"Japan's Abe Is the World's Best Leader"

[Yokohammer]

There has been some talk among neocons of rethinking the relationship with Japan if they don't take on more responsibility militarily.

So I've heard.

There's no doubt that the U.S. really wants Japan to be ready and able to back them up militarily. That's clear enough. And I think it's safe to assume that at least part of all this is due to pressure from the U.S. But whether that is a viable reason to essentially change Japan's constitution is a question that should probably be given a bit more time. I don't know how hard up for help the U.S. is at the moment, but I kinda doubt they'd be able to just turn around and say "that's it Japan, we're not protecting you any more." It was the U.S. that forced Japan to accept a no-war constitution in return for U.S. protection in the first place. U.S. bases in Japan would probably become a major bargaining point in that scenario too, and we know that the U.S. wants (needs) to keep them here not just to protect Japan.

I can't help thinking that the problem is more how the issue is being handled than the end result.

[Samurai_Jerk]

There has been some talk among neocons of rethinking the relationship with Japan if they don't take on more responsibility militarily.

So I've heard.

There's no doubt that the U.S. really wants Japan to be ready and able to back them up militarily. That's clear enough. And I think it's safe to assume that at least part of all this is due to pressure from the U.S. But whether that is a viable reason to essentially change Japan's constitution is a question that should probably be given a bit more time. I don't know how hard up for help the U.S. is at the moment, but I kinda doubt they'd be able to just turn around and say "that's it Japan, we're not protecting you any more." It was the U.S. that forced Japan to accept a no-war constitution in return for U.S. protection in the first place. U.S. bases in Japan would probably become a major bargaining point in that scenario too, and we know that the U.S. wants (needs) to keep them here not just to protect Japan.

I can't help thinking that the problem is more how the issue is being handled than the end result.

I'm not saying it's a realistic threat but that could be what Russell is referring to.

I agree with you that the method is the problem more than the result. However, anyone who voted for the LDP and is surprised by this is a real dummy.

[Yokohammer]

I'm not saying it's a realistic threat but that could be what Russell is referring to.

I agree with you that the method is the problem more than the result. However, anyone who voted for the LDP and is surprised by this is a real dummy.

You're probably right about what Russell was referring to,.

As for the LDP, they have been in power since 1955 except for a couple of short glitches and nothing like this has happened before. In fact, the LDP have upheld the constitution for the most part, so it's not surprising that people expected things to stay pretty much the same. Big mistake, that.


~ Tapatalking ~

[Samurai_Jerk]

If they expected things to remain the same, they haven't been paying attention.

[Yokohammer]

If they expected things to remain the same, they haven't been paying attention.

I think you might have pinpointed the problem.


~ Tapatalking ~

[Russell]

If they expected things to remain the same, they haven't been paying attention.

I think you might have pinpointed the problem.

Wasn't there a saying that a people gets the leaders they deserve?

[Russell]

There has been some talk among neocons of rethinking the relationship with Japan if they don't take on more responsibility militarily.

So I've heard.

There's no doubt that the U.S. really wants Japan to be ready and able to back them up militarily. That's clear enough. And I think it's safe to assume that at least part of all this is due to pressure from the U.S. But whether that is a viable reason to essentially change Japan's constitution is a question that should probably be given a bit more time. I don't know how hard up for help the U.S. is at the moment, but I kinda doubt they'd be able to just turn around and say "that's it Japan, we're not protecting you any more." It was the U.S. that forced Japan to accept a no-war constitution in return for U.S. protection in the first place. U.S. bases in Japan would probably become a major bargaining point in that scenario too, and we know that the U.S. wants (needs) to keep them here not just to protect Japan.

I can't help thinking that the problem is more how the issue is being handled than the end result.

As SJ says, there are some tendencies in U.S. politics to tone down militarily. I think it is not the neocons; they want war under all conditions, because that sells weapons and thus makes them money. Rather, it is more at the left side of the political spectrum. In itself that is good, but it also means that Japan can no longer play the freeloader. Japan has now been 70 years under the umbrella of the U.S., but times have changed. It is time that it learns to stand on its own legs.

I do feel very sympathetic towards the pacifism of a large part of the Japanese population, but it is no longer realistic given the assertive stance of (especially) China in territorial matters.

The best way to keep peace is to show that you have teeth, but not use them.

[Yokohammer]

If they expected things to remain the same, they haven't been paying attention.

I think you might have pinpointed the problem.

Wasn't there a saying that a people gets the leaders they deserve?

It might be worth taking a closer look at this.

The average voter probably doesn't look much further than a) the track record of the candidate's political party, and at most b) the candidate's up-front campaign slogans.

As for a), a person who has voted LDP for most of his or her life is likely to do it again with the expectation that things will remain the same, as I mentioned above.

And if the voter went as far as to examine b), in this case Abe's slogans were something like "美しい日本" (Beautiful Japan) and "日本を取り戻す" (Take Back Japan), which probably sounded pretty OK. Sure, why not. The voter would have had to analyse those slogans and study Abe's background quite deeply to see the danger, and even then he or she might think that the party would keep Abe in line with their policies thus far.

So yeah, they weren't paying attention. But they would have had to be really paying close attention to see this coming, which I suppose you could say is their responsibility. But you could also say that Abe wheedled his way into the post with euphemisms rather than laying out the harsh details of what he planned to do, which of course is SOP for politicians.

You also have to remember that Japanese politics presents the voter with very little choice at the best of times, and in this case people were still in shock over the earthquake/tsunami/nuclear disaster and probably thought that any change would be a change for the better. Of course the disaster wasn't the fault of Minshu-to, but perceptions are perceptions.

So my honest opinion is that it's a little more complicated than simply "they got what they deserved." Although I really wish they had been paying closer attention.

[Yokohammer]

The best way to keep peace is to show that you have teeth, but not use them.

That comes dangerously close to "we need more guns to prevent gun crime ... but of course we won't use them unless absolutely necessary".

Somehow that doesn't seem to work out very well.

[dimwit]

The best way to keep peace is to show that you have teeth, but not use them.

Russell, I think the problem with having teeth is that they will be used -against the Japanese people. I think that the SDF is still to full of generals like Tamogami who believe they are Japan rather than protecting the Japan people.

[Russell]

The best way to keep peace is to show that you have teeth, but not use them.

That comes dangerously close to "we need more guns to prevent gun crime ... but of course we won't use them unless absolutely necessary".

Somehow that doesn't seem to work out very well.

My opinion is based on the history of the Netherlands. Pacifism was popular there in the 1930's and they thought they could stay neutral in case Germany would become aggressive, just like they did in WW1. At the time the Dutch army had bicycles as an important means of transportation, and also well-known was their artillery from the previous century. Alas, in May 1940 the Netherlands was run over in five days.

The battle ended soon after the devastating bombing of Rotterdam by the German Luftwaffe and the subsequent threat by the Germans to bomb other large Dutch cities if Dutch forces refused to surrender. The Dutch General Staff knew it could not stop the bombers and surrendered in order to prevent other cities from suffering the same fate.

Given that China is very aggressive towards countries that lack effective means of defense, it is important that Japan shows it won't be an easy meal. Effective collaboration with the U.S. on defense is essential for that.

People reading my past post will know that I am not a fan of U.S. military power, but one has to be pragmatic.

[Russell]

The best way to keep peace is to show that you have teeth, but not use them.

Russell, I think the problem with having teeth is that they will be used -against the Japanese people. I think that the SDF is still to full of generals like Tamogami who believe they are Japan rather than protecting the Japan people.

So, a close collaboration with the U.S. is then even more wanted, because the U.S. won't allow the teeth it shares with Japan to be used against the Japanese population.

[Coligny]

I do feel very sympathetic towards the pacifism of a large part of the Japanese population, but it is no longer realistic given the assertive stance of (especially) China in territorial matters.

The best way to keep peace is to show that you have teeth, but not use them.

Called nuclear dissuasion.
Don't work with tactical stuff. You have the history of this whole planet as proof of its ineffectiveness.

Plus China is taking on non-Nato countries.

Feels like japs remilitarisation is more a way for the us to close shop and let them get fucked on their own while having the excuse "but they have their own armies"

[Samurai_Jerk]

Love this photo of the lady in the green jacket.

greenjacket.jpg

source

[Coligny]

Bitch wants the D...

Dat'ass... Bet the guy giving the tail got it awesome last night...

[dimwit]

So, a close collaboration with the U.S. is then even more wanted, because the U.S. won't allow the teeth it shares with Japan to be used against the Japanese population.

The US has always been more concerned about pliantness of it's client states than human rights. There are far too many examples of US backed states that where human rights abuses by the military were either ignored, swept under the carpet or at times even supported by Washington.

[Russell]

So, a close collaboration with the U.S. is then even more wanted, because the U.S. won't allow the teeth it shares with Japan to be used against the Japanese population.

The US has always been more concerned about pliantness of it's client states than human rights. There are far too many examples of US backed states that where human rights abuses by the military were either ignored, swept under the carpet or at times even supported by Washington.

That is true, but has the situation become worse in that respect now that this new law was passed?

I figure it has become better.

[Coligny]

So, a close collaboration with the U.S. is then even more wanted, because the U.S. won't allow the teeth it shares with Japan to be used against the Japanese population.

The US has always been more concerned about pliantness of it's client states than human rights. There are far too many examples of US backed states that where human rights abuses by the military were either ignored, swept under the carpet or at times even supported by Washington.

FFS Russell...

image.jpg

[Yokohammer]

That got rammed through, as expected. There was no way around it, which is the problem.

So here's the situation:

The Abe administration was able to force changes to Japan's constitution that cross the line from pacifism to military power. They were able to do that because they have a majority in the Diet. One might assume that they represent a corresponding majority of the country's population but sadly, because of the way Japan's political system works, that is not the the case.

This security bill was rammed through against the will of somewhere between 60 to 80 percent of the country's population (and that's without cherry picking polls). The population is overwhelmingly against the change, but had no recourse other than to take to the streets to voice their opposition, which many did. They were ignored.

That Japan's "democracy" is not really a democracy has been an open secret for a long time, and now here's the proof. And because of this, at some point in the future, young Japanese will die in armed conflict, and not necessarily protecting their own country. Because of this Japan is free to openly equip and expand a standing military, which in reality they already have, but now the legal and perceived restrictions on expansion and activities will be significantly loosened. Because of this Japan could quite easily become entangled in someone else's war or, depending on who happens to be in charge of a government that can easily act against the will of the people, start a war of its own.

The good news for me personally is that this all of this has helped me to finalise some important life decisions.

[wuchan]

The good news for me personally is that this all of this has helped me to finalise some important life decisions.

you out?

[Russell]

The good news for me personally is that this all of this has helped me to finalise some important life decisions.

you out?

I hope not out of this forum.

But I suspect it is a decision in which Hammer will not change his nationality to Japanese.

[Yokohammer]

The good news for me personally is that this all of this has helped me to finalise some important life decisions.

you out?

Not immediately, but any thoughts of naturalizing are finished, and I will try to arrange things so that my options for the future are a little more open. Minimize baggage, etc.

[Coligny]

Bug out tunnel to north korea, escape pocket submarine... I like where this is going...

[Russell]

The good news for me personally is that this all of this has helped me to finalise some important life decisions.

you out?

Not immediately, but any thoughts of naturalizing are finished, and I will try to arrange things so that my options for the future are a little more open. Minimize baggage, etc.

Minimizing baggage is always a good countermeasure (provided one does not have a woodworking hobby ), even if things turn out to become nasty in a different way.

[Yokohammer]

Minimizing baggage is always a good countermeasure (provided one does not have a woodworking hobby ), even if things turn out to become nasty in a different way.

Baggage is probably my biggest problem, but it's not just physical baggage. In addition to the house, cars, and stuff crammed in every available corner, there are sources of essential income, and the human connections. Stuff can be replaced (or done without), but the rest is not so easy. I will be thinking about workarounds.

[JAVGOD]

Love this photo of the lady in the green jacket.

greenjacket.jpg

source

She has a nice ass.

[JAVGOD]

There has been some talk among neocons of rethinking the relationship with Japan if they don't take on more responsibility militarily.

So I've heard.

There's no doubt that the U.S. really wants Japan to be ready and able to back them up militarily. That's clear enough. And I think it's safe to assume that at least part of all this is due to pressure from the U.S. But whether that is a viable reason to essentially change Japan's constitution is a question that should probably be given a bit more time. I don't know how hard up for help the U.S. is at the moment, but I kinda doubt they'd be able to just turn around and say "that's it Japan, we're not protecting you any more." It was the U.S. that forced Japan to accept a no-war constitution in return for U.S. protection in the first place. U.S. bases in Japan would probably become a major bargaining point in that scenario too, and we know that the U.S. wants (needs) to keep them here not just to protect Japan.

I can't help thinking that the problem is more how the issue is being handled than the end result.

As SJ says, there are some tendencies in U.S. politics to tone down militarily. I think it is not the neocons; they want war under all conditions, because that sells weapons and thus makes them money. Rather, it is more at the left side of the political spectrum. In itself that is good, but it also means that Japan can no longer play the freeloader. Japan has now been 70 years under the umbrella of the U.S., but times have changed. It is time that it learns to stand on its own legs.

I do feel very sympathetic towards the pacifism of a large part of the Japanese population, but it is no longer realistic given the assertive stance of (especially) China in territorial matters.

The best way to keep peace is to show that you have teeth, but not use them.

I agree. It is no longer possible to remain the US pacifist lapdog. US is having enough trouble fighting a few thousand extremists in Iraq and Syria.
I realize after reading some of the posts here I cam coming from a more LDP point of view so I won't go on too much.
I will say Japan is becoming more conservative and the majority of people are responding by embracing conservatism. The so-called demonstrations have a lot more to do with gaijin than native REAL Japanese people. I am not surprised they are protesting. They are losing welfare, status and many will soon be forced to become Japanese national or exit stage left. LDP is gaining ground in many prefectures.

[Yokohammer]

... The so-called demonstrations have a lot more to do with gaijin than native REAL Japanese people. I am not surprised they are protesting. They are losing welfare, status and many will soon be forced to become Japanese national or exit stage left. ...

You've totally lost me with the above quote.

Explain please?

[Russell]

... The so-called demonstrations have a lot more to do with gaijin than native REAL Japanese people. I am not surprised they are protesting. They are losing welfare, status and many will soon be forced to become Japanese national or exit stage left. ...

You've totally lost me with the above quote.

Explain please?

I don't get this either. Nowhere did I see suggestions that it were non-Japanese that were protesting, and neither was there any indication of a connection with people on welfare. Rather, this change of constitution appears to be an important political point for the Japanese people.

If a large majority of the Japanese population is against it, that is actually good (even though I do not agree with them on this particular point), because it exposes Abe for the ultra-right-wing extremist he is.

BTW, Hammer, I understand your exasperation, but don't you think the threat of China in the long term justifies this change of constitution? Hasn't Japan now finally become a "normal" country?

[Coligny]

Minimizing baggage is always a good countermeasure (provided one does not have a woodworking hobby ), even if things turn out to become nasty in a different way.

Baggage is probably my biggest problem, but it's not just physical baggage. In addition to the house, cars, and stuff crammed in every available corner, there are sources of essential income, and the human connections. Stuff can be replaced (or done without), but the rest is not so easy. I will be thinking about workarounds.

Book availble as english kindle on amazon japan...

image.jpg

It want to be Tom Clancy real hard. Have to check it. It' seems to be a chinese version of Red Storm Rising (840y ).

image.jpg

Also... Since we are there... Don't forget this book serie by John Mardsen:

image.jpg

(Dun't forget I have furst dib' on Fi and the actresse playing the main brunette is a muff diver)