Elections, Elections, Elections

[urbanoid]

11 hours ago, futon said:

Do you agree that the "Class A War Criminals" was a tool for imposing all blame for the Pacific War on Japan, as part of fabricating justification of total disarmament? And that true blame for the Pacific War was really equally the US and Japan? 

 

Germany had their own 'class A war criminals' equivalents and I believe a lot more people were convicted for war crimes and crimes against humanity there than in Japan, yet a mere decade after a war they joined NATO. A year before that the JSDF was established, despite the Article 9 - 'yeah, we cannot use force, but in self-defense we can'. The very idea of Article 9 might have been Japanese, not American, although the responsibility is still largely theirs, as they were an occupying power at the time.

4 years before that, when the Korean war broke out, the Americans have realized that they have committed a mistake with the Article 9. It was just 3 years after adopting the constitution, but by then it might have been the Japanese not trying very hard to revoke it. They were on a roll economically and the US was responsible for their defense - what's not to like? Under the 1955 system the LDP has been pretty much perpetually in power, minus a few years here and there and they didn't revoke Article 9, they just kept changing the interpretation until it became purely theoretical. From what I understand while they could find the majority to revoke it the Diet many times in the past, the referendum would be needed as well and that's where they're absolutely not certain about the results. 

While I'm pretty sure that certain elements in FDR's administration absolutely wanted to go to war against Japan, I think that legally they were somewhat 'clean', moreso than e.g. towards Germany, as the 'Neutrality Patrol' was nothing but, German warships and merchant ships locations were being reported to the Allies and in some cases there was outright shooting. Did they have an idea that an oil embargo might push Japan to go to war with the Allies and/or the US? Yes, I'm sure they did, but guess what, no country has an obligation to trade with another. Since 1937 Japan has been an invader in China, on top of this pesky 1931 thingy. Yeah, I know that CKS wasn't particularly interested in peace, but guess what, no country has an obligation to pursue peace with an invading power either. No country has an obligation to recognize something as 'X Great Power's sphere of influence' either. That's why I'd say that wrt Japan the US has been well within its rights legally and to an extrent justified morally, as they were dealing with a clearly aggressive power 'looking for its place under the sun' at the expense of its neighbours. Not that the US was doing what it's doing out of the goodness of American hearts and didn't have its own less than altruistic motivations and plans, but I'd say the Japanese took the bait line, hook and sinker after being painted into a corner.

[futon]

1 hour ago, urbanoid said:

Germany had their own 'class A war criminals' equivalents and I believe a lot more people were convicted for war crimes and crimes against humanity there than in Japan, yet a mere decade after a war they joined NATO. A year before that the JSDF was established, despite the Article 9 - 'yeah, we cannot use force, but in self-defense we can'. The very idea of Article 9 might have been Japanese, not American, although the responsibility is still largely theirs, as they were an occupying power at the time.

4 years before that, when the Korean war broke out, the Americans have realized that they have committed a mistake with the Article 9. It was just 3 years after adopting the constitution, but by then it might have been the Japanese not trying very hard to revoke it. They were on a roll economically and the US was responsible for their defense - what's not to like? Under the 1955 system the LDP has been pretty much perpetually in power, minus a few years here and there and they didn't revoke Article 9, they just kept changing the interpretation until it became purely theoretical. From what I understand while they could find the majority to revoke it the Diet many times in the past, the referendum would be needed as well and that's where they're absolutely not certain about the results. 

While I'm pretty sure that certain elements in FDR's administration absolutely wanted to go to war against Japan, I think that legally they were somewhat 'clean', moreso than e.g. towards Germany, as the 'Neutrality Patrol' was nothing but, German warships and merchant ships locations were being reported to the Allies and in some cases there was outright shooting. Did they have an idea that an oil embargo might push Japan to go to war with the Allies and/or the US? Yes, I'm sure they did, but guess what, no country has an obligation to trade with another. Since 1937 Japan has been an invader in China, on top of this pesky 1931 thingy. Yeah, I know that CKS wasn't particularly interested in peace, but guess what, no country has an obligation to pursue peace with an invading power either. No country has an obligation to recognize something as 'X Great Power's sphere of influence' either. That's why I'd say that wrt Japan the US has been well within its rights legally and to an extrent justified morally, as they were dealing with a clearly aggressive power 'looking for its place under the sun' at the expense of its neighbours. Not that the US was doing what it's doing out of the goodness of American hearts and didn't have its own less than altruistic motivations and plans, but I'd say the Japanese took the bait line, hook and sinker after being painted into a corner.

Going to the third paragraph, some things to add that changes the context.

About the 1931 "thingy". It was expansionism. Sure it was. But here is some context now.

What was that thingy? 1931 Manchuria, it was a 3 year old failed state. In the 1910s and 1920s, it was the Fengtian Clique, one of the main states in the Chinese Civil War. They were quite good in using their natural resouces and developing an economic. They generally were are descent buffer state with the SU as far as Japan went. Japan signed the 9 power treaty.

However,  Fengtian spending in the civil war was reckless. It's economy went into overdrive, and then bust by 1928. It's economy chief ran away, refusing to come back. The place turned a land of bandits. 

The SU, formerly a collapsed Russia, now resurgent with a new comintern agenda, has setup a puppet government in Mongolia in 1925. Mongolia was part of the Qing just like Manchuria and elsewhere that weren't strongly "chinese". The SU never signed the 9 power treaty either. And in 1929, the SU attacked the Manchurian failed state to reestablish control of the imperialistically-built Russian railroad the cut across Manchuria down to Vladivostok. No other Chinese faction was able to fill in the space that was once administrated by the Fengtian Clique.

And nevermind the fact that the other powers were still actively pursuing their upkeep of colonies. 

The Japanese took the massive area of Manchuria that had a total population of 30 million with just a 50,000 man force and Manchurian collaborators. That's the indication of the degree of failed state Manchuria was. 

And the US was "so appalled" at this that they decided to use this moment to grant the SU official diplomatic recognition, thinking that recognizing the SU would be a sign of using the SU to balance against Japan. Which surely you know what the SU was doing around that time.. Holodomor. What the hell moral compass is it to be "upset" about the Manchuria takeover but sweep Holodomor under the rug?

 

Edited October 12, 2024 by futon

[urbanoid]

16 minutes ago, futon said:

Going to the third paragraph, some things to add that changes the context.

About the 1931 "thingy". It was expansionism. Sure it was. But here is some context now.

What was that thingy? 1931 Manchuria, it was a 3 year old failed state. In the 1910s and 1920s, it was the Fengtian Clique, one of the main states in the Chinese Civil War. They were quite good in using their natural resouces and developing an economic. They generally were are descent buffer state with the SU as far as Japan went. Japan signed the 9 power treaty.

However,  Fengtian spending in the civil war was reckless. It's economy went into overdrive, and then bust by 1928. It's economy chief ran away, refusing to come back. The place turned a land of bandits. 

The SU, formerly a collapsed Russia, now resurgent with a new comintern agenda, has setup a puppet government in Mongolia in 1925. Mongolia was part of the Qing just like Manchuria and elsewhere that weren't strongly "chinese". The SU never signed the 9 power treaty either. And in 1929, the SU attacked the Manchurian failed state to reestablish control of the imperialistically-built Russian railroad the cut across Manchuria down to Vladivostok. No other Chinese faction was able to fill in the space that was once administrated by the Fengtian Clique.

And nevermind the fact that the others were still actively pursuing their upkeep of colonies. 

The Japanese took the massive area of Manchuria that had a total population of 30 million with just a 50,000 man force and Manchurian collaborators. That's the indication of the degree of failed state Manchuria was. 

And the US was "so appalled" at this that they decided to use this moment to grant the SU official diplomatic recognition, thinking that recognizing the SU would be a sign of using the SU to balance against Japan. Which surely you know what the SU was doing around that time.. Holodomor. What the hell moral compass is it to be "upset" about the Manchuria takeover but sweep Holodomor under the rug?

 

I have literally said that the US wasn't motivated by altruism at any point. 'Why did they get mad at us for Manchukuo while letting the Soviets get away with Holodomor' isn't really an argument here either. Then again Japan effectively DID get away with Manchukuo. If it wasn't for 1937, which was a trap that certain elements of Japanese establishment willfully fell into, things would have been different and while the Japanese would have likely still lost the empire in the end, it would have occurred much later and a lot more peacefully. Then again it's not like Japan was entitled to have one in the first place.

The US was using SU for its own ends before, during and after the war, even while they were opposing them. The US wanted the 'old empires' disbanded and I think they included Japan in that, while at the same time somewhat putting them on the 'special' spot of the 'old' (well, almost half a century, that's an eternity for the Americans) and 'expansionist' at the same time.

Edited October 12, 2024 by urbanoid

[futon]

17 minutes ago, urbanoid said:

I have literally said that the US wasn't motivated by altruism at any point. 'Why did they get mad at us for Manchukuo while letting the Soviets get away with Holodomor' isn't really an argument here either. Then again Japan effectively DID get away with Manchukuo. If it wasn't for 1937, which was a trap that certain elements of Japanese establishment willfully fell into, things would have been different and while the Japanese would have likely still lost the empire in the end, it would have occurred much later and a lot more peacefully. Then again it's not like Japan was entitled to have one in the first place.

The US was using SU for its own ends before, during and after the war, even while they were opposing them. The US wanted the 'old empires' disbanded and I think they included Japan in that, while at the same time somewhat putting them on the 'special' spot of the 'old' (well, almost half a century, that's an eternity for the Americans) and 'expansionist' at the same time.

Well for 1937 of course there was the December 1936 Xi'an Incident. The Nationalists Chinese were trying to mop up the remaining Chinese communists that have just went through their "long march" escape ordeal. But As the Nationalists Chinese were closing in, one of CKS generals kidnapped CKS and took him to the Chinese communists where the communists put CKS's life as condition to end the fight against the communists and instead to "unite" with the communists to fight the Japanese. This was December 1936... think about that.

No Xi'an incident.. no 1937 war breakout. 

So it was roughly 50/50 for the start of Second Sino-Japanese War as well. After the capture of Nanjing, yes, CKS didn't want to end the war. So obviously, a deeper invasion is going to happen. Fast forward to 1940, the war was nearing an end with Wang Jingwei on the Japanese side.

Edited October 12, 2024 by futon

[futon]

And "not entitled" goes both ways. The US was not entitled to butt in. 

 

[urbanoid]

Rare LDP L

 

Edited October 27, 2024 by urbanoid

[futon]

With 215, they did a bit better Arin's prediction. 

While still short of the 233, the make up of the non-LDP/Komeito parties vary by a lot.

The second biggest (+38) pretty much matches exactly with LDP for geopolitics and defense. The 3rd biggest (+28) is more conservative than LDP. So LDP getting their cooperation shouldn't be hard and that'll get the votes passed 233. 

[urbanoid]

Elections in Georgia, pro-Russian Georgian Dream allegedly wins more than 50% of the vote, the EU doesn't recognize the results, neither does... the president of Georgia. Who does? Russia and Orban, who congratulated before the votes were even counted:

 

[urbanoid]

German government is kil?

 

 

 

[Markus Becker]

And Olaf fried him! 🤣🤣🤣

This is beyond hilarious. The only time our lack of memory in the Chancellory has shown leadership is by ending his own government. 

Thank God this clown and shit show is over! I'm heading for the basement to get more hydration for celebration. 

[urbanoid]

Ok, so Scholz apparently got offended:

Quote

Chancellor Olaf Scholz has sacked Christian Lindner as finance minister after he proposed snap elections as a means of ending the crisis in Germany's governing coalition.

Quote

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz will seek a vote of confidence on January 15, 2025, for lawmakers to decide if fresh elections should be called by the end of March at the latest.

@dw_politics on X

[JWB]

The dems are imploding

https://x.com/Morning_Joe/status/1854548715274371486

[EchoFiveMike]

I'm disappointed at the lack of suicides.  I was promised shitlib suicides.  When is that fuck Bono going to drive his car off the cliff?  Fucking liars can't ever tell the truth.  S/F....Ken M

[Rick]

This is the closes I could find of a "Because Europe" thread. European voters have some difficult choices to make. 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/11/20/why-the-sun-is-setting-on-the-european-style-welfarism

The comments are interesting. 

[Ssnake]

The UK doubled its debt from 39% GDP to 80% between 2009...2011

That wasn't social spending. It was bailing out the banksters in the City.

Italy, France - sure.

Germany managed to buck the trend, so far. But we raised pension age from 65 to 67 over the last ten years while France goes up in flames when the government discusses a transition from 62 to 64, LOL.

 

The point being, the Torygraph is, as usual, one-sided in its reporting. Why that might be the case is a question I leave to others to answer. And then it doesn't look at countries like Poland, Czechia, Finland. Do they not support the narrative of European decline because, Socialism?

Maybe the situation in Europe is just as varied as its countries and cultures.

[TonyE]

Results of first round in the romanian presidential election annuled by courts, second and final round was to be held on sunday:

https://www.romania-insider.com/ccr-annuls-presidential-elections-romania-december-2024

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn4x2epppego

[lucklucky]

If the reasons for annulation are only TikTok, Telegram social campaigns then there are not much democracy remaining in Romania.

[lucklucky]

Portuguese went again for a general election that would not change anything. In the end it changed a lot. First the reason for the election:

The minority Government Social Democrats leader  has a compliance company that handed over to his own family to manage after he got PM.  Journalists out of nowhere picked him. In the end thy dragged the issue for weeks but never accused him of anything illegal, just that the appearance of it was bad.  The PM forced the issue and a vote of confidence in parliament which he know that would probably fail.

"Experts" thought that nothing would change much...but...

PM party Social Democrats got a small hike in vote to 32% so were not punished.

The mains opposition Socialists collapsed and lost 400K votes - the most important Portuguese party, the party that sees itself as owning the regime  - our constitutions stills says we are going to be Socialists-  for first time will not be the 1st or 2nd force in Parliament. At moment tied in 2nd place with right party Chega(Enough) called extreme right by journalists,  will most probably get more representatives by the emigration circle that vote Chega mostly.

2 other significant milestones: 

For first time Social Democrats and Socialists are unable to change the Constitution, they now lack 2/3 of votes.

For first time parties not on the left - Social Democrats are considered center right can change the Constitution, with Chega and Liberal Initiative (Libertarians).