JboneInTheZone comments

Heroes?!? What heroes? The ones that massacred more than 2 million of women and children in China

I mean to be fair, Mao massacred WAY more Chinese civilians and he’s celebrated as a hero in China

I love this shrine for the sole reason it makes Chinese shills on this site seethe with rage so badly

To improve our economy as he (not Powell) was elected to do?

You can’t actually believe this. Please explain how the tariffs in any way shape or form “improve our economy”

There is a comparison, if your numbers of 8000 are correct that's 1 execution per 176,000 people in China.

Iran is 1 execution in every 99,000 people.

Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Yemen have similar numbers.

Do you think I’m defending any of those countries? They’re all barbaric, China included

As does 54 other countries in this situation.

China executes 8000 people a year, more than any other country on earth. There’s no comparison

Day 95 of Trunp ending the Russia/Ukraine war in 24 hours

A little birdie tells me Japan and USA also execute prisoners. Do I hear crickets in your court?

Japan and America combined haven’t killed as many of their own people as the CCP.

Killing its own citizens is something China excels at.

The American occupiers exercised sovereignty over Senkaku/Diaoyu following WW2, effectively handing it over to Japan in 1972.

Yes, 52 years ago. Literally irrelevant to today and the conversation we’re having about territorial disputes in 2024.

I'm sorry. Am I mistaken that the USA military administered Okinawa for 25 years after WW2 and used it as a launching pad for a war that killed millions in Vietnam? Meanwhile, the USA military used Senkaku/Diaoyu for target practice. This seems pretty relevant if you ask me.

I’m sorry. Am I mistaken in the fact that the U.S. hasn’t administered Okinawa in 52 years making this point completely irrelevant to the situation in 2024. I’ll ask again: what relevance does this administration of Okinawa 52 years ago have at all to do with Japanese territorial disputes in 2024? You won’t answer because you can’t.

Also, see USA occupation of Japan and administration of the islands of the Ryukyu Chain for 25 years. That just might factor into to the current situation just a little.

What does this have to do with anything at all? You CCP shills have the majority of your brain carved out into seething about America. No matter the subject, you have to bring up America

Different thinking here. China is not so much interested in a "key strategic position" as it is not looking to invade. 

China is already making territorial claims to other nations internationally recognized waters, and attacking the fishing / coastguard vessels of those nations. At the very least they are aggressive towards neighboring countries and acting against internationally set norms

In other words there is no rational reason for China to attack Japan that you can provide, thanks for the confirmation.

The main would be the territorial dispute over the Senkaku islands

Why would China attack Japan?

Give one rational reason for what would be an enormously costly conflict. There is none.

China doesn’t have to start a full on war to still be aggressive to the point of attempting to get weaker countries to acquiesce. The point is that with US help Japan can feel confident in its ability to retaliate towards Chinese aggression knowing it has backup. Countries are less likely to step up the magnitude of retaliatory actions when the opposing country has strong allies. This is pretty basic stuff my guy

Anybody that seriously proposes China will attack Japan is either delusional or pushing an agenda.

Do you know what would make them even less likely to attack? The backing of the U.S. military

I guess we do not need to repeat the endless list of conflicts and mass killings currently embarked on

It’s hilarious that you would bring up mass killings as an argument against the US when defending China seeing as China has killed more of its own citizens than any country on earth. The Great Leap Forward killed around an estimated 15 to 55 million people alone.

No mention of any 1960 treaty there. No mention of the 'current military presence' there. Just a sweeping blanket statement that was easy to unpick due to it's historical and contextual inaccuracy.

I don’t have to mention it because the current situation that we’re discussing is a result of that 1960 treaty. It’s built into my argument. My comment that you quoted stated that the US had been invited in. Per the 1960 treaty, the most recent one that’s still standing, they have been invited in. The current military presence that we’ve been discussing is a result of invitation. No amount of goalpost moving on your end will change that. You can keep coping all you want though if that makes you feel better about being wrong

Again, you are trying to move the goalposts to wriggle out of the fact that you have been incorrect. Just take it on the chin and move on mate. You learned something and it takes a man to admit they were wrong.

Im not moving any goalposts. Im playing the semantic game you wanted to play and dog walking you in it.

When the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security with the US was signed in 1960, it led to the largest anti-government demonstrations in modern Japanese history and in order to pass the bill in the diet, Prime Minister Kishi (Abe's grandfather) had to order 500 police to remove opposition politicians from the diet building, so no, the bases aren't there by popular consent.

Thats not how democracies work. Large demonstrations don’t matter when the Japanese government was elected. Elections are what matters. Polling shows anyway that Japanese people generally approve of the presence of bases regardlesss

You could tack on the thoroughly undemocratic and underhanded way the security treaty was passed in 1960 under the direction of Kishi Nobusuke, the leacher of Manchuria and the grandfather of Abe Shinzo. 

This is not an argument. Japan is a liberal democracy, and as such political figures are direct representations of the will of the people and in no way “un-democratic”. In any case, my point that you continuously keep trying to avoid still stands. This treaty can be cancelled at Japan’s direction at any point in time.

Oh, you just used Chat GPT, didn't you? How good is it, JBone?! By doing that, you are (partially) clarifying your own misunderstanding of this topic. And we are all here to learn from one another, after all.

Not an argument

When I type in what I anticipate your prompt question was though, the summary at the end says:

So whilst the original U.S. military presence was not invited, Japan formally consented to it in 1951 and continues to host U.S. military bases through bilateral treaties.

You are most welcome.

We’re talking about the current military presence though, which was in fact invited per the 1960 treaty. It seems you’re unable to respond to this fact to support your argument and are trying to shift goalposts

Tamarama: I’m just going to keep correcting your incorrect reading of history

in 1960 Japan and the United States signed the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security, which explicitly authorized the presence of U.S. forces in Japan. Article VI of the treaty states:

“For the purpose of contributing to the security of Japan and the maintenance of international peace and security in the Far East, the United States of America is granted the use by its land, air and naval forces of facilities and areas in Japan.”

That is a clear invitation. Check mate.

In the occupation of Japan Post WW2, the US took control of Japanese territory and Military sites and built their own bases for the purpose of occupation.

And in 1960 Japan and the United States signed the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security, which explicitly authorized the presence of U.S. forces in Japan. Article VI of the treaty states:

“For the purpose of contributing to the security of Japan and the maintenance of international peace and security in the Far East, the United States of America is granted the use by its land, air and naval forces of facilities and areas in Japan.”

That is a clear invitation. Check mate.

JBone. One of the unwritten rules of this forum is that you cite accurate information and don’t copy and paste US military transcript which is universally referred as a clear manipulation of narrative against countries which are considered a threat for Washington (I.e. made up stories)

Here you go, a non-U.S. military source

https://bitterwinter.org/ccp-100th-anniversary-of-the-party-who-killed-50-million/

Now if you’d like to join us back in reality

May I remind you, these are the same people, the American breed warriors, whose country is sponsoring the brutal mass killings in Gaza and stay surprisingly quiet, but they worry about the skirmishes in the South China Sea

Please don’t lecture the U.S. about morals as someone who supports a country that killed 50 million of its own citizens

*What the US did, was forcefully occupy Japan and Korea at the end of the war - that's a totally different concept. You can ask Chat Gpt if you like. The purpose of this was, amongst other things, strategic control and advantage in the region, which is an entirely self-serving objective.*

If you want to play this semantics game we can. Per the Article VI of the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security:

“For the purpose of contributing to the security of Japan and the maintenance of international peace and security in the Far East, the United States of America is granted the use by its land, air and naval forces of facilities and areas in Japan.”

If you are granting use of land, you are in fact inviting them.

No they can't. 

Yes, they can. You’re relying on conspiracy theories to justify your argument. Embarrassing

I thought the treaty allowing US bases was signed in the 1950,s.

Thats why I thought the position of each party to a contract, WHEN SIGNED, is important.

The treaty is automatically renewed. They can cancel it at anytime. Do you agree or disagree?

Oh no, no, no, you don't get to shift the goal posts of the conversation to try and cover up your inaccuracy here, which I called you out on. People can read the thread, they can see what you said. 

You are trying to infer that the Japanese and Korean people asked the US to build bases in their countries - that's what an 'invite' is. That is historically and factually incorrect, they did no such thing.

What the US did, was forcefully occupy Japan and Korea at the end of the war - that's a totally different concept. You can ask Chat Gpt if you like. The purpose of this was, amongst other things, strategic control and advantage in the region, which is an entirely self-serving objective.

Why can’t you answer a simple question? Instead you go on some long cope post. I asked you a very simple question that you refuse to answer because you know you’re wrong, and it tears down your entire argument. You’re trying to now backstep into some weird semantic argument: So do you agree then that Japan allows the bases there and that they can remove them at anytime? If you agree, then it isn’t an occupation.

"Embracing Defeat " is a weighty historical analysis of the post WW2 Japan and America relationship including the semi paternalistic approach US took.

It would be wrong to attribute an equal bargaining power to each country , especially in any "treaties " etc signed in the 1950,s , allowing for US forces to remain in Japan.

Essentially, Japan had zero power to reject any US overture.

Wasnt the first time "treaties under duress " were signed by Japan.

Commodore Perry and the Black Ships began the first "gunboat diplomacy " for the US and Japan

We’re not talking about the 1950s, we’re talking about today. Today, now, Japan can cancel the treaty at anytime they want. There’s no coercion or “forced” occupation in2025

Again, factually incorrect. At the 1951 treaty of San Fransisco, Japan agreed to allow US bases to remain - totally different thing.

So you agree then that Japan allows the bases there and that they can remove them at anytime? That’s the entire basis of this conversation. The same applies to Korea.