Chamkun comments

Posted in: Korean campaigns for removal of Japanese flag from French stores See in context

That flag has been used in Japan for a long time. Before any war Korean is talking about. When people wanted to celebrate something long long time ago, they were often shown. Yes, the navy has adapted it after, and still our defense force (Maritime SDF) today uses. This is completely different from Nazi symbolic flag. It was represented their Nazism idea during a specific period of history and deigned for that reason.

I even feel sorry for this kind of Koran mentality. Over 10 years ago, for a very practical reason, I recommended to set Shoji Screen to divide a space, my Korean friend said it reminds Japan to my family. Don't I remind you Japan to you? He said yes, I have no problem who you are except your nationality. That was the end of conversation. I lost my words to say. I really feel sorry for this, but it is your problem now. Other wise, Korea should not have signed (signed by the father of today's president of Korea) the basic treaty to detach every historical issue for ever completely. That was 1965. May be your government uses the historical issues for some political advantage. Korean feel the way this article says is a victim of it. Wake up Koreans. Look at the future.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Posted in: McDonald's Japan to sell premium burgers for first time See in context

Who cares?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Posted in: Japan, U.S. begin joint island-retaking drill See in context

In this timing!!! I wonder what the Chinese leader this time in the US soil has said to Obama when he was spending totally for 8 hours with him. I know he discussed something about Senkaku to Obama besides cyber attack.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Posted in: LDP policy chief to keep visiting Yasukuni Shrine See in context

Toshiko: I understand your concern with Korea and China. But in order to have a better relationship in the future, Japan must let them know Japan's position frankly without any euphonious saying. The world seems do not understand the concept of Shito. Japan does not have to convert them as Shinto or asking agreement. But at least japan need to let them know the difference between Shinto idea and other religions. We do not go there to accept and agree what they did, (some'' war criminal'' ) Once they die, life energy of those people called Mitama. Pure life condition like one drop of water going back to a big ocean. It is hard to distinguish the former drop and ocean. The bottom line's problem is the religious concept is not being understood. Not every people go there is embracing what they did. I am a Buddhist and believe an individual Karma, so my personal point of view is very different from Shinto. So I do not go there Yasukuni but I since Japan has a religious freedom in our constitutions, we must protect it especially from out side of Japan.

The second point is that based on the international laws, technically there is no more war criminals in Japan since San Francisco peace treaty only technically speaking.

The amnesty provision for international law is the 2nd article of the Westphalia peace treaty in 1648 which made the 30 year war end. There, since war started, it has been specified "There shall be permanent oblivion, a pardon, or acquittal between hostilities countries" about all the things performed in the form of language, description, tyranny, violence, hostile activities, defamation, and expenditure. Thus, the amnesty provision based on the soul of "complete oblivion" which passes all in water, It is needed in order to calm hatred between the states agitated by war and to restore peace, It is incorporated in many peace treaties concluded during the 19th century from the 17th century, and 23~27 articles of the German Soviet Union treaty on March 3, 1918 and 31~33 articles of the German Romania treaty on May 7, 1918 constitute the general amnesty provision.

Based on the custom of the above, before World War II, Even if an amnesty provision is not installed into a peace treaty, that effectuation itself of a peace treaty has the amnesty effect an international treaty. In fact the world did not say anything when Mr. Kishi became a prime minister of Japan who was a former A class criminal. Because of this amnesty concept. If A class criminal was the issue, Korea or China shuld have said something then. The fact is that the president of S. Korea who is the father of today's Korean president made an agreement in 1965 as known as Japan Korea basic treaty and resolved the all issues between 2 nations.

The 3rd point is that China and Korea started to say about Yasukuni issue in 80s, because A class war criminal is there, this is a problem. But then do not say B and C class. This has no logic. Anther bottom line is that the law which determines A.B.C. category and its laws them self was made after the WW2. This is not my opinion but just my wondering that how any one could judge lawfully them based on the laws which did not exist when they were in a war.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Posted in: Anti-whalers ask supporters for cash to fund next campaign See in context

Sea Shepherd do a terrible job, I dislike it. Unfortunately I am sad to say, but they are absolutely wrong about many things nowadays. There are reasons for a whale hunting and dolphins.

-4 ( +6 / -10 )

Posted in: Anti-whalers ask supporters for cash to fund next campaign See in context

John Andresen Thanks for the info. I will contribute to Sea Shepherds.

I am sorry to hear that your plan to support a terrorist grope.

2 ( +9 / -7 )

Posted in: Japan protests to China over Okinawa claim See in context

Leszek Rybicki Freedom for Okinawa!

Freedom has been there since they have been under the same constitutions of Japan since 1972 as you know.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Posted in: China says U.S. should be concerned about Japanese nationalism See in context

Japan was clearly the one acting provocatively over the islands, not China, he added.

LOL!!! The 40 jet fighters and 8 war ships on the 23rd of April from China in the Japan territory. The radar lock system was used by China to Japanese Ships at Japan territory based on the International laws.China set the Unilateral Maritime law which has got some conflict with the international law. Who is acting provocatively? If China really thinks Senkaku is China, do not use the force but fight with a civilized way. Use the law. Go to ICJ.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Posted in: China calls on Japan to stop scrambling its fighters See in context

boilthebunny

The islands are under dispute. Japan is clearly the aggressor by laying claim to them with F-15's

The dispute which is produced by China. 1978, more than 100 fish man boat came into the area with machine guns into Japan territory based on laws. Which is aggressor? It is hard to believe in China 1978, the civilians can do such an activity without any problem with the government.

Japan has a right to defend. This is a defense action not aggression. Each time, we are losing our tax money. But it is inevitable unless China stop doing this.

If China really think Senkaku is China, instead of sending their military ships and plains, sue Japan. Japan can win 100%. That why they are producing the issue based on their unilateral maritime law promulgated in 1992 in China which has no effect to the world.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Posted in: China calls on Japan to stop scrambling its fighters See in context

Otago1000

It has nothing to do with the war. Japan started to do research 1885 if the islands (Senkaku) were recognized as TERRA NULLIUS by the international law. China never has registered them and confirm that fact to Chinese government then. After that, Senkaku became the part of Ishigaki county Okinawa.

You seem like history, Ming Dynasty, 13 emperors left 3058 volumes of their political record which is a very important objective historical evidence.It shows clearly that Senkaku was not the territory of Ming Dynasty.

1871, after the Miyakojima incident that 54 Japaneses were beheaded because the boat was wrecked from Typhoon and landed there , Japan complained to Qing Dynasty, they denied that the generally the areas were not governed by them. Senkaku has even smaller and farther, how China today could say Senkaku has been China since ancient time with this double standard saying. China today could not complain Japan how lawfully registered Senkaku as the part of Okinawa in 1895.

Even if China really found the island around 600AD? as they say. The based on judicial precedent in an international law. Island of Palmas Case. The title by geographical approach-ability does not have a meaning in the international law.Discovery itself is immature origin of rights to obtain a sovereignty in international law which is inchoate title.When a foreign country begins to use realistic sovereignty and a discovery country does not protest, the title which uses sovereignty is only larger than the title of discovery. Any territorial issue must be with laws not what I think base. Other wise, the world today will be in mess. In this case, 250 Japanese people lived on the island and had a dry bonito factory. The SF treaty article 3 states Senkaku is Japan, and no country has complained the article 3. Except China after the potential oil was found in 1968. China's claim is based on the aggression and so emotional without any hard evidence. Stop sending the ships and plains before China says to Japan stop scrambling.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Posted in: China calls on Japan to stop scrambling its fighters See in context

*

China calls on Japan to stop scrambling its fighters???*

Then Japan calls on China to stop sending its ships and plains to Japan Territory.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Posted in: Japan scrambled jets against China planes record 306 times in 12 months See in context

Ravi Tandukar Just give it back to China..the islands don't belong to you, you know it deep down.**

Where did you get this wrong idea? LOL

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Posted in: Kerry says U.S. will protect Japan from N Korean threats See in context

**Ravi Tanduk

Japan appears from a distance like a little boy hiding behind the US giant for protection from a bully.**

Have you ever considered the geopolitical situation around Far East? Also how Japan tries to act under the article 9 which is composed by the US.Your saying gave me an impression that you have no consideration about those. Abe administration has started to discuss to change the constitution of Japan according to today's circumstance.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Posted in: Have Japan’s anti-smoking laws gone too far? See in context

Japan needs to promulgate more draconian smoking control laws.

If we need to see the full implementation of our constitution of Japan article 25.The government needs to make more drastic approach. Article 99 states to keep the constitution is the duty of Emperor, Prime minister, and administration the politicians,,,,and so on. The people who has more power they have more duty.

For example, a tax for cigarettes must be much higher to discourage people to smoke but still some people want to smoke, they have more chance to be sick, the tax for cigarettes should be used as to maintain our health insurance system.

Yes some inconvenience will be increased for smokers. If smoking has no health effect to others, I would say different opinion but since the second hand smoke will jeopardize non smokers health as well. In that case the right to smoke and not smoke must not be treated as equal right. The right for seeking our healthy environment which stated in article 25 and having our desire to live as healthy as possible, this right is much stronger right than the right for smoking.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Posted in: Unfriendly relations See in context

*

demand an official apology for Japan's war crimes during the World War II

It has been done already. How many times Japan needs to do that? Japan has already also paid $800,000,000 cash when the average collage graduate monthly salary was about $65 in Japan. And $5,300,000,000 asset without any condition. The treaty between Korea and Japan states'' Everything is resolved perfectly and forever''. If any issue occurs,solve lawfully at ICJ. Signed by the father of today's Korean president in 1965. So Korea would not get any more apology from the past..

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Posted in: China 'extremely concerned' about U.S.-Japan island talks See in context

SuperLib

China and Japan need to work out some kind of sharing agreemen. They can work together to explore and extract the natural resources. Neither side is going to give 100% control to the other so that's just not an option. Find a different way. Turn a negative into a positive and build a bridge instead.*

Sounds civilized and nice. I understand. I wish your solution were fitting in this situation. But not this case.

Historically, Lawfully with actual many documented proof even from China, Senkaku is 100% Japan Territory. If China's aggression let China get what they want. If any country bring an old map from 13 century, 15 century whatever , then send their military to some nation which has governed that island more than 100 years lawfully and the world treaty admitted that legality. (SF Treaty) That will be a big mistake. That kind of example should not be created. It will make laws are weaker than power and lobbying with a deceptions. The world will be mess.

San Francisco treaty article 3 indicates that which country owns Senkaku. China said nothing before the oil was found.

This is nothing personal to Chinese people. The door is opened. If China thinks the treaty from San Francisco in 1951 has some error, instead of sending their warships and planes to Japan territory. They should go ICJ. China must know The Vienna Convention on the law of treaties article 65. But the fact is China has 0% chance to win if they challenge Japan by law. When they lose, they have no way to explain to their people since they have release so many tactful deceptions for this case to convince Chinese people. It is no longer only the issue for those rocks for China.

China, Do it lawfully. Do not act as if China is an out law country, please.

Mean while, Japan should focus on seeking the resolution with Taiwan for the both nations for the stability of Far East.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Posted in: China 'extremely concerned' about U.S.-Japan island talks See in context

IRobin

Please ask the American people whether they'd like fight for Japan instead of imaging this by yourself.

We are going to solve the issue by law not power. Unless China shows its aggression, even we will have no situation to ask American people as you said. Of course no one wants to have a war.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Posted in: China 'extremely concerned' about U.S.-Japan island talks See in context

IRobin

The Chinese had controlled the islands for about 600 years

No, They have not!!!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Posted in: Abe vows to change constitution, reestablish 'proud Japan' See in context

@Michael Craig

I wish for General MacArthur's ghost to haunt the Diet!!

I think MacArthur would subscribe to Abe's point of view the based on the time, place& occasion today.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: U.S., Japan hold senior defense talks with focus on China See in context

@IRobin,

Did you read my comment and question? There is no answer in your reply. What you said here make no differences. If your saying decide any territorial issue, the law will be unnecessary but only the size and power will dominate the world. Please read my question and comment one more time and reply. If you had understood my question, you would not have replied the way you did this time.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Posted in: U.S., Japan hold senior defense talks with focus on China See in context

@IRobin

I have already included a lot of information the last time on the same issue. You never considered another possibility? You (or today's China) blindly believe that Senkaku belongs to China, ignoring all the laws. Even if your historical ideas were true, still Senkaku has been Japan's. For more than 100 years China did nothing after Japan registered it in 1895 , even if China were the owner, China has lost it. To begin with, China never owned the islands. If you like history, In 1617 Aug record of (Ming)China then, The official political record of Ming clearly stated that the area is not owned by Ming. In 1561, China admitted the islands are part of Ryukyu which is today's Okinawa. (But until 1895, it was not offically recognized as Okinawa in Internatinal law.)

But it makes no difference. Based on the law, These 5 islands known as Senkaku today were recognized as TERRA NULLIUS by the international law in 1895 when Japan registered as Okinawa officially. Since then, Japan has been governing the islands since 1895.Except between the end of WWII to 1972 while America ruled there.Then that was returned to the original owner based on San Fransico treaty articl 3.

You can express anything you want, but for the sake of a more productive discussion, please let us know that how you fit or how China's claim fits in the law today.

One more time I will put the case here.I have nothing personal against China or you.

The judicial precedent in an international law. Island of Pal mas Case.

1)The title by geographical approachability does not have a meaning in the international law.

2) Discovery itself is immature origin of rights to obtain a sovereignty in international law which is inchoate title.

3) When a foreign country begins to use realistic sovereignty and a discovery country does not protest, the title which uses sovereignty is only larger than the title of discovery.

China,and you must take these 3 things in consideration to think more objectively. Then reply here if you have any logic not emotionally how you feel. If emotion and subjective thought without any evidence, it will take us no where but a war. That we must avoid. Any way, what China or you think would not produce the world map. But the law. This is the 21 century. No one wants to have a war any more. If you really think China is right, will you suggest to China that instead of sending the military ships and planes to Japan territory, sue Japan at the ICJ.

Because what you and China are saying today go against the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951.Saying Senkaku is China means challenging the treaty. The article 3 in the treaty indicates that Senkaku is Japan.

If anyone thinks it finds some error in the treaty, the law exists for that reason, basically it saying that -When it finds an error or asserts the invalidity of a treaty, the announcement to the country directly concerned is required by the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties article 65-.

However, no government or any nation have filed a complaint or made an announcement of error invalidity of the treaty until today as of today March 22nd. 2013.

As far as japan is concerned, There is no issue about Senkaku. But if China does this lawful way, Japan will not be able to keep that status. Japan must get involved. Then the world include China will know who is the real owner of Senkaku. A war is not the way to solve China's problem.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Posted in: S Korea, China fault Japan on 'comfort women' at U.N. See in context

@melonbarmonster

Do not mix everything together. I am talking about The sex slave issue which did not exist as the monuments in NY and NJ describe.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Posted in: S Korea, China fault Japan on 'comfort women' at U.N. See in context

@bannedacctsam

In the US - Japanese, Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese American lawmakers are spearheading efforts in New York, New Jersey, Texas, and California to set up memorials for comfort women. Japan is doing a disservice to herself by not acknowledging the gravity and significance of this issue - Japan is just PISSING people off!

The lawmakers do not know the fact. They go based on the document from 1996 from UN. I make a long story short. 1) 1977 and 1982, Japanese communist and writer Mr.Seiji Yoshida wrote books as if it had been a fiction. That how he sold his books for his economic benefit and to lead Japan what he though. Then Asahi News paper picked that book and made a huge deal. Then Korean started to know the issue. Many Korean journalists got angry especially some female journalist and Japaneses journalist Yoshiko Sakurai. Still then the name villages and people should remember the incident for abductions lived the area. But the fact they found was different, there was no abductions but some sad family story or some women were willing to make money. Mr. Yoshida was being questioned many times and finally in 1995, he admitted he lied in his book.

2) However, from 1992, the same kind of Japanese his name is Mr. Etsuro Totsuka a Japaneses lawyer started his lobbying in US, Europa, Korea and China. He raised the war forcible abduction problem of Korea and South Koreans, and the "comfort-women" problem for the first time as a representative of NGO "international educational development (IED)" in the U.N. Commission on Human Rights in February, 1992, asked the Japanese government to take the responsibility, and also requested correspondence of the United Nations. Since the examination on the international law about a "comfort-women" problem was not made till then, it newly had to be examined how this would be evaluated. Mr. Etsuro Totsuka's U.N. lobbying was obstinately repeated in 18 foreign voyages in 1992 to 1995 four years !!! His sex slave theory based on Mr. Yoshida was adopted as the U.N. official document in 1996 as a result of lawyer Totsuka's and others unusual activity. The UN people had no idea historically what really happened in Korea between 1910~1945. But Japanese people are keep coming back to UN with the stories documented that later we found that was not fiction but a non fiction of Yoshida. UN did not conduct their own investigation for this matter.

3)This document from UN was used as one of the documented proofs of a sex slave issue in 2006 at US congress meeting. You are right, bannedacctsam. A Japanese congress Mike Honda used this document as the proof of history and had a big speech on June 27 in 2007 in front of 167 lower house Representatives. Actual decision for United States House of Representatives proposed House Resolution 121 was discussed on July 31 2007 in the early morning as a suspension of the rules. Only 10 people were there and no one had objection. The resolution was accepted officially.

If you say,''Japan is just PISSING people off!'' Many Japanese are sad knowing this process. As I posted above, the issue has been solved in 1965. We must focus on our future. In that team work, we well understand each other. But if their version of historical fact and Japan's version of historical fact must be the same? It will not happen. Because Korea are using the history as their weapons. The new president of Korea announced on March 1st. '' We are not going to forget the next 1000 years as we are the victim of Japan""

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Posted in: Anti-whalers return to Australia claiming victory over Japan See in context

@Thunderbird2 Er... in reference to the Australian Antarctic waters...

Are you sure?

The Australian Federal Court has ruled that Japanese whaling is illegal

In that case, IWC is illegal? Japan does everything based on that limit.

SS activity is illegal that the fact no one can deny. Dangerous.

-3 ( +8 / -11 )

Posted in: Anti-whalers return to Australia claiming victory over Japan See in context

@Oz_Monster should be Australian navy guarding our waters.

The worst idea. If Australian navy get involved, it will escalate the issue to the next level. Australian has no right to sabotage Japan's legal activity. Japan is not doing any thing illegal. Japan is doing this in the international water.

If it is illegal or legally, it has enough reason that the military may get involved, what law support your idea?

-5 ( +8 / -13 )

Posted in: Anti-whalers return to Australia claiming victory over Japan See in context

Japan needs beefing up its defense from these illegal fanatics from the next year. SS has accomplished nothing but showing their stupidity. They polluted the water there. The force never convince anyone. If SS really wants to accomplish what they say, it about time to change their strategy. Not what they say, but what they do increase more people hate them.

-7 ( +7 / -14 )

Posted in: 126 U.S. military members to sue TEPCO See in context

The plaintiffs says the have suffered a number of ailments that they say are linked to their exposure, including headaches, difficulty concentrating, rectal bleeding, thyroid problems, cancer, tumors and gynecological bleeding.

How could they prove these conditions are caused by their action in Fukushima. So many total numbers of people by now have worked there since then. Why this is happening only for the 126 people here? They could be victims but unless some hard evidence comes together. I can not trust this kind of grope law suit. Just like the grope law suit for Toyota. So many lawyers for Toyota case manifested some lawyers's dishonesty and abusing laws. When I found out how they manufactured the case and fabricated the facts that they used during their law suit then. Then they lost.

I know they will not win in this Fukushima case. I wonder if the USS Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier which supposed to be a military ship. Even there is not any instrument to check radiation level? How are other people who were there from the same ship?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Posted in: S Korean 'comfort women' sue Japanese rock band See in context

It is interesting what they are going to sue based on which law. I would not support the band but their lyrics has provoked some people but in the freedom of expression they think. Always many artists have been doing it in many different ways. I am curious how they draw the line between a libel and expression at the court.

Also I am not sure who is claiming about the government of Japan that forcefully made more than 200,000 women as a sex slave and abducted them. Even some one erected 2 monuments in USA.One I saw was at the Eisenhower memorial park at Korean war memorial. 54,000 American lost their life to protect the freedom of Korea. That has nothing to do with the Sex Slave issue. Some people might get offended that monument. Is this considered as a libel by someone?With out any actual proof and evidence, establishing such a monument? Or freedom of expression? So many evidence exist that it is not true. I am not taking about some individual cases. I know those some local cases were true and I feel very sorry for the victims because some JPN solders were punished by JPN army because of their crime. The record exist.

But Japan has enough records that could prove the 200,000 abduction case which is stated on the monuments did not happened. In this case, this could be a libel by someone to Japan?

-2 ( +2 / -2 )

Posted in: China blasts Japan ahead of legislative session See in context

@IRobin

Thank you for your reply. I appreciate for your attention.

I personally respect what you said but we must govern the world order based on the law. If the world use to decide the world border lines based on some ancient time story which can not prove even the exact location especially so many rocks are on the area. We must respect the law and no nation should not be above the law.

You said having a Bonito flake factory on the island which was established by Mr. Koga after Senkaku was registered officially and legally with the consensus of China's former government, in 1895 then continuously Japan governed the Senkaku as Okinawa which has nothing to do with WW2 by the way, then Japan kept the conditions which is required by law in order to keep the islands as Japan till the end of WW2. If you bring up a history aspect you did. In 1920, your former Government sent a letter of appreciation when Japaneses people at Senkaku rescue Chinese fishermen the time of trouble, the letter is indicated officially by China to Senkaku Japan. http://blog.goo.ne.jp/hm-library/e/018d4b89474d0171751e3baa51d4f6ff

You said 250 Japaneses who lived on the island means nothing. May be nothing to you or China but it means colossally for the law. Again I paste here again how the International law see the territory issue. ''Discovery itself is immature origin of rights to obtain a sovereignty in international law which is inchoate title. When a foreign country begins to use realistic sovereignty and a discovery country does not protest, the title which uses sovereignty is only larger than the title of discovery. Even when Japan confirmed about the islands to Qing Dynasty, they did not say what China is saying today. As a result, the first map in 1905 was published by China, it was indicated as Japan territory. 118 years have gone, Japan used Senkaku in realistic sense and America took over based on SF treaty, now China claims 500? years ago, as many Chinese say that because China found the islands so it is Chinese territory. The law I indicated does not work that way. If this unilateral claim changes the sovereignty, the world would lose the order. Manhattan Island used be owned by not America but Dutch. That dose not affect today's geographical map. In case of Dutch, that is a historical fact with many documents but the case of Senkaku, no one can really prove who was there and which rocks they were talking about 500 years ago with out any indication of latitude-longitude coordinate system. That is why we must follow the law which as prevent a war. Even if this Chinese claim is true, it will not mean anything by law as I mention. This is a fact not my opinion.

When Japan did research in 1885, that was clearly in the condition of TERRA NULLIUS status. As small as an individual real estate to any nation's territory should be handled by law. Other wise, it will escalate to a war like the 19, and first half of 20 century. Those days are gone. The definition of TERRA NULIUS is this '' If judged as "undeveloped country, "no national sovereignty was approved and the relevant region was judged as "terra nullius." At that time, based on this condition, Japan merged the islands as Ishigaki county of Okinawa 118 yeas ago. China has no legal right for these islands that is for sure.

IRobin asked me "China only started to claim after the oil was found" Do you really believe this by yourself? '' I would say, yes I do.Of course, I do not know the true motivation of China, but at least I did not hear about China's claim before 1968 that was the year the potential oil was found. The last map which China published Senkaku as Japan was 1969,70.or 71 one or two of these years. 1972, the border sea line was pushed to East so, Senkaku area became Chinese territory. I saw the both maps.

IRobin ''about your contradiction of treaties, I never told the whole fair of both but one thing is fair, Japan should return back all the territories before the war''

Yes Japan did. What Japan needed to return were listed the article 2 in San Francisco treaty so Japan follow the all conditions. But many Chinese people I know that they do not respect but the world did respect. It became the base of today's world. The article 3 listed what Japan may keep. Okinawa and all its islands were listed in the article 3.

IRobin: ''Bring back to the way it was before the war'', Senkaku was Okinawa. So I see that Japan returned everything what Japan gained during WW2. These territory has nothing to do with the war.

Former President of Taiwan Mr. Lee Teng-hui admitted based on the law, the sovereignty of Senkaku belongs to Japan many times. I heard directly from his translator. But for a utilitarian reason, many Taiwan people were fishing there as a fact.Japan needs to negotiate with Taiwan how we do things from now on since Taiwan is claiming the sovereignty of Senkaku. I personally feel Japan and Taiwan can have a good negotiation even it might take time for the usage of the islands.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Posted in: China blasts Japan ahead of legislative session See in context

torosushi:People's Republic of China was established in Beijing on 1 October 1949, what do you do with the present government which does not recognize (to their advantage only) what was anything prior to their establishment?

One more additional point is that they have been a part of UN as a member of Security council. The treaty was promulgated in 1951. They could not deny the fact that they did not know that does not work.

Why China said nothing till the oil was found? And now their conspicuous interest to expand their NAVY. If this is the reason they started to claim, I do not like it but makes sense at least. That is many people's tacit understanding anyway.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites


©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.