South Korea compares Japan's 'rising sun' flag to swastika as Olympic row deepens

[Suika]

WWII brought the end of British imperialism in India. This Indian prefer to live under the British thumb.

On the other hand. The rising sun flag represents imperialist Japan. Japan only feel sorry for attacked America. Not for invading other Asian countries.

The Americans dropped the bomb on Japan in order to get them to surrender and end the war, it was purely a military action with a strategic goal. Japan commiting the rape of Nanking has zero military or strategic value and was simply an attrocity delibrately done to terrify the population. There is very clearly a difference.

They fundamental mistake with "US had to drop bombs in order to end the war" is that it is on the basis that the US was in the right to bomb until unconditional surrender was achieved. Had the US been willing to end the war short of occupation if Japan itself, then the war probably could have ended before the atomic bombs could be judged as necessary. But the US wanted to create a new world order with the UN having 4 permanant security council seats (US, GB, Nationalist China, and SU). The occupation and complete dusmantling of Imperial Japan was their objective. People confuse that objective with "righteousness" and "justification" for "Japanese aggression" and "starting the war". Its all propaganda that gets people to think things like the use of the atomic bombs were not war crimes while the rape of Nankin was a war crime. Both were war crimes.

Japan wants CKS to give up a large chunk of China which he refused, apparently the USSR, USA, UK and France agreed with him and give him plenty of support. And USSR allowed Japan to take Manchuria only for Japan to attack the USSR years later so they learn their lesson, UK, USA and France saw that and don't trust Japan as a result.

The USSR attacked the Manchuria area in 1929, KMT didn't come to their aid. That was before Japan took Manchuria. Even though CKS cried foul for Japan taking Manchuria, CKS had no administration of the area. Nationalist Chinese forces did nothing in its defense. Meanwhile, a few years earlier, Mongolia was independent for about 10 years since the end of the Qing dynasty. But then the SU went in and setup a puppet regime by around 1925. So we Japan backing the Fangtian Clique throughout the 1920s and signing onto the 9 powers treaty. But the SU did not. They makea puppet regime in Mongolia. They cause trouble in the Xinjiang area, they attack Manchuria in 1929. Where was the league of nations crying foul? The Nationalists still had no control in Manchuria by 1931. So the Japanese moved in. And the the League goes super critical. The same league made of countries that all were interested in keeping their empires intact. All the league did was hand China to communism in the long run.

 

[beijingwalker]

The Nationalists still had no control in Manchuria by 1931. So the Japanese moved in.

统治中国东北的奉系军阀将领张学良1928年12月29日通电全国，宣布：东北从即日起遵守三民主义，服从国民政府，改变旗帜. Manchuria declared loyalty to the central government in 1928.
If any country can enter another country under the pretext of those you made, the world will become a hell and Japan can be annexed too soon in the future by US, Russia or even China.

 

[Suika]

统治中国东北的奉系军阀将领张学良1928年12月29日通电全国，宣布：东北从即日起遵守三民主义，服从国民政府，改变旗帜. Manchuria declared loyalty to the central government in 1928.
If any country can enter another country under the pretext of those you made, the world will become a hell and Japan can be annexed too soon in the future by US, Russia or even China.

Manchuria's economy went bust in 1928. The Nationalist government had moved in no forces when the Soviets attacked it in 1929. There were no Nationalists forces in Manchuria that fought to defend it when the Japanese invaded it. The place was a power vaccumm. The whole region, an area larger than the size of France and of 30 million people was easily taken and developed. No massacre or anything like that. CKS's mistake was the feeling the need to start the second sino-japan war in 1937. As a result, he ended up losing the entire mainland. The Manchuria area wasn't a core part of "China" anyway. Almost as separate from "China" as Tibet and Mongolia. CKS decided to make trouble with Japan but did nothing about Hong Kong which was much more deeply culturally and historically "China".

Let them do it in the Olympics, the more they do it, the more they get Asian countries to hate them, they are already very isolated in this region, we should be happy for their stupidity.

Stupid book.

The Nationalists Chinese were in league with the same Nazi Germany in the mid 1930s. From that relation, Nazi Germany was able to obtain many rare earth materials. In 1937 Germany changed to Japan. Japan found Germany's anti-communism attractive and shared negativity with Italy in the naval treaties. Howevef in 1939, Nazi Germany signed the Molotov pact with the SU, catching Japan by surprise. When the US put theoil embargo on Japan in the summer of 1941, Japan wanted to negotiate with the US to improve relations and restore oil trade. Japan was willing to leave the axis so Prime Minister Konoye pressed for a meeting with FDR. But the US side never allowed for such a meeting. So seeing that the US was marching towards war with Japan one way or the other, Japan remained with the axis.

 

[beijingwalker]

Manchuria's economy went bust in 1928. The Nationalist government had moved in no forces when the Soviets attacked it in 1929. There were no Nationalists forces in Manchuria that fought to defend it when the Japanese invaded it. The place was a power vaccumm. The whole region, an area larger than the size of France and of 30 million people was easily taken and developed. No massacre or anything like that. CKS's mistake was the feeling the need to start the second sino-japan war in 1937. As a result, he ended up losing the entire mainland. The Manchuria area wasn't a core part of "China" anyway. Almost as separate from "China" as Tibet and Mongolia. CKS decided to make trouble with Japan but did nothing about Hong Kong which was much more deeply culturally and historically "China".

.

That's a funny theory I guess even your master US won't agree. You can make up thousands of excuses to invade a country, but the international community don't see it that way, you are part of UN and UN was founded by the winning side of WWII, if you don't agree with those principles, you can withdraw from UN and declare you are the righteous side of WWII and we are the evil side. You can even ask Germany and Italy to join you to form a new UN of yourselves.

 

[Suika]

That's a funny theory I guess even your master US won't agree. You can make up thousands of excuses to invade a country, but the international community don't see it that way, you are part of UN and UN was founded by the winning side of WWII, if you don't agree with those principles, you can withdraw from UN and declare you are the righteous side of WWII and we are the evil side. You can even ask Germany and Italy to join you to form a new UN of yourselves.

You're confusing the policies adopted by countries in the realm of geopolitics on one hand and history as it is on the other.

 

[Nein]

I think flag banning stupid a few years ago in the south they tried taking down the Confederate flag stupid controversy aroused all flags are draped in blood so knock it off

But muh feelings i find it ironic that it is South Korea creating such a problem.

To be honest China suffered just as much even had its own people tested as guinea pigs in Unit 731.

 

[beijingwalker]

But muh feelings i find it ironic that it is South Korea creating such a problem.

To be honest China suffered just as much even had its own people tested as guinea pigs in Unit 731.

China fought a war with Japan which was only contained to east part of China, central and western China was unaffected, but Korea was colonized by Japan for 50 years, the whole country was loss to the invaders.

 

[gambit]

They fundamental mistake with "US had to drop bombs in order to end the war" is that it is on the basis that the US was in the right to bomb until unconditional surrender was achieved. Had the US been willing to end the war short of occupation if Japan itself, then the war probably could have ended before the atomic bombs could be judged as necessary.

You are correct that the US wanted unconditional surrender. But is that demand inherently wrong? Am not asking in reference to WW II but in reference to warfare in general. Is the demand for unconditional surrender inherently wrong in pursuing an end to a war?

Wars do not end as simply as one side say 'I give up'. How a war ended is as important as how it was started in the first place, and how it was started usually set the foundation on how it will end. All sides do this.

 

[Suika]

China fought a war with Japan which was only contained to east part of China, central and western China was unaffected, but Korea was colonized by Japan for 50 years, the whole country was loss to the invaders.

But he's right. There even was no war between Korea and Japan before Japan colonized Korea. From the begining of colonial Korea, towards the end, the population doubled, literacy rate quadroubled, hangul script became more widespread, and infrastructure was developed.

Sure Korea doesn't have to think highly about being colonized, a nation being free has much value onto itself, but there were many colonies in the world in that period that hard much harder and less beneficial experience. Comparatively speaking, Korea didn't get such a bad deal.

Besides, colonization was the outcome from the Russo-Japanese war, had Japan lost, Russia woukd have colonized them. Ask Poland or the Ukraine what they think about being under Soviet control...

 

[beijingwalker]

But he's right. There even was no war between Korea and Japan before Japan colonized Korea. From the begining of colonial Korea, towards the end, the population doubled, literacy rate quadroubled, hangul script became more widespread, and infrastructure was developed.

Sure Korea doesn't have to think highly about being colonized, a nation being free has much value onto itself, but there were many colonies in the world in that period that hard much harder and less beneficial experience. Comparatively speaking, Korea didn't get such a bad deal.

Besides, colonization was the outcome from the Russo-Japanese war, had Japan lost, Russia woukd have colonized them. Ask Poland or the Ukraine what they think about being under Soviet control...

Talk this to Koreans, not me.

 

[Suika]

You are correct that the US wanted unconditional surrender. But is that demand inherently wrong? Am not asking in reference to WW II but in reference to warfare in general. Is the demand for unconditional surrender inherently wrong in pursuing an end to a war?

Wars do not end as simply as one side say 'I give up'. How a war ended is as important as how it was started in the first place, and how it was started usually set the foundation on how it will end. All sides do this.

Hello Gambit, in the long history of warfare, yes, that was just the result. Lots of countries get into wars. Japan and US had a war. The US won. At the raw geopolitical level, it can be understood. Life goes on. And in the following decades, Japan has done much better than it could have done if the overhead US was in character like the SU.

But all the arguments about "justification" on a moral basis is all BS.

Talk this to Koreans, not me.

There are plenty of Koreans that do see it that way, but just not the majority. That majority opinion is the result of state education that fails to teach history objectively and is too nationalistic.

 

[Nein]

China fought a war with Japan which was only contained to east part of China, central and western China was unaffected, but Korea was colonized by Japan for 50 years, the whole country was loss to the invaders.

Beef between Far Eastern Asians goes way back am I right?

But current tensions has always been the legacy and aftermath of the Japanese Empire.

 

[mike2000 is back]

The nazi flag is banned because it was a symbol of a political party that was founded on racism and hate and has used that ideology asthe basis to carry out genocide of a race on orders from the very top and carried out at an industrial level.

To be fair, Japan's action in Asia during WWII wasn't any better than Nazi Germany(some claim it was even worse). From what I have red and documentaries I have watched Japan's invasion of Asia was very brutal to the local civilian population and it was sometimes backed at the very top of the military hierarchy. I think this is why people there had such a negative view of Japan even after the war.
I think the US made a mistake by not denazifying Japan the way we did with Nazi Germany. This would have put an end to all this issues once and for all and led to a more United East Asia similar to Europe today. This issue was never fully resolved and the US just turned a blind eye, due to the fact that they had some interests in some research(human experiments Japan conducted on Asian captors and other Japanese military techs) and findings they could profit from and they needed Japan against the emerging Soviet Union as well. Since they feared communism taking hold of Japan as well. So in this regard I understand US actions back then.
However, due to this, I think this issue will keep dividing east Asian countries for a long time to come. And it doesn't serves US interests today at all. Since from my own experience in Korea I could see that Koreans in general are even more anti Japan than China. So go figure. This means the possibility of Korea leaning towards China is far more likely in the event of a conflict between Japan and China. Luckily the threat of nuclear crazy fat Kim's N.Korea still stops South Korea from going fully hostile against Japan.
All this goes contrary to US interest in Asia . So I think past US actions has come back against them on this regard.

 

[beijingwalker]

South Korea actually is the only possible potential ally of Japan in the Far East region, all other neighbors in this region, China, Russia, North Korea are kind of implacable foes to Japan, now South Korea becomes so hostile, Japan's future in the region is very bleak.

 

[Goku]

To be fair, Japan's action in Asia during WWII wasn't any better than Nazi Germany(some claim it was even worse). From what I have red and documentaries I have watched Japan's invasion of Asia was very brutal to the local civilian population and it was sometimes backed at the very top of the military hierarchy. I think this is why people there had such a negative view of Japan even after the war.
I think the US made a mistake by not denazifying Japan the way we did with Nazi Germany. This would have put an end to all this issues once and for all and led to a more United East Asia similar to Europe today. This issue was never fully resolved and the US just turned a blind eye, due to the fact that they had some interests in some research(human experiments Japan conducted on Asian captors and other Japanese military techs) and findings they could profit from and they needed Japan against the emerging Soviet Union as well. Since they feared communism taking hold of Japan as well. So in this regard I understand US actions back then.
However, due to this, I think this issue will keep dividing east Asian countries for a long time to come. And it doesn't serves US interests today at all. Since from my own experience in Korea I could see that Koreans in general are even more anti Japan than China. So go figure. This means the possibility of Korea leaning towards China is far more likely in the event of a conflict between Japan and China. Luckily the threat of nuclear crazy fat Kim's N.Korea still stops South Korea from going fully hostile against Japan.
All this goes contrary to US interest in Asia . So I think past US actions has come back against them on this regard.

So were British actions in Indian subcontinent , Africa and all the colonies .So should we ban union jack which was a symbol of British imperialism?
Just because allies won the war, their atrocities were whitewashed.