Obama: Diaoyu Islands Covered Under US-Japan Security Treaty

Obama shaking hands with Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

From NetEase:

Obama Claims US-Japan Security Treaty Applies to Diaoyu Islands

Obama Claims for the First Time That Diaoyu Islands [aka Senkaku Islands] is under Japanese Administration — The president of the United States of America Barack Obama will be arriving in Japan on the 23rd as the first stop in his four-country tour of Asia. Before arriving in Japan, Obama accepted an exclusive written interview with Japan’s Yomiuri Shimbun, in which he made clear that that America’s policy is explicit–the Diaoyu Islands are administered by Japan, and therefore are under the scope of the fifth article of the US-Japan Security Treaty. This is also the first time ever that a president of the United States has made a clear statement regarding this issue.

Comments from NetEase:

让包子飞 [网易湖北省襄阳市手机网友]:

The US-Japan Alliance is a product of the Cold War era, a balancing relationship of the previous era. Now that the Cold War has long ended, the relationship between Russia-US and China-US have shifted from adversarial to collaborative [or antagonistic to cooperative]. It is under this premise that the US has brought up the Pivot to Asia Strategy. Which is to say, the original Cold War era strategy of equilibrium is no longer suitable for today’s situation, so using the US-Japan Security Treaty as a cornerstone is also not appropriate.

Japan is making trouble, and the US is also very frustrated about it. A lion that has awaken must roar and no longer pretend to be asleep…

网易澳大利亚手机网友 ip:101.119.*.*:

A meal of sushi was all that was needed [to get Obama to say what Japan wanted]… Too cheap.

网易山西省阳泉市手机网友 ip:218.26.*.*:

Obama is also a lowly coward!

网易重庆市手机网友 ip:117.136.*.*:

[I] strongly condemn you people!!!

网易北京市手机网友 ip:111.206.*.*:

Huff and puff all you want, China/Chinese didn’t grow up being afraid [being easily intimidated].

网易贵州省贵阳市手机网友 ip:119.0.*.*:

When can there be a Tokyo Massacre?

网易山东省济南市手机网友 ip:58.56.*.*: (responding to above)

How can you say such a fucked-up thing?!

Comments from QQ (1 & 2):

我叫曲雨晴:

As long as our China rapidly develops, we can ignore them for now, because in the future, China will be the boss! Jia you.

394610419:

The US just wants to start another war between us and Japan, so they can again rapidly develop.

abubakar:

This is precisely the kind of paper tiger that Imperialist America is. Even when it attacks a small or weak country, it calls up several dozen allies to go in together. It doesn’t have the guts to go head to head with China. Today, Imperialist America’s economy is in a depression, the unemployment rate remains high, its economic recovery weak. Obama is determined to drag little Japan into Imperial America’s carefully designed TPP trap, first using their speech about the Diaoyu Islands to get Japan to concede on TPP negotiations, to pave the way for Imperial America’s future economic invasion of little Japan. Meanwhile, the Ukraine crisis has also brought America’s power on the global stage into doubt, especially among America’s allies. Then add to this China’s rapid economic development and military expansion in recent years seriously threatening Imperialist America’s strategic balance of power in the Asia-Pacific region. Because Imperialist America’s ability to contain China’s development by itself is looking inadequate, it now needs little Japan as a pawn, to protect Imperial America’s strategic interests and to prove that its military power is not in decline. It is for these reasons that Imperial America publicly supports and welcomes little Japan to lift the ban on the right of collective self-defence!

淡了。:

Go on! We’ll go on with developing ourselves. Frankly, nobody dares set foot on the Diaoyu Islands right now anyway, because going is just asking for trouble! I pray to the sky to bless our Heavenly Kingdom, to give us another 30 years of peace to develop and accumulate robust national strength, to deal with domestic problems, and recover Taiwan! We love peace, but when it comes to the rise and fall of our nation, we are not afraid of death, and not afraid of dying with our enemies in war! Although internet angry youth are always complaining about this or that being unfair [criticizing domestic problems], I believe all that is just idle chat about life, and the opinion of the vast majority opinion is the same as ours, that isn’t our country gradually getting better?! As long as our countrymen are united, even the greatest suffering will be like nothing, and instead, we will pay back what our enemies do to us twofold! Jia you China!

浪迹天涯:

The Diaoyu Islands has been Chinese territory since ancient times, and this is an indisputable fact. America, I hope you will behave more like how a major power should, walk the path of peace, mutual benefit, and win-win situations.

19_3_1102牵左手长相依:

In the beginning, America said they’d remain mutual on this matter, and would not interfere with China or Japan regarding the Diaoyu Islands dispute, but it still ended up interfering. American imperialism, is this boldness? Or is this treating your words as farts [not taking ones words seriously]? Or is it…?

赵赵:

Obama is tough/daring…
Now Japan can feel relieved.

╰叼煙丶看故亊の續冩:

China, now you see, right? America will still help their own dog. It’s time to beat the dog.

gg小个:

Ha ha, Obama once again has something to ask of Japan! America is Japan’s dog!

大宝贝儿:

Beware, this is a plot/scheme of America, to have China and Japan go to war, itself benefit from it, an attempt to disrupt China’s development. This now depends on the wisdom of the government [to not fall for the plot]. Strike down US-Japan reactionaries.

Ben:

Send 100 strategic missiles at Okinawa, and the whole world will be at peace!

自律耐心:

It’s not up to America to decide which country the Diayu Islands belong to. It’s up to us Second Artillery Corps.

金秋:

Since America supports Japan in antagonizing China, what are we still waiting for? It’s time to take some practical action against America.

命运:

The situation now is becoming worse and worse. America and Japan are joining together to swallow up the Diaoyu Islands. It is simply a disgrace. Although I know there are “too few good people and too many bad people” [a lot of problems] in China right now, for the Diaoyu Islands, I’m still willing to donate all my assets–200,000 yuan–to help the country. I’m also willing to join the army to fight against both Japan and America in order to defend our territory, because I’m Chinese.

我愿生死相依:

Support North Korea. The invincible North Korean People’s Army once said, machine guns can also destroy the Pentagon.

王庆新:

China can stand to be a little tougher [on this issue]!

青黛/mg:

The true colors of American politicians have been revealed, they can no longer conceal their true intentions. Chinese government, wake up! It’s not that we don’t want peaceful development, but just look at what those American politicians who say one thing but do another are doing around China.

李永彬:

Is Obama drunk?

Help us maintain a vibrant and dynamic discussion section that is accessible and enjoyable to the majority of our readers. Please review our Comment Policy »
  • noodles76

    The comments above were exactly what I expected. Sadly.
    Really getting tired of all the bluster from some corners on this matter. Sorry China, you aren’t going to get those islands (that you don’t care about anyway) or the natural wealth contained in and under the seas (that you do care about). You lose. Suck it up. And we all know you aren’t going to do anything about it either except rile up the masses with nationalistic propaganda. Maybe the sheeple will break a few windows on Japanese cars even though they are owned by Chinese people again.

    • Germandude

      To be fair, the idiot on this matter is Obama and the US government.

      Now I honestly cannot judge if the islands should be Japanese or Chinese but remaining the status quo should have been the first goal. And in the long run, maybe, a mutual agreement could have been made in which the resources around the islands (cause let’s be honest, it’s about resources, not those freaking rocks) could be expoited by supervison of a third party that checks that no one is cheating the other.

      Obama seems to be using this issue to switch attention from the disaster that is called Ukraine in which he was shown that the US do not have the international support that they seemed to think they have (also Europe is making a disastrous impression in that matter).

      I never thought I would say this but it appears that Obama is the weakest US president ever, even behind my most despised one, Mr. Bush.

      Remember, wars are started because of little matters like this. I don’t want to be history books mentioning that one incident that finally lead into WW 3 was because of some fucked up islands that nobody actually gave a crap about.

      • noodles76

        Well, the treaty was signed in 1951. The only thing Obama did was make a clear statement about it. But let’s be honest…. the wording of the treaty was not difficult to comprehend. Obama saying….yup…that’s right, we’ll protect the islands… really changes what exactly? China knew this before, Japan knew this before, the world knew this before. SecState made it clear in 2010 iirc. Somewhere around there.

        All this let’s go to war crap is just uneducated folks going full retard.

        EDIT: I won’t debate Obamas worth as a president nor his possible motives for clarifying something we all knew to be true.

        • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

          and you are educated i guess?

          • noodles76

            Educated enough to know that only fools clamor for war.

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            driving a german in qingdao? huh something is fishy here ….

          • noodles76

            If you have something to say, go ahead and say it. Otherwise….

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            you know what’s up unless you are not chinese………

            here you go its a real GERMAN (DESTCH) ARHHHHHHHH

        • Connor

          Ha China’s current military wouldn’t last very long in a full out war against the United States. Of course they could do massive damage they still are 20 years behind in just technology.

          As for Obama’s statement. You are right he was just continuing what the United States stance has been the whole time. That we will back Japan, as clearly stated in the treaty.

        • Germandude

          Well, what I mean is: communicate it on a diplomatic level, not public one. What he caused now is public (some great examples in this thread already) outcry and a rather heating up of the discussion.

          You understand what I meant to say, right?

          • noodles76

            Yes, I understand what you mean. This is not the first time the US gov’t made it’s stance clear though it is the first time a President has has done so. Personally, I believe he should have made the statement much sooner. Not with the intent of angering anyone but just to end any potential questions and make some folks understand the full gravity of the situation.

            I don’t mind that we disagree. Your points as reasonable, we just differ on opinion.

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            and you believe diaoyu is japan’s. what wonderful you must live in. WHAT A WONDERFUL WORLD…………… AH

          • Connor

            The problem is how you define a possible claim in international law.

            If it was clear then we would not have any problems.

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            OMG Conor why can;t we just repond each on a single post. i am being nice to you (only you …. oh) please don;t waster my time and enegry my patience is limited o friend

          • lacompacida

            You were speaking about “law” to a Chinese. All attempts will be futile.

          • lacompacida

            The US people need to know. China can always shut down all the communication channels if it wants.

          • loki

            gotta agree with you there..

        • Brian227

          Another Treaty signed in the 1950s with Chiang Kai-Shek’s government-in-exile bound Japan to abide by the terms of their surrender in 1945 and renounce all territorial conquests beyond the Home Islands.

          The surrender instrument itself placed these islands under US administration with the provision that their final disposal was a matter for he US, UK and Republic of China to agree on. Instead, the US unilaterally handed administration (not sovereignty) over to Japan at the same time they de-recognised the Republic. It’s been an immensely cynical affair from the start.

      • satuon

        I don’t think what Obama did is bad, actually. It’s better to show a firm stance now, than to give a wrong impression that will embolden the Chinese.

        • lacompacida

          With all these rumors about US abandoning Japan in China, this is a great move. I bet the next will be US supplying the radar to Japan to monitor those territories.

      • ex-expat

        This has nothing to do with Ukraine, and the trip was most likely planned far in advance. When pressed on the matter, it would be terrible to not say what he did. China has been a major aggressor in the region (do you really disagree?), and to do nothing would be weak and would send the wrong message to US allies.

      • The Wangsta

        You can be sure that there’s back channel dialogue between the US and China before that statement was made so both parties knows what’s up. People seem to not comprehend how the US views Japan. Pacification is needed to maintain certain level of influence and control over them because 60 year-old treaties and promises are wearing thin against their bitterness of being a semi-colony, especially with the recent rise in Japanese Nationalism movement. US-Japanese relations isn’t all hugs and kisses.

        • lacompacida

          That statement has been delivered in the open dozens of time in the last year. The Chinese government just try to confuse the Chinese people by sending confusing messages to its people, causing all kinds of rumors. It is great that Obama straighten it once and for all. The only one in the world seeing Japan as semi-colony are the Chinese. US, Japan and the rest of the world don’t see it that way. BTW, I still see China as a colony of Russia, obeying every order from Putin.

          • The Wangsta

            If you don’t think the US concern of Japan militarizing if given the chance is valid then I don’t know what to say. You seem to be one of only a few people with insights in the Asian Pacific region to think so.

          • Don’t Believe the Hype

            It may be a concern, but not a big one. The US cannot prevent the Japanese military from growing forever, and their are quite a few voices on both sides saying that it may be time for the Japanese to take control of their own military. I think this has already begun to happen a bit. But no, the US-Japan alliance is pretty strong and I doubt policy makers are too concerned about that changing.

      • lacompacida

        The treaty between US and Japan was in place for ages. Keeping the status quo is to maintain that treaty, not changing it.

        • Brian227

          The territory covered by the treaty at the time it was signed did not include these islands, though. They were tacked on afterwards.

          • MeCampbell30

            Nope. The treaty always protected land administered by the Japanese, regardless of sovereignty.

          • Brian227

            And the Diaoyus didn’t become land administered by the Japanese until long after the treaty was signed. The legality of Japanese administration is shaky in itself, since the US’s authority over them was part of the same treaty that required agreement between the three signatory powers for their disposal.

            Without consultations, let alone agreement, the 1972 US handover could easily be argued ultra vires in any impartial court.

      • A Gawd Dang Mongolian

        To be fair, that was some crappy sushi they gave him. I think he tried to be polite to cover up the fact he hated what they gave him.

      • wnsk

        I have not read the interview, but I assume he was asked specifically for America’s stance on the issue.

        To be fair to Obama, if he skirted around it or gave some non-definite reply, he might have appeared even weaker in the eyes of everyone (China, Japan, America, the whole world.) That would have screwed up his Japan trip (they might serve him even crappier sushi.)

        Might have been better if he had declined the interview, but maybe he couldn’t, out of decorum/politeness.

      • MonkeyMouth

        totally agree….. lets sit and watch the false flag start waving

      • steviewah

        I don’t think Obama is the weakest president, I think there were much worst, *Cough*Dubya*cough*.

        However I do agree that Obama slipped up on this matter. My theory about the Diaoyu Islands for the CCP has always been for the reasons 1) nation-build 2) Secure sea route access and 3) natural resources. Having Obama announce publicly his support for Japan does not change 2 and 3, but it does help the CCP look like superstars to the home crowd. It also has other implications like the fact Taiwan claim it as their territory.

      • MeCampbell30

        Nonsense. China exacerbated the situation when they extended an Air Defense Identification Zone around the islands. The status quo is that the islands have been and are administered by Japan, regardless of Chinese ancestral claims. China is just now getting the sea power to try and change right to the islands by threat of force.

        And the idea that the US does not have international support for sanctions against Russian for the incursion of forces into Crimea is crazy-talk. It was Russia who broke thier commitment to upholding Ukraine’s territorial integrity. It’s not America’s responsibility to keep bad actors from doing bad things 100% of the time.

      • KStyleBlue

        If you have been following the Japan-China dispute, you would know that the US has clearly, officially, and publicly said this same thing over and over for YEARS.

        Obama did not change the status quo at all. This IS the status quo.

    • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

      you have no say on this issue unless this island dispute concern the above soverign countries. plz keep in mind that diaoyu belong to china.

      • noodles76

        Shhhh. The adults are trying to have a conversation.

        • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

          why the fuck cant we claim our own terrioty you fucking white cunt. let me remind you that we don’t reject dispute but the truth is that it belong to us and your facist government and yourself are literally underming the strength and determnation of my people. get the fuck out of china you foreign cunt.

          • IsurvivedChina

            does your mother know you talk like that, such nasty language even for Chinasmack!

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            how about you shut the fuck up? where is the au government’s postion when the northern terriotry want to be independt? oh no the abos want to free! no says the whiteman. we have to enslave to end and dominate and rule over them untill we introduce enough racial laws targeted against then but wait let’s get into the matter of china’s diao yu island. YEAHHHHHH it’s homie USA. WOAH and my buddy japan.

          • IsurvivedChina

            the real Francisco would be rolling in his grave knowing you stole his name and spoke with a mouth like that! Please tell me, what are your thoughts on Chinese mainlanders allowing their kids to shit on the footpath? i know its a change of subject but since you speak shit I thought you might have an opinion!

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            i condemn such actions anywhere dispite the country or states. the kid on the other news report was simply taking a piss because they could not find a toilet and she is a fucking kid you fucking moron double standard white cunt. have some soul on human dignity. if your wonderful country allows prostituion and legal drug use don;t you think that fundermentally what we are doing right now and everyday is to just survive and you come along and say “why couldn;t the parents find a toilet or just tell the kid to bear it” the truth is that we are all the same and we are all just trying get moving.

          • IsurvivedChina

            but they still allowed the child to take a shit on the street, that must be a real proud moment for you hey!

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            shit? let’s get it right piss. oky. yes i do agree with you that uritnation and taking a shit is fucking sick and disgusting and wrong but it’s a fucking kid. learn to forgive motherfucker. where is the whitenss in your when a fucking black kid in africa cant eat because war or he shits on street beacuse condtion. yes the parents shouldn allowed their kid to do that but photographing his daughter’s vagina and delibaterally holding their baby trolley with abusive langauge and where is his human dignity you white bitch.

          • Don’t Believe the Hype

            You really need to tone it down, you sound like a crazy person.

          • loki

            Nah just a mainlander….

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            why are you making a huge deal out of this. how many fucking time do i need to tell you that she is a kid and their parents could not find a toilet and honcunts photographing her private parts debliabelly. you fucking sick cunt. next time i see white person in my city i will fucking kill them in honor of your greatness motherfucker.

          • IsurvivedChina

            you’re not in China, I tracked your IP address… so please stop with the all bad ass chinese talk, my guess is your sitting in some bedroom multi-tasking porn while trying to sound tough!

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            my ip/ oh shit! i got fucking tracked mate? jesus fing christ where am i braz? i am in china pretty giddy damn sure.

          • noodles76

            There’s nothing wrong with porn….but there is seriously something wrong with that guy.

          • IsurvivedChina

            i know, he was on here the other night, just a punk kid who got hold of his mother’s iPad.. ignore him and he’ll go away!

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            fuck your mother and fahterrrrrrrrrrrr ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh. fuck off from china

            fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china fuck off from china

          • ex-expat

            Sorry, but how did you track his IP address?

          • loki

            love this person ….. Don’t be mad.. this is how they all are.. well with 95% confidence interval..

          • lacompacida

            Why don’t you condemn such actions in China, by the PRC government ? Different standards ?

          • loki

            wow… Don’t know who you are . or what your point is .. but I love you soooo much… You make all of the prejudice things I say about Chinese people true… Kisses…

            Anything else you want to say just remember you only furthering my points about Chinese people in general…

          • David

            Is that really the only kind of English you know? Your not even actually writing the bad language correctly. Nobody is going to be convinced by you writing like that. You just seem drunk and stupid. Do yourself a favor and compose an actual argument without the racist, ignorant, comments.

          • Isn’t this the wrong article? This comment thread is about a Japan/China territorial dispute.

          • MonkeyMouth

            i wish they didnt delete his comments….sigh…..its entertaining to read over a nice hot cup of joe

          • mr.wiener

            Compared to shanghaiist? It’s gotten real freaky over there.

        • IsurvivedChina

          He named himself after a Spanish philosopher who is best known for defending the rights of native indians and he talks like a gangster, oh the irony!

    • ILoveGoldStandard

      You need to look at the fact objectively without taking any side. The US presence isn’t going to completely reverse Chinese territorial claims, nor will it completely stifle their aggressive behavior. Why? Because Japan who precipitated the conflict that started this entire chain of escalation. China didn’t want to start provocation with Japan. The Senkaku/Diaoyu islands exist as a zero sum preference proposition. But Japan changed that status quo ante on these waters in 2012. Laying claim to them as if they own them. Nevermind the legitimacy of the claim from both side since it’ll start an neverending argument. But at least let’s just agree that the water is disputed.

      The current dispute is already very clear, and Japan is denying that there is any dispute. Relations worsened in the last 8 years when Japan began getting a new head of state every couple of months, and the leaders were increasingly right wing and began trying to whitewash history of atrocity in Asia as well as start to aggressively impose on disputed islands with Korea, China, Taiwan and Russia. All these absurd attitude is clearly provocative by any standard, made only possible by US backing. If there’s any attack on Chinese patrols over the disputed islands is an act of war. Japan must be prepared to face the “full” consequences of such reckless act, which will pull the US into war too.

      • Alex Dương

        As you mentioned, Japan doesn’t even acknowledge the existence of a dispute over Diaoyu / Senkaku. Childishly, they then get super annoyed when the Koreans and Russians use this tactic against them: there is no dispute over Dokdo and the Kurils.

      • Don’t Believe the Hype

        “Why? Because Japan who precipitated the conflict that started this entire chain of escalation. China didn’t want to start provocation with Japan.”
        Dude, c’mon, China is not some innocent victim here. They have been pushing anti-Japan riots for years over these islands. Just because the leader’s dont’ have the balls to say anything themselves doesn’t mean they don’t inflame national opinion in the press and education curriculem

        • ILoveGoldStandard

          The riots in 2012 was a reaction toward the action made by Japan.

          My point is the current tension we see today was all started with this xenophobic ex-Tokyo governor, Ishihara Shintaro, trying to buy the island. In the Chinese government’s view, a violation of the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, which stipulate that Japan must return all lands it usurped during the Second World War.

          In case you don’t know who this ‘Ishihara Shintaro’ guy is, he is one of the most radical far right wing politician in Japan.

      • noodles76

        They had control of the islands before 2012, they laid claim before that. In 2012 the gov’t took control of the islands and it was the right thing to do for everyone involved. You’d see that if you were more open minded on the subject matter. At the time, Ishihara was planning to purchase the islands. He’s an ultra nationalist who is not shy about provoking China and in general…being a dick. He had plans to develop port facilities and otherwise develop the islands. To rational people….that would be something to avoid. And Japan did what it had to do in that situation, it kept the islands from being purchased by any individual with a potential agenda that could exacerbate the situation. Nothing changed for the worse in 2012 unless you’d rather have seen hotels and tour groups with a nationalistic twist going out to those islands and fanning the flames. Before 2012 the US made it clear that they’d honor their commitment to Japan and before 2012 the islands were in Japanese control. Focusing on the purchase as a negative or inflammatory event is very shortsighted and borderline irrational.

        • ILoveGoldStandard

          In realpolitik, there’s no such a thing as irrationality of how a nation deal with sovereignty issue. Conflict often occurs because a lack of communication leads to rational miscalculations, becomes plausible. Like i said before, the islands exist as a zero sum preference proposition. Japan think they owns them, China think they owns them. Both countries have their own claims. But in reality, the status quo ante leaves neither Japan nor China would have a strong de jure claim to the islands. When Japan made the first move by changed that status quo, it leads to a security dilemma. A spiral model where actions by a state intended to heighten its security, such as increasing its military strength or making alliances, can lead other states to respond with similar measures, producing increased tensions that create conflict, even when no side really desires it.

          • noodles76

            That post was far more logical and reasonable than your other post I replied to. In your other post you were heavily biased against Japan. Not sure how you claim that it was Japan who changed the status quo though, enlighten me.

          • ILoveGoldStandard

            That’s because you see it as status quo from Japanese point of view. Which the same could be said from Chinese point of view as well, before all this mess began. But one thing for sure is the status before Japan nationalized the island in 2012, was that preferences were effectively positive sum to both sides. The state of the islands was such that both Chinese and Japanese leaders could remain content — or if not content, tolerant — of the sovereign status of those territories, even if they’ve were technically under dispute. Neither side grumbled publicly about the state of the islands (at least not as regularly as today).

          • noodles76

            You fail to see that nationalizing the islands was the reasonable and responsible course of action in 2012. I am not biased (or try not to be) but considering the alternatives at the time, they had no choice. Yeah, it pissed off China and the Chinese. What doesn’t?

          • ILoveGoldStandard

            I’m just being realist. Chinese see the Japanese action as a unilateral move. Japan have many alternatives and choices at the time. Noda could have delayed the “purchase” by Ishihara by citing constitutional challenges, legal or even held back by environment assessment studies, etc. But since it was very-near elections, Noda rather choose a quick political fix. He created a situation where someone necessarily has to be a loser in this game. If that’s the case, then the ‘might makes right’ theory is applied.

          • KStyleBlue

            Now, I agree that Japan DID change the status quo by buying up the islands.

            But I don’t hold it against the Japanese politicians. Who knew that the Chinese were gonna get their panties in a bunch over such a small change.

            If the problem was this simple, Japan’s government could just sell the islands back to the private owner and return to the previous “Status quo.” Obviously, that’s not going to work. That was never the problem here, it was just an excuse to get riled up.

          • ScottLoar

            But the Japanese government bought the islands with the intent that they become “official” Japanese territory and well knew “that the Chinese were gonna get their panties in a bunch over such a small change”. You have seriously misread Japanese intent; the islands became “nationalized” by the Japanese, regardless of whomever claimed prior ownership.

          • KStyleBlue

            I don’t think I understand “nationalization” the same way you do. What I saw was a transfer of ownership from a private entity to a public entity.

            In this kind of transfer (in American Law) it doesn’t matter if ownership is private or public. Both are under the territory of the Japan.

            Which means, the government can just sell the islands back to a private entity. This would ‘de-nationalize’ the islands. And the problem would be solved.

          • noodles76

            Scott’s points are completely invalid. The islands were already ‘officially’ Japanese territory and have been so under no uncertain terms since 1972. As to the Japanese doing purchasing them regardless of prior ownership…that also is false since they paid something like 2billion yen to the owners of 3 of the little shithole islands. Also Scott ignores the fact that by nationalizing the islands the Japanese prevented any other parties (crazy ultra nationalist ex governor of Tokyo comes to mind here) from buying and developing that land to push an agenda.

            KStyle, you are exactly correct. Nothing changed. When the 3 islands in question were in private hands they were Japanese territory though privately owned. Now they are still Japanese territory and owned by the gov’t.

          • ScottLoar

            The Chinese side could have seen the Japanese landowner as a squatter and so served eviction notice by marshals (agents of the government); that parallel in American law you can surely understand. But the Japanese government obtained national sovereignty over the islands by buying them from a private party, and this was exactly Japanese intent. My argument is not who had prior rights or claims to the islands (this should answer noodles76 that my “points are completely invalid”); I merely try to relieve your wondering “who knew that the Chinese were gonna get their panties in a bunch over such a small change”. Can you now understand the Chinese side understood this “big change”, and that this big change was an exercise in Japanese national sovereignty?

            Insisting that the islands could be “de-nationalized” and the problem solved ignores understanding that China claims sovereignty over the islands. Right or wrong, China says the islands are theirs, and transferring the islands back to a private party ain’t gonna’ moot that claim.

          • KStyleBlue

            Correction. Japan does not gain national sovereignty. They just gain property ownership. In a western system: national sovereignty is a prerequisite to property ownership. The very fact that the landowner has a Japanese deed/title to that land means that Japan “has” sovereignty to that land.

            Serving an eviction notice would be meaningless since the landowner considers himself to be under Japanese jurisdiction… If China must serve eviction notices, than they can just serve it to the government of Japan.

            Now if Japan never gave the property owner a deed/title. And there was never a deed/title for the land… I could see a clear change in the situation.

            —-
            But I get your point, even though it makes no logical sense. If Chinese people see things this way. I think I was wrong about the situation being un-fixable. All Japan has to do is de-nationalize the island (sell it to a private entity). And in Chinese eyes, this would mean that Japan is giving up sovereignty.

            As an extension to this: Japan made a huge mistake. They should have let the right-wing extremest buy the island. China would have seen him as a squatter. It doesn’t matter if hes holding anti-China rallies on the island every day.

          • ScottLoar

            We are not arguing American law nor is American law universally applicable.

            And now you do finally understand:

            “But I get your point, even though it makes no logical sense. If Chinese people see things this way. I think I was wrong about the situation being un-fixable. All Japan has to do is de-nationalize the island (sell it to a private entity). And in Chinese eyes, this would mean that Japan is giving up sovereignty.”

            It makes no logical sense to who? The Japanese buying the islands from a private party made excellent sense and logic to the Japanese and Chinese who well understand that was an act of sovereignty. This was my point from first to last. And, no, Japan is not going to sell away the island now that it is truly and by law sovereign territory.

            No, Japan did not make a huge mistake. Rather than let the island and control of the situation devolve to extreme nationalists the government bought the island and so can prevent anyone in Japan from going there. They also have done well to the present in preventing others from going there.

            Your comment, “it makes no logical sense” is a laugh. I recommend an article to you about how Americans have come to think themselves the standard of human universality titled We Aren’t the World ;see, http://www.psmag.com/magazines/magazine-feature-story-magazines/joe-henrich-weird-ultimatum-game-shaking-up-psychology-economics-53135/

            The resulting acronym is WEIRD. Read the article.

          • KStyleBlue

            The problem is, I don’t know any other law. So I have to apply what I know to the situation.

            “in American Law,” is a nod to the fact that I don’t understand Chinese law and so I could be completely wrong. It’s also an invitation for you to come in and tell me how Chinese Law would see it (which is more applicable).
            [Probably a result of the whole “politically correct” trend in America, I feel obligated to throw in these little disclaimers]

            I’m not implying that my “logical sense” is universal. The phrase itself, “this makes no logical sense”, is an exaggeration: It’s supposed to give you an image that – I’m throwing my hands up and shaking my head in confusion.
            It probably came from a television show or something,

            —-
            I think most Americans will never be able to understand China’s reaction to Japan. Our ideas of what is nationality sovereignty seems to differ greatly.

            It seems to me that the cost of “gaining sovereignty” of the islands was greater than the benefits. Which is why I said Japan made a mistake.

          • ScottLoar

            How does Chinese law see the Diaoyutai? As an inseparable part of China by historical right, Chinese law and party policy being one and the same. Does any law even apply to this situation? Only when it serves the interest of Japan or China, and neither is bringing the islands up for adjudication.

            I repeat, I merely try to relieve your wondering “who knew that the Chinese were gonna get their panties in a bunch over such a small change”. Can you now understand the Chinese side understood this “big change”, and that this big change was an exercise in Japanese national sovereignty? Had Japan not bought the islands the Chinese could land a vessel, disembark marshals, and post no trespassing/no squatting signs, serving notice that the private owner was in illegal possession and squatting on Chinese land. That can’t be done now, can it, with the owner being the government of Japan? Not without a war.

          • KStyleBlue

            I understand what is China and Japans “official” positions.

            What I am trying to do is to form an opinion on which side’s opinion is more legitimate. In order to do that, I have to examine the supporting law / international norms.

            From my position of examining this as an American, It’s very difficult to understand the “why” in China’s point of view. What you tell me is contrary to my understanding of law.

            For example: I own property in the United States. My house is my property, not the governments. So it’s “de-nationalized.” Can China put soldiers on my property or post eviction notices? No, the US government will defend my property because it is territory of the USA, and because I pay taxes to the government in return for protection.

            On that note, most of California is “de-nationalized.” Using Chinese logic, China can land it’s armies in California without it becoming an act of war.

          • ScottLoar

            You do like to complicate matters by going off on the wrong tangent. Read carefully: It is not the obligation of a sovereign nation to protect by force or even recognize the foreign properties of its citizens. Example, I have a property in Malaysia. That property was legally acquired through Malaysian law and protected within the limits of Malaysian law. In a dispute the US government is not obligated to act on my behalf and would surely not employ the military on my behalf which is a personal dispute, not a matter of US interest.

            China did not recognize the islands as the property of a Japanese owner; China recognizes the islands as Chinese territory. Recognizing that the Chinese government could land in the unprotected islands and “evict” the private owner the Japanese government instead bought the islands, thereby making those islands Japanese territory, officially “nationalized”, and thereby rightfully obligated to protect them against foreign powers.

            Don’t try to make this harder than it is.

          • KStyleBlue

            The Islands are NOT “foreign property.” The property was registered by a Japanese, in Japan, to a Japanese province.

            Are you are saying that China can land soldiers on the 2-3 diayu/senkaku islands that are still currently privately owned? And if they did, Japan would not respond? IF you say “yes”, I think you are wrong.

            Perhaps you can add to this discussion by detailing exactly what “nationalization” means in Chinese Law. Not just in the context of the diaoyu/senkaku islands. So far, you have told me that nationalization is synonymous to sovereignty to the Chinese.

            ———-
            Thanks to your input, I think I am able to come to a conclusion.

            In conclusion: China’s strong response to Japan nationalizing the islands was because they operate on a very different paradigm.

            China’s paradigm is completely nuts and without merit.

            However, Japan’s prime minister should have foresaw China’s reaction to Japan’s nationalization. As a president, he should have a strong group of advisers who understand and could predict China’s response.

            The idea that Japan’s prime minster did this on purpose because he knew China’s response is most likely just a conspiracy theory.

          • ScottLoar

            “However, Japan’s prime minister should have foresaw China’s reaction to Japan’s nationalization. As a president, he should have a strong group of advisers who understand and could predict China’s response.

            “The idea that Japan’s prime minster did this on purpose because he knew China’s response is most likely just a conspiracy theory.”

            Oh Jesus! I give up. Now you assume the Japanese Prime Minister, a man who cannot act without consensus which is also Japanese custom, did not have a strong group of advisers who understood and could predict China’s response, even as you ignore that China was already knocking on the door of the islands and threatening to land troops to protect Chinese soil.

            Yet you still insist on defining “nationalization” according to Chinese law because it suits your definition of the problem.

            To answer your sole question, of course China cannot now land on the islands – Jesus! that’s the whole point of Japan buying the islands, transferring disputed private ownership to national ownership. What can you not possibly understand after all this?

          • KStyleBlue

            Not all of the islands were nationalized. 3 of the 8 islands are nationalized. 5 islands are still privately owned.

            I was asking, can China land on the islands that are still privately owned?

            Look. My definition of the problem makes sense to me. Your definition does not. You insist that nationalization = sovereignty. I am unconvinced. I’m not here to convince you of anything.

          • ScottLoar

            Can China enter Japanese territory without risking military repulse? Can China seize Japanese land without the risk of war? C’mon, think it through.

            It’s not what you or I think or what makes “sense”, even though you insist on defining the issue by your understanding of first US law and then by definition of “nationalization”. Nationalize, to make that which was private ownership into government ownership. Can you not see that in this matter government ownership trumps private ownership? That China cannot take those islands – any part of them – without entering declared Japanese territorial waters and occupying Japanese government’s land? That’s called “war”.

          • KStyleBlue

            I was wondering why changing ownership from private to public (nationalization) was such as big deal. Which is why I am trying to define nationalization. And why I said “american law” since there is a possibility that nationalization means something else in China.

            They way I see it, China couldn’t enter Japanese territory without risking military repulse. Regardless if the territories were privately owned or publicly owned.

            And as it is now, Japan will not and does not react with war to the current Chinese incursions of these islands. Regardless of private or public ownership. Therefore the situation does not change, since china still does not recognize Japanese sovereignty.

            To answer your question: I can’t see why government ownership trumps private ownership.

            Look, I think I have come to a satisfactory conclusion. I don’t see any more point in arguing the details. Unless you are telling me my conclusion was wrong.

          • ILoveGoldStandard

            Saying that there’s never a problem is a bit naive. If there’s a constant communication going on between China and Japan, the problem would never have happened. Like i said before, conflict often occurs because a lack of communication. When Noda decided to bought the island, without any bilateral consultation, he just assume China will not take that seriously. An unilateral assumption like that cannot work in world politics. International relations behaved anarchically. No one trust anyone.

          • KStyleBlue

            I said “that was never THE problem.” As in, the real problem/issue is something else, NOT the fact that Japan nationalized the islands.

            But yes, you are correct. Noda definitely should have consulted China first.

            My judgement is: Noda made a huge blunder. But I don’t think it was intentional. As a prime minister, he failed. As a person, I forgive him.

  • lonetrey / Dan

    Someone… Please just send a boat full of TNT there and blast the damn rocks out of the ocean…

    • Markus Peg

      The area of ocean would then become a dispute as gas can be found in that area… Maybe Philippians, Malaysia and Vietnam should all claim it as well just for the hell of it.

      • takasar1

        There’s not much there apparently. It seems they were too optimistic

      • lonetrey / Dan

        Exactly. Remove their excuses, ad cut to the heart of the problem.

    • lacompacida

      Why now ? PLA hasn’t landed yet. Blasting just rocks is no fun. Got to have some protein.

      • hercm

        you surely earned your 5 cents today..

        • Phil

          Actually it’s fifty cents

    • Doge Wallace

      you do it.

      • lonetrey / Dan

        No. Which is why I’m asking.

        • Doge Wallace

          why don’t you do it?

          • Because he’s a busy man.

          • Doge Wallace

            Then he should have said, “Someone… Please handle my affairs for me as I’m too busy to go and send a boat full of TNT to Diaoyu/Senkaku and blast the damn rocks out of the ocean.”

    • ex-expat

      But it is not just about those particular islands, unfortunately. It is really about the larger South China Sea.

    • filabusta

      It has nothing to do with the rocks, its just a flash point for the growing possibility of resource conflict. The pentagon seems to think it will be a big issue in the next ten years.

      • takasar1

        In that case all is safe

    • cb4242

      The problem is, it’s not the rocks themselves, but what’s under the rocks. Gas and oil. That is the REAL reason for this ongoing tug of war.

      • ScottLoar

        No, gas and oil under those rocks has nothing to do with China’s expansion and claims in the South China Sea and East China Sea (what? you didn’t know that China also claims parts of the sea the Koreans consider theirs?). War ain’t about economics; didn’t you learn anything from history?

        • cb4242

          What are you talking about? Don’t be an idiot, of course it’s MOSTLY about the natural resources overall. If there were nothing there, China wouldn’t give a crap, NOT one iota. Also, war is ALWAYS about economics. War is profitable, if NOT, North Koream Iran, Syria, other rouge nations and Russia wouldn’t try to sell arms to other countries or try to buy them or the technology.
          So yeah, I did learn history.

          • ScottLoar

            “If there were nothing there (the islands), China wouldn’t give a crap, NOT one iota.” Proving you understand nothing about this bunch running China and are wholly ignorant of the other claims China is making in the South China Sea and East China Sea despite Korea, Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia and Indonesia.

            “Also, war is ALWAYS about economics.” Proving you have never read the history of war with any understanding of the cause. As a primer look to the article I referenced here under this topic, War: The Gambling Man’s Game (January 23, 2014, Defining Ideas – A Hoover Institution Journal).

            War is not profitable, but the selling and development of arms is profitable, a seeming paradox which I am sure you can’t understand.

            And, the word is “rogue” and not the rouge your grandma wore.

            Now, click on my moniker, look to comments I’ve made, then look to your own comments and discover who’s the village idiot here.

          • cb4242

            Assjerk, you know nothing about me, never met me, you can’t have a decent disagreement and you have to lower yourself by throwing cheap insults. I guess your parents didnt teach you how to behave. It doesn’t matter what article you wrote. You didn’t write history, nor are you a history teacher. I read enough history, but I don’t have to prove shit to you, wise up. Of course war is profitable, it always has been and with the development of arms to USE in military conflicts proves exactly that. Again, you made my point for me.

            But it’s ok, I do forgive you.

            Also when you have to stoop so low to talk about someone’s grandmother shows what kind of a childish douche you are.

          • ScottLoar

            I’ll ignore every silly remark but that solely relevant, i.e. “Of course war is profitable, it always has been and with the development of arms to USE in military conflicts proves exactly that.” As I said, war is not profitable, but the selling and development of arms is profitable, a seeming paradox which I am sure you can’t understand. And you can’t understand that no matter how many capitals you want to use for emphasis.

            Yes, your grandma wore rouge, silly, because that was the fashion. The word you intended is “rogue”.

          • cb4242

            Good ignore it as well as I will ignore your childish schoolyard taunts. but yes, in the bigger sense war is and always will be profitable especially when you have countries that will pay for these arms.

            But you seem somewhat bright enough to understand the difference. But don’t worry, I don’t hate you, buddy. But if you have enough time to go around and banter with me, you just might have too much time on your hands.

            Also, you know nothing about my family, grow up guy. Get outside, life is good.

          • ScottLoar

            Learn the difference between “rogue” and “rouge”.

            Stop using capitals for emphasis; it doesn’t help your argument and confirms the weakness of your statements.

            Read the background on a topic before you remark. The islands are not in dispute because of gas and oil.

            Understand that human affairs is not the history of economics or whatever other euphemism you use for greed.

            When you’re wrong admit so with good grace rather than throwing crap like a caged baboon.

            Above all, read with understanding.

          • cb4242

            I think you should first learn how to read, but I guess, if you lack the education, why would you?

            When you’re wrong admit so with good grace rather than throwing crap like a caged baboon.

            (Same goes for you as well, buddy boy)

            At least I know how to read.

          • “Human affairs is not the history of economics”? Wow, really? So what has the rise and fall and rise of China, the Industrial Revolution, post-WW2 rise of the US and Germany, been all about? Accidents of the narrative of social development, where the profit motive was just incidental?

          • ScottLoar

            Human affairs is not the history of economics. Yeah
            Reptilian. Yeah, wow. Yeah, really.

            By your examples you’ve painted a circle to encompass
            certain events and now try to convince me it’s a bull’s eye of historical accuracy,but in truth it’s the consequence of paying attention to information that confirms what you believe while ignoring information and examples that challenge your preconceived notions.

            You’d agree that these centuries since the Industrial
            Revolution in Europe and its consequential spread throughout most of civilized humanity have uplifted every aspect of human well-being: longevity, health, diet, comfort and leisure, even matrimony and birthing children? But probably not understand that during this same period the incidence of warfare, the numbers of human beings killing and being killed, brutal acts in the main, have dropped dramatically for reason
            “violence has declined because historical circumstances have increasingly favored our better angels”; see Violence Vanquished by Steven Pinker, The Wall
            Street Journal, September 24, 2011 (if you don’t know of him Steven Pinker is not a casual commentator). As to the immediate causes of war “as a primer look to the article I referenced here under this topic, War: The Gambling Man’s Game (January 23, 2014, Defining Ideas – A Hoover Institution Journal).” Really, Reptilian, read.

            You imply that the profit motive animates all human affairs, that people and their nations rise and fall by profit, that money (or some form) drives people especially to warfare. A look at history, almost any history of any region, can show that is simply not true; a look at the writings of men throughout history can show that is simply not true; the discredited philosophies of Marx and Engels can show this is simply not true. But, I see, it is a convenient crutch, an excuse for thought, for failing to look more deeply.

            Now go back again to the genesis, “It’s all about oil”. No it’s not, this push and pull over the islands and the South China Sea is not about oil and gas, and if you had an understanding of Chinese history you wouldn’t insist so. Admit you don’t know, then remedy that ignorance by reading on the subject.

          • I see you’ve got your little panties tied up in a bunch over being contradicted. You couldn’t quite grasp a short statement, so—

            Let me try to expand what I said a bit: humans went from hunter-gatherer societies to agricultural societies and from there learned to trade their products and services across continents. The appearance of currencies eons ago attests to the very fact that economics was the basis upon which the current global order was built. Societies now had a “gold standard” upon which to measure their prosperity. And those metrics include what you mentioned: life expectancy, health, improved living conditions. When those national interests where threatened one way or another (ex., a source of freshwater being diverted, mineral resources in a disputed territory, etc), then war was frequently a remedy.

            But you put words into my mouth by saying that the profit motive was the sole reason countries went to war. Neither did I say it’s all about oil. I never said anything like it, although I would reason economics plays a huge role. Many world events, from the expansion of (put your favorite ancient empire here), to the rise of the US and consequent rise of the MidEast as a geopolitical power, which brought about the current problems with Islamic fundamentalism, to the Iran-Iraq War, the Soviet invasion of Poland, the current Iraq/Afghanistan War, the Great Leap Forward, the Sino-Soviet split leading to Sino-US rapprochement, were all driven by economic imperatives. But with this article’s root issue (the Senkakus) I do not believe economics is the driving force for the current Sino-Japanese animosity. There is also at play national pride and strategic considerations. So no, I’m not at all cherry-picking facts to suit my arguments and make “bulls-eyes”. You’re the hopeless ignoramus who’s painted himself into a corner by saying too much.

            Don’t attempt to look authentic by throwing Pinker at me; I know him personally and am familiar with his works. You can cut-and-paste all you want for your bibliographic references, but the urgent remedy here is for you to gain basic comprehension. Your stupidity is beyond belief, but with the way you extrapolate wildly from what other people have said, you have a promising career as a tabloid reporter, if you could tear yourself away from the keyboard making ignorant comments on the internet.

          • ScottLoar

            I reply in kind: Wow. Really.

            My references are disregarded because, you see, it’s only cut-and-paste; I’m a hopeless ignoramus with stupidity beyond belief; and the urgent remedy here is for me to gain basic comprehension and tear myself away from the keyboard making ignorant comments on the internet. All this from – well, anyone can compare the two posts, his and mine, to see who needs that instruction.

            And, he claims to know Steven Pinker “personally” no less, so I’m not authentic by referencing his article in The Wall Street Journal. Uh, wanna’ try going by that last one again?

        • trololol

          It’s about natural resources Scott. Coomunist party has a bigger territorial dispute with India and Russia but they’re not paying attention to it why? 1. they won’t get shit from it 2. Russia and India both have mlitary might.

          • ScottLoar

            You’re wrong. Chinese military jets recently overflew Indian airspace to reinforce Chinese claims over the area, and China offered to support Russia’s claim over the Sakhalin Islands if Russia would support China’s claim over the Diaoyu Islands (Russia declined). No knowledgeable person can deny China is carefully picking its fight right now in the South China Sea, especially targeting Japan, but likewise to insist China’s claim to the South China Sea is all about natural resources doesn’t square with the public pronouncements of the Party in power, or with the Chinese view of historical right, or with the Party’s actions showing that economics are secondary to the Party’s interests.

  • IsurvivedChina

    Just watched the ANZAC celebrations on the evening news, maybe the Chinese could learn a little from the Australians and New Zealanders when it comes to forgiving past enemies. The dawn service in Turkey took place side by side with both former enemies united in peace!

    • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

      ANZAC day ha, Hate ANZAC day. we always have to feel for the people who died in the first world war because German didn’t invade Australia BOO WHOOOOOOO. Don’t even compare Australia and China oky? the japs and yanks are fucking around my motherland. the diaoyu/senkaku island does not concern australia/new zealand. fuck off mate

      • IsurvivedChina

        I’m not Australian, I come form the planet Zorba, but I was referring to the way in which both enemies have learned to put their differences aside. your a little xenophobic but then, judging from your past posts that’s understandable!

        • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

          let me gues you are nea zealander, oh wait. australia is going full in braz. maybe you are from england the wonderful nation that dersrve to be immigrated with all the black and mix your white girls and then a huge gambo mixed baby too bad you guys going to loose your national identity.

          • IsurvivedChina

            Planet Zorba is located right next to Alpha century, located on the outer reaches of the milky way, I’ve come down to your planet to study your ways and to learn from you!

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            im xenophobic yes no shit right. white people be like “i was excluded out because im white” asians be like “i was excluded because who i am” FUCK YOU you think that i’m xenophic as hell look your country mate. filled with perverts, pedos, assholes and better yet kkk or neo nazi choose one and take it. dont come to my country and tell us about the land dispute. take it to your daddy. as a chinese, the middle kingdom can open door against anybody but no t you BOO WHOOOOO. little white cunt.

          • IsurvivedChina

            yawn… you’re a moron, you do know that don’t you?

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            cos i fucked your mama last hahaha. no shit son!

      • mr.wiener

        I got up at 4:30 this morning to hike to the top of a mountain in the humid rain for an ANZAC day service. We talked about the futility of war and dying far away from home for someone else’s gain. We also talked out the true meaning of “Mates” and having friends you will always stand by…..That is the meaning of ANZAC day, please educate yourself before you shoot your mouth off again.

        Consider yourself on probation. If you put one foot over the line you will be banned, and I do not forgive some of the things you have said here easily.
        Stay off the weed if you can’t handle it.

        • loki

          R.I.P. Francisco De whatever….

        • David

          Sounds like a good time. We do the same at the VFW during special occasions. Sometimes it is the only time you can talk about those things. I know thinking back on war is never easy, especially if you have seen it up close.

      • David

        Someday you will look back on comments you have made and truly be ashamed of yourself as a human being. You think being young and stupid and high is an excuse to insult the memories of those who have died so you can spout ignorant crap. Your not even Chinese, Every Chinese person I have as a friend would denounce the stupid and ignorant things you are saying.

    • Alex Dương

      You seem to have conveniently forgotten that Mustafa Kemal Ataturk took active measures to communicate that he did not wish Turkey to be enemies with Australia and New Zealand:

      “Those heroes that shed their blood and lost their lives … you are now
      lying in the soil of a friendly country. Therefore rest in peace. There
      is no difference between the Johnnies and the Mehmets to us where they
      lie side by side here in this country of ours … You, the mothers, who
      sent their sons from far away countries wipe away your tears; your sons
      are now lying in our bosom and are in peace. After having lost their
      lives on this land they have become our sons as well.”

      • wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_apology_statements_issued_by_Japan

        • Alex Dương

          We need to get something straight first. Has Japan apologized? Sure. It’s all in that list you linked to.

          Is that the complete story? No. In the same link you gave, we see that one of the big problems is, quote, “the perception by some that some apologies are later retracted or
          contradicted by statements or actions of Japan, among others.”

          Examples abound. PM ABE has often, for political reasons, stated that he doesn’t agree with past apologies only to later say something like, “Just kidding. I stand by it.”

          Does Turkey do that with respect to the Australians / New Zealanders? Hell no.

          • The problem is, Japan’s not a person; it’s a country, with millions of different people with all sorts of different beliefs. Conservative Americans often say things that embarrass liberal Americans, and liberal Americans often say things that embarrass conservative Americans. So long as there is diversity of thought, there will always be people from the same country with different points of view who claim to speak on behalf of the country whilst saying something that much of the country disagrees with. This is why it’s pointless to generalize entire countries. A country is a governing unit––nothing more. A nation is a cultural unit––nothing more. Feeling regretful or remorseful for a country or nation’s past actions has nothing to do with governance or culture, and therefore the supposed degree of regret or remorse than Japanese feel about their country’s/nation’s past actions should not be aggregated into a single value.

            Turkey’s relationship with Australia and New Zealand is hardly as significant as Japan’s with China. To be honest, I don’t even know what Turkey supposedly did to Australia and New Zealand that’s so bad to warrant comparison, but neither do most others, and that’s the point––Turkey has nothing to lose by just letting bygones be bygones and letting the past stay in the past. Japan has nothing to lose by doing that either, but the difference is that Australia and New Zealand allow Turkey to do that, whereas China and Korea do not allow Japan to so conveniently apologize once and let the world forget about it. Turkey has the cooperation of Australia and New Zealand graciously choosing to drop the issue and move forward, but Japan receives no such cooperation from China and Korea. I can guarantee you that if China and Korea stopped talking about it decades ago, so would have Japan. Try to guilt-trip someone for too long, and eventually they’ll get defensive.

          • Alex Dương

            I think you are too willing to overlook and forgive unnecessary provocations from Japanese Prime Ministers. You know perfectly well that Abe recently gave hints that he would not uphold prior apologies before basically saying “Just kidding.”

            http://japandailypress.com/ex-pm-murayama-says-1995-apology-for-wwii-should-be-upheld-by-current-administration-2845060/

            http://japandailypress.com/pm-abe-says-murayama-statement-will-be-upheld-by-current-administration-0545281/

            You can’t blame the Chinese and the South Koreans while giving Abe a pass for this kind of childish “I won’t do it, just kidding, I’ll do it” behavior.

            Japan does not need to issue any more apologies. But it doesn’t have to do this kind of crap either.

          • I really couldn’t care less what Abe says. Peace in the present and future is more important than avenging national pride over the past. Anyone who contributes to the deterioration of East Asian relations is doing the world harm.

          • Alex Dương

            Then we have a problem. You point fingers at the Chinese and the Koreans for not “letting it go,” but when Abe doesn’t “let it go,” you shrug your shoulders and talk in generalities.

          • I condemn both but have no interest in preaching to the choir (i.e., you).

          • Alex Dương

            Clarification accepted.

          • MonkeyMouth

            because ‘letting go’ means ‘losing face’, man…its aint in the ol’ DNA

          • Teacher in China

            I would normally agree with you on that, but when you are the ruler of a country, you have an obligation to not say obnoxiously inflammatory things. Imagine if Obama were to say something like “I know past presidents have apologized for all the women and children who died in Vietnam, but I don’t agree with that apology.” It’s just not the kind of thing you fuck around with if you’re a leader. The leaders of Japan have got to pull their heads out of their asses and stop doing and saying things regarding WWII that they know will anger people in neighbouring countries.

  • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

    DIAOYU BELONG TO CHINA FOREVER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    WILL SOMEONE PLEAS GET RID OF OBAMA HE IS GETTING ON MY NERVERS ESPECIALLY WITH THAT LOOK ON HIS DAMN FACE.

    • Germandude

      Well, some people tried to discuss this topic under normal conditions. Then came you shouting…

      • noodles76

        Let’s ignore the troll and have a civilized conversation.

      • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

        where is hitler when you need him, this negro president is doomed i say.

  • Connor

    One annoying thing is the masses and uneducated are all taught by the CCP to hate Japan and the United States. The problem is that most Chinese could have a real opinion on the subject of the Diao yu Islands but of course that opinion has been tainted and warped by the current regime.

    The majority of the comments, if not all, are obnoxiously nationalistic and filled with ad hominems. Not one is even worth rebutting.

    Food for Thought

    China does $350bn worth of Trade with Japan yet they hate eachother? Just Politics and face.

    Pakistan and India do $2.5bn worth of trade per year. (They actually hate eachother)

    So China and Japan do 140 x the amount of trading.

    Possibly outweigh the benefit of having the Diao yu islands?

    • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

      let’s get this straight you don’t think diaoyu is china’s land or you are being typical american condescending asshole. real opinion on the subject of diaoyu is that IT BELONG TO US MOTHERF*********

      • Germandude

        This ain’t no blog about Rap-music. Do your gangsta talk somewhere else, internet tough guy.

        • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

          hitler we dont have time for your shenanigans. it’s real ironic that we are hearing a opinion about this from a “GERMAN”
          i know you are not busy ensalving and killing yet but honestly would you just take this somewhere else where the aryan race is concertrated. oky? take it to heavens. take it to kaiser Franz or maybe your wonderfull leader Adolf Hiter, hang on on second thought. no i think he is having a strugle. yse a strugle possibly a shopping hollas. and i think price is 6 million.

      • Connor

        I mean I shouldn’t even respond to this but I wanted to point out that I really can’t respond to this. You do not offer any substantial points except ignorant stereotypical justifications for why the Diaoyudao is Chinas’.

        “typical american condescending asshole” — Yeah you’re right that is exactly why China has sovereignty over the diaoyudao, because I am a typical american condecending asshole.

        “real opinion on the subject of diaoyu is that IT BELONG TO US MOTHERF*********”

        So because thats an opinion that would mean fact would that it doesn’t?

        • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

          and enlighten me o’kind sir! please present all the facts and disscuss this out a loud like real gentlemen. shall we>? jolly good today!

      • lacompacida

        You think Senkaku is Chinese just because you are a brain washed ignorant Chinese asshole. Senkaku had been under effective Japanese administration since 1895, and was transfered to Japan by the Kingdom of Ryukyu when it surrendered.

        Having a territories in a map (Just like China was in the German map given to Xi when he visited) is no proof of ownership. Having it written in books is no proof of ownership. The only thing that international law recognize is effective administration. China didn’t even claim the islands until the 1970’s, and that is not “historical” nor “ancient”. No Chinese official had ever visited the island, in history. Japanese had effective administration, and Japanese fishermen built and used a fish processing plant on the islands. There are graves of Japanese on the island, but not Chinese. The Chinese government keeps on harping on the theme “historic”, “ancient”, etc. etc. just because the PRC government has no other leg to stand on. And the ignorant, foolish, brainwashed Chinese people believed that joke.

        • Alex Dương

          So what happened before 1895? Oh, of course, the islands were “terra nullius.” Well, the Governor of Okinawa first petitioned Tokyo to annex the islands in 1885. If the islands were “terra nullius” in 1895, surely they would’ve been “terra nullius” in 1885 as well? So why didn’t Japan just annex the islands in 1885?

          Answer: The Japanese were not yet confident that they could beat the Qing Empire in 1885. This is why then Foreign Minister INOUE Kaoru rejected the Governor of Okinawa’s request. This is also why later requests in 1890 and 1893 were also rejected. It’s not a coincidence that Diaoyu became Japanese in the same year the Japanese easily defeated the Qing in war.

          Tokyo actually knows how shitty its “terra nullius” argument is. That’s why whenever anybody asks them what happened before 1895, they try to silence the discussion with “it is irrelevant.”

      • loki

        haha….. I love this guy or girl…. just amazing what a Chinese will do with the English language.. just think each word in that comment probably cost “it’s” parents boats loads of mullah…

      • MonkeyMouth

        nice ta-ta’s…

      • Guest

        Wow. Very mature. Now try this one: I wanna squirt cum on your mom’s boobs.

    • noodles76

      And that’s just it. That’s why this should be nothing but an embarrassment for the Chinese gov’t. They have no way to save face here. They won’t risk losing the trade with Japan or with the U.S. and they certainly won’t risk an actual war. So what their end game is, I cannot comprehend. They have nothing to gain.

    • Insomnicide

      Japan and China do have real beef with each other, it’s not just nationalist propaganda so it doesn’t take much to fan the flames between the two people. And yes, countries who hate each other can and do trade each other, welcome to the post-Cold War world where money talks.

      • Connor

        Yes but I am trying to say that the “beef” with each other is exacerbated by the CCP. (Japan does it as well but not near the same scale)

        I am comparing the two to show that the Japan-China relationship is essentially convenient for the government, whereas a vitriolic hatred like Pakistan-India is not. It really is in the best interest to inundate the media with biased anti other governments to boast China domestically.

        The current master is Putin and it is working wonders for his regime.

        As you see in the comments it is cited that China is getting bigger and they should just wait until they can take the islands by force and eventually Taiwan as well. Is this a better alternative? That is why the United States reinforced the fact that we will still back Japan. Maybe there is an temporary escalation but in the long term it will de escalate the situation because there will be consequences if China does decide to intervene militarily.

      • lacompacida

        There were trades between Cold War opponents during the Cold War too. You are just confused.

      • The FRED DONG

        I like my beef with a side order of Japanese grown Bukake

    • takasar1

      I love how people assume it’s all simply propaganda, as if they are the authorities on detecting bias. It was 70 years ago, not 700. people remember.

      • Archie

        Yes, just like how all of Europe hate the Germans so much, and are biding their time to get revenge.

        • MonkeyMouth

          big up this comment. revenge is petty, cowardly, and doesnt have any solution. even your beloved confucious said ‘men who desire revenge should dig two graves’, he didnt add ‘except those bastard japanese’…..

        • takasar1

          Can’t say I blame them, seeing as how the German’s like to whitewash history and have their politicians say stupid things in public. wait a minute…

          • mr.wiener

            Well played sir.

          • MeCampbell30

            Well then clearly it’s the right thing to antagonize Japan over uninhabitable rocks.

            It’s also completely rational to ignore the Presidents other comments that the dispute shouldn’t be resolved with violence.

      • Connor

        I love how you ignore what I stated and take every word literally.

        “but of course that opinion has been tainted and warped by the current regime.”

        Never said all.

        Even if there is a miniscule amount of bias (tainted) and propaganda as well as a hardline stance against criticism the majority of people will be ignorant of what is really happening.

        Average Life expectancy is 74 years in China. 70 years ago…so I guess 4 year olds remember geopolitics and on their deathbed are currently debating.

    • Reptilian

      States are rarely rational actors. If they were, the 2 World Wars wouldn’t have been fought, and diplomats would be all we need. But when factors like pride, history, politicking, natural resources, strategic calculations come into play, rationality goes out the window. Witness how Putin’s gambit over Crimea is costing Russia, and there’s no foreseeable profit in annexing eastern Ukraine, but still he is going full steam ahead with black ops within Ukraine to try and foment another Crimean crisis.

      • Connor

        “Just Politics and face.”

        The Crimea act is making Putin a hero in Russia.

        • Surfeit

          I think he was a hero before. Now he’s a God amongst men.

  • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

    GERMANDUDE IS LIKE I GOT A OPINION ON DIAOYU ISLAND. OH WAIT DO I? THEY ARE NOT ARYAN.

    • Germandude

      Francisco is like “I use a nice decollete as my avatar because that’s as close to a couple of boobs as I can get”

      Nicely played…

      • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

        hitler is like where is the gas chamber?

        • IsurvivedChina

          Francisco is like, hey I got no balls so I have to come on here and act all big and tough!

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            and a english man is like fuck me i lost the ashes!

      • MonkeyMouth

        hahahahaha……word to that!

  • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

    noodles76 IS LIKE SHIT SON I JUST FUCKED A CHINESE GIRL AND I AM GERMAN AND I DRIVE BMW CURZING IN CHINA BRO. COS I AM A DIPSHIT. BOSS

  • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

    I DEFEND MY MOTHERLAND LIKE IRONROD (YEAH) COME AT YOU FOREIGN CUNTS.

    • IsurvivedChina

      your comrades will be proud! nice example your setting by the way! great job! keep it up!

      • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

        yo

  • noodles76

    I’m new to this whole Disqus thing. Can somebody be banned? If so…what exactly does it take…?

    • Germandude

      I am sure Kai or wiener will take care of him soon.

      • noodles76

        Cool. Was a decent enough conversation until…..

        • IsurvivedChina

          I know I shouldn’t but I can’t help egging on morons like that.. keeps me entertained!

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            fuck off from china

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            fuck your mom and your dad

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            fuck your grandprants like fire

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            .

          • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

            moijdsaoijdsaoijdsaijdsaijdoijoijdsaoij

          • MonkeyMouth

            yayaya! me too! me too!!! i love the e-vitriol!!

        • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

          fuck off from china and take your half cunt with you motherfuker.

        • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

          hope wife ends in a hand of a pimp cos i spend my money tonight. :)

          • noodles76

            You have to pay for pussy? What a sad life you must have.

      • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

        hitler please fuckk off from china

      • IsurvivedChina

        the mods must be busy!

        • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

          get fucked mate.

      • IsurvivedChina

        We’ve got a live here!

    • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

      get fucked mate

    • lacompacida

      Banned ? Like in China ?

      • mr.wiener

        No, at Chinasmack we do not have a policy or the resources to affect house arrest, fines or being barred from certain jobs.

        • loki

          lol

    • mr.wiener

      Flagging comments bring them to the attention of the mods who will then decide the appropriate action to take. If a user is “moderated” his/her access to comment on a site is taken away. I will confer with Kai as to the ultimate fate of this user.

      • loki

        yay …. MR. Wie**** but in all seriousness that person was fun to have around… brought some color to the place… hehe…

      • MonkeyMouth

        ya, weiner….let trolls do their thing, mate. makes CS so much fun. censorship of these folks isnt necessary unless their content puts your whole site in jeopardy, right? but its up to you…but relax your hands a bit before you push the red button. that ‘spanish philosopher’ really isnt hurting us, is he? we’re big kids, we can take the e-abuse

        • mr.wiener

          He has been warned, the next move is up to him.

  • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

    shit guys, SORRY i just got off weed and i just realize what i said sorry @noodles76:disqus@disqus_qpFQtxPJyF:disqus@disqus_Bu5P2d56bi:disqus@disqus_FTGwfq4IkD:disqus@Kai@Mr.Wienner

    • IsurvivedChina

      Special K more like it!

      • Mighty曹

        Except he really needs it as a tranquilizer.

    • Lei Feng’s Hat

      @Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)…
      Obviously, you’ll soon be spending some quality time in a mental institution. But, before you go, can I get the rights to that word you coined: “IRONROD!”? That’s gold, man.

      Slightly more on topic. It’s a strange juxtaposition between how the Chinese can become furious over the ownership of a piece of land…but, meanwhile, in their entire life…they will, personally, never ever own a single thing…not even a blade of grass.

    • Irvin

      Sounds more like cocain than weed, weed only makes you happy, sleepy, hungry. It don’t make you bat shit insane.

    • loki

      regardless of your apology.. I would just start making a new account if I were you…..

      I’m just saying

    • Mighty曹

      This sounds like a typical punk who talks shits all the time until when he’s about to get his ass whooped then backs off with the excuse, “Sorry, man, I didn’t mean it. I was high”.

  • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

    good bye you lovely people. woooooooooooo

  • IsurvivedChina

    Any one wish to discuss this topic now that the child has gone… ?

    • Germandude

      How do you know he’s gone?

      • IsurvivedChina

        good point. we’ll know in about ten seconds or so I guess!

        • Irvin

          so………what did I missed?

          edit: never mind, just saw it.

        • Germandude

          Did you report him and could see somehow that he was banned?

    • Connor

      Well to be honest, what would be a realistic agreement both Japan and China would agree too. We both know that the stakes for each country are great.

      • IsurvivedChina

        they need to start forgiving.. thats a good start.

        • Connor

          Posted this earlier.

          Point is why China or Japan won’t start forgiving because its good for their domestic interests.

          I am comparing the two to show that the Japan-China relationship is essentially convenient for the government, whereas a vitriolic relationship like Pakistan-India is not. It really is in the best interest to inundate the media with biased anti other governments to boast China domestically.

          The current master is Putin and it is working wonders for his regime

    • Irvin

      What do you guys think the best strategic move china can make regarding this news? or what limited option do you guys think china have?

      • IsurvivedChina

        not lose face would also be a good start, try some reverse tactics maybe.. instead of calling them enemies, try talking to them

        • Germandude

          Nah, the government cannot stand there and appear weak. That would make them lose face and appear them to be easily bullied. They need sth for the people.

          I assume they will condem this meeting and the statements, play some cards in the UN, probably block some stuff regarding Ukraine and try to get closer with Putin who is in desperate need now as well.
          Then probably China will send an airplane over the islands and maybe take some nice pics of one of their ships getting closer to the islands and throw this “proof” to the people that they are in charge and not bullied.
          Meanwhile, public will release some pressure and disregard other topics.

          The usual game really.

        • Irvin

          In my opinion china can lose alot more financially if they insist on taking the island, japan alone buy shit tons of chopsticks alone from china yearly. More than that island would every yield.

          But that’s just looking at it from a financial point of view.

          • Yes!

            Its navy needs a channel to comfortably access the Pacific. US “imperialist forces” are stationed in Okinawa, and have mutual defence treaties with SKorea, Japan, Taiwan and the Phillipines, which form a sort of arc of encirclement to the east of China mainland.

  • Francisco De Vitoria (Chinese)

    ..

  • FYIADragoon

    Damn the Chinese are buttblasted over a simple comment. Seems they’re a bit more afraid of Uncle Sam than they let on.

  • The FRED FONG

    Obama likes Japanese Bukake almost as much as i do!
    I bet he does not bath in it, like the hygienic FONG master does.

  • Zen my Ass

    Who knows what’s really going in the corridors of power? What if the entire controversy was an enormous stunt to stir patriotic feelings among the populations and tighten the hold on respective countries?

  • lacompacida

    Huff and puff all you want, China/Chinese didn’t grow up being afraid [being easily intimidated]. Yep. I remember Empress Dowager Xixi declared war on 8 European powers simultaneous too. That’s certainly not intimidated.

    • noodles76

      And how exactly did that all work out for China? Oh…Beijing was occupied by foreign troops. BTW….she declared war on 11 countries at the same time. 8 of them came over and took over Beijing. China had to cough up a boatload of silver and gold too…and let foreign powers station troops in Beijing.Not all bad came of it though, the Chinese were forced to ditch the imperial exam and Western education became common in schools for a time. A high price to pay for education.

      Easily intimidated or not….it’s never wise to bite off more than you can chew.

  • Don’t Believe the Hype

    American policymakers were largely absent in the past couple years. Obama missed the APEC meeting and there were fears that US allies in the region were beginning to feel isolated, particularly with China’s heavy handed relations with regional nations. This may have been an attempt to reassure Asian allies that the US is still on their side.

    http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/10/7/obama-absence-fromasiatradetalksaadiplomaticdisasteraanalystssay.html

    Whether the US could have achieved the same message through emphasizing the economic vs. security relationship is probably the real question. It’s hard to say, China has been using both econonomic and military means to intimidate its neighbors, particularly on territorial disputes. I think someone needed to step in and quell the clamouring a bit.

  • Jannick Slavik

    Amateur hour at the White House.

    Simultaneously driving China and Russia together precisely at the time Obama should be doing the opposite.

    Talk about stupid.

    • MeCampbell30

      It’s would be China and Russia’s loss if they retreated from the West and double down on the sinking ship that is BRICS.

  • The FRED FONG

    Obama loves Japanese Bukake as much as i do.

  • Don’t Believe the Hype

    you are thinking too short-term. This isn’t about poking jabs at the Chinese just for the fun of it. It is to reassure all US allies in the region that their alliances are still strong, particularly in light of the techniques used by China to intimidate its neighbors in the past few years.
    Also the US doesn’t want to be anyones enemy. The war in Iraq was a disaster created by a president who many found abhorrent. Since then the US military is trying to get out but wants to make sure the Afghan government can keep itself standing.

    These issues are more complex than you might believe. Trust me, if there is war over those pathetic islands it won’t be initiated by the US, it will be the equivalent of the US iraq war (in other words, China will go to war over the real interest- oil, and create a disaster)

  • noodles76

    Besides the obvious short term and long term damages an all out war would inflict on both countries, there are some other thing to consider. If China is in a weakened state, the gov’t will lose power. They can only stay in power if the people are happy and they won’t be happy when their cities are getting bombed. Even now their control is tenuous. Revolution would be all but certain. Even an economic embargo (full or partial) would likely kick one off. Then….there are other countries to consider. if China is weakened it’s very likely that some countries nearby that China has pissed off in the past will come grabbing territory.

    The U.S. has little to fear from either of those scenarios. Canada and Mexico are not going to come grabbing land and there will not be a mass revolution.

    There will not (in my lifetime) be an all out war between China and the US. That means there will not be a war between Japan and China.

  • YourSupremeCommander

    Russia + China + NK vs USA + Japan?
    No thanks Uncle Sam, I want to live so I can’t pick you!

    • Mighty曹

      The new Axis of Evil vs USA?

      • David

        If we get Liechtenstein on our side watch out China (do they actually HAVE an army or just some guy who won’t put up the toll booth to get in?). lol

        • Mighty曹

          That reminds me of an old move called “The Mouse That Roared”. LOL

    • Does the rest of the world not exist in this scenario?

    • The FRED DONG

      Japan has secret Bukakae weapons of mass destruction.

    • FYIADragoon

      You might want to correct that to the way that it actually would be:

      Russia + China + NK vs USA + Japan + India + EU

      • Jahar

        +Canada!

    • David

      lmao have you SEEN the Russian army lately? It only looks tough picking on Georgia or the Ukraine. Besides it is a statement. Everybody pretends to be upset (only nationalist who stupidly listen to their cynical government actually are upset) but nobody is going to war over this or anything else anytime soon. As opposed to what is happening in eastern Europe, which actually requires some military push back..

  • Mighty曹

    If Obama endorses one treaty he should also denounce how Japan had violated the Geneva Convention Treaty during WW2.

    • noodles76

      They tried war criminals in court. Some were sentenced to death, some were given lesser sentences. I don’t quite get what you’re driving at. Do you expect every sitting US President to rehash what Japan did wrong in WWII? That’s….kinda silly and pointless.

      • Guang Xiang

        Have you heard of Unit 731?

        • noodles76

          Yup. And it’s not much different from what we did in Germany at the end of the war. Operation Paperclip.

          If you can’t understand why the U.S. did such things then nothing I can say will enlighten you. I will never sit here and say what happened at 731 was OK…not by any stretch of the imagination was it OK or acceptable.

          • Guang Xiang

            I understand it just fine why the U.S. would do it. It’s just reality.

          • noodles76

            Fair enough. So what point were you trying to make by mentioning Unit 731? Or should I have taken it more at face value and just figured you were testing my knowledge? /confused

          • Guang Xiang

            yea, there wasn’t a point, just curious if you go into it knowing about that.

          • Mighty曹

            Actually Unit 731 is a sticking ‘point’ Japan needs to teach in history class.

          • Mighty曹

            The point is Japan still isn’t including detail of it in their school textbooks as history.

          • noodles76

            …uh…no shit? I can’t imagine that you’re remark was intended to be serious.

          • Mighty曹

            Dead serious.

          • noodles76

            So I guess the textbooks in your school covered all the negative things done by your country right?

          • Mighty曹

            First, let’s be clear. My country is the US. I’m ‘assuming’ that you were assuming I’m in China just because of my negative stance against Obama.

          • noodles76

            Just out of curiosity do textbooks in China include details on how many Chinese Mao and his policies killed? (40-75 MILLION) Or that some people were forced into cannibalization to survive?

            Of course not. Though it would be nice if they at least acknowledged his policies killed an unfathomable number of people…I would still never expect them to go into the details of cannibalization for example.

          • Alex Dương

            Japan is supposed to be better than China, no? So I don’t see how politically unfree China hiding the grisly details of the Great Leap Forward absolves supposedly politically free Japan from hiding the grisly details of the Second Sino-Japanese War.

          • noodles76

            Ok. Forget Japan and China for a moment. Most countries I am aware of do not put all/most of their dirty laundry in history textbooks and if they do, it’s often whitewashed. Should Japan be held to a different standard?

          • Alex Dương

            Hold them to whatever standard you expect for developed, politically free countries.

          • Surfeit

            He/she just did, and asked if you differed on the outcome of his/her standard.

          • Alex Dương

            He can speak for himself. If that is what he thinks, I agree with the choice of the standard, and I disagree that Japan meets the standard.

          • Surfeit

            The standard being “Most countries I am aware of do not put all/most of their dirty laundry in history textbooks and if they do, it’s often whitewashed. ” Opposing that would be stating Japan has an accurate history in it’s textbooks.

          • Alex Dương

            That seems to be quite a deliberate misread of my words: “I disagree that Japan meets the standard.” But if it was simply poor writing on my part, then I’m happy to rephrase: Japan does not meet the standard, much less exceed it.

          • Surfeit

            The standard is still the same, as set out by Noodles. I think you mean Japan’s standard is lower still, than the standard Noodles put forth.

          • Alex Dương

            No, I mean exactly what I said: Japan does not meet the standard. Do you not know what it means to not meet a standard? If you say you do know what it means, please define it.

          • Surfeit

            To not meet an aforementioned standard means to be of a lower standard.

            Right now I can adduce from your comments that, in your opinion, Japan does not meet the poor standard set out by Noodles. It neither exceeds nor is lower than that standard either. Which really leaves us nowhere.

          • Alex Dương

            To not meet an aforementioned standard means to be of a lower standard.

            If this is how you understand it, then why did you say “Opposing that would be stating Japan has an accurate history in it’s textbooks”?

            Right now I can adduce from your comments that, in your opinion, Japan does not meet the poor standard set out by Noodles. It neither exceeds nor is lower than that standard either. Which really leaves us nowhere.

            If you conclude that I think Japan “neither exceeds nor is lower than that standard either,” then I question your critical reading ability. I said that Japan does not meet the standard. Bizarrely, you chose to interpret that as my saying that Japan exceeds the standard. I then clarified and emphasized that Japan is below the standard. You replied by saying that you think I have not said Japan is below the standard.

            Really?

          • Surfeit

            The first part was a misunderstanding. I thought you said you disagreed with Noodles interpretation. You did clarify, but it still reads as you saying Japan does not meet an already low standard. That’s hard to assess because it’s almost a double negative, and certainly a very poor sentence for understanding compound semantics.

            That’s why I said perhaps you meant Japan has a lower standard than the (again) aforementioned standard. I was trying to explicate your words. You blankly refused this with a ‘No’, then repeated that Japan does not meet the standard. This dissolved any clarity of your words for me. Hence the confusion.

            I can see now what you mean, but it has taken this long to understand due to poor use of language, rather than inability to read critically. (If anything, I was being too critical.)

            These are key moments for me.

            You: Japan does not meet the standard, much less exceed it.

            Me: I think you mean Japan’s standard is lower still, than the standard Noodles put forth.

            You: No, I mean exactly what I said: Japan does not meet the standard.

            It’s A to B, to C, back to A.

            Forget about it anyway. It’s a misunderstanding.

            Furthermore, you already said you think China is immune to such a code of behaviour; Nothing you say about Japan will hold calibre. I don’t even know what I’m doing here.

          • Alex Dương

            You should not have misunderstood me. “There is a standard, and Japan doesn’t meet it” is hardly ambiguous. It really baffles me that you actually interpreted that as “Japan exceeds the standard.”

            Furthermore, you already said you think China is immune to such a code
            of behaviour; Nothing you say about Japan will hold calibre.

            So if China, a developing politically unfree country, doesn’t do something it should do, that gives Japan, a developed politically free country, the right to behave like China? Why on Earth would you judge a developed politically free country by the standards of a developing politically unfree country?

            I don’t even know what I’m doing here.

            With all due respect, you seem to be confused an awful lot when you discuss / argue with people.

          • Surfeit

            Immediately before stating ‘I agree with the choice of the standard, and I disagree that Japan meets the standard’, you held the standard bone to contention. So yes, it was open to ambiguity.

            I misunderstood you initially, because I thought you were opposing Noodles’ standard. You told me I was wrong. After that I wrote that I think you mean Japan’s standard is lower that Noodles’ standard. You replied that I was wrong again, but that assertively Japan did not meet the standard. Thus, not more than, not less than, not equal to. That is undoubtedly open to ambiguity.

            It is not easy to understand vagabond ideas from different sources with very little development of insight when questioned. You claimed to ’emphasise that Japan is below the standard’, but you merely repeated yourself 3 times, and quashed any alternate views. Even the one you would later atone to.

            Now you quote yourself with comments you never said, “There is a standard, and Japan doesn’t meet it”, you again raise something I previously admitted was a misunderstanding, “It really baffles me that you actually interpreted that as “Japan exceeds the standard.””, and to top it all off, you’ve resorted to closed questions to support your belief in double standards, which was exactly the root of confusion in the first place!

          • Alex Dương

            Immediately before stating ‘I agree with the choice of the standard, and I disagree that Japan meets the standard’, you held the standard bone to contention.

            No, I did not.

            I misunderstood you initially, because I thought you were opposing Noodles’ standard. You told me I was wrong.

            I have no idea why you thought that. I said, “Hold them to whatever standard you expect for developed, politically free countries.” You replied with “He/she just did, and asked if you differed on the outcome of his/her standard. I then said, “He can speak for himself. If that is what he thinks, I agree with the choice of the standard, and I disagree that Japan meets the standard.”

            After that I wrote that I think you mean Japan’s standard is lower that Noodles’ standard. You replied that I was wrong again, but that assertively Japan did not meet the standard. Thus, not more than, not less than, not equal to. That is undoubtedly open to ambiguity.

            For you to say “not more than, not less than, not equal to” would require you to

            1. ignore that I literally just said, quote, “Japan does not meet the standard, much less exceed it“; and

            2. argue that “did not meet” does not imply “not equal to.”

            At best, I’d say this is disingenuity. At worst, I’d say this is stupidity.

            It is not easy to understand vagabond ideas from different sources with very little development of insight when questioned.

            Well, I guess I learned something new today. I shouldn’t expect people to understand what “does not meet a standard” means. Apparently, some people think it’s natural for that phrase to suggest exceeding the standard.

            Thanks.

          • Mighty曹

            You’re comparing events that took place internally that has no bearing on the international stage. Should China denounce China? WTF.

          • noodles76

            Who said anything about denunciation?

          • Mighty曹

            Your argument was that China should not denounce Japan’s atrocity when such act was carried out by Mao. Right?

          • whuddyasack

            This is pretty much the case. But it has little to do with being “reasonable” or looking at a win-win situation considering the shocking, disgusting comments made by White people during the 3/11. Conveniently forgotten and ignored by the “China-bashing” crowd here when it is far worse, might I add.

            And in addition, they bring up cases like Tibet and Xinjiang. If that were the case, shouldn’t they all be getting their butts out of Canada and the US? They too are foreigners, illegal immigrants and invaders and trust me, the natives aren’t going to miss them one bit. It’s just race tribalism from the most “race-obsessed” lot on their part, their opinions of Russia confirms this. Occasionally, they bring up Taiwan, Korea and HK into this, but let’s get real. It’s obvious they couldn’t care less about any of these, only favoring them when there is something to “gain”. To them, it’s just a game of pointing and laughing at the Chinese just like they were doing to the Japanese a while back.

            What’s more how many Vietnamese were killed, how North Koreans, Middle Easterners, native Americans, Africans? How many of their own citizens were killed in civil wars over the most petty of reasons? If anything, it should be they who denounce themselves and not worry about China x Japan considering they belong to neither and OUTSIDE groups in this case are the LOUDEST lol. Amazing considering most Chinese couldn’t give a fuck about Turkey vs Greece or Jewish hatred of the Nazis.

            Actually, I opened up my eyes a little bit after talking to your average Japanese, some who were unnecessarily apologetic about what their “ancestors” had done. Most said that they couldn’t stand the overly critical White virgin dudettes themselves and felt that the only reason they were such disgusting “Japan defenders”/”China bashers” was insecurity and a desire to drive wedges and misunderstandings further. Needless to say, I’ve come to agree. A good Japan x China relationship won’t benefit them at all, in fact it would be detrimental. I encourage you to read some of the PS4 vs XBONE comments, gives you a rough idea on actual “attitudes”. To me, there’s no comparison, PS4 wipes the floor off XBONE just like a not-so-great Japanese is still better than a typical redneck.

            Inspite of supposed differences between politics and history, I’ve always felt closer to the Japanese than any other. Sorry, long rant but you get the point. Avoid the tribal primates at all cost lol, something even the Japanese recommend.

          • Mighty曹

            Yes, yes, and yes. LMAO @ “not-so-great Japanese is still better than a typical redneck”. Totally agreed. I have a cousin who works in design in the hardware division of MS. Yep, the Xbox. He can get me great deals on everything but I have yet to take up the offer. LOL

          • whuddyasack

            It’s true though. The typical redneck smells like crap, I don’t think they take baths nor brush their teeth. A few days ago, I had the displeasure of seeing a very trashy family brawl with security in a department store. It was like 4 against 1 and they still got their asses handed to them. You can guess the race haha. My friend told me they were called “bogans”, the Australian equivalent of trailer trash. Needless to say, I was glad that I could jump on a bus and without hesitation, I happily sat next to an Asian passenger. I just had enough of those ooga boogas for one day.

            Inspite of how many CSmackers/ Shanghaiists argue how Chinese never fight fair, I think Whites are a lot worse and in a similar situation, would definitely call their buddies for back up. Those that stereotype the most are the biggest cowards of all. You see it with the French, who do more running and getting killed than actually fighting. You can also see it in the Asia Pacific theater in WWII and how Allied forces often ran and got mowed down by much smaller Japanese forces. That’s why their colonies were always left as easy pickings.

            You see the same thing today. Anyone who is weak, outnumbered or defenseless are cowardly beaten without mercy and then the victim is shamed and blamed. White women happen to be the easiest and most available target if there are no Asians present.

            At least nerdy/anime obsessed Japanese still have more style and substance than the trashy laowai types. I’ve never ever seen a badly dressed and poorly presented Japanese. Chinese can learn a thing or two from them XD.

            About the XBox, no surprises there. I’d have done the same, XBOX is pretty shitty LOL. Remember how so many 360s broke down on release? Plus, the PS4 had such an awesome ad campaign haha

          • Mighty曹

            Hahahaha…. this is one of the funniest read. I like your writing style. A nice blend of truth, irony, and descriptive ways to get your point across satirically. Bravo, Bro!

          • whuddyasack

            Aha thank you! A talent of mine, I know. I do have a problem with writing too much. That up there is more suitable as a blog post than a comment but I like to cover many points thoroughly haha.

          • Mighty曹

            Do you blog? Shoot some links to me.

          • whuddyasack

            I don’t and I kind of wished I did (provided I find the time ;-))

            But I do read some exceptional ones from time to time. Here are a few I really do enjoy reading, there’s lots more of course:

            http://www.nikkeiview.com/blog/ and http://www.racefiles.com/
            http://blog.mellylee.com/
            http://www.ministryoftofu.com/

            I can’t find the rest at the moment but trust me, they are pretty good reads. Sadly, I didn’t bookmark them which is a shame because there was something special in each of them. I’m a sucker for travels to remote areas and major charitable/social work.

          • Mighty曹

            Thanks Bro. I’ll report back later.

          • Dr Sun

            just a small point of correction it was not the allied “grunts” that run off, they fought and died by the 100, 000’s,in battle or as POW’S. It was their senior officers, the diplomats and rich business men that run off, once their own families and their colonial estates were under threat.

          • whuddyasack

            Perhaps, but they sure surrendered quicker than you or I can say “I surrender!” All I can say is the allied troops were typically wiped out in all their colonies when facing the Japanese. The Dutch from Indonesia, the Canadians from HK and the Germans from “Asia” after WWI. The French were famous for giving up without a fight against people that could actually fight back, in recent memory they were defeated by the British, the Germans, the Japanese and the Vietnamese. So it’s either they can’t fight or lacked courage or a combination of both. We’re not talking about an untrained, unmodernized, ill-equipped army like China/SEA but those possessing state of the art technology and diplomacy for their time.

            Perhaps the most telling of all was the Miracle of Malaya and Fall of Singapore where British troops were completely annihilated and butchered by Japanese on bicycles…

          • Dr Sun

            Again I would say, look to the senior officers, not the “grunts”.

      • MonkeyMouth

        they also snuck ‘war criminals’ into the USA (project paperclip), and practically started ever war ever since illegally. just sayin…. all politicians live double standards. but i agree with your latter point about diggin up stuff they probably dont fully understand/care

      • Mighty曹

        Before you call me silly try expanding your mind and understand what I was ‘driving’ at.

        You think enough has been done for China and Korea to forget the past and move forward? It is thinking like yours that is impeding progress in the region.

        What I said was simply meant to point out that if Obama were to be diplomatic on such sensitive issues he should also acknowledge the fact that Japan hasn’t done nearly enough for China – NOT for the US or the world but for CHINA – otherwise it appears as though he’s only siding with Japan.

        • noodles76

          Too many Chinese like to play the victim card. It’s your choice to move on or not, don’t make it the responsibility of others. At risk of being too blunt, I have to say…….get…the…fuck…over…it.

          • Alex Dương

            So do you also condemn Abe when he plays with fire (e.g. hinting that he will not abide by the Murayama statement before saying that he will)? Or do you reserve your condemnation solely for the Chinese (and maybe the Koreans)?

          • noodles76

            Should I condemn somebody for something that was never said? He hinted at something….What he said was…”The Abe Cabinet is not necessarily keeping to it”. Yet, they did keep to it. Certainly it was a foolish thing to say in any case.

          • Alex Dương

            Certainly it was a foolish thing to say in any case.

            Fair enough.

          • Mighty曹

            How the fuck is that playing the victim’s card when the aggressor still refuses to admit the crime? Let’s say you were ass raped and your perpetrator got caught and served some time. He comes out of jail he’s saying that ‘shit didn’t happen’ and you bitch about it. Are you playing the victim card? It’s always so easy for non-victims to say ‘forget and move on’. Get fucking real.

          • noodles76

            Ok guy, go ahead and tell me…what would be ‘enough; to compensate China? Not the ludicrous amounts of money Japan has given China already of course….so what is ‘enough’?

          • Surfeit

            This is exactly what Obama wanted!

            Chopsticks vs Forks (+ Chopsticks) !

          • Mighty曹

            Just a simple admission and to teach the new generation of its role in history. (Germany did enough with education, Holocaust reparations, and outlawed the Nazi party). Japan’s continuing visit to Yasukuni Shrine is like Germany still honoring the Nazis. If one argues that the shrine does not exclusively house war criminals then Japan make an official acknowledgment.

            Here are some interesting articles that resonates with most Chinese (and Koreans).
            http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/asia-pacific/japan-s-leaders-are-still-stubbornly-refusing-to-admit-their-war-crimes-1.1665858

            http://nation.time.com/2012/12/11/why-japan-is-still-not-sorry-enough/

          • whuddyasack

            Predictable and pathetic isn’t it? Look at the video he links, key words “China uncensored”. When you have to resort to name calling, crudeness and horrible references to support your argument, you know you have none. I’ve noticed this is a common tactic amongst 100% of the headbangers here.

            Either way, I think in the past this was enough and China and Japan actually did have an excellent relationship. I laugh every time some self-professed experts of neither background argue that both countries have always hated each other and have insane blood grudges throughout history.

            Actually, I think the problem isn’t just coming from the Japanese/Chinese governments, nationalists. I think Western media totally milks the conflict and blows them out of proportion into Syria like levels. Every disagreement makes it to the front pages, like the 2005 and 2012 riots as well as the ADIZ zones and every positive interaction is ignored. Conveniently and willfully except when bashing China/Chinese.

            It is thinking like yours that is impeding progress in the region.

            Precisely.

          • Mighty曹

            China and Japan did have a good relationship until its emerging economic and military power give it that classic ‘power and ego’ syndrome that we recently talked about with the Chengguans. Its ‘perceived’ Superpower status is stoking nationalism and pride.

          • noodles76

            Sorry, visiting that shrine is not like Germany honoring the nazi’s at all. Not even close. That particular shrine is not dedicated to war criminals in general. It is dedicated to those who have died in past wars. Yes, some of those men were war criminals and perpetrated terrible acts upon mankind in general and in some cases…upon Chinese in particular. That should not for a moment negate the fact that the shrine is dedicated to all who have died in battle….honorably or less so. Sure, it’s easier to focus on the negative than it is to see the entire picture….that’s human nature I guess. You yourself understand the valid argument that the shrine does not acknowledge only war criminals.

            Frankly, the historical revisionism at the shrine and it’s immediate surroundings bothers me more than anything else. If you are Chinese (and I assume you are from your attitude but don’t want to make assumptions)….your feelings of course will be different than mine,

            As to an admission..a clear admission…I’d have to agree with you. One would and should be welcomed. However…just as a counterpoint….consider this..
            If Japan were not sorry why would they have gifted so much aid to China? If China were not willing to forgive past transgressions why would they accept such gifts?

            Currently, the only people who benefit from Chinese/Japanese tensions are the CCP and Japan’s gov’t. They can and do both use the hatred (in some cases…fostered hatred) as a tool to manipulate the masses. It’s sad to see people who are victims of their own governments private agenda.

          • Mighty曹

            Sure it’s akin to honoring the past. But… as I said, Japan can visit and honor the dead but they can take one small step to express some regrets over some of the shrine’s occupants’ action. A little gesture can allow the two sides to reconcile.
            Giving aid/gifts without owning up to guilt is like ‘hush money’. Except China won’t remain hushed amid its growing economic and military power.
            I agree that only people in charge are benefitting and using ‘international tensions’ to deflect attention from internal issues. We’re all victims.

          • whuddyasack

            It’s always so easy for non-victims to say ‘forget and move on’.

            Very easy, especially when it comes to people as relenting, tolerant and forgiving as the Chinese. Even easier behind a screen. If they could do the same towards a group of Muslims in person, I’d be impressed.

            So much for moving on, 13 years later:
            http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/18/us/ramadan-violence/

            http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/22/government-silence-british-muslims-attacks

            http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/fbi-dramatic-spike-in-hate-crimes-targetin

            It’s easy to point fingers at others and so forget it and move on. I don’t see any benevolence on the part of the hairy savages either and there are plenty of well-read blogs that routinely support these attacks. When you have to resort to violence on people that aren’t even involved in killing people that aren’t related to you, that’s just pathetic. At least most Chinese condemn the actions of the rioters (which barely left any Japanese hurt).

          • Mighty曹

            Yup, I’ve had no ill experience so two of my best friends are Japanese, despite my grandfather’s constant reminder of Japan’s past. lol I understand how it’s hard for them to ‘move on’ because they witnessed the atrocity at an age that they will bear the rest of their lives. They’ve visited most of Europe and Asia, except Japan. They refuse to set their feet there. This is something that most younger generations cannot understand, let alone non-Chinese.

        • whuddyasack

          And this is the thinking of nearly every single Westerner with a bone to pick here. Intentionally. Chinese netizen comments are used to generalize and justify, taken out of context and exaggerated. Used to define the Chinese as “racists” (like Japanese and Chinese aren’t the same race, riigghhttt).

          I don’t see a single White person speaking up against the wacists (because that word is racist towards Whites lol) when “niggers” and “camel humpers” are attacked. Instead, true to their tribal nature, they become the victims of wacism and a few comments doesn’t justify any generalizations. Oh please.

          http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/steve-rose/911-racism-islamophobia_b_3908411.html

          Since people here are taking Chinese netizen comments at face value and extrapolating from there, it’s ironic that doing the same to them becomes such a “great injustice”, ugh saaab jahhaari disagrees lol.

          • Mighty曹

            Add ignorance and stupidity to racism and it’s a very unfortunate combination. There was a simple survey on American college students, “Of Canada and Mexico, which country is to the north or south?”. 60% failed. These are the people who think anyone wearing a turban is a muslim and being muslim is a terrorist. Sigh….

    • moop

      as much as i am disinclined to defend obama, he recently did make comments on japans actions in ww2, specifically about “comfort women”

  • Alex Dương

    One of the best sources for arguing in favor of Chinese claims to Diaoyu is actually from a Japanese scholar, SUGANUMA Unryu.

    http://www.amazon.com/Sovereign-Rights-Territorial-Sino-Japanese-Relations/dp/0824824938/ref=sr_1_1

    SUGANUMA carefully documents that Tokyo’s official claim – the islands were “terra nullius” before 1895 – is complete bullshit. The Japanese first tried to annex Diaoyu in 1885. If the islands were “terra nullius” in 1895, then logically they must have been “terra nullius” in 1885. Why did Japan wait ten years to claim unclaimed islands? No apologist for Japan can answer this question directly. They can only say “you’re a brainwashed China apologist; this question is irrelevant.”

    Moreover, SUGANUMA also documents that throughout history, the Chinese have always referred to the islands as “Diaoyu” whereas Japan only recently settled on one name for the islands. Before “Senkaku,” the islands were referred to as “Sento,” “Chougyo,” and “Gyochou.” “Sento” is Japanese for “Pinnacle,” which is how the British referred to the islands. “Chougyo” is the Japanese on’yomi reading for “Diaoyu,” which is the Chinese name for the islands. “Gyochou” reverses the order of “Diaoyu” to “Yudiao” to conform to Japanese grammar.

    Even today, the Japanese cannot hide Chinese influence on the names of the islands within “Senkaku.” The largest of the islands is “Uotsuri,” which is the kun’yomi reading of “Yudiao.” As I just mentioned “Yudiao” is “Diaoyu” reversed to fit Japanese grammar.

    I wouldn’t have a problem with Japanese sovereignty over Diaoyu if they just fessed up and admitted that they took it as a prize of war in 1895 instead of continually trying to push this bullshit that it was “terra nullius.” It wasn’t.

    • filabusta

      I have proof that Texas belongs to Mexico. 100 years ago the people there called it Tejas, which it is still called by a small amount of the population. This word comes from Spanish, which is spoken in Mexico. Therefore, Texas must return to its motherland.

      • Alex Dương

        Thank you for straw manning me. I did not say Diaoyu was Chinese because of irredentism; I said Japan’s claim that the islands were “terra nullius” can easily be shown as false. The islands were not “terra nullius.” I am fine with them being Japanese so long as Tokyo has the honesty to admit that it took them as a prize of war in 1895.

        • filabusta

          Alright I concede that point but that argument is often taken the express that the islands are China’s and should be returned. I was simply trying to straw man the general argument which tends to arise with Chinese people.

          • Alex Dương

            I am against irredentism. Irredentism is dangerous and always invites itself to slippery slope claims which quickly (and intentionally) become absurd. All I am asking for is some intellectual honesty and decency here. If you grant me that, then we have no problems.

          • filabusta

            Certainly, I still to this day have yet to have a logical discussion on this topic with a Chinese person. Even my Phd holding professors use this same logical fallacies or refuse to talk about it. I wasn’t so much going after you as highlighting the absurdity of the discourse on this issue.

          • Alex Dương

            My parents are Chinese. I’m American. I’m happy to discuss any part of this issue with you.

            To rephrase my beliefs, I am fine with the islands being Japanese under the following reasoning: they were claimed as a prize of war in 1895, and the Republic of China did not expressly ask for them back in 1945 following the conclusion of World War II.

            I am not fine with the islands being Japanese under this reasoning: they were “terra nullius” in 1895, and Japan was the first nation to declare and establish sovereignty over them.

            I accept that some, perhaps even many, Chinese do not rationally discuss this issue. But I chafe at any implicit suggestion that Japanese or other non-Chinese regularly discuss this issue with reason and logic. As I said, if you ask a pro-Japan supporter why the islands weren’t claimed in 1885 if they were “terra nullius” in 1895, you will not get any answer other than “it is irrelevant. You are brainwashed.”

            That’s neither a logical nor a rational reply.

          • filabusta

            Well I’ve never lived in Japan so I can’t say I’ve heard the other side. I thought that China didn’t explicitly ask for the islands back until the 70’s. Plus, you’ve obviously had too much American imperialist influence… :)

          • MonkeyMouth

            ya, man…agreed. I dont know A) the general public get all fired up as a result of B) being told what to think. You CANNOT get a calm discussion about it over here in China. Same with taiwan for the most part, too. So frikkin weird. Mere mention of Japan being ‘bastards, and the bike U-locks come out swinging, and all the Ito Yokado supermarkets get ‘occupied’…the you ask later how come? the answers just puppet extreme hatred, propaganda. then the next day, everyone goe to Ito Yokado and 7eleven in their Hondas…weeeeiiiiiird….

          • Alex Dương

            No, I think you’re doing what I disagreed with: “I accept that some, perhaps even many, Chinese do not rationally discuss this issue. But I chafe at any implicit suggestion that Japanese or other non-Chinese regularly discuss this issue with reason and logic.”

          • noodles76

            I understand your point about terra nullius but…I fail to see the value in it. The claim about terra nullius is perhaps an effort to be more diplomatic about it and allow China to save face by simply agreeing to that version of the truth. Would you prefer Japan rub it in the face of China that they failed to ask for the islands back? If they did not care enough about the islands then….trying to lay a claim on them now many years later… and coincidentally after the true value of the natural resources has started to come to light….is damn near laughable. Where were all the people yelling their heads off about the islands being Chinese in 1945? fact is, China did not make a peep about the islands until 1972 when the islands returned to Japan. Seems like the Chinese fell asleep at the wheel until news of the islands reverting back to Japan came out…at which point some smart guy said…’Hey! wasn’t that ours once?’……’can we snag it back now?’. Sorry, too late. No backsies.

          • Alex Dương

            The claim about terra nullius is perhaps an effort to be more diplomatic about it and allow China to save face by simply agreeing to that version of the truth.

            No, it’s a vestige of imperial Japanese history; claiming that others’ islands were “terra nullius” was the modus operandi of the Empire of Japan. Did you know that Japan also claimed Dokdo was “terra nullius” when they annexed it in 1905? And that’s not all: believe it or not, Japan even claimed that the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea were “terra nullius” in the 1930s!

            Would you prefer Japan rub it in the face of China that they failed to ask for the islands back?

            Yes, I would. That would be much more honest than perpetuating a bullshit lie that Diaoyu was “terra nullius” in 1895. It wasn’t.

            Seems like the Chinese fell asleep at the wheel until news of the islands reverting back to Japan came out…at which point some smart guy said…’Hey! wasn’t that ours once?’……’can we snag it back now?’. Sorry, too late. No backsies.

            I’m OK with this. I’m not OK with Tokyo pushing bullshit that the islands were “terra nullius” as the truth and then condemning everyone who dares to do actual research on their claim as “brainwashed.” All I ask for is a modicum of intellectual honesty.

          • noodles76

            Intellectual honesty? In politics? I wish you good luck sir.

          • Alex Dương

            Hey, if you admit, however indirectly, that Tokyo’s official claim is crap, fine by me.

          • noodles76

            Actually, if the islands were directly mentioned in the treaties ending the First Sino-Japanese war you’d have a much firmer position since that would indicate that Japan acknowledged China as owner of the islands and thus could not later claim terra nullius.

            EDIT: I am not quite clear on what exactly needs to be true for land to be considered terra nullius. I’m trying to educate myself about this now. I am also not clear on why the islands would not have been considered terra nullius in 1895

          • Alex Dương

            As SUGANUMA Unryu documents, even if you think maps (including Japanese maps, Hayashi Shihei’s 1785 map shows Diaoyu as Chinese) are not evidence, the Empress Dowager Cixi granted Diaoyu to a Qing subject before 1895. SUGANUMA claims that Japan does not dispute the authenticity of the document in question; it simply says it is not relevant.

            So no, the islands were not “terra nullius” in 1895. And as I said, if they were “terra nullius” in 1895, logically, they must’ve been “terra nullius” in 1885. And 1890. And 1893. So why did the Meiji Government deliberately and consciously reject requests from the Governor of Okinawa to annex Diaoyu in 1885, 1890, and 1893?

            The claim that Diaoyu was “terra nullius” in 1895 doesn’t even pass the smell test. It was taken as a prize of war in 1895, and all I ask for is some basic honesty and for my intelligence not to be insulted.

          • Reptilian

            Hey, it’s you again! It’s amazing that you could claim some iota of intelligence, when you couldn’t even understand a simple argument about social heritance in the Chinese context. Hope you reread everything I wrote in the other article; it’d help you jack up your IQ.

          • Alex Dương

            Oh, it’s the tool expat again! Hey, what happened to your oh-so-gracious offer of giving me the last word? Couldn’t resist? No problem.

            Your argument was trash. You admitted that for most of human history, people have lived under the rule of absolute monarchies. So your “social inheritance” *cough* “hypothesis” applies to everyone, not just Chinese. Moreover, your “hypothesis” can’t even explain why a subset of the Chinese, the Taiwanese, successfully democratized in 1996.

          • noodles76

            You were doing well until the last paragraph. Will it help you to sleep at night if I say…yup…it was a war prize though not officially mentioned in any treaties at the end of the war in 1895?

            EDIT: And in a sense….it’s not relevant. China isn’t getting the islands back. Perhaps they had a valid claim at the end of WWII but not anymore. Taiwan may have a better claim right now than the PRC….and they have no chance at getting the islands either. So while I’m glad you went out of your way to provide historical information it’s currently irrelevant.

          • Alex Dương

            I was actually referring to Tokyo insulting my intelligence with their “terra nullius” nonsense, not you. I think you should be more concerned with your child’s sleep and not mine, but thanks for asking, I guess?

          • noodles76

            I did not think the last paragraph was aimed at me. But asking for honesty and for your intelligence not to be insulted by politicians will happen the day after pigs fly.

          • Alex Dương

            And in a sense….it’s not relevant. China isn’t getting the islands back. Perhaps they had a valid claim at the end of WWII but not anymore. Taiwan may have a better claim right now than the PRC….and they have no chance at getting the islands either. So while I’m glad you went out of your way to provide historical information it’s currently irrelevant.

            Thank you for confirming, more or less, what I said originally: “No apologist for Japan can answer this question directly. They can only say ‘you’re a brainwashed China apologist; this question is irrelevant.'” (And for the sake of clarification, I will also thank you for not calling me a “brainwashed China apologist.”)

          • noodles76

            I am not an apologist for Japan. And…..the debate over terra nullius is fine for academia and for shooting the shit but it is not relevant anymore. I know that’s an answer you don’t like to hear but that does not make it less true.

          • Alex Dương

            Why wouldn’t I like to hear that? When you say that, you’re doing exactly what I predicted would happen. That makes me happy, in a small way, of course.

          • noodles76

            If thinking you’re right (still uncertain just have not had the time to research it more) about a matter that has no bearing on the current situation makes you happy…..then have at it.

            Once when some friends of mine were drinking….one guy says to another “I bet you will punch me in the face”, the other guy did in fact punch him in the face. First guy was all…”Hey look how smart I am because I knew it would happen!!!”

            You have been able to carry on a decent conversation. But this bullshit tactic of yours is not doing yourself any credit.

          • Alex Dương

            Alright, I’m through with being patient. It won’t kill you to cut back just a bit on the assholeness, you know? You don’t always have to be a smug pretentious condescending twat when you discuss with other people. I dunno if this is your schtick in China, and maybe the locals don’t call you out on it, but I will.

            You seem to like picking on less educated Chinese netizens for arguing with too much emotion and too few facts on this issue. Fine. But it’s pretty clear that you aren’t interested in the facts either; you just want to be able to point your fingers at them and chuckle.

            Like I said, that’s totally fine. But please, drop the pretension of wanting to have an actual discussion if that’s what you want, mmmkay?

          • noodles76

            Personal attacks. Way to go! Let your true colors shine.

            EDIT: And no need for you to play the victim card and make this about somebody trying to keep the Chinese down. I’ll pick on anyone who is ignorant, not only Chinese. If by pick on you mean….try to show them where they are incorrect. I expect others to do the same to me if I make a bullshit claim or use absurd tactics in a discussion. It’s how we learn and expand our comprehension of complex issues. For example, I now know more about terra nullius than I did previously. In fact, I know more about it now than I ever wanted to.

          • Alex Dương

            Give it a rest, pal. If you want “personal attacks” to hold any water, then don’t be a smug asshole and say shit like “you were doing fine until…” and “would it help you sleep better if I…”

          • noodles76

            Perhaps I could have chosen my words a little better, It was not my intention to make a backhanded compliment. I was dismissive of your constant repetition of terra nullius and the history involved simply because you were not willing to bring the current reality into the equation since it would make all your points null (though interesting nonetheless). I reacted poorly to that form of argument…thus the “help you sleep at night…” remark.

            Look, I’ve been lurking here for years. Recently I started posting. The reason I did not post in any threads earlier was because the comments here were mainly garbage with a few nuggets worth reading hidden in there somewhere for anyone brave enough to wade through it all. Too many personal attacks….too much absolute ignorance and nationalistic fervor….. and not nearly enough worthwhile reading. Too many here were quick to go down to the lowest form of argument/discussion and in the end it seems you were not an exception.

          • Alex Dương

            Well, it seems like you can’t help but be pretentious and condescending. Oh well. I was willing to end the discussion much earlier

            Hey, if you admit, however indirectly, that Tokyo’s official claim is crap, fine by me.

            but you insisted on me acknowledging that historical facts in this issue are “irrelevant,” and when I didn’t do that and indeed refused to do that, you got personal with me.

            So while it may be that you can’t help it, do me a favor and try, just try to cut back on being “holier than thou.”

          • Guang Xiang

            Seems the most pretentious comment out there. But your points were good nevertheless.

          • Alex Dương

            As I mentioned later, I was getting progressively more annoyed with noodles’ tone, and my comments here were when I was still “letting it go.” I lost my patience after I felt that he was getting personal with me for not agreeing with him that these facts are “irrelevant.”

            I didn’t insist that he agree with me that the facts are relevant; I was willing to leave the discussion so long as he agreed that Tokyo’s official claim is pretty crappy.

      • MonkeyMouth

        And Arizona, Nuevo Mexico, Colorado, Florida, California, Nevada….haha

    • KStyleBlue

      I’m back on Chinasmack after a year of neglect.

      I agree with you completely Alex.

      It’s nice to see that the discussion here on the chinasmack has become more informed and logical over the past year.

      Or maybe the Chinese/Japanese nationalists have abandoned the site / were banned from the site.

      • Alex Dương

        Or maybe the Chinese/Japanese nationalists have abandoned the site / were banned from the site.

        I can’t prove this, of course, but I want to say that hiding downvotes made it so that the nationalists couldn’t just come in and downvote every comment they didn’t like without contributing anything of substance to the discussion.

    • Blue

      New territories wishing to be claimed by a nation must fulfil 2 main criteria. Firstly, that the territory must have no territorial markers from another nation; which the islands didn’t in 1885, when the Japanese first decided they wished to annex them. Secondly, the territory must be observed, unclaimed, for 10 years (in case someone forgot to mark their territory) before an official proclamation of ownership can be legally recognized under international law. This is why Japan didn’t claim the islands until 1895.
      I don’t care who owns them, and agree that it’d be better if they were just shared. But on this point, Japan did it by the book.

      • Alex Dương

        Secondly, the territory must be observed, unclaimed, for 10 years (in case someone forgot to mark their territory) before an official proclamation of ownership can be legally recognized under international law.

        Please give a source for this.

        This is why Japan didn’t claim the islands until 1895.

        This is a problematic conclusion for two reasons:

        1. We know that Foreign Minister INOUE Kaoru rejected the initial request in 1885 because he did not want the Qing to be suspicious, not because they needed to wait ten years.

        2. If it were understood that they must wait ten years, then the Governor of Okinawa would not have repeated the requests in 1890 and 1893. He or his successors would have just waited the full ten years.

    • Paulos

      Hi Alex, these are all reasonable points, but historically this whole debate over whose claim is stronger isn’t really necessary. In territorial disputes, any claim that’s able to be argued serves it’s purpose. The winner of the dispute is ultimately determined by political maneuvering and military action. The claim is just there to get your foot in the door.

      Take William the Conqueror v. Harold, Charles VIII v. Alfonso II, Polk v. Santa Anna, or any other dispute, it’s the same story each time.

      • Alex Dương

        If you want to say might makes right, I won’t disagree with you there.

        • Paulos

          I’m not necessarily saying that might makes right per se, but to put my own spin on the Anna Karenina principle, I will say that might is a prerequisite for right, if that makes sense.

    • whuddyasack

      A very well-argued and written comment. This is many times better than the comment by 90% of the head bangers here and those who disagree predictably do it for one reason only. To troll and stir up anti-Japanese feelings amongst the Chinese posters. Notice how this thread lacks ANY Japanese posters and very few Chinese ones. Most of those making all the noise have been White, the closest to a true Japanese would be certain Southeast Asians (don’t really care from where). They aren’t interested in a proper, civilized discourse, and despite how many like to parrot and pretend to be balanced, reasonable and non-emotive, they are anything but. I knew it right from the start that even a perfectly argued, non-confrontational point like yours would predictably give rise to the mock outrage an bile from the petty savages. For the sole reason that you are Chinese. The few balanced posters don’t post here or limit their posts.

      You’ll notice the comments where the Chinese posters op for peace, or those that say the islands aren’t worth the hassle are NEVER upvoted by the ones who demand Chinese to move on. Crude insults are however glorified with upvotes. Their posts fall under the same old boring predictable, one-dimensional and hypocritical pattern.

      Alex, I don’t mean this as an offense to you and all the other Chinese posters on this board but you have what I call a “Chinese problem”. Overly patient, calm and passive, with a clear emphasis on non-confrontation. Because Chinese naturally do things solo, you don’t see us gang up and jump on any unfortunate non-Chinese. As for the comments on this thread, it doesn’t represent Chinese that much. I’d say the anti-Muslim riots are far more representative of the wagon jumpers.

      • Alex Dương

        Alex, I don’t mean this as an offense to you and all the other Chinese posters on this board but you have what I call a “Chinese problem”. Overly patient, calm and passive, with a clear emphasis on non-confrontation.

        No offense taken. I try (keyword) to be calm and non-confrontational, but if I perceive that I am discussing with someone who is overly insistent on my agreeing with a point that I do not agree with, then that is when I push back. I also admit to being hotheaded at times, especially if I see comments that are just blatantly and unabashedly prejudiced.

        • whuddyasack

          Humble to a fault, Alex. You are doing better than 90% of the people on both Csmack and Shanghaiist and 99.99999% of all the ______(fill in the blank) posters. Keep up the good work and avoid the thick-skinned keto on issues which don’t involve them and to which they have no idea on. ;-)

  • The island will never be officially taken (at least probably not in our lifetime). It will have to perpetually stay in limbo for the politicians on both sides to use.

  • Don’t Believe the Hype

    Your assumptions are about the world economy and diplomacy are off, as well as your cynicism about the US. You should have a more open mind/ try to think optimistically and have more harmonious thoughts.

    “I think the US Government is betting on WW III to save its failing economy.”

    That might have worked in WW II, but the interconnectedness of our world economy would mean a third war would be disastrous for all parties. Particularly those which rely on global exports/imports (ie China but also the US).

    “American companies (be it oil or mining companies) working on different areas to tap into their resources”

    You are talking about colonialism, which failed. Just taking over countries to get their resources usually turns out badly- see Iraq war, Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, Japanes invasion of China. Also, nobody wants to take over a white elaphant country like China, it is a mess of pollution, corruption and brain dead robots.

    “I mean, first it’s invading Iraq then Afghan, then they’re working on flaming Russia and then North Korea now it’s China”

    I like that you are comparing China to a rogue/failed state (N. Korea) and Russia (dictatorship and petrodollar nation) while saying the US should just let these countries destroy each other. On that, at least, we agree. The US shouldn’t bother trying to foster more nation building, it is a waste of time for countries that don’t even have the intellectual ability to maintain it.

  • mr.wiener

    “Diaoyu island belong to Japan. PERIOD”

    This sounds like an explanation of the Japanese flag.

  • ScottLoar

    “What really causes international conflicts? It’ s not what you think.”

    Rather than the ignorant squawking about money, trade and supposed economic depression, or the conspiracy freaks posing dark motives and immorality to governments and peoples, look to what really causes wars: “war occurs
    when nations misjudge their relative power” ; see http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/article/166256 (War: The Gambling Man’s Game, January 23, 2014, Defining Ideas [A Hoover Institution Journal]).

    “If two nations are deep in disagreement on a vital issue,and if both expect that they will easily win a war, then war is highly likely. If neither nation is confident of victory, or if they expect victory to come only after long fighting, then war is unlikely.” Add to that, “war is more likely to occur as optimism about an economic recovery increases.” The result: “the greatest incidence of wars (occurs) when states are confident about their future, even when others in the international order rate their futures less optimistically.”

    Read. Look at the present circumstances of attitude among certain countries. Think. Now ask yourself, which nation is most likely to war over the islands or South China Sea?

    • steviewah

      This reminds me of a very short passage I once read for my humanities class at university. It was called The Melian Dialogue. An entertaining read if you enjoy these things, it was basically a back and forth between, I believe, an Athenian general (the dominant power at the time) and Melians on why Athens shouldn’t burn the city to the ground. This really relates to that article why wars occur.

      • ScottLoar

        Your mention of it stirs my memory.

  • Alex Dương

    Like I said, I’m fine with the islands being Japanese. I’m just not fine with Tokyo’s bullshit official claim that they were “terra nullius” before 1895. They weren’t.

    • Jahar

      Why does it matter if they waited 10 years to claim it?

      • Alex Dương

        There’s no point in waiting ten years to annex islands that belong to no one, which is what “terra nullius” means. You could just do it. Immediately.

        • Jahar

          Sure, but there’s been lots of land not claimed throughout history. And just because we don’t have the reason doesn’t mean there wasn’t one.

          It would actually be nice to have more information about that time. How exactly did the Qing government react to this? Did they even care? I have heard that they recognized it as Japanese territory, but I don’t know how much of that was under duress.

          Also, as we see in many of these situations, “claiming” something and actually having control of it are two different things.

          • Alex Dương

            Oh, of course there was a reason why Japan didn’t annex the islands in 1885; it wasn’t 100% confident it could defeat the Qing in 1885!

  • MonkeyMouth

    yaaaaaawn,.,,,,,,,,, they should fight this like the Canada-Denmark island dispute. that would be more interesting.

    • David

      Canada and Denmark have an island dispute? Can we read about it on CS (CanuckSquish)?

      • MonkeyMouth

        yup! its downright nasty!
        just look up ‘Hans Island’. there are the Danes who go there, put up there flag, leave behind culturally significant Danish things…like maybe Danish pasrty(?), the Canada goes over, eats their pastry or whatever, then leave behind whiskey and donuts, thats actually true, mate.. they bury it under the tundra line to keep them nice and fresh!
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_island

        • MonkeyMouth

          typo…..THEIR flag….

        • David

          LMAO the world is a strange place isn’t it? Now if it were like Greenland they were fighting over I could understand it but this sounds like somebody is fighting over fishing rights.

  • Jahar

    I read a news article a few months ago where someone representing the U.S. government said that while the US doesn’t take a position on the dispute, since it’s actually administered by japan, they will defend it as part of the alliance. Obama saying it is nothing new.

  • WFH

    and Japan promptly sends the US back without a trade deal. Japan 1 US 0

  • KamikaziPilot

    I hereby challenge Obama to a one on one fight where we are both locked in a room, last man standing wins. I win and he steps down as president, if Obama wins, he gets my house.

    • David

      Why would he want your house? He has a lot of money and will by a really nice house when he is out of office in two and a half years. lol

      • KamikaziPilot

        Oh yeah I forgot about that little detail. I guess it’ll just have to be a fight to the death. He has the size advantage on me but I’m younger and smarter than him.

        • David

          lol can we get pay-for-view to cover that? Unfortunately you might be outnumbered by 10-15 secret service guys.

          • KamikaziPilot

            If I ever get Obama in a room alone he’ll feel my wrath. I’m just afraid who’s going to replace him might be even worse.

          • David

            There is always that possibility. As I am of a different political party than the current President, I don’t agree with most of what he has done in his 61/2 years. As much as I do not wish to chance somebody worse, I wil be happy when January 2017 arrives.

  • David

    I think you need to actually learn your history before trying one shot insults at the U.S. Mexico should be a bigger country? How do you figure that? They lost a war, they lost land. Land they only gained from winning a war with Spain 24 years earlier. If anything they should give it back to Spain who had it for 325 year. Easy come easy go. Those Indians (Native Americans) got the land the same way, they killed the Native Americans who were on it before them. Reparations is a joke, no slave ever asked for any when they were alive (the idea is quite modern), why should it be paid to their great grand children? That does nto take away from the injustices the U.S. government has been responsible for in its history but beating Mexico is not one of those injustices (the Mexican government did as bad or worse to their own Native Americans to get and keep their land).

    • Bischoff

      Well, so you defined it as insult. And based on this I assume you are presuming the morality sense of all human kind has really been promoted in this century within the past couple hundreds of years, as people nowadays does not get lands by launching an invasion war…
      OK that`s kidding, and history is history, besides almost all nations and countries exist simply ignore the inglorious part about invasion and conquer.
      Yet I am still not quite comfortable about the “Winner takes all” stuffs. Ingloriousness is always ingloriousness. I am not presuming you intend to set a moral high stand for US, but if what you are claiming is statically representing the idea of you fellows, then maybe those issues now should be treated in a more ruthless way with simply politics and benefits (sure they are doing like that) but without mentioning anything relevant to morality stuff, — just to be fair enough.

      So it really confused my (seriously and not offensively) why you consider this as insult when the fact that American eventually took the territory is firm according to what both you guys described– beating one injustice does not qualify the justice. — Oh maybe justice with political stuff is naive, right?

      • David

        As you said, history is history, it does not require justification (a fact), things happen for many reasons which, at the time, may have been moral, immoral, right or wrong. As for my opinion on modern political behavior (as a person not a historian, because historians do not give opions on this) taking those ides forward would require justification. People are responsible for their actions and for the actions of those they lead. Therefore any morality is on actions of today that are still being decided. I limit my guilt to things I have actually done within my lifetime. I do not claim that the actions of the Americans who lived 200 years ago were more noble than that of the native Americans they tricked, bribed, and fought with to take the land that is now the U.S. (including a lot of land we actually bought from Native Americans and other countries). Conquest is not about nobility it is about practicality. They had the land then, we have it now and someday (eventually) somebody else will have it. While we are here I appreciate it when my politicians act with the best interests of the people they represent on their minds but I am often disappointed.

        • Bill the Awesometacular

          Dioyu islands were given back to Nationalist China after WW2. Nationalist China was still China. So why does it belong to Japan now?

  • Pete of Perth

    Look a man in the eyes when you shake his hand nancy boy.

  • mr.wiener

    Your name and satire of The fred fongs avatar are at odds with our rules on trolling and being disruptive. EG a user name like “mr. wiener sucks balls” would fall into this category.
    I personally have very little liking for his posts, but so long as he obeys the rules I have no choice but to put up with his stupidity. Kindly keep your personal feuds on Shanghaiist in the future.
    Chinasmack has a lot of extreme views from both pro and anti Chinese posters, My fellow mods and myself will try to see that no one from either side gets out of hand ….fact

  • Anna Presman

    Lately it seems that the USA is trying to pick fights with everyone… Usually this kind of behavior indicates that something is wrong in the internal affairs of a country. And before anyone accuses me of being pro this or anti that, I should say tat I’m barely aware of the existence of those islands and couldn’t care less about who owns them.

    • mr.wiener

      The US has acted like this since Teddy Roosevelt hon.

    • Zappa Frank

      lately? i would reather say it was for the war in afghanistan and iraq, but recently was just a reaction to what is happening in ukraina and what Putin is doing on one side, on the other side is just the last pices to contain the expansionism of china… while in the ukraina thing was probably unwanted this one is something probably programmed. the thing is simple, if us cannot contain the expansion of china will likely lose his supremacy. It is on the other side evident that the US are not considered so strong as sometimes ago.

      • Anna Presman

        I actually think that Ukraine was planned in advance but than they lost control over the situation, while Putin quickly realized what’s going on and took the opportunity to return Crimea…

  • diverdude7

    cool if CIA can do something very creative and escalate this into WWIII !

    We need Names guys !! Allied / Axis … too out-of-date.

    USA – good guys – ___________

    PRC- bad guys – _____________

    * every other country must pick a side and join with ( USA, UK, Canucks, ANZAC, Japan. … ; PRC, DPRK, Russia….)

  • Historically the Diaoyu islands are part of the territories of Japan…much like Bukkake is part of Japanese culture…it can’t be denied

    • bang2tang

      you must be have large collection of JAV in your HD, lmao.

      • I’m a movie director based in China….would you be interested in acting in one of my movies?

        • mr.wiener

          Make sure she gets swimming goggles.

    • Apothis

      Just like Tibet? How about a little ethnic cleansing? Not even close to what America did for Iraq and Afghanistan. China should be happy with all the territory it currently occupies and should forget about the Diayu islands.

  • Reptilian

    Now what makes you think the US is becoming the “World’s Public Enemy no.1”? The Saudis require US military presence to prevent them from becoming another Egypt, and that’s why Saudi Arabia’s Middle East policy is always aligned with the US. Kuwait, Jordan, the UAE are all strong US allies. Iraq is effectively taking instructions from Washington DC every day.

    In East Asia, Korea and Japan still acknowledge the need for US bases to remain on their soil. The US is expanding military exercises with Thailand, the Philippines, Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam and Singapore, and is now courting Myanmar and Cambodia. Take note it was these countries who invited US defense officials for talk on expanded cooperation, not the other way around. Pakistan has had a love-hate relationship with the US, but they do know that India is there to balance them out. And let’s not forget where India’s upcoming nuclear reactors came from—that’s right, George W Bush.

    Meanwhile, who are China’s friends? Russia? For now, yes, because Putin has no friends anymore after Crimea. Who else? Pakistan? Iran? Cuba? Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan and the other Central Asian states? Outer Mongolia? A hodgepodge of sorry-a(s)s states that are there only because China has been sending petrodollars for its energy imports. Otherwise, who really has deep socio-cultural, historical and political bonds with China?

  • MeCampbell30

    It’s always easier to blame America through some half-assed conspiracy theory than accept reality. America has become the global scapegoat for everyone’s problems.

  • Mighty曹

    hahaha.. yeah!

  • mr.wiener

    Glad to see you are treating this like a mature adult.

  • ScottLoar

    Liquid gold underneath? Sorry Charlie, it’s all about territorial expansion, not gas and oil.

  • ScottLoar

    Strangerland, so there you are in Indonesia and listening to “some locals talking in hush-hush tones about US Government (sic) influencing Indonesia General Election (sic)” and although you’re not sure what this implies you see fit to lecture us here.

    I was in Jakarta all of last week and the pending elections are thoroughly discussed in English language print (e.g. see the Jakarta Globe which is also on-line) and so open even to those not literate in Bahasa, and publicly discussed; no need for hush-hush.

    The myriad parties – Golkar, Democratic Party, etc. – cannot reach a coalition and neither can the Islamic parties unite. Neither they or the most popular Islamic party The National Awakening Party (PKB) much likes the idea of that political outsider Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, who is not even Moslem much less thoroughly ethnic Javanese, as the nation’s most likely next President. Now tell me, is that the “hush-hush” you heard? Persons inhaling their own fumes? Or ascribing sorcery and dark practices of the USA to events they can’t really understand or control? Why not introduce those same locals to the Oracle at Delphi for an answer rather than you coming here and exhaling their fumes of frustration and disbelief?

    Joko Widodo, elected the mayor of Solo in 2005 and then continuing to the governorship of Jakarta is respected for being intolerant of that national vice corruption, popularly engages with the electorate to solve problems and better their livelihood, and doesn’t owe his popularity to the “pak” network. And you, you simple ass, come here to say the US is trying to control the people of Indonesia. How? By promoting (undercover and “hush-hush” of course) that darling of most urban Indonesians a 52 year-old Indonesian Chinese who is committed to better governance and eradicating corruption?

  • Gordon Gogodancer

    “We love peace, but when it comes to the rise and fall of our nation, we are not afraid of death, and not afraid of dying with our enemies in war!”
    That’s Chinese people for ya, they love peace.

    • Alex Dương

      You can argue that Chinese people don’t love peace, but if you actually think Chinese people think that way, I don’t see any contradiction.

  • David

    How about we all agree that the islands belong to me? That way everybody loses but everyone’s enemy also loses, so it is not too bad. china and Japan can go back to making lots of money off of each other.

    I will create a wildlife refuge for hot 20 something women of all nationality to frolic and play in bikinis.

    • whuddyasack

      I really wished that the islands would be declared yours haha. In an ideal world, your idea is perfect! But I still feel the urge to correct you a little David. Nobody loses with your proposal. Everyone gains haha

      • David

        I do believe you have just made it to the top of the list for game warden there.

        • whuddyasack

          Awww shucks… thanks David. I’m honored even if I don’t think I’d quite fit the bill ;-)

  • Alessandro

    He looks like he has been given a service in Japan to rival the Swan Lake at Changing Dongguan.

  • Blue

    I quite agree.
    Check out the toddler’s rules of ownership and draw your own comparisons.
    http://www.circleofmoms.com/terrible-twos/i-found-this-funny-toddler-rules-of-ownership-and-sharing-254766

Personals @ chinaSMACK - Meet people, make friends, find lovers? Don't be so serious!»