With some marketing savvy and self deprecating humor, one could successfully capitalize on China's spirited disdain for Japan and turn it for profit with a great sales pitch to the Chinese consumer :) Though it's doubtful that Japanese nationalists would support it.
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
Seeing the discussions of the former US president Bush and current President Obama in this thread is interesting from the perspective of leadership approaches for the 2 x situations (invasion of Iraq & handling of ISIS/ISIL). How I wonder what may have come if President Obama was president during 9-11 and the eventual invasion of Iraq when compared to how the current situation with ISIS/ISIL would have been handled by the former president Bush?
From the outsiders perspective, it appears that President Obama is looking to exude leadership by encouraging Middle Eastern countries to take a more active role in being part of the solution to ISIS/ISIL and even encouraging one of them to be the leader with the US playing a supporting role to a certain extent. When compared to the invasion of Iraq, with the US leading from all fronts by almost dragging each coalition member to the proverbial bar, it may seem that "leadership" is lacking especially in light of the atrocities that are occurring. I can't help but wonder if a more forceful approach, as with the invasion of Iraq, would help to solve or compound the situation with ISIS/ISIL? Of course there are no clear cut answers, but it does make me wonder.
Finally, what is interesting when comparing both scenarios is the UN's involvement. With the invasion of Iraq, there was a presenting of cases for and against the invasion (which were vigorously presented by all sides) that was put before the UN Security Counsel, though the foundation was based upon the never ending weapons inspection (more particularly the violations that occurred) which was an existing resolution imposed upon Iraq. Given the atrocities that are ongoing by ISIS/ISIL, and the gravity of the situation notwithstanding the claims (and threats) that it has presented to the region and world, it is curious to see the UN's handling of the events as if the threat and atrocities will lessen or go away with time. It appears that the UN is also take the position of a "wait and see" leadership approach where time is on their side.
I just hope that time and patience are truly on our side, though my concern and fear are that ISIS/ISIL will only grow stronger (monetarily, in numbers, influence and capabilities) with time and the price of action being much greater in loss of life and resources.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
I could not help but notice that your comments hillight history, wars fought and lost, past grivences, etc. In short, such comments only seek to deflect from the realities of what is happening today especially when you use references from almost 1,000 years ago.
I agree that history has a part, and perhaps a bigger part then the US wishes to admit to, when it comes to some of the frustration at the "West" as its involvement in middle eastern affiars (eg. overt & covert political/para-military/military involvement in Iran & Iraq more recently, going back to the fall of the Shah in Iran) has produced less then stellar results and has contributed to where we find ourselves today. Suffice it to say, many "Western" countries have been involved in shaping middle eastern governance & affiars going back to British colonial rule and perhaps even further (my apologies as I'm not a versed historian). But put in context, when compared with self-rule of such nations for lack of a better term (or more autonomy), human rights were advocated for and protected, attrocities such as mass killings based upon religious affiliation (Suni, Shia, Christian, Jew, and all of their variations) and the like were infrequent though admitedly I'm sure that they still occurred as the region seems to be rife with such events even without outside influence.
I have read articles discussing the cultural contribution to the friction that's ongoing, or the "clash of cultures" and believe that it has a role as Western ideals and cultures, though varied, are different then those in the Middle East. Then there is the religious contribution which plays a big role in the conflict.
What I'm hoping to convey, is that we are where we are and even though history plays a part with respect to Western activities and influence in the region, culture, religion, etc., none of them excuse or even come remotely close to being justified or rationalized with what ISIS/ISL is doing. This is October 8th, 2014 and beheading of innocent volunteers (seeking to help others of different faiths, but mainly innocent mulsims who are affected and displaced due to the ongoing war in Syrian & now ISIS/ISL) due to their nationality and religious afiliation (Western/Christian), mass killings of enemy combatants (Syrian & Kurd), killing of innocent people (Muslim, Christian, etc) due to their religious afiliation and more has no place in our world regardless of your faith, nationality, culture, etc. Seeking to justify or rationalize such barbarity and devaluing of human life in the name of one's faith and belief verbally or otherwise is indirectly supporting and enabling such attrocities via the invisible hand. We are fast approaching a point where sides must be chosen not based on religion, culture, nationality, etc. but by a shared belief that there is a sanctity to life, to the belief that all are created equal, have human rights that are to be protected and defended when faced with death due to one's beliefs, views, etc. We must all look in the mirror, look at our families and friends, take a moment of pause to reflect and ask ourselves, what side are we on (right now, October 8th, 2014)?
1 ( +1 / -0 )
Interesting article which helps explain the complexities.. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5877570?utm_hp_ref=politics&ir=Politics&partner=skygrid
2 ( +2 / -0 )
Clearly, none of the supposed "world powers" or "concerned" countries in Arabia or Turkey are "all in". Sadly, it's the Kurds and Shia in Iraq who are committing and shedding blood to even try to stop the advance, let alone avoid beheadings for themselves and family. Ironically, it is the same Kurds and Shia who stand the most to lose if they're successful.
Let's consider the full capabilities of the "coalition" in the diplomatic, intelligence and information, military and economic realms. Let's imagine that they were truly a coalition and "all in". How long would would it take to destroy their military capabilities, eliminate their funding, and creat conditions for their defeat? Probably not long.
But, the bigger question and challenge is what are coalition partners willing to do to, what lengths are they willing to go to, what sacrifices are they willing to make and what consensus can be reached to create a lasting peace and make peace more attractive and worthwhile I an alternative when compared to terror and destruction for those of the Muslim faith? Or is this merely a continuation of a never ending internal struggle within Islam taken to a new level?
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Perhaps another approach to end this round of the conflict.
1) "Palestine" must destroy the tunnel network with UN observers confirming
2) "Palestine" must cease the missile bombardment; UN observers allowed to go to missile launch locations and be observers to ensure compliance
3) "Palestine" to be given land, nation, autonomy and recognized by Israel; to have a constitution and government after compliance of 1 & 2
4) "Israel" to be recognized by Palestine
The next round of fighting to follow that would be between Israel and a "failed" state as I seriously doubt that a Palestinian government could stop extremist groups from building tunnels, infiltrating Israel, and firing rockets into Israel. But that is for Palestinians to decide and act upon.
If Palestine rejects this, Israel then takes over the West Bank and Palestine shrinks some more to only the Gaza Strip. If Gaza then builds tunnels and fires rockets into Israel, then precedent for action is set.
Know it's too simplistic and probably doesn't address the 1,000,000,000 issues though. I'm interested to see if Palestinians really want independence or if it's just a disorganized land space occupied by hard working people mixed with extremists which can not, and don't, want to be controlled or stopped from infiltrating, harassing and attacking Israel.
1 ( +3 / -2 )
And... Am glad the teacher was exonerated. What an amazing and selfless reply from him as well. Only in Japan will you find such a reply.
2 ( +3 / -1 )
Having lived in Japan for 5 years, I have to say I was thankful for the warnings and notification systems that are in place with the cell phones and other technologies. Japan always seemed to be ahead of other places I've lived, when it comes to technology, emergency systems (especially considering the variety of natural disaster that can occur) and the way citizens react and treat one another for the most part. Which, by the way, makes me wonder where the complaints come from?
9 ( +8 / -0 )
Perhaps an alternate method for Japan to consider in dealing with the CCP or other supporters, such as the newspaper, is to create a canned reply which emphasizes it's desire for cooperation, constructive dialogue, emphasizing leadership responsibilities in regional and world interactions focused on fostering and developing peaceful solutions to disputes and disagreements, and the desire to learn from the past while ensuring the security of Japan through diplomatic, cultural, social, technological, humanitarian, economic and military collective self defense. Strenuously responding and objecting to each outburst from the CCP and others is only feeding their appetite to raise tensions.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
Posted in: Republicans grapple with post-Trump future