Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-14-2013, 11:56 PM
 
Location: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
11,155 posts, read 29,207,864 times
Reputation: 5479

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679 View Post
The Chinese and Japanese don't like each other but why would they go to war? It's more likely China would try and forcefully annex part of Russia.
How do you come to the idea that China would start messing with Russia since both are nuclear superpowers and Russia is not a Country that would let China push them around and Russia would have India on their side and then Pakistan would join China to take on India and well the U.S. and the rest of us Western Forces would side with Russia and India over Pakistan and China but to have try to prevent a nuclear war sucks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-15-2013, 12:55 AM
 
3,353 posts, read 6,417,701 times
Reputation: 1128
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTOlover View Post
How do you come to the idea that China would start messing with Russia since both are nuclear superpowers and Russia is not a Country that would let China push them around and Russia would have India on their side and then Pakistan would join China to take on India and well the U.S. and the rest of us Western Forces would side with Russia and India over Pakistan and China but to have try to prevent a nuclear war sucks.
Also China and Russia are build great relations at the moment, so it would be a against each others interest to ever fight. If Russia and China did fight though, America really wouldn't be able to join; neither is really considered an ally to us but instead just our investors.

Japan and China fighting over oil (that's what the Islands possess) essentially isn't likely to happen, the UN would obviously intervene and say that islands belong to Japan for pretty obvious reasons:

1.) The UN is pretty much the US's 'peacekeeping' organization.
2.) By the US being allies with Japan, and the relationship of the US and UN stated above would automatically give Japan the islands.

Would China accept this ruling? No, of course not but they'd probably occupy the islands anyways and have Russia back them up on protecting the island. As most of us know Japan doesn't really have an military and it's our job to protect them, therefore we'd try to keep Japan cool about China illegally occupying its islands because China is our investor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2013, 01:09 AM
 
Location: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
11,155 posts, read 29,207,864 times
Reputation: 5479
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMOREBOY View Post
Also China and Russia are build great relations at the moment, so it would be a against each others interest to ever fight. If Russia and China did fight though, America really wouldn't be able to join; neither is really considered an ally to us but instead just our investors.

Japan and China fighting over oil (that's what the Islands possess) essentially isn't likely to happen, the UN would obviously intervene and say that islands belong to Japan for pretty obvious reasons:

1.) The UN is pretty much the US's 'peacekeeping' organization.
2.) By the US being allies with Japan, and the relationship of the US and UN stated above would automatically give Japan the islands.

Would China accept this ruling? No, of course not but they'd probably occupy the islands anyways and have Russia back them up on protecting the island. As most of us know Japan doesn't really have an military and it's our job to protect them, therefore we'd try to keep Japan cool about China illegally occupying its islands because China is our investor.
Umm the have a very large and highly advanced military that trains with the U.S. and RIMPAC 2012 delt with China trying to take the islands by force.

RIMPAC 2012 is the 23rd exercise in the series and started on 29 June 2012. 42 ships, including the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN 68) and other elements of Carrier Strike Group 11, six submarines, 200 aircraft and 25,000 personnel from 22 different nations took part in Hawaii. The exercise involved surface combatants from the U.S., Canada, Japan, Australia, South Korea and Chile.

The US Navy demonstrated its green fleet of biofuel-driven vessels for which it purchased 450,000 gallons of biofuel, the largest single purchase of biofuel in history at a cost of $12m. On July 17, USNS Henry J. Kaiser (T-AO-187) delivered 900,000 gallons of biofuel and traditional petroleum-based fuel to the Nimitz's Carrier Strike Group 11.

The exercises included units or personnel from Australia, Canada, Chile, Colombia, France, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of the Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Thailand, Tonga, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Russia participated actively for the first time, as did the Philippines, reportedly due to the escalating tensions with the People's Republic of China over ownership of Scarborough Shoal.
RIMPAC - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2013, 01:33 AM
 
Location: Texas
38,859 posts, read 25,422,751 times
Reputation: 24780
Default what if China and Japan go to war?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Angorlee View Post
It is a real possibility that those two could go to war in the near future.
No, it isn't. It's nothing more than a silly notion.

Quote:
That would put America in a bind because we have a treaty with Japan(defense treaty) but we need China to help finance our entitlement programs. So what do we do? We have to side with Japan or be the biggest traitors in history. Its scary.
Time to clean out that Y2K bunker and stock up on peanut butter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2013, 01:49 AM
 
11,768 posts, read 10,227,786 times
Reputation: 3444
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTOlover View Post
How do you come to the idea that China would start messing with Russia since both are nuclear superpowers and Russia is not a Country that would let China push them around and Russia would have India on their side and then Pakistan would join China to take on India and well the U.S. and the rest of us Western Forces would side with Russia and India over Pakistan and China but to have try to prevent a nuclear war sucks.
China is crowded and Russia has land and a declining population, that's how. The idea that China would take Russian land is less absurd than China going to war with Japan, not more likely, but less absurd.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2013, 04:17 AM
 
Location: Fredericktown,Ohio
7,168 posts, read 5,350,139 times
Reputation: 2922
Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679 View Post
China is crowded and Russia has land and a declining population, that's how. The idea that China would take Russian land is less absurd than China going to war with Japan, not more likely, but less absurd.
They trade with with each other and in their own currencies I can see the 2 countries making some kind of land deal for Chinesse migrants.

It would be a shame if the U S gets dragged into this over a Island dispute and that dam treaty. I sort of like " trade with all treaties with none" approach, the way Hillary was talking we are going to honor the treaty. I am rooting for this to get solved we do not no war, there is enough problems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2013, 07:29 AM
 
210 posts, read 274,176 times
Reputation: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swingblade View Post
It would be a shame if the U S gets dragged into this over a Island dispute and that dam treaty. I sort of like " trade with all treaties with none" approach, the way Hillary was talking we are going to honor the treaty. I am rooting for this to get solved we do not no war, there is enough problems.
The US should stick up for Japan because of the fact that it was the US that returned the Senkaku islands to Japan in 1972 along with Okinawa. In 1971, the US President Richard Nixon confirmed Japan's "residual sovereignty" over the Senkaku Islands just before a deal to return Okinawa Prefecture to Japan, according to recordings and other materials kept at the Nixon Library in California. Nixon made the confirmation in a conversation with his national security adviser Henry Kissinger.

The CIA also stated in related documents that the Japanese claim to sovereignty over the Senkakus is strong and that any dispute over the islands would not have arisen had it not been for the discovery of potential oil reserves on the nearby continental shelf in the late 1960s.

China needs to stop ignoring The San Francisco Peace Treaty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2013, 08:16 AM
 
9,240 posts, read 9,706,841 times
Reputation: 3315
Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679 View Post
China is crowded and Russia has land and a declining population, that's how. The idea that China would take Russian land is less absurd than China going to war with Japan, not more likely, but less absurd.
Mainland China is less crowded than Japan, S Korea, Taiwan... not to mention India.
China's population is almost steady too, and will start to decline soon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2013, 08:45 AM
 
409 posts, read 496,244 times
Reputation: 369
China isn't stupid enough to go to war with Japan and possibly the U.S.

This whole thing is just dick-waving by two new nationalist leaders to distract that "LOL WE CAN"T FIX OUR COUNTRIES PROBLEMS".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2013, 08:51 AM
 
409 posts, read 496,244 times
Reputation: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
I'm surprised China didn't go in and finish off Japan after WWII for what they did to folks.

Rape of Nanking: Japan's Forgotten WWII Atrocities - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com

Also, that yahoo voices article neglect to mention that once the Neighboring Countries Clause was passed, these textbook incidents were literally statistically insignificant. With only one right-wing textbook approved in recent memories and is now being used in less that half a percentage point of Japan schools (all private schools, Public schools refused to use the book).

Here are screencaps of a JPN History Textbook.
????????

Atrocities are obviously given mention.

The fact that people keep spreading this misinformation about this stuff kinda pisses me off.

To quote several redditors.

(A) Here we go again... Since 1982, the Japanese education ministry has required textbooks to conform with the "Neighboring Country Clause" (近隣諸国条項): Textbooks ought to show understanding and seek international harmony in their treatment of modern and contemporary historical events involving neighboring Asian countries (近隣のアジア諸国との間の近現代の歴史的事象の扱いに国際理解と国際協調の見地から必要な配慮がされてい ること). Textbooks published since the 1980's mention that large numbers of Asian civilians were killed by Japan's invasions and the Nanking massacre is also mentioned. A Stanford University study of American, Japanese, Korean, and Chinese history textbooks found that Japanese textbooks were the least nationalistic[1] : Far from being nationalistic, Japanese textbooks seem the least likely to stir patriotic passions. They do not celebrate war, they do not stress the importance of the military, and they tell no tales of battlefield heroism. Instead they offer a rather dry chronology of events without much interpretive narrative. Japanese textbooks are deliberately written in this somewhat subdued manner, partly to avoid overt interpretation and because they are aimed at preparing students for university entrance examinations. Nonetheless, Japanese textbooks do offer a clear, if somewhat implicit, message: the wars in Asia were a product of Japan’s imperial expansion and the decision to go to war with the United States was a disastrous mistake that inflicted a terrible cost on the nation and its civilian population. Indeed, that basic tale is what prompted revisionist critics to author their own textbooks to correct what was seen as a “masochistic” view of modern Japan.

Contrary to popular belief, Japanese textbooks by no means avoid some of the most controversial wartime moments. The widely used textbooks contain accounts, though not detailed ones, of the massacre of Chinese civilians in Nanjing in 1937 by Japanese forces. Some, but not all, of the textbooks also describe the forced mobilization of labor in the areas occupied by Japan, including mention of the recruitment of “comfort women” to serve in wartime brothels. All of the nations were guilty of leaving out descriptions of events that reflect badly on themselves. It could be said that history textbooks in China and South Korea are guilty of even worse distortion, especially China's whitewashing of the millions who died under Mao's rule.
Far from Oblivion: The Nanking Massacre in Japanese Historical Writing for Children and Young Adults[2] Concentrating on atrocity as reflected in Japanese popular historical writing for children and adolescents since the 1960s, this essay argues that such war crimes are far from ignored. Representations of the Nanking Massacre in particular, and of Japanese World War II atrocities in general, have been widely mobilized in Japan to inculcate an anti-war philosophy. Japanese nationalists face an "uphill battle" to spread their views. Opinion polls show[3] the majority of Japanese do not share the views of deniers.

(B)To further back this up, let's check out why there are articles about the textbook problems that make their way into the press: BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | Japan textbook angers Chinese, Korean press[1] This article from 2005 covers the work of the Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform[2] , a fringe nationalist group that makes it their business to write textbooks that deny war crimes. This article is not about whether this textbook has actually been used in schools, but simply about the fact that it passed the dry bureaucratic standards set for textbooks in Japan. The book technically passed regulation standards, but ended up being used by less than 1% of schools in Japan, all of them private. The BBC article ultimately amounts to sensationalism.

(C)It is funny that you mention "government censorship" as if it is being used to hide war crimes. If anything, such censorship has prevented nationalists from whitewashing history. Over the years, the ministry of education (even under the conservative LDP) has forced nationalist publishers to make major changes to textbook content. For example, in 2009: The social studies textbook, published by Jiyusha, originally carried a passage on war history stating, “In areas that were invaded, Japanese troops … were also unable to fully avert unjust killings and abuse toward unarmed civilians and soldiers of enemy countries who became prisoners of war.” This passage was judged to be “difficult to understand,” and the wording was subsequently changed to “… carried out unjust killings and abuse, leaving behind great horrors.” In another passage on the period after Korea’s opening, the phrase that Japan “assisted in modernization” was changed to “assisted in military system reform” on the basis that the original wording could be misinterpreted. Another section on Japan’s advance south was also changed over fears that it could be taken to mean that Japan contributed to independence of countries in Asia.

There, three separate "bestof'd" reddit posts detailing how much this textbook stuff is sensationalized.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top