politics

Majority want Taiwan, China to cooperate on island dispute with Japan

65 Comments

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

© 2012 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

65 Comments
Login to comment

Cooperation! Working together!

A much, much better plan than the 29th century "blow them out of the water" attitude. The last thing we need is another Iraq or Afghanistan.

Surely Taiwan, China and Japan can share the work and share the profits.

We all need oil.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Sure the thief's want a piece of Japan. What about the people of Japan? 90.8 percent of China suppose military moves, does this include the entire prefecture? Japan needs the oil.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Up to 90.8% of Chinese support military moves

If China really thinks the Senkaku islands belong to China legally, I wonder about something,,,, Why hasn't China taken them back by force years ago? Why is China still hesitating to take back these islands for many years? Japan thinks these islands belong to Japan, so it has actually been controlling them for a long time.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The Senkaku Islands belong to a Japanese citizen living in Saitama. China and Taiwan should stop interfering in Japan's domestic affairs.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

"Taiwan and China split in 1949 after a civil war but Beijing still claims sovereignty over the self-ruled island."

What kind of revisionist history is this? Telling part of the truth that is convenient is akin to lying. The Communists PRC took over China in 1949 and were going to kill off the ROC.. Taiwan and Japan cooperating is a possibility since they have historically been close. China forcing their will on Taiwan to cooperate with Japan will only isolate Taiwan further from Japan, which has always been China's goal.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The most important information from this article is that over 90% of the Chinese are in favor of military actions, which is a very alarming, dangerous figure in itself. Meanwhile figures coming from Taiwan are not overly surprising, in that it basically shows their maturity and balance on matters of this nature. If we ask similar questions in Japan I expect figures to show much lower figures supporting military actions and perhaps more essentially expressing indifference. When it comes to push and shove there is certainly the need to show some teeth once in a while and such figures to come from Japan should clearly be encouraging and comforting for China thereby inducing them to continue to show a more aggressive and arrogant stance on the matter.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

"In China, 85.3% of the 1,502 people interviewed were in favor of cooperation with Taiwan..."

"Up to 90.8% of Chinese support military moves, if need be, to resolve the disputes..."

An interesting interpretation of "cooperation".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

These people can't try to make a constructive move if their lives depended on it.

Sure the thief's want a piece of Japan. What about the people of Japan? 90.8 percent of China suppose military moves, does this include the entire prefecture? Japan needs the oil.

It's interesting that you can ever only look from the Japan's point of view...

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Thomas AndersonJul. 20, 2012 - 11:38AM JST

It's interesting that you can ever only look from the Japan's point of view...

It is true that Japan was a legal owner of that Islands from 1895 to 1945. It was trophy of sino Japanese war. When Japan lost the war in 1945, they surrendered unconditionally to allied forces. They did not make any precondition for exemption of that Islands. Even Japan by itself under mercy of Allied forces. Thanks to USA, their territory size was not much different from post war 1945. If China controlled Japan after World War II, Japan current size will be smaller than Taxas.

Who care about Japan 's point of view or China point of view? When the nation lose the war, their territotry will be smaller. If the nation is a winner of war, territory will be larger. Treaty was written by winner of war. Not the other way around.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

It seems strange that when the US was occupying and administrating the Ryukyu Islands (Senkaku Islands included) before reverting to JP controls, neither China or Taiwan put forth their claims to the Americans.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

If these people want to go to war against China over some islands, then they should. But they should be in the front line, and not just ordering people to go to war while sitting comfortably at home.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Taiwanese public opinion is becoming more favourable towards China. A majority favouring cooperation with the PRC 1on almost anything would have been unthinkable in the past. The last 10 years have seen stronger economic and business ties along with the establishment of flights to many Chinese cities. As allswellinjapan mentioned, Taiwan now seems to be in a much more beneficial mindset where cooperation with the PRC can be tolerated if it is in its interests.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China is a country that expands until it meets an opposing force.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Taiwan has strong anti-Japanese sentiment due to the 50 years colonial rule of taiwan, this resentment goes strong after their former president Chen ShuiBien thrown to jail! Chen was pro-Japan anti China and his imprisonment was part of the vengeance from CCP and KMT!

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

However, ties have improved markedly since a Beijing-friendly government took office in Taipei in 2008.

China has a far stronger business, intelligence networks than japan has in Taiwan! Bitter memories of Japanese colonial rules similar like those in South Korea has boosted China's influences! Japan has overestimated her support from other countries, all her neighbouring countries from Russia, Koreas, China, Taiwan has strong resenement against her territorial claims! Poor diplomacy and arrogance, uncompromising claims has wrecked Japan's influences and security!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Historically the disputed islands came under dispute was due to post WWII issues, Japan colonised nearly all of Asia. When we surrendered, many of these colonies went back into its traditional ownership, except for Taiwan and the disputed islands. The islands where then placed in supervision by America and when America had enough control over Japan, it gave the islands to Japan, without consulting China how historically had a claim as is with Taiwan. Causing this mess! All a part of Western Colonialism in Asia. We need to focus on our traditional values as Japanese and not errode our sence of culture by substituting Western ideology into our mainstream. Japanese youth these days lean too much towards Western values and our traditions are lost.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

When we surrendered, many of these colonies went back into its traditional ownership, except for Taiwan and the disputed islands. The islands where then placed in supervision by America and when America had enough control over Japan, it gave the islands to Japan, without consulting China how historically had a claim as is with Taiwan. Causing this mess!

Then shouldn't Japan return those islands to Taiwan and China?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Well, it appears that the Senkaku islands formally belonged to Taiwan, and that's why the Taiwanese people are complaining about it. Japan and China should get over it and hand it back to Taiwan.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Then shouldn't Japan return those islands to Taiwan and China?

Of course NOT!! Japan is taking the isles that doesnt belongs top her! The Okinawa didnt belongs to Japan as well, it was the Meiji era the Japanese emperor send troops to attack and occupy there taken the isles for her own! Those were neglected by the allies and that crazy Nixon returns Okianawa to japan 1972 was a plot top provoke a regional conflict!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Territorial aggression means resource availability and accessibility. Wars are fought primarily over territories. That translates to control of resources. In todays terms, economics.

Both China and Russia's 's access to resources are by the warm oceans facing the Pacific. But there are countries in the way, and two of those countries are Japan and Taiwan. Air you say? The airspace above those countries are not accessible, air transport MUST land somewhere and then "control" the resources which are on land and in the sea or bottom of the sea.

Just happens that quite a bit of the natural resources of the ocean are all within Taiwan and Japanese territorial waters all the way from Okinawa to northern Hokkaido.

Were you aware of that?

While the general Chinese and Taiwanese population may not know all that, the governments and those political and economic powers within those countries do. Even if by a small "war" such access and possession will give those who own the resources military as well as political power. Because we all are aware that money really "buys" military and political power, even at the expense of the general population.

So while the general population may want to have a nice discussion to settle the problem... on the surface... those in power may really want confrontation.....

There are few that already know.... or are playing a part....

Why should fishermen with their fishing ships "participate" in such aggression?

They must know that it means economic gains....money... wealth... don't you think?

And economic power is ultimately, political and military power.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

By the way "surveys" are meaningful ONLY IF the questions were meaningful. We did NOT get the actual survey questions and exactly where and who were surveyed and under what conditions. We did not even get specific numbers.

So surveys without the correct survey methods and a meaningful survey population, such results really are only "guesses" or controlled propaganda to distract from the real intent of what ever is happening. So we must also question our source, as to where did they get such data?

Do you believe in such surveys?

Especially if the survey was conducted by a government?

The problem is surveys if mis-used and given to the uninformed and mis-informed, may mis-lead the population to misfortune such as false hope and mis-interpretation of what is happening.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China only believes in power. The history is not on their side to go after Senkaku since there are documents showing the ownership of Senkaku by Ryukyu. Now they are talking about taking back Okinawa. Crazy.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The fact that Chinese and Taiwanese are open to cooperating over this natural gas grab shows that they understand how weak their position is.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The fact that Chinese and Taiwanese are open to cooperating over this natural gas grab shows that they understand how weak their position is.

I think it's more that they feel resentment over the fact that Japan is now claiming territorial rights over Senkaku when the islands originally belonged to Taiwan. Remember the LDP of Japan used to tell China that those islands didn't exactly belong to Japan.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

"85.3% of the 1,502 people interviewed " in China, that would make the poll pathetically small by any standards.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

If Japan gives these islands to Taiwan and china, will "the weather girls" go away?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Those islands belong to Taiwan. Chinese records of the islands date back to the 15th century. The Japanese claim only begins in 1895 - the same year that Japan takes over Taiwan after winning the Sino-Japanese War. The U.S. supports the Japanese claim not only because it is an ally, but also because it wants access to the strategic waters. If Japan wants better relations with its neighbors, it should start dropping colonial claims like this one.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The falling out underscored how history remains a potential flashpoint in Japan’s ties with China that it once conquered. The problem of WWII denials are still common by Japanese conservatives. But there is also a widely shared perception in Japan that China’s communist government plays up the Japan's brutal invasion for its own propaganda purposes.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

What the majority of the people of the Republic of China and the Peoples Republic of China think is not a factor in Japans decision. I would warn Taiwan that alienating Japan is not a good thing. Also if they like each other perhaps it is time to mend their differences. Perhaps they can be part of China but have "local rule".

Sir_Edgar, giving up these islands to either China is not going to improve relations. What will they ask for next? sfip330 if Japan gives up these islands, what would we do if they ask for the Okinawa islands close to Taiwan?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Sir_Edgar, giving up these islands to either China is not going to improve relations. What will they ask for next? sfip330 if Japan gives up these islands, what would we do if they ask for the Okinawa islands close to Taiwan?

Uncomfortable truth was that Islands became part of Japan legally in 1895. Okinawa also became part of Japan in 1871. Before that Okinawa was known as Ryuku kingdom which have tribunal relationship with China. It was not owned by middle kingdom. Neither Japan! Japan has no moral ground for claiming as rightful owner of all Islands . Unlike Japan, Taiwan or China, USA was not greedy about that Islands natural resources and protected the environment and historical heritage of that Islands. After World War II, they were under gentle care of USA.

If there is no natural gas or oil, no one is claiming right now. Their interest is off shore and on shore exploration and making pollution and environmental damage to ecology.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sir_Edgar

The U.S. supports the Japanese claim not only because it is an ally, but also because it wants access to the strategic waters.

Actually US doesn't support Japan. The US has always been vague about who the islands belonged to. The US has not specifically said that the islands belonged to Japan. The problem is that who Senkaku islands belong to after the Treaty of San Francisco is still not very clear.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

YuriOtani

What the majority of the people of the Republic of China and the Peoples Republic of China think is not a factor in Japans decision.

What Japan thinks is not a factor in the international decision. Japan has signed a treaty to give up all the islands after the US occupation except for the four main islands of Japan.

I would warn Taiwan that alienating Japan is not a good thing.

Taiwan is incredibly pro-Japan and anti-China, so why do you think that they're doing this? Because they have good claims that those islands belong to them.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Even if Japan claims the ownership of those islands, the US doesn't recognize that those islands belong to Japan, so China can easily occupy those islands using military force. The US won't do a thing about it because they don't recognize those islands as Japan's territory.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Thomas if it is so easy than The Peoples Republic needs to come and get them. You know I am from Okinawa? It is up to the PRC now, all we can do is wait. However attacking Japan is risky, what if they fail? What is the balance if China attacks fails and America stood on the sidelines?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@YuriOtani

You know I am from Okinawa?

Seriously? No, I'd never have guessed that from your previous posts. Never.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Thomas if it is so easy than The Peoples Republic needs to come and get them. You know I am from Okinawa? It is up to the PRC now, all we can do is wait. However attacking Japan is risky, what if they fail? What is the balance if China attacks fails and America stood on the sidelines?

They don't have to attack Japan, they can just occupy the Senkaku islands. Good luck cause the US won't be helping you.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Thomas, to get to the islands they will have to pass through the Coast Guard and then Maritime Self Defense Force. If America does not help they will have the Devil to pay! This survey shows the vast majority (90%) of Chinese want war with Japan. So what is stopping their government? If what most posters write is true, they can have the short victorious war.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@yuri

You are such an angry man. Nobody wants war, these disputes ill be sorted out peacefully. This is not the mid 20th century when Japanese were warmongers.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Taiwan's claim is meaningless as long as they are not a sovereign country. China consider's Taiwans claim to be part of China's claim. Does Taiwan agree with this?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Thomas AndersonJul. 21, 2012 - 11:26PM JST They don't have to attack Japan, they can just occupy the Senkaku islands. Good luck cause the US won't be helping >you.

The US Secretary of State has declared that the Senkakus fall within U.S. defense parameters. The U.S. committment to it;s allies is global in scope. Why do you keep posting such complete nonsense?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Thomas AndersonJul. 21, 2012 - 11:47AM JST What Japan thinks is not a factor in the international decision. Japan has signed a treaty to give up all the islands after >the US occupation except for the four main islands of Japan

No, the Cairo accords stipulated that all Japanese territories taken through war or greed shall be taken away. The Senkakus, having been incorporated as Terra Nullius without war or dispute with anyone, was exempt. This is why it was returned to Japan together with the rest of Okinawa in 1972.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Thomas AndersonJul. 21, 2012 - 11:44AM JST Actually US doesn't support Japan. The US has always been vague about who the islands belonged to. The US has >not specifically said that the islands belonged to Japan. The problem is that who Senkaku islands belong to after the >Treaty of San Francisco is still not very clear.

Actually you obviously have no idea what you're talking about that. The OP is correct on both counts; the United States has stated it will defend the Senkakus in accordance with the US-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty, the US does side with the countrry that hosts the US 7th Fleet as home base as the centerpin of US east asian security and ther US has no ingention of letting China gobble up all of the East and South China Seas. When it is clear that any attempt to take the Senkakus by force will receive a response from the United States, the question of ownership is a moot point.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Second try, Johnny please to not call me a man. It hurts my feelings and it is the Chinese that approve of using force against Japan. Am sorry there is no room for "talks". Japans EEZ goes out to halfway to China. That line can be talked about but not to the demanded 12 nm off of the coast of Okinawa. I do take note that Taiwan is in bed with the Peoples Republic.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

OssanAmericaJul. 22, 2012 - 06:52AM JST

The US Secretary of State has declared that the Senkakus fall within U.S. defense parameters. The U.S. committment to it;s allies is global in scope.

In theory it may be right. Reality is US needs finance for defending that Islands. The more war means the higher the debt. If US have to defend every allies, Taiwan and South Korea also included. When Japan has conflict with them, Does US need to confront with Japan or Taiwan or South Korea?

Irag war operation majority fund was financed by China. Will China finance to US for defending Daiyoku or Senkakus? During the Asean submit, secretary tried to raise the issue with Asean counter parts. It was fruitless and waste of time. She did not want to offend China by herself. The problem that Asean by itself not united for standing against China for economic reason. Secretary also understand that her salary and Marine wages are indirectly funded by China. US does not need to involve every territory dispute of other nation. It is not the national interest of US.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Flyfalcon, China holds such a small part of US debt and in fact needs them more than the US needs them. Taiwan and South Korea will not be armed conflicts with Japan. I do not see an armed conflict with Russia. The only possible conflict is with the Peoples Republic of China.

It is disturbing Taiwan and the peoples republic would agree to do something tougher.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

YuriOtani

Thomas, to get to the islands they will have to pass through the Coast Guard and then Maritime Self Defense Force. If America does not help they will have the Devil to pay! This survey shows the vast majority (90%) of Chinese want war with Japan. So what is stopping their government? If what most posters write is true, they can have the short victorious war.

If both China and Japan are stupid enough to sink a few ships over some islands, then I think they are being stupid. There will probably be an international condemnation and people will look down on both China and Japan. What they both need is diplomacy, not more nationalist sentiments. The nationalists in China are even talking about destroying the Japanese economy by driving up the price of yen even further. They need to find an agreement soon before this whole things blows over.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

OssanAmerica

The US Secretary of State has declared that the Senkakus fall within U.S. defense parameters. The U.S. committment to it;s allies is global in scope. Why do you keep posting such complete nonsense?

Well you are obviously a Japanese nationalist... Please tell me when the US has ever officially stated that the US supports the Japan's territorial claims of the Senkaku islands. The US's stance of the Senkaku islands has always been "neutral". They will not help Japan in any way. The US did not even intervene and help the British during the Falkland islands dispute, so what makes you think that they will with Senkaku islands?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Look at Syria, just for the latest example. If you think seriously the USA will go to war over these disputed islands/rocks, then you are out of your mind.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China and Japan has been bumping each other ships near the water of that inhabited Island for more that 20 yrs now. In late 90' Ultra nationalist form HK and Taiwan went there and raised the flags of both ROC and PROC. Media has been inlamming that issue for a few weeks right now. However it is nothing new about China cockiness or Ja pan arrogance. In the reality, it was just displaying national pride for domestic audience. Therefore, military conflict will be unlikely in 2012.

Last week China fishing vessel was seized by Russia. There was no complaint for China. China wanted to be cocky with Japan especially. it is understandable about their humiliation and suffering of war time. China is nuclear power. US has never want to get the nuke war for neglected small islands for sake of noisy friend. If Is a fantasy for ultra nationalist of Japan for waging war with Japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Pls correct my last sentence as waging war with China for displaying national pride.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China and Japan has been bumping each other ships near the water of that inhabited Island for more that 20 yrs now.

True, Chinese fishermen got quietly arrested at Senkaku islands back in 2004 but nobody cared then. It's only because now the DPJ started diplomatically claiming that the Senkaku islands belonged to Japan, and that has angered China. Remember, this problem has been "shelved" since the 70s. Both China and LDP have been secretly keeping quiet to each other diplomatically and showing a difference face back in their own nations. And now that DPJ has taken power, they have broken that secret arrangement, although probably not knowingly.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

This quote from the article seems to go against the headline:

"Up to 90.8% of Chinese support military moves, if need be, to resolve the dispute"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Here is the quote for you. http://articles.cnn.com/2010-10-30/world/vietnam.clinton.visit_1_senkaku-islands-diaoyutai-islands-diaoyu-islands?_s=PM:WORLD The USA will help defend Japan from attack but takes no position on ownership.

Still the article is very disturbing, soon over 50 percent in Taiwan will favor attacking Japan.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Thomas AndersonJul. 22, 2012 - 01:08PM JST "OssanAmerica The US Secretary of State has declared that the Senkakus fall within U.S. defense parameters. The U.S. committment to it;s allies is global in scope. Why do you keep posting such complete nonsense?"

Well you are obviously a Japanese nationalist..

No, but you're obviously a Chinese nationalist. Japanese natonalists are a small bunch, insignificant bunch, whereas Chinese nationalists are a threat to all of Asia.

. Please tell me when the US has ever officially stated that the US supports the Japan's territorial claims of the Senkaku islands.

Shortly after your drunk trawler captain rammed the JCG vessel. Twice.

The US's stance of the Senkaku islands has always been "neutral". They will not help Japan in any way. The US did >not even intervene and help the British during the Falkland islands dispute, so what makes you think that they will with >Senkaku islands?

Sorry but the US State Department has reaffirmed that the Senkakus fall within the defense parameters of the US-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty. To translate for you, if your PLA Navy invade those islands the US will consider that to be an attack on Japan and the the US 7th Fleet will be responding. You obviously have mistakenly interpreted the fact that we "do not take a position on the sovereinty issue and expect both China and Japan to resolve the issue through dialogiue" to mean that the US is "neutral" on the issue. How anyone can reach such a conclusion in the face of the current Chinese threat to the ASEAN countries, the US suppport for them and the confrontation with China's aggressive territorial and military expansion anfd effort to take over all of the South and East China Seas is bewildering.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Wow, "Thomas Anderson" - the LDP never exercised sovereignty?!

Japan's policy on the Senkaku's has been consistent, and not changed by political parties. The islands were legally annexed terra nullius in the 19th century and have remained Japanese territory uninterrupted since then, bar the temporary US occupation of Okinawa.

China only made this an issue for the first time in history after gas was found there.

A lot of misinformation and newly invented PRC propaganda in your posts. Nicely played, Thomas Anderson.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@Hikozaemon Well that's where you are wrong, the LDP has been telling two different things to both China and the people back in Japan. Like I said, this problem has been "shelved" since the 70s. Why do you think that nobody cared when Chinese fishermen were quietly arrested back in 2004? Because there was a tacit agreement between China and Japan.

A lot of misinformation and newly invented PRC propaganda in your posts. Nicely played, Thomas Anderson.

Yes, because truth is obviously Chinese propaganda... why do I even bother. Obviously anything that you are ignorant of or disagree with is apparently Chinese propaganda. Again, why do I even bother with Japanese nationalists... they don't have a clue and they always think that they're right even though they're ignorant as hell.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Basically, LDP didn't want to damage the relation with China, while at the same time they didn't want to alienate the voters back in their own country. China has been doing the same thing.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

For starters, it was never the LDP - it was the foreign ministry. The LDP had nothing to do with policy. Second, the foreign ministry played down attempts to escalate provocations, by sitting LDP politicians such as Shintaro Ishihara who landed on the islands and raised the flag with several other LDP politicians at one point, by leasing the islands and basically making them no-go areas for Japanese, no doubt in the hope that it would put a dampener on Taiwanese and Chinese nationalists trying to make similar demonstrations near the islands.

The fact that the foreign ministry has consistently de-escalated and de-prioritized the islands as a flashpoint (indeed, even extending the offer of co-development of nearby gas in the 90s) never was a concession on sovereignty. Neither the foreign ministry, and least of all the LDP ever held any line other than that the territory is historically or in terms of international law the territory of Japan. Making stuff up that a political party conceded sovereignty shows either ignorance or wilfull mistruth. Not that this is to be expected given the parties involved.

And yes, labelling anyone who points out you are wrong a "Japanese nationalist" when they are not is of course a wonderful debating technique.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmericaJul. 23, 2012 - 04:16AM JST

How anyone can reach such a conclusion in the face of the current Chinese threat to the ASEAN countries, the US suppport for them and the confrontation with China's aggressive territorial and military expansion anfd effort to take over all of the South and East China Seas is bewildering.

How anyone can reach such a conclusion in the face of War mongering attitude to the nation which has never invaded other nation from 1951? Your post are not representing majority of Americans. Only the President of USA can make up the decision of war. I am not a China fan. I admitted China is getting greedy about territory claim. However peaceful settlement should be encouraged instead of threatening with 7th fleet.

If China really want to invade Japan, they even do not need to send navy ships. The have many range of missiles for destroying many strategic locations.

Uncomfortable truth was US struggled to defeat poorly equipped Irag and Afgan. Afgan war took more than ten years cost more than world war II. It is not the national interest of US for waging another war for sake of rocks, natural gas and fish which are not entitled for. China and Japan ships have been bumping each other for a long time. It was nothing new. The main reason was getting fish. 7 th fleet is reluctant to go for war for sake of fishing dispute. The course of that nation is not depending on war mongering posts.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

AthletesJul. 23, 2012 - 08:08PM JST

How anyone can reach such a conclusion in the face of War mongering attitude to the nation which has never invaded >other nation from 1951?

So India and Vietnam, both of which of which were invaded by PRC aren't "other nations"? All Tibetans are happy abnout being occupied by China and hordes of Han people moving in?

Your post are not representing majority of Americans. Only the President of USA can make up the decision of war. I >am not a China fan. I admitted China is getting greedy about territory claim. However peaceful settlement should be >encouraged instead of threatening with 7th fleet.

You obviously aren't reading my posts very well. It is CHINA that is threatening all of her smaller Asian neighbors with it's military might. And it is only China's fear of he US Military that is keeping them from further acts of outright aggression to attain it's aims of tewrritorial expansion.

If China really want to invade Japan, they even do not need to send navy ships. The have many range of missiles for >destroying many strategic locations.

Nonsense. China does not want to invade Japan or any other nation that will draw it into a direct confrontation with the United States. Want proof? Look at Taiwan.

Uncomfortable truth was US struggled to defeat poorly equipped Irag and Afgan. Afgan war took more than ten years >cost more than world war II. It is not the national interest of US for waging another war for sake of rocks, natural gas >and fish which are not entitled for.

Iran and Afghaistan are irrelevant to this discussion.

China and Japan ships have been bumping each other for a long time. It was nothing new.

Since 1970. That's pretty new.

The main reason was getting fish. 7 th fleet is reluctant to go for war for sake of fishing dispute. The course of that >nation is not depending on war mongering posts.

China's is not interested in controlling all of the South and East China Seas because of "fish". They want all of these waters because it is a vital lifeline to many Asian countries and by controlling it China can control all of Asia. Only the United States stands as an obstacle to this goal. China is the only warmonger in Asia and only China supporters are contributing "warmongering posts".

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Athletes, China would have to get through Japans defenses. Also these missiles have conventional warheads and it would take a lot of them to be effective. For any war to start, China will have to throw the first punch. Once that happens than there will be a response. It would be a true furball over the South China Sea! The story Beyond the Spectrum may be played out yet. It is by Morgan Robertson who wrote Futility the wreck of the Titan. It is about a ship much like Titanic which hit an iceberg and sank. He wrote it 10 years before the fact. The details are very similar unnervingly in their detail. Anyhow his story went on about "sun bombs".

So all we can do is wait and one day soon China will get up the nerve and attack. All it will take is a little spark to set off the inferno.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmericaJul. 23, 2012 - 10:25PM JST

So India and Vietnam, both of which of which were invaded by PRC aren't "other nations"? All Tibetans are happy abnout being occupied by China and hordes of Han people moving in?

India is not relevant to south China sea issue. It is off topic. Vietnam is one of the claiming nation. In 1972, Vietnam beat China in border war. Therefore you do not need to concern and worry much about China capacity. Native Americans are not happy in the states either. There are many injustice.

You obviously aren't reading my posts very well. It is CHINA that is threatening all of her smaller Asian neighbors with it's military might. And it is only China's fear of he US Military that is keeping them from further acts of outright aggression to attain it's aims of tewrritorial expansion.

You obviously did not study about China history. China was a loser of every war in history. Culturally it is strong. Militarily it was so weak and they even could not beat Vietnam in 1972. Let alone conquering the whole Asia. China by itself getting larger it was not because of China military might. Thanks to Mongul and Manchu! Otherwise today China may be smaller than Ohio.

Nonsense. China does not want to invade Japan or any other nation that will draw it into a direct confrontation with the United States. Want proof? Look at Taiwan.

Uncomfortable truth is China and US had already military conflict in 1950 Korean war. It was not only direct confrontation but also face to face combat. At that time, they even have no gun for every soldier. China has waited HK for 100 years. Why not they wait 1000 years for Taiwan? It is win win for all people.

Iran and Afghaistan are irrelevant to this discussion.

True! it is also lesson for Neo Con who avoided draft many times. They are just Chicken hawks!

Since 1970. That's pretty new.

Since 1970, President Nixon established the diplomatic relation with PROC. He was no longer alive. It is old.

China's is not interested in controlling all of the South and East China Seas because of "fish". They want all of these waters because it is a vital lifeline to many Asian countries and by controlling it China can control all of Asia. Only the United States stands as an obstacle to this goal. China is the only warmonger in Asia and only China supporters are contributing "warmongering posts".

Sea Water is salty and undrinkable. Fish are major diet of both Japanese and Chinese. Gas will need to take along time for exploration. As I mentioned before, China has never won any war with their neighbor, I have no concern about China threat or aggression. At the moment, US has high unemployment and high sovereign debt. Domestic issues are priority. Marines can not go to war with empty wallets.War is not cheap like talk! It is not right moment for another military adventure.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

YuriOtaniJul. 24, 2012 - 12:20AM JST

So all we can do is wait and one day soon China will get up the nerve and attack. All it will take is a little spark to set off the inferno.

On that day, we are no longer alive anymore! As Ossan posted they caught fish from 1970s. Japan has lost a lot of fish not the territory. This year is 2012. It has been almost half a century.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

YuriOtaniJul. 24, 2012 - 12:20AM JST

It would be a true furball over the South China Sea! The story Beyond the Spectrum may be played out yet. It is by Morgan Robertson who wrote Futility the wreck of the Titan. It is about a ship much like Titanic which hit an iceberg and sank. He wrote it 10 years before the fact. The details are very similar unnervingly in their detail. Anyhow his story went on about "sun bombs.

I am not sure that rocky inhabited Islands are worth for such terrible consequence! It is unimagineable for China for such a huge price to pay! They have to be careful about that bad omen. Reality is no nation has sufferedso much like Japan . It is under mercy of nature before wrecking of the Titan or making rapid fire sparks . Geologically Japan is very prone to submersion because of tetronic junction and volcanic chain.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's interesting that the issue is causing Taiwan and China to be drawn closer together, in a sort of circling-the-wagons type movement.

All of the territorial issues in the seas south of China are fairly complicated, and the fact that Japan is in possession of the islands called the Senkakus in Japan that are at the center of this particular dispute is, of course, very important. In a similar manner, the fact that China just opened new facilities on one of the small islands in the Paracels is probably even more important, given the longer history and greater complexity of issues in that territory, which is more than barren rocks.

I don't think that there are adequate institutional capacities for addressing these contentious matters in a way that will satisfy all concerned, so it is necessary that the circling-the-wagons phenomenon doesn't lead to a further retrenchment that prevents dialog.

These issues need to be contained in a manner that prevents them from causing open conflict, and the capacity of international institutions to contribute to resolving these disputes needs to be enhanced.

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