SJ comments

Most Japanese here seem to have no idea about Moon. Before shouting, take some time to study who he is:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_Jae-in

https://time.com/person-of-the-year-2018-moon-jae-in-runner-up/

Try to find any contemporary Japanese politician who can be compared with him.

Some say that Moon did not make any progress with respect to the nuclear weapons and missiles of N. Korea. Look back what was going on 4 years ago, compared with today: no nuclear test, no ICBM test.

https://www.reuters.com/article/northkorea-missiles-hawaii-idINKBN1DS09H

The progress was not perfect, but it was far better than without it. It is not easy, but Moon did his best to bring peace in the Korean peninsula:

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1295067/john-bolton-says-diplomatic-dance-with-nk-was-south-koreas-creation

@kennyG

MOFA site SJ linked already explains Takeshima is used to be called Matsushima and for those who understand Korean/Japanese, this Korean professor also explains pretty well about Takeshima

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEgp-dOrEQM

I do not have time to dispute all of his claims, but just one thing on the topic. The professor alludes that the 3rd island called 'Seokdo (stone island)' could exist south off Ulleung island (starting at 26 min at the video clip), but there are only 2 islands off Ulleung island: Jukdo and Dokdo.

The inaccurate distances on the old maps in the standards of the modern GPS can not justify his argument. Indeed, Seokdo (stone island) denoted Dokdo. The professor just tries to negate it with his ambiguous knowledge of linguistics which was not even his study area. To justify his own claim, he has to show any map of the 3rd island, but he can not. He seems to be ignorant of geology and geography. Look at the google map or other geomorphological profiles to realize that the 3rd island, whatever it is called, can not exist there. The area is a deep ocean, not a shallow coastal area.

@itsonlyrocknroll

The two claims…..

Government of Korea first…….

https://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/

That site is not governmental, but an NGO's. The governmental site is: https://dokdo.mofa.go.kr/kor/

@OssanAmerica

Sound legal arguments, substantiated and with merit presented before an International Judicial Forum such as the ICJ is the only thing that has any meaning in resolving this dispute. Going on and on about bamboo is meaningless.

I agree, but the Japanese government has better go to the ICJ with a correct name, not with such a comical and oxymoronic name as "the bamboo island without any bamboo". Of course, together with the accurate coordinates of the island, probably with help of the GPS.

Wikipedia in English also lists another Takeshima:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takeshima_(Kagoshima)

And, of course, as I already expected, "the island is heavily forested with stands of Ryukyu bamboo."

Should I show more?

@BeerDeliveryGuy

'Takeshima' literally means: bamboo island 竹島, but there is no bamboo in Takeshima.

By that logic, the Korean claim is bunk as well. Dokdo “独島” literally means “solitary island.” But it is part of a group of islands and not solitary at all.

If you want to follow the logic, you have to show some examples of other islands with the same name 獨島 that are solitary.

I have already shown the other Japanese islands called Takeshima that have bamboo:

竹島 (宮城県) - 宮城県本吉郡南三陸町の島。

竹島 (愛知県) - 愛知県蒲郡市の島。

竹島 (山口県) - 山口県山口市の島。

竹島 (熊本県) - 熊本県天草市の島。

竹島 (鹿児島県) - 鹿児島県鹿児島郡三島村の島。

竹島 - 多景島の別名。琵琶湖の島の1つ。

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%AB%B9%E5%B3%B6_(%E6%9B%96%E6%98%A7%E3%81%95%E5%9B%9E%E9%81%BF)

@OssanAmerica

If you are so sure why doesn't the South Korean government go before the ICJ to present all your lengthy claims? You make it sound like it will be a slam dunk. Obviously South Korea feels otherwise.

You again ask a meaningless question. I am not any kind of representative for the S. Korean government, and I am not eligible to answer your question. My point is how funny the Japanese government is on every diplomatic issue. I just remind you that everybody in the world can enjoy it.

An update on the 7 Japanese Takeshima islands, as the contents of Wikipedia were changed.

There are 7 Japanese islands called the same name Takeshima (竹島 bamboo island) along the coast of Japan, and all of them have bamboo: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%AB%B9%E5%B3%B6

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%AB%B9%E5%B3%B6_(%E6%9B%96%E6%98%A7%E3%81%95%E5%9B%9E%E9%81%BF)

The territorial claim of the Japanese government on Takeshima is comical. Japanese people know what 'Takeshima' literally means: bamboo island 竹島, but there is no bamboo in Takeshima.

But, there is another small island called 'bamboo island' (Jukdo 竹島 in Korean) at 2 km (1 mile) east of Ulleungdo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jukdo_(island)

You may see those abundant bamboos there: https://wayfaringflaneur.com/2018/09/02/jukdo%EC%A3%BD%EB%8F%84-bamboo-island/

Japanese government never mentions this real bamboo island (Jukdo in Korean) when they explain their territorial claim. They intentionally omit it, or obfuscate it with Ulleungdo. For example:

https://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/takeshima/position.html

https://www.mofa.go.jp/a_o/na/takeshima/page1we_000057.html

Long times ago, Japanese fishermen certainly recognized the existence of Jukdo 竹島 near Ulleungdo island. At that time, Takeshima did not designate the Liancourt Rocks, but Jukdo to Japanese fishermen. Both Jukdo and Ulleungdo are now Korean territories that Japan and the other countries acknowledge. Now the Japanese government claims the territorial right with a wrong name or a wrong location.

There are 7 Japanese islands called the same name Takeshima (竹島 bamboo island) along the coast of Japan, and all of them have bamboo: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%AB%B9%E5%B3%B6

But only one exception is the remotely-located Liancourt Rocks,called 'Dokdo' in Korean, which literally means a rock island. It is a consistency problem. Koreans knew that it consisted of rocks, and therefore bamboo could not grow there. The so-called bamboo island without any bamboo was just an imaginary island for Japan to forcefully occupy Dokdo in 1905. Now they still shout "the bamboo island without any bamboo is a Japanese territory". What a farce!

@Burning Bush Today  06:47 am JST

The vast majority of these people were already in their final years and many had seriously underlying conditions.

Excess mortality during COVID-19 compared with previous years is far higher in the U.S. along with European countries than Japan and South Korea:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&time=earliest..latest&country=KOR~JPN~USA~ITA~GBR&region=World

@Antiquesaving

Either SK joins ICJ and goes or it shuts up.

You seem to be misinformed by Japanese fake news here and there.

https://www.icj-cij.org/en/states-entitled-to-appear

@OssanAmerica

Is South Korea prepared to do this? A simple yes or no will suffice.

As I am not a representative of S. Korea, I am not entitled to answer your question. The fact is very simple, but you ask a meaningless question.

The fact is that Japan has repeatedly said they may 'CONSIDER' going to the ICJ, but actually, they never did. I am not saying about the willingness of S. Korea, but just dispute the claim that Japan is ready to go to the ICJ. Japan never was and never will be ready to go to the ICJ on the issues of forced labor and CW. Should I explain the reason?

Typo corrected:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-southkorea-japan-labourers-nishimura/japan-says-no-comment-on-international-court-of-justice-plan-in-south-korea-dispute-idUSKCN1UE08F

@Antiquesaving

@OssanAmerica

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-southkorea-japan-labourers-nishimura/japan-says-no-comment-on-international-court-of-justice-plan-in-south-korea-dispute-idUSKCN1UE08

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2021/01/13/national/international-court-justice-comfort-women/

Should I show more examples of the Japanese unwillingness to go to the ICJ?

@Antiquesaving

Japan is ready to go.

Japan will never ready to go. Responses of the Japanese government have been consistently the same. For example, today,

https://www.nna.jp/news/show/2153554

This shows Japan actually does not want to go to the ICJ. Obfuscation has been a feature of Japanese diplomacy.

Japan needs to stop brainwashing the Japanese people with distortion of history by assuming themselves as a victim rather than an aggressor. In the future, they may teach a truthful history to future generations, and allow more freedom for the Japanese press.

https://youtu.be/9K4zhfMHM4U

https://www.heritage.org/asia/report/the-pearl-harbor-anniversary-japan-still-says-dont-blame-me

@Antiquesaving

And that is again why South Korea refused to go to international court, it will lose again.

A classical type of misinformation propagandized by the Japanese media. S. Korea can not, but Japan can do go to the ICJ. The Japanese government always says they will CONSIDER bringing the comfort women/forced labor issue to the ICJ, but actually, they never do. For example, 2 years ago, they said they will CONSIDER going to the ICJ, but the consequence is like:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-southkorea-japan-labourers-nishimura/japan-says-no-comment-on-international-court-of-justice-plan-in-south-korea-dispute-idUSKCN1UE08F

The same pattern repeats:

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2021/01/13/national/international-court-justice-comfort-women/

@Antiquesaving

You mentioned 'compensate', which means that Japan acknowledged some wrongdoing during the WWII. But Japan has never acknowledged it as recently testified by the Japanese foreign minister: https://youtu.be/LB3xsKcMZXU

Whatever the Japanese officials said in 1965, legally Japan never compensated for the Korean victims. Nevertheless, the S. Korean government has tried to abide by the agreements, even though they are not documented and signed. But, in the court, the matter is different. Strict legal interpretations are applied to make a ruling. Moreover, the ruling was for compensation for the 'mental' suffering of the living CW, which could not be explicitly discussed in 1965, but now widely accepted in the international society.

The Korean or Japanese judges know far better than the Japanese governmental officials in those legal matters. For example: http://justice.skr.jp/estatement.html

The term 'deal' may confuse some naive Japanese. The so-called "final and Irreversible" 2015 deal was just a form of press conference held by a few delegates from Abe and Park administration without any signed document, not to mention the approvals from the parliaments. Nevertheless, the S. Korean government now proposes to accept it as a kind of a symbolic and official oral agreement, although it is legally void. It is just a good intention.

Japan has said the lawsuit should be rejected on the grounds of sovereign immunity -- a principle under international law that allows a state to be shielded against the jurisdiction of foreign courts.

The Japanese government needs to take a more mature approach. The suffering of comfort women is exempt from sovereign immunity by Japan's own domestic law, not to mention the international law. The Japanese law states that Japan shall not be immune from jurisdiction with respect to Judicial Proceedings in which monetary compensation for the damage in the following cases.

Act on the Civil Jurisdiction of Japan with respect to a Foreign State, etc.

Act No. 24 of April 24, 2009

Article 10　In cases where the death of or injury to a person or the loss of or damage to a tangible object resulted from an act for which it is claimed a Foreign State, etc., should take responsibility, if all or part of said act took place in Japan and the person who performed said act was in Japan at the time it was committed, said Foreign State, etc. shall not be immune from jurisdiction with respect to Judicial Proceedings in which monetary compensation for the damage or loss resulting from said act is being sought.

第十条　外国等は、人の死亡若しくは傷害又は有体物の滅失若しくは毀損が、当該外国等が責任を負うべきものと主張される行為によって生じた場合において、当該行為の全部又は一部が日本国内で行われ、かつ、当該行為をした者が当該行為の時に日本国内に所在していたときは、これによって生じた損害又は損失の金銭によるてん補に関する裁判手続について、裁判権から免除されない。

http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?id=1948&vm=04&re=01

政府参考人（倉吉敬君）　確かに、ここに書かれているのは人の死亡若しくは傷害という、要するにいわゆる我々が日本法で不法行為と考えるときは、損害はもっといろんなものがございます、精神的苦痛であるとかですね。だから、その程度のものは国家はもう主権免除してあげようよという、そういう配慮があるわけです。

https://kokkai.ndl.go.jp/simple/detail?minId=117115206X00920090416&spkNum=107#s107

@itsonlyrocknroll

Lee Jae-yong should have been in the cell next to Park and Choi serving a similar sentence handed down of 22 and 18 years,

Unlike Lee who was confirmed guilty in a single bribery charge, other charges such as power abuse and bribery from Lotte and SK were additionally applied in the cases of Park and Choi. A total of 12 charges were confirmed guilty in the case of Park.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-55657297

https://www.wsj.com/articles/former-south-korean-president-park-geun-hye-indicted-for-bribery-1492418552

@kennyG

Playing words? Civil case and the government involved into civilian matters are totally different. SJ.

Yes. You have a right to play words, interpreting every term in your own way. You are now saying "Civil case is not a civilian matter."

@kennyG

Of course NOT. So what? have you even heard of diplomatic protection?

Yes. The Japanese law states that Japan shall not be immune from jurisdiction with respect to Judicial Proceedings in which monetary compensation for the damage in the following cases. You may now claim that diplomatic protection and immunity from jurisdiction are totally different.

Act on the Civil Jurisdiction of Japan with respect to a Foreign State, etc.

Act No. 24 of April 24, 2009

Article 10　In cases where the death of or injury to a person or the loss of or damage to a tangible object resulted from an act for which it is claimed a Foreign State, etc., should take responsibility, if all or part of said act took place in Japan and the person who performed said act was in Japan at the time it was committed, said Foreign State, etc. shall not be immune from jurisdiction with respect to Judicial Proceedings in which monetary compensation for the damage or loss resulting from said act is being sought.

第十条　外国等は、人の死亡若しくは傷害又は有体物の滅失若しくは毀損が、当該外国等が責任を負うべきものと主張される行為によって生じた場合において、当該行為の全部又は一部が日本国内で行われ、かつ、当該行為をした者が当該行為の時に日本国内に所在していたときは、これによって生じた損害又は損失の金銭によるてん補に関する裁判手続について、裁判権から免除されない。

http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?id=1948&vm=04&re=01

政府参考人（倉吉敬君）　確かに、ここに書かれているのは人の死亡若しくは傷害という、要するにいわゆる我々が日本法で不法行為と考えるときは、損害はもっといろんなものがございます、精神的苦痛であるとかですね。だから、その程度のものは国家はもう主権免除してあげようよという、そういう配慮があるわけです。

https://kokkai.ndl.go.jp/simple/detail?minId=117115206X00920090416&spkNum=107#s107

Just curious. What are "ice bribes"? Can you detail it?

@James

Since Japan has already admitted their guilt and apologised and provided Monetary contributions on the issue regarding Comfort Woman.

Another type of Japanese misinformation on S. Korea.

The fact is that Japan never admitted their guilt, as recently testified by the Japanese foreign ministry: https://youtu.be/LB3xsKcMZXU

Legally, the monetary contribution was just for FREE, not for damage compensation as Japan never admitted any wrongdoing in Korea. Apologies were revoked at anytime, some within a few weeks.

kennyGToday  02:06 pm JST

SJ

Let me ask you one question. The following verdict is a civilian issue or not?

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-northkorea-usa-warmbier/u-s-court-orders-north-korea-to-pay-501-million-in-u-s-students-death-idUKKCN1ON134?edition-redirect=uk

Of course NOT. So what? have you even heard of diplomatic protection?

Accepting your definitions, what do you call such lawsuits such as the CW and Warmbier cases?

Just for reference: Civil Case No. 1:18-cv-00977

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Warmbier-suit.pdf

I am not quite sure about Japan, but other countries, including S. Korea and the US, define them as civil cases.

Although most modern countries are generous on economic crimes of capitalists, this ruling demonstrates that S. Korea is a mature constitutional state, governed by law. The 2 recipients of the bribery have been in prison, and today the donor is, too.

@kennyG

Think a bit before posting. The defendant of the recent stupid verdict was Japanese government, bilateral official treaties/agreements SK kept nullifying were closed with Japanese government, which are not a simple civilian issues any longer

Let me ask you one question. The following verdict is a civilian issue or not?

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-northkorea-usa-warmbier/u-s-court-orders-north-korea-to-pay-501-million-in-u-s-students-death-idUKKCN1ON134?edition-redirect=uk

@Garthgoyle

She was indicted in charge of libel against the survived comfort women regardless of the truth about the CW.

So you agree this proof they're are indeed altering history when it's convenient for them. It's wonderful when people can come to agree with each other.

Is this a typical Japanese logic to announce an agreement?

I am not detailing the legal issue here, but just let me teach you one thing. For example, the truth is that "G is stupid", and I publish a book stating that "G is stupid", then you can be indicted in charge of libel in S. Korean courts. Publishing a simple truth sometimes can be libel according to the verdicts made in S. Korean courts. Of course, most libel cases are from false statements. In the case of the professor, whether it is true or false was irrelevant.

How about the Japanese courts?

garymalmgrenToday  10:23 am JST

SJToday 10:09 am JST

People are diverse, and so do their thoughts and actions

the Japanese people who are traditionally obedient.

Pot, meet kettle.

That is what I heard from a Japanese professor. It sounds true, as long as the Japanese are tolerant of state-controlled history textbooks. In S. Korea, people do not accept it, and even toppled the government whose leader tried to control the history textbooks.

https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/165911

How about Japan?

Show me a Korean textbook (in wide public use) that mentions or gives details of the massacres and atrocities committed by South Korean troops in their own country during the Korean war or in Vietnam and I will go along with your argument.

A typical Japanese response to obfuscate the issue by bringing up irrelevant stories. Study by yourself.

@MarkToday  

They also arrested a professor for publishing the truth about some Koreans voluntarily becoming comfort women and other Koreans cooperating to recruit them. Seems like they're fine with altering history when it's convenient for them.

Typical Japanese misinformation on S. Korea. She was indicted in charge of libel against the survived comfort women regardless of the truth about the CW.

Even the following retired professor published a book, which became a bestseller in Japan, and the truth is irrelevant here.

https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2019/08/25/features/Historians-reexamine-Koreas-accepted-history-Book-touching-on-Korean-nationalism-has-created-a-firestorm/3067163.html

@MarkToday  09:34 am JST

People are diverse, and so do their thoughts and actions

the Japanese people who are traditionally obedient.

Pot, meet kettle.

That is what I heard from a Japanese professor. It sounds true, as long as the Japanese are tolerant of state-controlled history textbooks. In S. Korea, people do not accept it, and even toppled the government whose leader tried to control the history textbooks.

https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/165911

How about Japan?