a side note, lets face it, if the Chinese had invaded Japan instead of Japan invading China, they would have treated the Japanese just as badly, if not worse.

Like I say, I'm absolutely not defending Japanese military atrocities (notice the emphasis on military) I'm just saying what I can gather from the evidence.

Henners91 wrote:Japan's had a Defense Force for donkey's years.

.

Yep, small group of great guys. Technically an extension of the police, with a good maritime section and air superiority fighters. Oh and tanks. But a bare minimum. When I was in the service, (20 years ago) and our infantry trained with theirs they seemed to do a lot with limited support. Their average age seemed to be older too, compared to ours. It seemed the "army" guys didn't get as much of a budget compared to the air and sea arms of the defense force. Just an impression, and from a limited sample, but an impression a few of us had.

Is there a law, similar to Godwins, about when Godzilla comes into the conversation if the Japanese military capabilities are discussed?

Godzilla, or tentacles.

I'd say it's even odds for either one.

Monster Rain wrote:Godzilla, or tentacles.

I'd say it's even odds for either one.

He who controls Godzooky, controls the universe.

purplefood wrote:Australia?
If there was a country that probably couldn't manage an invasion of Britain, Australia would likely head the list...
Or New Zealand which frankly would be even funnier to watch...

HEY! Your right though, but I'm Canadian, and we would be the only common wealth nation that would put up a fight agianst the British.