JapanInc OBEYS the Smirking Chimp!

[Taro Toporific]

Japan was right to back U.S
Lead Editorial / Daily Yomiuri / 02/20/03 01:50
[the final lines read]... At home, there are opinions critical of the government for having indicated it will throw its support behind the United States in the event of a war. However, it should be pointed out that, considering the circumstances surrounding Japan, there was no other option for this country.

Tokyo draws line in the sand, sends signal to Paris, Berlin
Asahi.com / 02/20/03 03:56
[the final line reads]... The sources said Tokyo will support the United States if it embarks on regime change in Baghdad despite great domestic concern about the advisability of such military action.

[Gaisaradatsuraku!]

Peace, peace, no matter what it costs we want peace. It will be interesting to look back on today's events one year from now. Iraq will be exposed for having WOMD and its leaders will be smoldering. The greater population will come through unscathed and there will be more terrorist activities.

Of course, I am for peace too. I don't see any danger in allowing fascist goverments continue to exist unfettered in a day an age where constructing a dirty bomb or funding the destruction of skyscrapers, etc., is mere childsplay. No need to intervene. No need to try to drag any group into the 21st century by force. That would just be wrong and ethnocentric.

[Taro Toporific]

Peace, peace, no matter what it costs we want peace. ...

The problem is that NO Japanese is interested in a fight in Iraq. Democratically speaking, the Japanese government's support is a travesty.

[Gaisaradatsuraku!]

What? No Japanese is interested in fighting with Iraq. First, that is not true but the second problem with this statement is that even if Japan supports the US effort NO Japanese will be on the front line. In other words no Japanese will be fighting in any event.

Lastly, when would the average Japanese be willing to expend its soldiers? Well, 50+ years of peacetime have lulled the Japanese into thinking peace is something you don't have to earn and manage. The answer is basically never. The only time the average dolt on Honki Dori would ever support using troops is if Japan itself were attacked. Not good enough for the international community from its number two economy.

[Armandeus]

The threat right across the Sea of Japan from my house, which is openly flaunting it's WMD and ranting about war, is much more worrysome to me than the threat in the Middle East, which doesn't seem to be of much concern even to neighboring countries there, and doesn't seem to own any ICBMs like whatshisface does. I have great doubts whether Bush's priorities are on straight. I expected Koizumi to support him, though. It would be surprising if he didn't.

[Armandeus]

Sorry, double post due to slow response. It looked like I was going to get timed out with a DNS error or something. My bad.

I will edit it and take this opportunity to ask this off-topic newbie question: what's the deal with the beer bottles?

[Taro Toporific]

What? No Japanese is interested in fighting with Iraq. First, that is not true.

"No" Japanese is interested in fighting" with Iraq. Period.

Ok, ok, I underlined "no" for good reason. Ask your Japanese friends, coworkers, and neighbors: nobody supports an Iraq war. Actually, there's plenty more Japanese interested in fighting Russia, NK or America than Iraq. Hell, I have my doubts about fighting willingness the dozens of SDF guys (com. engineers) I've worked with over the years ("American Oyaji": What's your read on the on the readiness/willingness of the SDF?)

Is this cowardice goodor bad? Who the f*ck cares here? Ignoring Lit'l Kim Il and his U238 toys is working just fine for the Japanese. DEOMCRATICALLY speaking, the J-government is ignoring the overwhelming will of its pavid people.

[GuyJean]

I don't see any danger in allowing fascist goverments continue to exist unfettered in a day an age where constructing a dirty bomb or funding the destruction of skyscrapers, etc., is mere childsplay. No need to intervene. No need to try to drag any group into the 21st century by force. That would just be wrong and ethnocentric.

Good one!
(Whoa. I'm agreeing with Gaisa.. Somebody slap me)

To be honest, I've been on the fence recently.. Actually, jumping back and forth over the fence. I was hoping they'd find that 'smoking gun' to make my decision easier, but they haven't yet.

The inspections are good. Most the world agrees. But they also probably wouldn't have been as 'successful', or able to produce the results they have without the threat of inialation from an dumb-ass psycho.

I ALSO believe that MOST Iraqis would welcome a different government system. My Iranian friend hopes Iran is next on Bush's list! I imagine many Iraqis feel the same about their leader.

BUT, a war could, and probably WILL gaurantee increased terrorism everywhere... The horror..

I think we should move to a new level of fighting: Iron Fisted Inpections!

Thousands of highly trained, heavily protected, armed inspectors search ANY site they want for 1 year. They find something they don't like, they destroy it using the new high-tech 'toys' the military has to test...(then sell). They're restricted access? BOOM! Some anthrax here? BOOM-BOOM! A stockpile of WMDs? BOOM-BOOM-BOOM! Hitting only specific targets while killing the right people. Now that's my kind o' war.

I can dream, can't I?

Maybe I was thinking of Fisting Inspections?.. Nevermind.

I need to eat.

GJ

[Taro Toporific]

To be honest, I've been on the fence recently.. Actually, jumping back and forth over the fence.

That's better than the cheese-eating Surrender Monkeys and ...

French Ad Calls For Peace, Love And More Mattress Sales
Yahoo News - 20 Feb 2003
"Make Love, Not War" - in French, "Faites L'Amour, Pas La Guerre" - is the slogan that shouts out in large white letters from three full-page advertisements, which appeared in daily newspapers Wednesday and Thursday.
... the advertisement doesn't necessarily reflect his company's politics, nor those of Dunlopillo, which is part of Japanese conglomerate ... from London, a variation - "Make Tea, Not War."
- - - Dow Jones Newswires; 33 1 4017 1740, 20 Feb 2003

[American Oyaji]

The JASDF is ready physically.

It's more of a club among the grunts. As for the pilots....they are ready.

I only know of JASDF. Not much about the other branches of the SDF. The JASDF pilots go through the same training that U.S. pilots do and they sometimes practice along side them up in Misawa.

[ramchop]

"No" Japanese is interested in fighting" with Iraq. Period.

Ok, ok, I underlined "no" for good reason. Ask your Japanese friends, coworkers, and neighbors: nobody supports an Iraq war.

Is a democratically elected government chosen to act on the will of the people or in the best interests of the people?

If it's there to represent the peoples' wishes then there's no way Japan should support a US attack on Iraq.

If it's there to act in the best interests of the people, then it's slightly less clear cut.

[GuyJean]

Is a democratically elected government chosen to act on the will of the people or in the best interests of the people?.

Good question. Leadership is also supposed to lead. Governments, I would hope, have more information than the average citizen.. Although I think they sometimes just watch CNN, like the rest of the US, to make the big decisions.

I thought some would like this joke:

A British doctor says, "Medicine in my country is so advanced that we can take a brain out of one man, put it in another and have him looking for work in six weeks."

A German doctor says, "That's nothing, we can take a brain out of one person, put it in another and have him preparing for war in four weeks.

The American doctor, not to be outdone, says, "You guys are way behind, we just took a man with no brain out of Texas, put him in the White House, and now half the country is looking for work, and the other half preparing for war."

GJ

[ramchop]

Plus there's the whole other issue about Saddam being a huge threat to world peace and all that.

What is "world peace"? I'd like a definition please. Bush loves the term.


So far I'd agree it's quite likely that Saddam has the nasty chemical weapons. And yes he is a potential (not "huge"... I'd say Israel was a bigger threat to igniting cross border unrest in the region) threat to regional peace. As such a threat to world oil supplies... but world peace?

The evidence put forward about links with Osama's gang has been pitiful. Iraq is not an islamic fundamentalist country, it is an ugly dictatorship. There are many ugly dictatorships.

[GuyJean]

The evidence put forward about links with Osama's gang has been pitiful.

I KNOW!

If there wasn't a connection between Iraq and Ill Qaeda before, they're DEFINITELY on the same side now! Bush has basically forced them to be allies..

It was my understanding that the Qaeda-baters didn't consider Iraq a true Islamic state. It was too 'secular'.

OH.. and didn't the US train Been Laiden? Oh, AND supply Sodom with the Anthrax spores we're fearing now?

Maybe the US military should attack the US government..

GJ

[Taro Toporific]

[cstaylor]

Can someone point me to a MacArthur (not Mac-Arthur like Kerr writes) quote illustrating that the General regretted Article 9? I can point to plenty of MacArthur quotes that say otherwise.

A nobody like Kerr should refrain from passing his words through the mouths of the deceased without direct quotes showing those statements as fact.

But hey, when did a journalist ever turn to the truth to back up his preconceived opinions?

[Steve Bildermann]

There are no journalists - they are all just reporters.

[GomiGirl]

Somebody sent me this link.. lots of images that can be fleeced.

[GuyJean]

Unfortunately, and obviously here, the history of the UNSCOM inspections is something relegated to the Memory Hole.

Actually, just this morning, NHK ran a documentary on what happened with UNSCOM. The US-made documentary talked to almost everyone involved, including Ritter. UNSCOM was dissolved in 98, but then the UN later returned as UNMOVIN.. or something of that nature.

Ritter is SO adamant that Iraq has NOTHING to threaten the US]Thousands of highly trained, heavily protected, armed inspectors search ANY site they want for 1 year.

Why is this necessary? What is the evidence that would justify such an action.

I was mostly being fascicious. If they find no evidence, then no bombing. Isn't that simple?

I might remind you that Iraq is a sovereign nation.

A sovereign nation that lost a war and signed a contract with the UN, right? I'm not sure how 'sovereign' factors into that equation.

That fact is I'm still not convinced there's reason to attack, and I don't trust Bush at all.. I'll leave it at that for now.. It looks like things are postponed for a couple more weeks anyway.

GJ