Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by futon

  1. Oh yeah, Soviet aid alone wasn't enough so I think it likely.
  2. When I read about battles in the Second Sino Japanese War, I do have a sentiment that sides more on the Chinese for some battles. Some other battles its a sentiment of them having been foolishly fated into such a total war. But I'm rather tempted to speculate a what-if where the Nationalists Chinese that ran off to Chongqing merge into the Wang Regime and the war ending in 1940/41.. as oppose to the current historical record of the CCP winning it all, along with the Korean peninsula being cut in half. I think the possibility of the Wang Regime being worse then reality's outcome rather unlikely.
  3. Well, I sort of hate getting defensive each and every step of the way, but the US and UK kept their interests in Shanghai after it was occupied by the Japanese. The Wang Regime was setup by 1940 and the US And UK interests in Shanghai remained intact. It was only removed when the Pacific War literally started. It was intended that the Nationalists Chinese based in Chongqing would merge into the Wang Regime as still the Nationalists Chinese. The Wang Regime getting international recognition would have open access. Access though was still by means or extraordinary rights. In 1943, Japan promised an end of extrodinary rights in China. To keep in step, the US then promised to give up extraordinary rights in China, a few days after Japan announced it.
  4. Widespread, no, it didn't seem so. Although, the Japanese population was not widespread, mostly on Hawaii or the West Coast. There was anti-Japanese activity that reached a plateau effect of limitations on the west coast in the 1920s that remained at that level (minus the fall during the war) until the 1950s/60s. Similar with Chinese but it turned around sooner for the Chinese because of the war. https://www.google.co.jp/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.archives.gov/files/research/japanese-americans/justice-denied/chapter-1.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjh_Y_sk7uBAxVPMN4KHWOaDJI4FBAWegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw2eS0qO_zzpX-KSczKSkva0
  5. And the 8th clause in the Atlantic Charter, mid August 1941, is particularly damning for Japan. Points from the Japanese side about the Pacofic war really being defensive and for survival of the empire gains credibility in respect to the 8th clause from the charter as it is already talking about disarmament. It really adds the sense of an all-or-nothing game emerging.
  6. If Roosevelt did not want war with Japan, and had wanted to steer clear of it, it would still be possible to have that position while refusing to sell oil. But some points show that was not so. Rooservelt, against the opinion of the Chief of Navy who lost his job as a result, relocated the Pacific Fleet from the West Coast to Hawaii. Rooservelt wanted that to be a sign to Japan. Rooservelt wanted the setup of the AVG fighter squadron and was already arriving in IndoChina just as PH happened. Rooservelt made the survival of the Nationalists Chinese a priority and thus tied the oil embargo to it. US government surveys throughout 1941 included a question like "Would you support the US going to war to stop Japan from becoming bigger?", it was something like that, if I gather it right, there were two or three instances the question came, spaced out, the latest one before the PH attack, somewhere like in Oct/Nov. The earlier one(s) was like May and maybe an earlier one in Feb or something. The early ones were like 30-40% yes. The latest already had a high 70% yes. So the country was already conditioned and ready to go for war vs Japan. The shock of the PH attack must surely not have been the "we were at peace with that country, wtf" sort of thinking but rather shock that the attack at PH had been carried out and quite successfully so by yellow monkeies and so a full blown challenge to answer. Many years later, the interpretation somehow morphed into a sort of complete unprovoked shock, probably because only propsganda narrative and Tokyo Tribunal narrative was probagated. Those 1941 surveys are very indicative war with Japan was all so possible and ready for it. Yes, Rooserelt also saw the surival of GB is absolutely necessary and for that part, it was good policy. Asia was different than Europe. Saying that is not an argument for plain black/white Japan-good/China-bad. It's just way more complex, mixed, and grey then that. People conditioned to think or pretend to think everything in black/white are ill-fit for that topic.
  7. Ooo, the party line's narrative, spoken so confidently.
  8. A democratic (genuinely -- not CCP's definition of "democratic" for itself) China would really change a lot. A whole lot. I guess there could be two points of times where a transition to democracy is hypothetical without going deep into hypothetical lala land. The first would be as a result of the demobstrations around China but centered at Tianamen Square in the late 1980s to early 1990s. The other possible moment was 2006ish to 2012ish. But a democratic China means no friction between and HK. No 2014 umbrella movement. No 2018/19 prostest led by Joshua Wang and Agnes Chow. HK could have served as an example how to implement democratic features rather the other way around with the central govenment CCP salami slicing it down to nil. It may very well also mean greater acceptance of the KMT. There would be a much higher possibility of unification with Taiwan on terms of natural agreement and in a peaceful way. The threat of force to do that unification highly unlikely. People like Liu Xiaobo would be heard normally and free to give speeches. The very heavy hand in Xinjiang would be unlikely. Some of the development in Xinjiang may also be less, due to unacceptance of such high surveillance and massive dentention centers claring the path for infrastructure or industry development projects. Falun Gong would go its normal but compete more with local Chinese confucious values, Chinese bhuddism, or Chinese Christanity and Chinese Islam. This China may likely not be as economically strong but could be more resilient in different ways. This kind of China may be easier for the ROK to work with regarding DPRK. Maybe such a China would be less antagonistic with Senkaku islands, leaving it a dormant matter as it had been until progressively became a hot issue due to PRC steps in 2008, 2010, and 2012. Without that, no PRC withholding of rare material episode to Japan. That among no threat of Taiwan crisis, less support to DPRK (even if a democratic China would want a Korea buffer, they would be less accepting of the fat-Kim regime). Alk that gives Japanese businesses greater leeway and political support than Japanese security concerns. Okinawa base protests start making more sense. Why still keep them here if people aren't worried about China? There's so much to assess what changes abd how that would alter realites timeline with the snowball effect of changes. Maybe not, sure, thus instead maybe a weird Yuan Shikai sort democratic China that still acts old style. Take back Mongolia, etc. Who knows. But surely not guranteed to be as problematic as the PRC.
  9. No problem, you're welcome. I guess if the aircraft itself is F-35ish in shape, the pilot can assume that its friendly, at least until more stealth aircraft types with the typical stealth lines start emerging across the board.
  10. Foreign Ministry Spokesperson’s Remarks on Japanese Politician Taro Aso’s Visit to Taiwan and His Irresponsible Comments 2023-08-09 17:28 Q: It was reported that Vice President of the Liberal Democratic Party and former Prime Minister of Japan Taro Aso has visited Taiwan, where he met with Tsai Ing-wen, William Lai and others and delivered a speech saying that there should be no war in the region, including the Taiwan Strait, and calling for a posture of strong deterrence and “a readiness to fight”. What is your comment? A: Despite China’s strong opposition, certain Japanese politician visited China’s Taiwan region and made irresponsible remarks that sought to hype up cross-Strait tensions, stoke antagonism and confrontation, and blatantly interfere in China’s internal affairs. This seriously violates the one-China principle and the spirit of the four political documents between China and Japan and tramples on the basic norms governing international relations. China has made serious démarches to Japan and strongly condemns this. Taiwan is an inalienable part of China’s territory and the Taiwan question is entirely China’s internal affair that brooks no external interference. For half a century, Japan exercised colonial rule over Taiwan, brutally suppressed its people’s resistance and committed atrocious crimes. As a country responsible for the historical crimes it committed against China, Japan needs to all the more draw lessons from history and act prudently. The Japanese politician, however, kept raising the possibility of “a war” whilst in Taiwan—an obvious attempt to stir up trouble in the Taiwan Strait and push the people in the Taiwan region over the edge of an abyss. Today’s China is no longer what it was when the Qing government signed the Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1895. What makes this Japanese politician think he is in a position or has the confidence to make such unwarranted remarks on Taiwan?  I want to stress that the complete reunification of the motherland is the common aspiration of all the sons and daughters of the Chinese nation and an unstoppable historical trend. No one shall underestimate the strong resolve, will and capability of the Chinese people to defend the nation’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. We seriously urge Japan to deeply reflect on its history of aggression, abide by the one-China principle and its commitments regarding the Taiwan question, and stop meddling in China’s internal affair and lending support to the “Taiwan independence” separatist forces in any form. We also have a clear message for the Taiwan authorities: “Taiwan independence” has no future, soliciting Japan’s support and selling Taiwan away will only harm the people in Taiwan, and any attempt to collude with external forces in seeking independence and provocations will only fail.  https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2535_665405/202308/t20230809_11124457.html
  11. 今ほど我々は 日本 台湾 アメリカ をはじめとした有志の国に強い抑止力を機能させる覚悟が求められているとおもっております。 こんな時代はないのではないか。戦う覚悟です。 いざとなったら (抑止力を) 使う。 台湾の防衛のために 台湾海峡の安定のためにそれを使う。 Nowadays, I believe that from us.. willing countries such as Japan Taiwan the US, a resolute determination to make work a strong deterrance is required. May it not be so that in this age that it is not there. The resolution to fight. When the necessity arises, to use it (deterrance). For the defense of Taiwan For the stability of the Taiwan Strait, to use it.
  12. TOKYO -- Japan and its allies and partners need to convey the "will to fight" to deter China from seeking to change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait, former Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso said in Taipei on Tuesday. In a keynote speech to the Ketagalan Forum, an Indo-Pacific security dialogue, the vice president of Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic Party said deterrence only works when three elements are met: having the ability to deter, having the will to carry out necessary actions and conveying both of these elements to the adversary. "Never has there been a time" when like-minded players like Japan, Taiwan and the U.S. "have needed the resolve to make strong deterrence work than now. It's the will to fight," the 82-year-old politician said. Since the visit of then-U.S. Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Taiwan last August, China has stepped up its aggressive actions toward the island, expanding military drills and crossing over the median line with daily flyovers. President Xi Jinping has said China will strive for peaceful unification but has also noted Beijing "will never promise to renounce the use of force." The military balance between China and Taiwan is "rapidly tilting to China's favor," Japan said in its annual defense report released last month. In the Taipei speech, Aso said: "It is not enough to spend money and just having defense capabilities. It is important to make clear to the opponent that we will use those capabilities for the defense of Taiwan, for the stability of the Taiwan Strait. That becomes deterrence" "Like-minded countries like Japan, Taiwan and the United States, we need to wake up now," Taro Aso told the Ketagalan Forum in Taiwan on Aug. 8. (Screenshot) Being a close neighbor to Taiwan, Aso said, "We should be the very first one to express our attitude and also to make that message clear to the international community, including China." The commitment will not change, he said, citing the three defense documents the Japanese government published in December. Aso pointed to the Falklands War of 1982 as an example where deterrence failed. "Then-Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had not signaled accurately to Argentina that the U.K. would defend the Falklands," Aso said. "That small mistake led to the war, and the U.K. had to endure large sacrifices to retake the islands. If the signaling had been clearer, it did not need to happen." Despite the peace in the region today, "We are tilting toward a time of emergency," Aso warned the audience. The international community is facing era-defining changes, Aso said. "Isn't it becoming clearer that globalization and interdependence alone do not guarantee peace and development?" he asked, noting that the Russian invasion of Ukraine shows efforts to alter the status quo by force can happen anytime, including in East Asia. Later on Tuesday, Aso visited President Tsai Ing-wen at the presidential office. Tsai thanked the Japanese government for noting in the communique of the Hiroshima Group of Seven Summit that the peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait is "indispensable" to the security and prosperity of the "international community," a point that she has been making. Aso said that he had lunch with Taiwan presidential front-runner Vice President William Lai and felt "reassured," after hearing his views on the future of the island. The visit of the No. 2 official of Japan's ruling party was the first since Japan severed official diplomatic ties with Taiwan in 1972. On Monday, Aso visited the grave of Lee Teng-hui, Taiwan's first democratically elected president, at a military cemetery on the outskirts of Taipei. Lee was close to the late Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, under whom Aso served as foreign minister. Together, Abe and Aso formed the basis of what is known today as the Free and Open Indo-Pacific concept. https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/Taiwan-tensions/In-Taiwan-Aso-says-Japan-must-show-will-to-fight-to-deter-China
  13. At 48:35 where he quotes Mao mentioning "democratic centralism" on the notion of taking opposites and presenting it as unified, they or Xi still do that by mentioning democracy as part of their "modern socialistic country" endeavor, as in Xi's speech in 2017: https://www.tanknet.org/index.php?/topic/42830-mandate-of-heaven/
  14. I came across this article suggesting that it might be the paint that is part of the stealth absorbing material. Although Denmark uses color on theirs. https://www.outono.net/elentir/2023/06/09/what-will-happen-to-the-red-and-yellow-roundels-if-spain-decides-to-buy-the-f-35/
  15. Interests can be advocated or determined to be anything. Perceptions are different. The deciding set of values are different. The interests of morally corrupt will differ from those that are not. Just "interests" does not drive a people, a nation. Because it's shallow, ambiguous, at only the basic level of necessities, or undefined. And is easily transactional in nature. It's only a step prior to defining the what to do and why to do which is perhaps could be referred to as "core interests". Something that implies there is much more to it readily accessable to see. Keep Taiwan in the US's security sphere or piss it away to CCP China once semiconductor independence is achieved. Those are two different paths that interests can go down and center its "core interests" around. If "core interests" includes partnering with another country, then there is a responsibility that develops by both sides in order to sustain that set core interests. And as time goes, the status and process of the core interests is assessed and checked, to see that obligations or expectations are still being met for that in the span of time and conditions change, and new leaders change, so if one side no longer fullfills the responsibililties to a once agreed and sustained evolutionary franework, then base interests determine to end responsibilities. That's the fear of getting into a framwork of pouring responsibility into it with one or more other countries. The fear or distrust of getting played and being the sucker by doing the honest job in the framework. That's a weakspot of honesty. However if only base interest is poured into a framework by the members, then the framework is weak and won't really be able to do what it was originally intended to do, thus responsibility to the framework, to the partnership, to see to it that it is sustained, otherwise the framework rots until its nil. So continual assessment is how to defuse unwarranted distrust and to cover honesty's flank in the framework. If the US is out, Japan will try to marshal other countries to help before it has to kow-tow. Typically, these other others countries prefer the US to be included. The line has to be at Taiwan.
  16. Write like your TN show about giving up on Taiwan to Rep. Senators.. thet'll probably be like wat?! But might get lucky and persuade them.. "yeah, let's leave East Asia, forget about Taiwan." Start with Mike Lee if want to have highest chance of that.
  17. Try spending a bit to learn a bit of the 2nd tier languages that are the local languages of the region if so worried about China.
  18. It people here don't want to rhetorically commit the US to Taiwan's defense, they should advocate leaving the ROK and Japan as well. Just go on and say that next step, stop keeping it in reserve for next rhetorical headbutting. Just go home. Pack up and leave Okinawa, Sasebo, Yokosuka, Yokota, Misawa, Iwakuni,.. just go. Not going to defend Taiwan? What are you doing? You don't care about Taiwan = You don't care about Japan, duh, didn't know. Stupidity should be a war crime. That Japan.. Godzilla, Toyota, Pokemon, stupid game shows, JAV, SEGA and playstation, decades of that Japan, the number one glory example for the WW2 glory narrative's proof of worth, you betray it stupidly now. Just put the tail between the legs and go home and then y'all can feel that China won't be your problem anymore. Either Japan makes nukes in time or just becomes a de facto satelite state of the PRC. Clinging hope onto wimpy temperament is foolish. Go home and just keep swimming in circles in your WWF politics style woke pond.
  19. The QE will make its second trip to the Pacific in 2025. Carrier Fujian may be commissioned in the same year. The first trip was in 2021. At that time, there were 3 Type 55 destroyers commissioned in PLAN. Now there are 8.
  • Create New...