How do revisionists argue their case? Like lawyers in the US. You try to find the slightest problem or disrepancy.
So, you admit that if this case was brought up in a US court of law, it would not hold water.
It's the same way that some wrog details or a person who lied about being in Auschwitz is evidence - for holocaust deniers.
The evidence is irrefutable. Why are you comparing the two completely different issues?
-3 ( +2 / -5 )
Then, wait for the rice farms to start disappearing from Japan. Demand for rice will never decrease. The suppliers can start raising their prices. The suppliers' governments can then also start using Japan's dependence on rice as leverage. So, cross your fingers and hope... (not usually the best option for national policy).
0 ( +0 / -0 )
So let the consumer decide on buying California's U.S. rice at fraction of the cost of Japanese rice.
There are a few more variables that have to be considered. Your argument only makes sense in a perfect world. This one is not so.
For instance, subsidizing rice farms are in the interests of national security. The US oil industry is subsidized approximately $4 billion per year for the sake of national security. Okay, yes, oil ...important. If you have it, protect it. Staple crop ...even more important, don't you think??? Once Japanese rice farms can't compete in any way, they will disappear. And, Japan will be at the mercy of rice producing nations. China has already proven they will use that kind of leverage to intimidate-- remember the rare earth element fiasco last year?
0 ( +0 / -0 )
JeffLee: So, ...change the channel. You have choices. You can even watch it live. This is Uemura's fifth Olymipics and she's finished the last two in fourth place. And, now she's retiring. Now, that's a story. If that doesn't deserve a "lengthy report", I don't know what does.
Here in the States, they don't show it live. On the official NBC broadcast, at the expense of the (non-American) competitors, they showed a report on one of the American slope style judges and her path to an Olympic snowboarding judge. She was an Olympian herself-- in gymnastics. Weird.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
...a bit harsh for someone's opinion on a very subjective sport-- do you think?
Just watched it here in the States. Johnny Mosely was on the mic. After the gold medal winning run of the Lapointe sister, he actually commented that he thought it wasn't enough to go ahead of Uemura, who was leading at the time. ...so, if he was the judge, she may have won gold?...
Oh, by the way, noticed your posts on how Japan only shows Japanese competitors in the media. Over here, they don't even show it live. The only competitors they showed throughout qualifying were all the Americans and the two Canadians medalists. ...finally got a glimpse of Uemura in the final. ...and, the Japanese guy who made it into the slope style final never even got a second on screen here. ...just fyi...
2 ( +4 / -2 )
If you are dubious about your ownership, you should go.
I am so lost here. So, you are saying-- you should only defend yourself in court if you think there is a chance you'll lose??? And, if you're 100% sure you'll win, you will refuse to defend yourself in court??? You go to court to end disputes. Korea obviously doesn't want it to end.
Too bad international law has its limits. Hypothetically speaking, if these two countries were citizens in a civilized first world country, Korea would have been served with a summons and forced to go to court to argue their case... and the matter would have already been resolved one way or another.
Oh, yeah... all those "Dokdo"s in parentheses, should actually be the island of Jukdo when translated honestly. So, yes, thank you for all the evidence proving Jukdo should stay as Korean land. And, what does it have to do with this argument? ...Okay, I'm done with replying here... maybe some other time.
-3 ( +2 / -5 )
Wow, that is a very complicated rebuttal with lots of parentheses around different islands' names-- all signifying critical assumptions made which are assumed to be proven with supplemental arguments. It is obviously not a simply clear-cut fact that Dokdo was Korean territory. This calls for both cases to be brought to the ICJ and debated, don't you think?
-3 ( +2 / -5 )
Every document translated by Korean "historians" substitutes a variant of the name 'Usando' liberally into 'Dokdo'. There is usually no disclaimer to that fact. Why is that? Or, the assumption that "Usando is the old name for Dokto" is stated as fact. The whole arguments are based on the critical assumption that Usando is, in fact, the same island as present day Dokdo. Japanese researchers only have to refute that one assumption with evidence (which they have done), and all those Korean papers/essays/arguments have no meaning whatsoever. Wouldn't changing names on historical documents during translation equate to distorting the facts? Enlighten me as to where my logic is flawed please. Liars tend to accuse other people the most of lying. ...in this case, this holds true.
-3 ( +2 / -5 )
Now, now... stop comparing apples to oranges and "distorting" (as you like to put it) the situation. How shall I put it? ...Let me summarize it all in layman's terms for you.
If a neighbor claims part of your land should be theirs, and you have documents supporting it is part of the title you have from when you bought it, then as civilized citizens, your neighbor brings the case to court. You both present your cases, and the third party court weighs the evidence and settles the matter. Done.
Japan's territorial disputes:
a. Kurils - Russia holds ~ acknowledges Japan's pre-war ownership, but claims them as spoils of war
b. Senkakus - Japan holds (occupied peacefully), China claims ~ China does not want to bring the issue to ICJ, so to Japan, there is no dispute
c. Takeshima - Korea holds (occupied violently), Japan claims ~ Japan offers to bring the issue to the ICJ; Korea refuses
They are not the same:
a. negotiations on-going
b. China claims land held by Japan. Instead of taking it to court, they scream, yell, throw things, etc. Japan has signed an agreement saying any case brought against them to the ICJ-- they will go to court and abide by any final decision. China still avoids going to court. (If a neighbor keeps complaining part of my land is theirs, I cannot take them court. They would take me to court. Simple logic in any country.)
c. Japan repeatedly offers to settle the matter at the ICJ. Korea refuses saying their is no dispute. Then starts shouting Japan is distorting history by continuing to assert claims. Then, again refuses to go the ICJ-- I guess as a friendly gesture to Japan for not making a mockery of them and tearing their argument to shreds??? (If I think my land's title lays claim to a parcel of my neighbor's lot, I would take them to court, and, in a civilized society, my neighbor who thinks otherwise will oblige, ...and the matter will be resolved.)
4 ( +4 / -0 )
Got it. So, treaties and contracts can be nullified if we decide the "wording" does not fit what we intended when we signed it. I'll have to remember that. ...wait, why do we even sign them in the first place? I'm confused now.
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
chucky3176-- what was the money for, then? A gesture? Where is the list of exceptions to the issues resolved?
With the 1965 Treaty, the agreements between Japan and Korea concerning the settlement of problems in regard to property and claims and economic cooperation was signed. By this Agreement, problems in regard to property and claims between Japan and Korea has been settled completely and finally. To normalize relations, all issues of the past were resolved via this treaty.
-2 ( +1 / -3 )
There again, anyone who thinks any country, in this case, Japan, has never done anything wrong does not have a firm grip on reality.
THAT is one of the big differences between nations like Germany and Japan when it comes to atoning for wrong doing and making sincere apologies and efforts to improve ties.
...here we go again ...George Bush Jr. "You're either with us, or against us" logic. There's no in-between. ...forget the details, you either agree with ALL the "facts" we claim and apologize for ALL of them, or your apologies are insincere. If you disagree with ANY of our stated facts, you are a denier who believes "Japan has NEVER done ANYTHING wrong."
How about this-- stop making stuff up and exaggerating truths-- that WILL improve ties. It's hard to come to an agreement when the truth is, as Koreans put it, "distorted". Let's start with not calling the occupation the "Asian Holocaust". There were no concentration camps in Korea. That IS one big difference between Germany and Japan.
...having said all that ...I personally don't think Abe should have visited Yasukuni ...not while he's Prime Minister. ...nothing to do with right or wrong. ...just don't, man. The dead won't notice either way.
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
Amazing! The pickpocket is also a mindreader and can visualize her PIN number! Unless she was dumb enough to have it written on the card or somewhere in her wallet.
Just used my credit card at Target. No signature even required. Stores can ask to see ID, but rarely do. You only ever use a credit card PIN number when withdrawing cash from an ATM.
Wow, what a bunch of unlucky people! Neither I nor anyone I know who lives in the U.S. has been a victim of a pickpocket.
When you go on the internet, you are bound to bump into plenty. Check the stats of how many people are victims.
...you remind me of a guy I met who kept boasting about how ethically moral he is-- "he never even got a parking ticket in his life". ...um, he lived in some smaller town ...let's see how you do in a city. ...late 2 seconds trying to get back to your 15 min. limit meter & you've already got a ticket ...doesn't make you ethically challenged. It's part of city life with a car.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
After reading comments on this site, apparently, a lot of people believe that if you don't agree with established laws, it is acceptable to resort to violence and breaking other laws, rather than going through lawful procedures-- if you think due process will not go your way or will take too long. ...scary stuff.
0 ( +3 / -3 )
...love your > & < infantile observation, but, how about this permutation: Columbia(4) > Belgium(11); Greece(12) & Ivory Coast(17) > Russia(22); Algeria(26); Japan(47) > S. Korea(54). FIFA rankings in parentheses. http://www.theguardian.com/football/interactive/2013/dec/18/world-cup-2014-draw-strength-of-schedule
Going by FIFA rankings alone, Japan actually has one of the tougher draws, ...albeit seeing it that way, their fans are surely relatively on the happy side about their team's draw. I have yet to meet a Korean friend who wasn't literally ecstatic about their team's draw. Just googling-- the confidence level in Korea about their team is higher than some of the top countries' fans: http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20131212001020
1 ( +1 / -0 )
But don't you think it goes both ways ....I know I am biased, but do you?
My opinion/reaction to your stance below:
He's saying-- let's form conclusions from the evidence from both sides.
Your words-- not mine:
So Abe denies there is enough evidence at this moment in time to make conclusions, and says more historical research is needed.
That implies he wants all the evidence (from both sides-- biased or not) to be taken into consideration when formulating the truth-- at least that which can be proven. You can say all you want about the Japanese right-wing, but at least they base their arguments on some form of logic.
By the way, you don't seem to understand Abe's stance. He does not deny a percentage of the comfort women were coerced, but, that there is no evidence whatsoever that the Japanese government had a systematic policy to coerce those victims. (In those cases where former comfort women testified they were coerced-- their claims stem from being tricked into thinking they were being offered a different job by their broker. ...their Korean broker.) It is a very complex issue that requires civilized debate. Moreover, it is an issue that not only pertains to Japan, but all countries that have had brothels set up for their troops. That include the US, European countries, and many members of the UN.
3 ( +6 / -3 )
To suggest there isn't enough evidence now is a form of denial, although I'm sure you disagree.
He's saying-- let's form conclusions from the evidence from both sides. The comfort women debate actually started in Japan by Japanese researchers. The Koreans have been hand-picking evidence before scrutinized and listing them down as facts, whether later proven to be false or not. Anyone who disagrees with their position is labelled a righ-wing nationalist or a Japan-lover... & their arguments are discarded based on that label. The only "truth" they are interested in is the one that fits the argument they have been parroting for a couple decades. You either agree with their list of grievances, or you are 'in denial' or 'distorting history'.
3 ( +5 / -2 )
smithinjapan: property line cases happen all the time here in the U.S. My cousin went through one a few years ago. Their neighbor's driveway was partially on their land. They settled the matter amicably through the city's court system and let their neighbors purchase that land from them.That's the civilized way to do it. If their neighbor refused, they would have taken them to court, and their neighbor would have been forced to go to court. You are saying, the neighbor could have just claimed there is no issue ...end of story. Really??? Korea built their driveway on Japan's territory. Japan has asked Korea to settle it in the ICJ multiple times. Korea refused. China claims Japan has built their driveway on China's territory. Japan says different. China never requested Japan to have the issue settled with any third party. So Japan says there is no issue. You're comparing apples to oranges. btw, Japan has signed an agreement to accept any decision by the ICJ. Korea & China are now behind the 8 ball to settle these matters once and for all. Japan requesting China to go to the ICJ is akin to my cousin's neighbors taking my cousin to court because they keep claiming the property is theirs ...doesn't work that way ...where is the logic in that?
1 ( +6 / -5 )
Tempura - Portuguese roots ~ but, evolved into a distinct cuisine for 500 yrs. in Japan Sushi - not Japanese? Wow. Most everything in present civilization can be traced back to have foreign roots. Even though English is actually a Latin based language, I personally see no problem in giving the British credit for the language I speak. You would disagree, ExExpat?
0 ( +2 / -2 )
Original stickers & price tags left on caps! Really!??? Cool???
2 ( +3 / -1 )
Oh... boo hoo. The Giants & Tigers were in first & second place in a pennant race. Bass was having the greatest season ever. And, you wouldn't walk him? Maybe he should have gotten the 55th before playing Oh's team. Barry Bonds was intentionally walked with no runners on base ...& with the bases loaded. That's strategy. And a show of respect. If Oh does it... it's racism? Anyways, number of walks is an example of an actual fact. These so-called facts you present are called hearsay in a court of law. "I just didn't want a foreign player to break Oh's record."-- yes, this guy probably did say that. But, obviously it wasn't a conspiracy by all of Japanese baseball as you claim. If so, they should have at least walked over the course of the season close to as much as Oh did in the season he got his 10th most walks.
Oh, you listed 3 people. Who are the other 3 of the half dozen?
...the sarcastic "champ" comment... meant as an insult... does tell a lot about you, hoserfella.
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
Yeah, those foreigners who had a chance to break the record were walked so much ...which means, they must have broken the league walk records ... oh, wait ... no? ... hmmm ... typical gaijin victim mentality. And, yes, if you're having a record breaking season, you get walked. Barry Bonds had to deal with it & Sadaharu Oh had to deal with it. It's smart baseball. Deal with it. Oh yeah, the guy with the walks record-- Sadaharu Oh. Let's see you back your claims up with facts for once... sheesh.
-4 ( +2 / -6 )
No. Chula Vista East Lake Little League All-Stars vs Musashi Fuchu Little League All-Stars. There are many Little Leagues in Tokyo. Last year's winner was by a team of a totally different League... but, also from Tokyo. That team didn't make it out of the Tokyo regionals this year. Musashi Fuchu and Chofu represented Tokyo in the Japan regionals. They won that, and then won the international bracket. ...the US winner gets an automatic berth in the final.
1 ( +3 / -2 )
Intentional hand ball in the penalty box = a red card.
Defenders cross their arms so as not to unintentionally use their arms to block a cross or a shot. ...learning experience for Mckay. That call was a no-brainer-- I can't believe people are arguing about it.
0 ( +2 / -2 )
Anti-whaling crowd-- worried about Japanese taxpayers wasting some of their budget?... seriously? If they moved that money to create the biggest pile of in the world-- just to get on the guiness book of world records, these people wouldn't give a ...
-3 ( +4 / -7 )
The law was created to assist researchers and hinder those that would only kill whales for profit, the Japanese government`s main aim is to make a profit, therefore using a loophole in the system.
...if the "loophole" is so wrong ...close it. Simple as that. That is how laws work. Oh, and are you really so naive to think no one noticed the "loophole" when it was written up?
This is how politics works- 1986 revisited (in lay men's terms) --
Anti-whaling nations:Let us create a moratorium where we can tell the anti-whaling public we got you to fold and that Zero whales are now (officially) allowed to be caught for consumption. (psst psst, of course, you know, we do know that that is totally unreasonable-- but, that's the only way could impress those people and shut them up. we'll create this loophole, though, so, actually, a reasonable degree of sustainable whaling can continue. come on, throw us a bone here. we do this kind of thing all the time. the majority of the public really is quite gullible. this will work.
Japan & whaling nations: Oh, okay. Yes, the whaling stocks need to replenish themselves. Zero is good for now. Right now, let's just concentrate on letting the population replenish. When the time comes, and science shows sustainable whaling can continue, we'll discuss lifting the moratorium. Although it's not us, but you now-anti-whaling but former-big-whaling-nations-that-now-don't-need-whale-oil that depleted the whaling stock in the first place, ...we understand. ...this is politics. We'll let you "save face" (or rather "create face"). You can go ahead and act like heroes now.
20 yrs later-
Japan & whaling nations: dang, stabbed in the back... seriously? We were supposed to start talking science, and let logic determined whether to lift the moratorium or not. Let's talk.
Anti-whaling crowd: No discussion. Zero forever & ever. Our word is final.
0 ( +4 / -4 )