supercub comments

Japan should give up on its refueling cruises in the Indian Ocean and instead send in brigade of infantry into Afghanistan. Indeed, it is time that Japan wakes up and realizes that the threat of radical Islam as professed by the Taliban is a threat to us all. The war in Afghanistan is not just America's war. It is not just Britain's war. It is a war that belongs to us all. As such, it is time that the Japanese get off the fence and start donating some blood rather than just floating around the Indian Ocean and showing each other the golden rivet.

First, there is no way Japan will send in combat troops, because that violates their constitution. Second, the Taliban is not an international terrorist organization. While it did provide safe haven for Al Qaeda prior to the U.S. invasion in 2001, the 9/11 attacks and other terrorist attacks were planned and carried out by Al Qaeda, not the Taliban. Defeating the Taliban is not in America's direct interest and certainly not in Japan's. Defeating an insurgency like the Taliban could take years, if not decades, and would involve a level of causalities and destruction that the American nation will not tolerate. The U.S. could easily maintain a military presence in the region that would target Al Qaeda. This is far more prudent and effective than trying to defeat a full blown insurgency, build an economy, and create a civil society and government system that did not exist before our arrival. All of that must be accomplished without the support of a large portion of the populace. It's not going to be successful. It's not going to work. There is no exit strategy. There is no endgame.

Reasons why Japan should not continue this operation: 1. Japan has no direct interest in this conflict 2. Japan has a pacifist constitution and aiding a war in a foreign land is seen by many to violate the spirit of that document 3. Support for the Afghanistan War is far from universal and increasingly citizens of the countries involved are questioning their involvement (Germany, UK, Canada, USA, Japan).

We can discuss why the war in Afghanistan is ill-conceived and probably futile if you like.

The AP did the right thing. War needs to be depicted and recorded fully, with all of its horrors and trauma exposed. This story, and the powerful images that tell it, cannot be hidden away.

Assuming this is fictionalized depictions of torture, i.e. no one is actually being tortured, then slap it with the most restrictive rating and be done with it. This is censorship.

I'm really looking forward to flying in this plane. Unlike the Airbus and the A380, Boeing actually seems interested in improving the passenger experience.

yet it still takes an hour to get to the airport

on a good day

Not to be morbid, but I wonder how long it would take to fall 2,400m. Perhaps I should have paid more attention in physics class.

I like how this is presented as some kind of scary and extreme scenario, when this exact situation happens all the time in schools.

As someone said above, there are money involved in the scene here, everything is so professional it is boring sometimes.

Go to a local live house, and you'll see plenty of non-professional bands, that's for sure. Very, very non-professional.

Well, the guy who wrote the article is musician. tkoind2 apparently is also in the business. But everyone else says they are wrong?!

I know dozens of people "in the business" including my wife who played in a band for years and worked in a well known live house. There is a big difference between saying the system and culture of live performances in Tokyo has problems, and saying there isn't enough live music. Go to any city in any country, and you'll find plenty of complaints about the way live music venues are run and musicians are compensated. That's kind of the nature of the biz. If this article was a critique of the live music industry in Tokyo, you'd see a lot of agreement in the comment section, but that's not really the point of the article. The author is basically saying he can't find a gig to go see, and that's ridiculous.

Haha. I've seldom seen an article in JT get so unanimously slammed.

@tkoind2 - I totally agree that the live house scene has serious problems. Admission is generally too expensive, bands are often exploited, and live houses still don't seem to do all that well. You make some good suggestions.

This article is utter nonsense. There are hundreds of live music venues throughout the city catering to a variety of tastes. The notion that Tokyo lacks live music is laughable. What is the author of this article talking about?

I'm a daily bike commuter and love it. However, I have access to showers at work. If I didn't, there is no way I would bike commute. If companies really want to encourage bike commuting, they need to provide shower facilities.

A solution to Japan's dental shortcomings?

What's up with JT in recent weeks? If it bleeds, it leads.

Got the shirt v(..)

^this is as much a bailout of the working class as the rich.

I'm with conbinibento on this one. Now if the victim had sought help and been rebuffed by the "system" then this story could have larger implications. Unfortunately, as combinibento points out, this happens everywhere. It's important that society provide services to help people in abusive relationships and the culture completely condemns domestic violence. Does Japan do that? That's a question that must be asked.

Just to give some perspective, here in Honolulu we've had three totally random stabbings (two fatal, one very serious) in 6 months. All the suspects were unknown to the victims and all the incidents were totally unprovoked. Point being, in a city 1/30 the size of Tokyo, and a low crime rate, random violence happens with disturbing frequency. I don't think this is particular to Japan, but it's certainly sensationalized in Japan. These incidents speak more to general shortcomings in mental health public policy in many industrialized countries, rather than any cultural factors.

What?

The woman was the true icon/epitome of modern Japanese womanhood. Empty, shallow, devoid of the desire for personnal empowerment, materialistically obsessed and immoral.

I think you hang out with the wrong women.

*

How many terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since September 11, 2001?

Thanks to the Bush administration, zero. This cannot be denied, except by liberals.*

No terrorist attacks = Bush prevented terrorist attacks. This is a very poor null hypothesis. How do you test this?

It's a highly flawed logic. I'm certainly glad there have been no terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11 (although there have been plenty in other parts of the world), but no one can say that the lack of terrorist attacks is due to Bush's policies.

How many foreign acts of terror were there in the U.S. in the eight years prior to 9/11. Also zero. Was that because of Clinton's policies or the myriad of other factors involved?

George W Bush is one of the most maligned presidents in history. Nearly everyone hates him because of THE WAR IN IRAQ, HURRICANE KATRINA, FAILED CLIMATE POLICY, RECORD BUDGET DEFICITS, TORTURE, ILLEGAL DETENTIONS, PATRIOT ACT, FAILED AFGHAN POLICY, FAILED MIDEAST PEACE POLICY, FAILED NORTH KOREA POLICY, FAILED IRAN POLICY, FAILED PAKISTAN POLICY, NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND, FINANCIAL CRISIS, NO HEALTH CARE REFORM, NO IMMIGRATION REFORM, ETC. ETC. ETC.

He's maligned, because he is a terrible president.