What do you think of Japan's militarization plans?

[The_Hypocrite]

Wow,,,I see another left wing bleeding heart liberal who has a brain smaller than a pea,,,,now siding with the Japanese,,,Do not forget,,,the Japanese started the war by bombing Pearl Harbour 1st,,,do not forget the brutality of the Japanese,,,when the Japs invaded China,,even the Nazis were shocked by the Japanese brutality towards the Chinese.


And the 2 weak atom bombs dropped on japan were nothing compared to the rape of nanking and japanese agression,,,more people were killed by conventional means done by the japanese,,than the bombing of japan by conventional and atomic means lah,,,

and many left wing bullshit sprouts tat Japan would have surrendered and no need to use the Atom bomb,,,that is complete bull crap as the Japanese army was about to launch a coup to prevent the Emperor from surrendering as they wanted to fight to the last man,

So if the atom bombs werent dropped,,,the casualty rate would have been higher as the americans would have to launch a land invasion and all the Japanese civilians etc were being trained to repel the americans,,,

since u are soo pro japanese,,if the invasion happen more jap civilians would have been killed as they would have been shot by the americans as they yanks have to defend themselves,,


Also look at how brutal the Japanese treated Prisoners of war,,,

Yes, Japan killed many Singapore civilians. This is a documented historical fact. Japan also killed many civilians in countries like China, Thailand, Malaysia, Korea etc. This can't be disputed.

But America also killed many Japanese civilians by dropping not one but two nuclear bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

If Japan should be made to apologise (and pay reparations to the victims' families) should the USA not be forced to do the same?

Why is the US allowed to maintain a strong military and to continue to stockpile its nuclear arsenal, whereas Japan is not allowed to re-militarise itself?

 

[Fook Seng]

Stalin and Mao were quite good friends.

<img src="http://www.sammyboy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=8999"/>

<img src="http://www.sammyboy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9000"/>

Russian and China were natural enemies because of their common borders. Stalin and Mao were good friends because, in the name of the Cold War, the hostile USA forced them into a corner to be friends. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Otherwise, history would have been written differently. It seems history is repeating itself. The USA is pitting neighbours against neighbours for its own national interest. Japan will be destroyed.

 

[Tuayapeh]

Why Japanese attacked on pearl harbor because Japan was at war with China. Despite being a military superpower, their war with China was using up their resources. During that time, most of their resources especially oil were coming from the US. The US did not approve of Japanese aggression in China and they declared an embargo on Japan. This means they would stop supplying Japan with raw materials. So where would Japan get their resources to continue the war now?

The Japanese High Command carefully discussed this and came up with the conclusion that the Dutch East Indies would be the best place to gain resources. But they knew that an attack on the Dutch East Indies would probably bring the US into the war. So they had to find a way to prevent the US from fighting with them until they conquered the Dutch East Indies. That's when they planned Pearl Harbor. The goal of Pearl Harbor was to disable the American fleet for a few months to give them enough time to conquer the Dutch East Indies and to absorb its resources to finance their war in China and the US once the US' navy was rebuilt.

 

[palden]

I am totally for the idea of Japan to raise her army ones again, not to get aggressive but as a deterrence against the Chinese.

Nowadays, no amount of defense can deter the Chinese. The Chinese are not aggressive in nature.

 

[Fook Seng]

Some people predict that the world will be divided into two in the future: the West with USA as leader, and the East with China as leader. But I think it could be a repeat of the Three Kingdoms of ancient China - the US dominated West, the China-dominated Asia, and the Russia-dominated Eurasia.

I doubt the rest of the West will necessarily follow the USA. Today they are behind the USA because of its economic strength. Once that got subordinated, Europe will have to see which side is more useful to them and their alignment will change. Already today, not all Western countries viewed the future in the same way. The USA might still harbour the ambition of staying as the dominant power and believe it would continue to do so. But many Western countries are seeing change as inevitable and are adjusting their foreign policies accordingly. In recent years, you see the USA going into war almost by themselves with only one or two other alliance partners which are still very much dependent on them for their economic contribution. No longer can the USA depend on the entire European bloc to be behind them.

 

[Fook Seng]

But America also killed many Japanese civilians by dropping not one but two nuclear bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

If Japan should be made to apologise (and pay reparations to the victims' families) should the USA not be forced to do the same?

Why is the US allowed to maintain a strong military and to continue to stockpile its nuclear arsenal, whereas Japan is not allowed to re-militarise itself?

Yes all offensive nations should apologise and repent for their sins. I agree. Why is the USA so special?

 

[Fook Seng]

Why the Korean hated the Japanese ? Because those Korean have been brainwashed since young by education and media .

Because the Koreans know their history.

 

[The_Hypocrite]

I do believe that the USA economic strength will pick up soon,,if their Gahmen can get things in control,,without all these Congress vs Senate and all the bullshit,,,USA has a huge private sector whereas Singapore has a huge Gahmen sector,,,

its the gahmen and taxes that need to be revamp in the USA for it to grow again,,,but with a paralysed Government, the rent seeking behaviour of the jews and so on,,,the USA is finding it hard to reform and move on,,

I doubt the rest of the West will necessarily follow the USA. Today they are behind the USA because of its economic strength. Once that got subordinated, Europe will have to see which side is more useful to them and their alignment will change. Already today, not all Western countries viewed the future in the same way. The USA might still harbour the ambition of staying as the dominant power and believe it would continue to do so. But many Western countries are seeing change as inevitable and are adjusting their foreign policies accordingly. In recent years, you see the USA going into war almost by themselves with only one or two other alliance partners which are still very much dependent on them for their economic contribution. No longer can the USA depend on the entire European bloc to be behind them.

 

[Tuayapeh]

Because the Koreans know their history.

Can I say those who voted PAP because PAP is right ? of course not !!! Because they have been brainwashed !!!

 

[maozedong]

Do not underestimate the USA. In spite of all its financial problems today, the USA is fundamentally in a better shape than China. It's land mass is roughly of the same size as China but it's population only less than one quarter of China. It still has a lot of land undeveloped and a lot of resources untapped. It's agricultural output is enough to feed all its people (if they don't eat like pigs). If there is a world war today, the people in USA will not starve if there is more equitable distribution of resources. However, there is no denying that USA is a falling superpower. Once the USD loses its Petrodollar status, it's game over for the US because it will no longer be able to finance its military. But there is a Chinese saying: a dying camel is still stronger than a horse.

Also, do not underestimate the "blood" ties of the Anglo-Saxon world, i.e. English speaking countries, UK, USA, Australia, NZ and Canada. They may see each other as one of themselves in a world conflict. It may well be a Clash of the Civilizations as per Samuel Huntington. So there will be blocs - and the most likely leader of the western world will still be the USA. Possible that it could be Germany but unlikely because of its past. Whatever it is, it won't be a China-dominated unipolar world - China also does not harbor such ambition.

I doubt the rest of the West will necessarily follow the USA. Today they are behind the USA because of its economic strength. Once that got subordinated, Europe will have to see which side is more useful to them and their alignment will change. Already today, not all Western countries viewed the future in the same way. The USA might still harbour the ambition of staying as the dominant power and believe it would continue to do so. But many Western countries are seeing change as inevitable and are adjusting their foreign policies accordingly. In recent years, you see the USA going into war almost by themselves with only one or two other alliance partners which are still very much dependent on them for their economic contribution. No longer can the USA depend on the entire European bloc to be behind them.

 

[Sideswipe]

Why Japanese attacked on pearl harbor because Japan was at war with China. Despite being a military superpower, their war with China was using up their resources. During that time, most of their resources especially oil were coming from the US. The US did not approve of Japanese aggression in China and they declared an embargo on Japan. This means they would stop supplying Japan with raw materials. So where would Japan get their resources to continue the war now?

The Japanese High Command carefully discussed this and came up with the conclusion that the Dutch East Indies would be the best place to gain resources. But they knew that an attack on the Dutch East Indies would probably bring the US into the war. So they had to find a way to prevent the US from fighting with them until they conquered the Dutch East Indies. That's when they planned Pearl Harbor. The goal of Pearl Harbor was to disable the American fleet for a few months to give them enough time to conquer the Dutch East Indies and to absorb its resources to finance their war in China and the US once the US' navy was rebuilt.

Richard Sorge, the Soviet spy working through Hozumi Ozaki and Kinkazu Saionji managed to impress and convince the Japanese officials the benefits of attacking South. another key factor was that the Japanese Navy was idle prior to the 4 years wars in China. the Navy looked upon the American and British as its imaginary enemies. the Army was running amok in China. the Navy was very eager to enter the war to show its strength. the Japanese Navy leaders pushed Japan into the war with the United States and Britain.

on the other side. late Nov 1941. the US and Japan discussed a modus vivendi for a three month truce. but Henry Dexter White ( Soviet spy ) convinced President Roosevelt to give the Japanese an ultimatum instead. the Russians were very anxious for US to enter into the war against Japan and Germany. if there was a 90 days truce. the Japanese might reconsider the wisdom of going to war with the US. it was in Dec 1941, when the German army suffered its failure in the Battle of Moscow.


the wars were all schemed by the Russians.

 

[zhihau]

What are your views?

we've got too many idiots in today's world, if they like to wipe each other out, please do it at home

 

[Fook Seng]

Ask me to live in Japan for a few years ? Are you kidding me ? Lol . I know lots of Japanese stuff and culture you can't even imagine . You don't even know who you are talking to . Few Korean buy Japanese car is the example of being brainwashed by their own government . And also because korea did produce their own brand of car . It's like most Malaysian driving proton and not other brand . For your information most HK ppl protest about Diaoyu Dao aka 尖閣諸島 (Senkaku) are those PRC living there . Even Jackie chan carry china balls .

Jackie Chan is from Hong Kong, whatever his allegiance, you cannot change that. Your example of Hongkong illustrates exactly what people really feel about the Japanese occupation of Diaoyu Dao. Despite their opposition to so many Chinese policies, Hongkongers can understand the history behind Diaoyu Dao.

How about the Taiwanese? They also protested against Japan's control of Diaoyu Dao. Taiwanese are also brainwashed by CCP?

So you have been immersed deeply in Japanese culture. Now we can see, where you are coming from. Are you brainwashed by Japanese version of " history"?

 

[Tuayapeh]

Richard Sorge, the Soviet spy working through Hozumi Ozaki and Kinkazu Saionji managed to impress and convince the Japanese officials the benefits of attacking South. another key factor was that the Japanese Navy was idle prior to the 4 years wars in China. the Navy looked upon the American and British as its imaginary enemies. the Army was running amok in China. the Navy was very eager to enter the war to show its strength. the Japanese Navy leaders pushed Japan into the war with the United States and Britain.

on the other side. late Nov 1941. the US and Japan discussed a modus vivendi for a three month truce. but Henry Dexter White ( Soviet spy ) convinced President Roosevelt to give the Japanese an ultimatum instead. the Russians were very anxious for US to enter into the war against Japan and Germany. if there was a 90 days truce. the Japanese might reconsider the wisdom of going to war with the US. it was in Dec 1941, when the German army suffered its failure in the Battle of Moscow.


the wars were all schemed by the Russians.

Thanks for the read , very interesting . where can I find more information on that ? Thanks in advance .

 

[maozedong]

You are absolutely right that the casualty of the two bombs may indeed pale in comparison with the atrocities committed by the Japanese on civilians in China and other countries they conquered. And that the Japs were absolutely cruel to their POWs. No other countries in Asia at that time taught their children that people of other races are sub-human - and that's how the Japanese soldiers saw the people they conquered - not as human beings - and that's why they could commit all those atrocities without any qualms. Even today, there are hardcore nationalists in Japan who think this way. You don't find this kind of thing in most other countries.

But it is now known that many US generals were against dropping the A bomb. Even those who agreed objected to dropping them on cities with so many civilians. Continuous raining of conventional bombs could've forced Japan into surrender. But the US wanted to end the war FAST because they feared the Russians would come in and grab a piece of Japan. And so they dropped the two A bombs. This is the opinion of many experts, which I also concur.

and many left wing bullshit sprouts tat Japan would have surrendered and no need to use the Atom bomb,,,that is complete bull crap as the Japanese army was about to launch a coup to prevent the Emperor from surrendering as they wanted to fight to the last man,

So if the atom bombs werent dropped,,,the casualty rate would have been higher as the americans would have to launch a land invasion and all the Japanese civilians etc were being trained to repel the americans,,,
,

 

[The_Hypocrite]

Actually the generals was pro dropping the bomb,,when Macarthur planned the invasion,,,he wanted to drop the bombs on japanese positions before the troops went in..thank goodness this did not happen as the US troops would have been exposed to the radiation too,,,

and the Japanese military wanted to fight on,,,,so the bombs had to be dropped

You are absolutely right that the casualty of the two bombs may indeed pale in comparison with the atrocities committed by the Japanese on civilians in China and other countries they conquered. And that the Japs were absolutely cruel to their POWs. No other countries in Asia at that time taught their children that people of other races are sub-human - and that's how the Japanese soldiers saw the people they conquered - not as human beings - and that's why they could commit all those atrocities without any qualms. Even today, there are hardcore nationalists in Japan who think this way. You don't find this kind of thing in most other countries.

But it is now known that many US generals were against dropping the A bomb. Even those who agreed objected to dropping them on cities with so many civilians. Continuous raining of conventional bombs could've forced Japan into surrender. But the US wanted to end the war FAST because they feared the Russians would come in and grab a piece of Japan. And so they dropped the two A bombs. This is the opinion of many experts, which I also concur.

 

[Fook Seng]

I do believe that the USA economic strength will pick up soon,,if their Gahmen can get things in control,,without all these Congress vs Senate and all the bullshit,,,USA has a huge private sector whereas Singapore has a huge Gahmen sector,,,

its the gahmen and taxes that need to be revamp in the USA for it to grow again,,,but with a paralysed Government, the rent seeking behaviour of the jews and so on,,,the USA is finding it hard to reform and move on,,

The US national debt needs 10 years to correct itself based on the optimistic scenario that the two parties can agree on how to do it. By that time it would be too late to stop China from taking over economically. The continuation of QE for two more years at least though necessary to bring back its competitiveness will force others to live with a weaker dollar for a longer time. This trend would not be a good thing in the long term for the rest of the world. They too have to adjust. China has already started to restructure its economy to put higher weightage on the domestic economy. The relative strength of the two currencies will push China to overtake the USA faster, not slower, as on the PPP basis, the two countries are already running neck to neck but on a current basis, with the relative strength of the two currencies the gap will only narrow. The weakened dollar means more holdings will be away from the USD. The USA is making this choice because they have no other choice. They need the employment.

 

[Tuayapeh]

Jackie Chan is from Hong Kong, whatever his allegiance, you cannot change that. Your example of Hongkong illustrates exactly what people really feel about the Japanese occupation of Diaoyu Dao. Despite their opposition to so many Chinese policies, Hongkongers can understand the history behind Diaoyu Dao.

How about the Taiwanese? They also protested against Japan's control of Diaoyu Dao. Taiwanese are also brainwashed by CCP?

So you have been immersed deeply in Japanese culture. Now we can see, where you are coming from. Are you brainwashed by Japanese version of " history"?

You cant deny the facts that Jackie is born in china until now he still think highly of china . The facts that Everyone wants that island its because of oil, mineral, and fishing rights in surrounding waters.

 

[Fook Seng]

Can I say those who voted PAP because PAP is right ? of course not !!! Because they have been brainwashed !!!

You have gone through the same brainwash. Did you vote for the PAP?

 

[Tuayapeh]

Was it necessary to drop the atom bomb on Japan?
After more then Sixty years later, many scholars still argue about the decision to use atom bombs against Hiroshima and Nagasaki as a way to hasten the end of World War II . So don't draw your own conclusion . Just use it as a reference .

YES :

The atomic bomb was necessary to end the war with Japan at the earliest possible moment. By the early summer of 1945, Japanese leaders knew they could not win. But they fought on in hopes of securing better surrender terms.
President Harry S. Truman considered several ways to convince Japan to quit the war: 1) intensifying the already heavy bombing of Japanese cities; 2) waiting for the Soviet Union, an ally in defeating Germany, to join the war against Japan; 3) allowing Japan's emperor, Hirohito, to remain on his throne; and 4) invading Japan.

The first three options were far from certain to compel a Japanese surrender quickly, however, and each posed serious military, political, and diplomatic risks. More than 55,000 Americans had already died fighting the Japanese in the Pacific. An invasion was certain to be very costly in American lives.

When the atomic bomb became available in July 1945, it appeared to be the most promising way to end the war as soon as possible and without the drawbacks of the alternatives.

The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and then Nagasaki persuaded Emperor Hirohito, who had wavered for weeks, that the war must end immediately. Combined with the Soviet entry into the conflict, the atom bombs brought about Japan's surrender within a few days.

The bomb was necessary to accomplish Truman's primary objectives of forcing a prompt Japanese surrender and saving American lives, perhaps thousands of them.


No :

When General Dwight D. Eisenhower, then the Supreme Allied Commander, was informed by the Secretary of War that the atomic bomb was going to be used, he later recalled saying it was unnecessary because Japan was already largely defeated. Eisenhower said the bomb was "no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives." At one point after the war he said bluntly, "It wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing."

Before the bomb was used, U.S. intelligence officials believed the war would likely end when two things happened: When the U.S. let Japan know their Emperor could stay on as a figurehead, and when the Soviet army attacked. The U.S. did tell Japan the Emperor could remain, and the Soviets declared war, as agreed, on August 8.

But U.S. officials chose not to test whether this intelligence was correct. Instead, Hiroshima was bombed on August 6, and Nagasaki on August 9. Because of logistics, an invasion of Japan could not begin for another three months, so the U.S. could have waited to see if Japan would surrender before dropping the atomic bombs.

Most top World War II military leaders are all on record agreeing with Eisenhower. Admiral William Leahy, President Truman's Chief of Staff, later called the bomb a "barbarous weapon" that was unnecessary. Leahy wrote, "The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender. . . . In being the first to use it, we . . . adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages.