politics

Biden's remark on Japan's constitution raises eyebrows

68 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

68 Comments
Login to comment

This is more the case of Japan being overly sensitive since the point was that Japan have its capacity for war reduced. That element has remained and is a great thing.

19 ( +29 / -10 )

A popular front-page column in the national Asahi newspaper said this week that the comment “was unprecedented in its insensitivity” and “could even be considered arrogant.”

Hardly. Biden merely stated a fact, as confirmed by the article:

The constitution was drafted by U.S. forces occupying Japan after World War II, though Japan modified the draft somewhat before adoption.

Sometimes it just seems like some people want to whine about anything and everything.

19 ( +25 / -6 )

Nothing wrong with Japan's constitution, as is. Japan needs to accept losing the war, in hindsight, was a great outcome.

16 ( +25 / -9 )

Who thinks it's arrogant? The people who want to be rid of the 'embarrassment of a constitution forced on them from the US'? There can be no doubt the US wrote it, but the thing is, it is that very US written Constitution that has allowed Japan to enjoy 71 years of relative peace. It might be a bit of a bitter pill to swallow, sure, but is what Japan had before, where it was reduced to ashes, better? Should they draft their own by the hands of those that would like to see a "stronger Japan" and a return to said country that was reduced to ashes?

It may have been written by someone else, and it may have been forced on the nation at the time, but it is JAPAN'S Constitution and no other countries, and they have done very well with it up to now. Japan can thank itself, largely, for that. They also have the power to keep on the path of peace or change it.

21 ( +31 / -10 )

The last thing you ever want to do in diplomacy: tell it like it is.

17 ( +21 / -4 )

Biden talking like an old southern slave owner.

-28 ( +8 / -36 )

Which article in the US Constitution is the "peace article"?

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Asahi shinbun, August 17, 2016

天声人語

バイデン副大統領が言った。「核保有国になり得ないとする日本の憲法を、我々が書いたことを知らないのか」▼対立候補のトランプ氏が日本の核武装を容認したことに対する批判だという。米政府の要人としては異例で、無神経というほかない。

Vice president Biden said, “Does he not understand we wrote Japan’s Constitution to say that they could not be a nuclear power?” He said it was a criticism against the opponent candidate Mr Trump's approval of nuclear armament by Japan. We cannot help but say he was exceptional and reckless as an important official of the US government.

Asahi's take was,

Japanese constitution does not say anything about nuclear weapon, and

Trump did not approve possession of nuclear weapons by Japan.

It is interesting to see how words are taken out of context.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

Biden screwed up here definitely.

Though it is to a great degree true, the United States cannot admit they "wrote" Japan's constitution without seriously damaging its legitimacy.

Biden's failure to understand this simple and basic principle makes his competency doubtful.

-17 ( +9 / -26 )

And what makes it worse,is that his comments are giving ammunition to Abe and his ilk about the need to push thru change in the constitution because our former "colonial rulers" still look down on us though we are the third most powerful economy in the world. A poor choice of words by the Biden.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

So the truth hurts then?

9 ( +13 / -4 )

The question is not who wrote it, but is it any good. The test of time shows that it is a good constitution. But an amendment needs to be added: periodic reapportionment like the US. One country bumpkin vote is worth 4 to 7 city votes. This needs to be changed. Then there will be less talk about changing the constitution.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

@Kazuaki: Respectfully, it's a known fact that the USA drafted the Japanese constitution.

After the initial draft, many Japanese scholars in fact wanted to make many changes are were simply "not allowed" by MacArthur and company. Some things they did budge on was more...mechanical stuff of government (eg. allowing two governing houses instead of one).

There really wasn't a lot of direct hands-on work by Japanese on the Japanese constitution; it was more "Yeah ok, we'll take that into account..."

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Japan's first postwar leaders wanted to reject the draft of the constitution when they first saw it. One of the things they hated was the provision about equal education for boys and girls, and on this point they accused the American authors of failing to understand Japanese culture. (See John Dower's "Embracing Defeat." )

Yep, there's "arrogance" here, and it's clear who's guilty of that.

12 ( +14 / -2 )

Um, its true!!!! What is wrong with the truth? SMH Japan. Why is it that you don't like to hear the truth?

10 ( +11 / -1 )

Regardless of whatever anyone prefers to think there is little doubt that the USA dictates to Japan what it should and should not do. It's been that way ever since WWII. Even the recent arming up of Japan and its turn to the right has a lot to do with the USA telling Abe to do so and keeping him strong within the government. Do you really think that if 20 years ago some popular PM with control of the senate decided to change Japan's constitution to a warring one, that would have been ok? The USA would have made a massive deal about it, probably declare Japan to be a threat, and impose at least sanctions and try to cripple it in one way or another if not by force. This is all according to plan...

4 ( +6 / -2 )

stomach sick ...

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Japan is certainly welcome to become a nuclear power, but if it does, it will most likely be on its own.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Respectfully, it's a known fact that the USA drafted the Japanese constitution.

I'm not disagreeing with this. But this is one of those things the United States cannot really admit to. After all, the story is always that the Constitution is one of the Japanese people - otherwise, it has no legitimacy. Legitimacy cannot be justified by longevity, thus there must at least be an accepted fiction by all those with cards in the play that this Constitution is American influenced (undeniably), but still a Japanese product.

And Biden's mistake is to break that taboo.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

Why does anyone ever not want to accept History as it happened? Its been done and it cannot be changed. But only denied. Those who fail to accept history as it happened are destined to repeat that history , good or bad!

3 ( +5 / -2 )

I am neither American nor Japanese and to me the sad part about this is that Biden and his defenders can't see that that line is offensive in this day and age. It is a reminder that American imperialism is as alive and well as it was in the era of Manifest Destiny.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

Just like with so many other things that happened after the war, EVERYONE knows, but no one wants to admit or openly talk about and just leave the status-quo as is.....except Abe is being pretty damn insensitive as well, by openly talking about rewriting, excuse me, reinterpreting and THEN rewriting the US written document too.

If it has served the country so well for 7 decades why change it now Mr Abe?

1 ( +7 / -6 )

not permitting the introduction of nuclear weapons (into Japan),

well that has never been the case. US bases in Japan have nuclear missiles ready for use even now. Only a naive fool would think Japan isn't protected by land based nuclear weapons.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

"And Biden's mistake is to break that taboo."

I support politicians who break taboos.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

Japan is their colony. Their wining ship in asia. The only one.

And a man is still a man that love to humiliate people with his power.

It is time japan understand america better like the reste of the world.

America will not let japan leave their sight without a fight at least a moral one and witch one.

Now if america have really writen Japan constitution we should be worried and now we can understand the high level of family murders in the country. (not many people know this but it actually full of conception mistakes)

America democracy and constitution was made so that violence and mafia could stand again or survive.

-15 ( +1 / -16 )

Shimazaki-san, you are exactly right you cannot have a democratic constitution forced on a people- that is an oxymoron. The Japanese constitution is illegitamate. Accepting fiction as truth is in other realms known as insanity. Maybe if we stop living so many lies, we can actually move towards solutions for what is! Na, that's just crazy talk - we are better off in lala land.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Agree with Kaz. Biden done screwed up with that quip. Successfully pissed off all sides of the spectrum. Validates team Abe's position by re-insulting their national pride while simultaneously undercutting the oppositions efforts to portray the Constitution as Japanese with former PM Shidehira playing the prominent role regarding Article 9. All this from a speech that was not centered on Japan. Rather inexcusable carelessness.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

@kobejim

"You cannot have a democratic constitution forced..."

Well guess what it happened here and it led to the most successful and productive period in our history and shaped Japan into the nation that it is today. One with many problems but still better off and with more potential than 90% of other countries.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Biden occasionally puts his foot in his mouth, and he seems to have done it again. In his effort to put down Trump's comment, he's made a statement that is both arguably and technically false. Arguable because while Article 9 was effectively written by the U.S. as a means to keep the demand to prosecute the Emperor placated, the rest of it was done with input on the Japan side. More importantly, there is nothing about nuclear weapons in Article 9 and the no-nuclear position was a solely Japanese invention that did not appear until decades later- making Biden's statement "false". Put bluntly, Japan, while having nuclear capability, doesn't want the cost or responsibility, perhaps both politically and psychologically of maintaining nuclear weapons. And why should they when the U.S. offers a nuclear umbrella, which effectively covers South Korea and Australia as well, both nations which considered going nuclear at one point. Biden needs to do some homework before opening his mouth.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Biden makes an irresponsible statement.

Republicans: "Biden should be condemned"

Trump makes an irresponsible statement.

Republicans: "It's all good. Carry on"

2 ( +8 / -6 )

today's world need no war to settle scores but just negotiate without fear with great rationale. if so why talk on war machinery called nuclear arms...!

Bidden talk is a slip of tongue if read with president Mr Obama's ways of handling issues, one can make out. tks

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Very nice remark, Ossan - and Biden is well known for his ability to bring things to a point, however uncomfortable.

Let's take a look at Article Nine:

ARTICLE 9. (1) Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes. (2) In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.

Your assertion for the basis of the establishment of the Article may be true, but there are competing theories. Regarding interpretation, if taken to logical extremes, the entire existence of the Self Defense Forces could be questioned - if not for the "self" part. Nuclear weapons, though, can only be used for attack, regardless of whether their use were preemptive or retaliatory. So, in that sense, Biden was correct - Japan maintaining nuclear weapons should be considered unconstitutional.

When discussing what was learned from the war, I'm often disheartened by the most common answer, "War is bad." Of course war is bad, and I wish Americans had a better knowledge of that. What disappoints me is the lack of knowledge of what brought Japan to that point: The total disregard of law. Japan as a sovereign nation is free to do what its people choose - but that should be within the realm of law. If not, change the law, or refrain from action.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Nuclear weapons by definition are offensive weapons, you do not nuke Hokkaido to defend it, so therefore Biden is right. Nuclear weapons are banned under the Japanese constitution as they are not defensive in nature.

The only people upset about this are the ones that want to relive the 1930s again with similar results as seen in the 1940s.

Japan has prospered under the current constitution with all the benefits of being protected and encouraged by the USA. To end that would be folly for Japan and she would pay a horrible price for a fake independence.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

The prenumbra to the American Declaration of Independence was plagiarised from a Brit. Does that make it less worthy? Same could be said of the Fedralist papers. Does isource devalue either?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

After the initial draft, many Japanese scholars in fact wanted to make many changes are were simply "not allowed" by MacArthur and company.

The "initial draft" (the Matsumoto Commission draft) was a "same ol' same ol'" document written by the Japanese side and binned by the Allied Occupation just after the ink was dry and just before the Allied laughter had died down.

The final constitution was mostly written by two American soldiers with legal experience. This "McCarthur draft" was slightly modified by the Japanese side before being enacted.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

How well educated are the new young voters? Do they know and understand the issues? These young voters are going to take responsibility for their nation!? I kind of doubt it. Sorry. The trigger happy government wanting to prove they are the bosses in the region is not what we need. The present constitution has brought peace and development. In the last few decades few things have gone right for Japan. None of it due to a perceived flawed constitution. Giving Japan (and Korea) nuclear weapons will only precipitate blood shedding in the region. It's a war in the making between a communist party and a nationalist leader. The citizenry doesn't care. Japan crawling out from under the US umbrella will only create more sorrow here. Less money, fewer people. China has many nuclear weapons. I hope the PM understands he can't finish this fight without a major bruising.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-review/1991-06-01/macarthurs-japanese-constitution-linguistic-and-cultural-study-its

So, Mac Arthur's staff were instrumental in drafting the English version of the Constitution, but it did not specifically mention nuclear weapons when it was first written.

It is a very delicate subject, one that is hard to discuss without insulting anyone.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

John Dower's "Embracing Defeat" gives a very interesting insight into how the Japanese Constitution evolved.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

@Rik314 - Got that on my shelf as a 'soon to read'. Will look out for that part especially now!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I havent read Dowers book lately so it is time for a reread of it. Also check out Beate Sirota`s work on the project.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Not just America, but American Military Officers...they were the ones who wrote Japan's constitution. Here's the catch, it was light-years more progressive than the ones being offered by Japanese. I believe that I recall that the US only undertook the writing of the constitution after Japanese submitted a draft that was not anit-military enough nor did it enfranchise Japanese women. It was the failure of Japanese in immediate post war period to seize the opportunity presented them by America and produce a modern constitution befitting a representative democracy that led to US officers having to write it themselves. Of course it's been amended a few times and tweaked a bit, not much, but some. So its not fair to say that the extant constitution was written by the US but the bulk of it comes straight from the US version.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Gives more ammo to Abe to justify changing the constitution. Honesty is not always the best policy in diplomatic circles.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

It's moot. Japan is peaceful. Abe isn't going to create a nuclear Military.

It will be a coalition of Asian nations that resolve Red China's escapades on Mischief Reef in the Spratleys. It's doubtful the owners of the oil leases there can be pressured into selling. Diplomacy trumps guns.

Biden takes the view that Japan is considered the United States' unsinkable aircraft carrier as do most of his generation. It isn't a POV that indicates disrespect but of interdependency.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Biden “kind of misspoke. This is not something he should talk openly about in public.”

What is wrong with stating facts? Instead of telling people to shut up, Mr Aida should explain why he thinks facts should be suppressed. If he has no coherent argument he should keep his own mouth shut.

Left to themselves the Japanese would have kept the Meiji constitution unchanged and would not have permitted freedom of expression or many other freedoms imposed by the US.

The likes of Abe want to see a return to the Meiji constitution, removing rights and forcing Japanese to be conscripted into the armed forces. These proposed constitutional changes should certainly be discussed and debated in detail. Instead the media avoid the topic under threat from the LDP.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

LagunaAug. 18, 2016 - 09:48PM JST Your assertion for the basis of the establishment of the Article may be true, but there are competing theories. Regarding interpretation, if taken to logical extremes, the entire existence of the Self Defense Forces could be questioned - if not for the "self" part.

Indeed the entire existence of the JSDF can be questioned. But let's look at how it got that way. The U.S. wrote Article 9. Just a few years later 1950 when North Korea crossed the 38th Parallel, the United States demanded that Japan create a military on the grounds that US forces were now being deployed on the Korean Peninsula leaving Japan with no defense of the homeland, with a wink towards the Soviets eying Hokkaido. The Japanese as usual argued "Sorry no can do" pointing to Article 9. The U.S. persisted and eventually the JSDF was created as an extension of the National Police Agency to somehow skirt the constitution. Fast forward to 1980s, US President Ronald Reagan asks J-PM Zenkp Suzuki to give assurance that Japan will help defend Guam. Again, "No can do". Gulf War I, the US leading it's coalition against Iraq's Hussein again demands that Japan sends it's JSDF to the middle east to fight. Once again "No can do". Ended up that Japan paid for most of the costs of Desert Storm and the term "Checkbook Power" came to be. Still, the JMSDF did send minesweepers well after the combat was over. The point here is that yes, the very existence of the JSDF, especially with the size and capability that it has grown to, is a contradiction to Article 9. But that contradiction was created not by Japan, but by the United States which authored Article 9 in the first place.

Nuclear weapons, though, can only be used for attack, regardless of whether their use were preemptive or retaliatory. So, in that sense, Biden was correct - Japan maintaining nuclear weapons should be considered unconstitutional.

There are Strategic Nuclear Weapons which can only be used for either offense or retaliation. But if a nation possesses Strategic Nuclear Weapons with a no-first-use declaration, then it becomes an effective purely defensive weapon as a deterrence, in fact probably the best defense you could have. A line of thinking that is seen in North Korea., In addition, there are smaller Theater Nuclear Weapons which can be used for defense. With no mention of nuclear weapons in Article 9, and the existence of the later, Biden's statement is, in my view, incorrect.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Doesn't surprise me at all and people said this guy could be the President of the US. If Biden said it the same thoughts this is the mindset of the demo bats and they don't change the Apple doesn't fall to far from the tree. They promote one thing but show another until they slip up and expose their true thoughts

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Why Japan is so sensitive. Did the japanese forget that japan surrendered to the ally unconditionally? of course their constitution is the result of the surrender.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Isn't Biden just stating a known fact? Oh I see, it's insensitive to remind Japan that they lost the war of their own aggression and that they're only the junior in this partnership.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Well, Biden is right. Biden is pretty much right. And very impolitic.

1.. Biden is right. Regarding Art. 9. The US wrote Article 9. See here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Japan#Drafting_process

For many years, the cover story that Hirohito came up with the idea to renounce war during his famous meeting with Mac kinda provided a fig leaf on the open secrete that SCAP was the top dog. That pretense was dropped by the 1980s.

The US wrote Art. 9. And, interestingly, almost immediately started to undermine it. Some put the change in '48, but this is hotly contested. One thing is clear in the record, by the summer of '50, we wanted help fighting the Korean War, and the communists in general. We wanted Japan to re-arm. Prime Minister Yoshida, interested first getting the country back on its feet economically, was more than happy to supply NATO (US) troops with all they needed, but, gee, so, sorry, we have this little problem with sending troops, 'cause, gosh, we renounced war.....

[BTW It is now clear this tactic was viewed by Yoshida as merely temporary. Yoshida wanted to beef up the SDF, but ran into intense domestic opposition. Thus, a temporary tactic morphed into the (in)famous "Yoshida Strategy,, or Yoshida Doctrine = (supposedly) having no armed forces and primarily focus on economic growth. see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoshida_Doctrine

Biden is pretty much right. Art 9 was intended to preclude Japan from having armaments that could project power.

Here is the text in the original:

ARTICLE 9. (1) Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.

(2) In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized

Nuclear weapons, with a delivery system, enables a nation to project power across the globe. They are clearly the kind of armament contemplated in the ban on "war potential."

While Japan has since the 1950s interpreted and re-interpreted the ban on war potential weapons to the point where Japan today has the second best military on the planet, no one in Japan has gone there with nukes.

They could. But they haven't.

The entire defensive v offensive weapon debate is ruse. There is no difference in war. That which enables me to neutralize your ability to attack me or mine increases my power over you. Further, while nukes are obviously the most offensively destructive and intimidating weapon we have divised, they are also the most persuasive defensive weapon around. That's why it is called a nuclear deterrent. That is what MAD was and is all about. MAD never went away, just because the Soviets collapsed.

That's why Iraq could be pushed around so relatively easily by the US. Not so had Saddam had the bomb. That is why North Korea wants nukes.

That is why the US and other strong nations do their level best to limit nuclear proliferation. Nukes are a cheap way to ensure a country the ability to resists a US, or Russian, or Chinese invasion. Which, if you haven't been paying attention, happens quite a lot.

Do you think Russia would have invaded the Crimea if the Ukraine had its own nuclear deterrent? I don't either.

Nuclear deterrent. It's right there in the name.

Biden was impolitic.

While it is, as everyone here points out, no longer an open secrete that the US forced Art. 9 on Japan, Japan has struggled from the outset how best to make peace with its Constitution. Note, I do not write, how to make peace with its peace Constitution, because this goes waaaaaaay deeper than just Article 9.

The Japanese Constitution is not theirs. It is not theirs in the way that the US constitution represented a hashing out of competing political ideas and interests resulting from enlightenment ideas and a pluralistic society. IOW an out growth of liberal democracy. Not at all. The Japanese constitution was imposed on a prostate nation at the lowest ebb of national power in its history. The liberal democratic values and operation of government enshrined in its basic law were alien -- as alien as if Japan had occupied Washington DC and imposed a Meiji type constitution on the US.

Yet, it is theirs. Japan has raised three of four generations of its youth under this imposed order, the whole while adapting and interpreting it to their country. And it has largely been a great success.

Nevertheless, in the end, there remains a deeeeeeeeeeep ambivalence about it. Japan needs to resolve that ambivalence on its own terms. It is quite simply impolitic for an American official to stick its nose there. It does no good.

Indeed, it does great psychic harm.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@notasap:military officer. GHQ legal officer Lt Col Kadis. English version

0 ( +0 / -0 )

To add - Joe is authentic. He doesn't scare the Japanese the way Trump does. Us Americans will enjoy him for years to come. I'm not worried about a political party that is losing its national presence daily. Donkeys are stubborn not stupid.

Japan doesn't care what the outgoing VP says.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Come on.... Biden is the VP, and not a very smart one at that. He's gone in 6 months too. So lighten up.... every country in the world has its fair share of misinformed politicians. At least he was partially right.... the U.S. Drafted the Japanese constitution and it pushed for Japan to be Constitutionally a peaceful nation.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Trump: Japan should pay for its own defense. Why are they free riding on American taxpayers anyway? Biden: After winning the war, the US imposed conditions on Japan that included a Constitution that forbids rearmament, so OF COURSE the United States has not only a responsibility for Japan's defense but also for the security of all Asia.

In short, Biden gets it. Hillary also gets it. The whole defense establishment gets it. They also know that the relationship that Japan and the US share has been renegotiated CONSTANTLY and that Japan bears a huge burden financially for the status quo, which benefits all of Asia. Trump has no clue whatsoever about any of that.

Biden is no news wordsmith, and that is not news. Biden is also no dummy, and that is not news.

My eyebrows have not been raised.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Japan doesn't care what the outgoing VP says.

Yes, it most certainly does. "Biden “kind of misspoke. This is not something he should talk openly about in public.”

and

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/08/19/national/politics-diplomacy/dp-leader-okada-raps-biden-for-nuclear-remark-on-constitution/#.V7YWzCg6EyE

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Stop any Japanese person on the street and ask them who wrote Japan's constitution and they will answer "the United States."

2 ( +3 / -1 )

What a load of shita, Yes Japan was force no end to except and sign on the X spot. It took 2 atom bomb and a few million deaths in doing so. How f%^$ing Arrogant !!!!! “was unprecedented in its insensitivity” and “could even be considered arrogant.” Asahi Newspaper is the one being arrogant. Japan have no choice but to front their rotten history and be reminded off. This force constitution will hang around Japans neck for at least another generating because idiots like Asahi Newspaper still have a need the be reminded of the fact.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Biden is not familiar with WWII history or Asia so he talks like Trump.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Poor comment, but still light years ahead of Trump in class

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The vice president said, “Does he not understand we wrote Japan’s Constitution to say that they could not be a nuclear power?”

Just a finicky point, but does the VP not understand that Japan can change its constitution without permission from the US?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Perhaps they'd rather be speaking Russian?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

JeffLeeAUG. 18, 2016 - 07:12PM JST

Japan's first postwar leaders wanted to reject the draft of the constitution when they first saw it. One of the things they hated was the provision about equal education for boys and girls, (See John Dower's "Embracing Defeat." )

Most certainly untrue. Equal education for boys and girls was practiced in Japan well before the end of WW2.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

It's time Japan's constitution was rewritten to enable them to protect themselves from China and North Korea. Japan is not a threat to democracy and freedom. We need Japan to be a powerful country, one that can help keep the balance of power in the Asia Pacific region. Especially now that China has started to flex some muscle, and show its intention to dominate the region and eventually the world. It's time Japan was allowed to have nuclear weapons, that will curtail any plans of attack or occupation that China or North Korea might have.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Alls fair in LOVE and WAR!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I would've hoped his comment would be something like "and the US and all other countries would do well with an Article 9 in their constitution. I will sponsor this bill..."

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Black SabbathAug. 19, 2016 - 03:26AM JST Well, Biden is right. Biden is pretty much right. And very impolitic. 1.. Biden is right. Regarding Art. 9. The US wrote Article 9. See here:

According to this article Biden never said "we wrote Article 9". He said "we wrote the constitution". Had he said the former, he would have been correct. But I guess we can forgive him because his raybans look very cool.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

MacArthur constitution. No one nicknamed USA constitution. Doesn't matter, Except Emperor, we all got freedom.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Trump did not approve possession of nuclear weapons by Japan.

It is interesting to see how words are taken out of context.

It's also interesting how sycophants will deny facts staring them in their face. In Trump's OWN words, he advocates Japan acquiring nuclear weapons. Of course, you'd have to take your fingers out of your ears and open your eyes to witness it, though:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEsBoRVlWXU

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Last primary, he was against Hillary. She is aware Biden said in China Japan can use nuclear weapon overniiight to attackkk N Korea. Bye bye Biden by Hillary advisers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites