Occidentalism
Duc, sequere, aut de via decede!

Ok if Abe visits Yasukuni? 99% “yes”

September 28th, 2006 . by Gerry-Bevers

A CNN online poll asked the following question:

Now that Shinzo Abe has become Japan’s prime minister, do you think it is appropriate for him to visit the Yasukuni Shrine?

or View Results

According to a KBS News article today, 99% of more than 198,000 people answered “yes.” The article also said that Koreans think the Japanese manipulated the results, and that some Koreans said that even though they voted “no,” their vote did not show up on the results. It also said that an earlier CNN poll asked the following question:

Do you think Japan needs to compensate victims of World War II?

According to the KBS article, 99% of those surveyed said, “It isn’t necessary.”

Now that Korean “netizens” know about the poll, let’ see how long that 99% figure stands.

Here is the link to the CNN page:

“Japan Decides: Abe ushers in new era”


38 Responses to “Ok if Abe visits Yasukuni? 99% “yes””

  1. comment number 1 by: YoungRocco

    Matt:

    99%…

    It’s pretty obvious that the results stem from of a gross computational error.

  2. comment number 2 by: ponta

    Views were divided on the Yasukuni issue in Southeast Asia, just as they were in Japan.

    In Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, those who said it was “acceptable” for Japan’s prime minister to visit the shrine exceeded those who said it was “unacceptable.” In Indonesia, 41 percent said it was “unacceptable,” surpassing 37 percent who said “acceptable.”

    In all four Southeast Asian countries, about 20 percent refused to respond to the question. In Japan, 60 percent said it was “acceptable.”

    On the fact that class-A war criminals are enshrined at Yasukuni Shrine along with war dead, more than 50 percent of Thais and Malaysians said it was “acceptable.”

    A majority of Indonesians, at 57 percent however, said it was “unacceptable.” In Vietnam as well, disapproval outweighed acceptance. The figure in Japan was 46 percent for “acceptable,” and 44 percent for “unacceptable.”

    The survey also asked pollees if Japan’s actions in their countries during World War II were still an obstacle to relations. “No” surpassed “yes” in all nations except South Korea, where 75 percent said “yes.” Those who said “no” was 73 percent in Vietnam, 66 percent in Malaysia, 62 percent in Indonesia and 49 percent in Thailand.

    yomiuri/Sep. 4, 2006)

    Japan gets good marks in poll / S.E. Asian countries have ‘good impression’; S. Korea less upbeat

  3. comment number 3 by: Darin

    YoungRocco Said:
    September 28, 2006 at 1:29 am | Edit

    Matt: …

    Posted in Uncategorized at 1:08 am by Gerry-Bevers

  4. comment number 4 by: James

    I’m actually quite surprised by the results of this poll. Somehow I doubt that so many of CNN.com’s legitimate readers support Yasukuni visits, especially when you consider the negative image Yasukuni is given by western media outlets.

  5. comment number 5 by: tomojiro

    Personally I don’t think that internet polls are trustworthy.

    I don’t understand why CNN( and other media) is using it.
    The result could be so biased and artifical.

  6. comment number 6 by: YoungRocco

    Ponta:

    Thanks for your reply.

    Ponta, you’re a pretty clever guy most of the time, but this time you’ve slipped up.

    And slipped up badly.

    Japanese Occupation of Vietnam: 1942-1945
    Japanese Occupation of Thailand: Never Happened.
    Japanese Occupation of Malaysia: 1942-1945
    Japanese Occupation of Korea: 1905-1945

    Ponta, taking surveys of countries that were occupied for only three years and comparing them to Korea doesn’t prove that much. Indeed, that such a high percentage of Southeast Asia perceive the Yasukuni visits as negative, is indicative of Japan’s deplorable behavior in Southeast Asia at the time.

    And the time differential just tells one part of the story. Ponta, if you’re going to say that South Korea is unjustified in its reaction to Yasukuni relative to other countries, then you first have to prove that occupation in Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand were similar.

    You haven’t proven that.

    And you can’t.

    Hope that helps.

  7. comment number 7 by: Darin

    Japanese Occupation of Thailand: Never Happened.

    That’s debatable:

    Japanese forces began invading Thailand at nine areas on the morning of December 8, 1941. Thai troops initially resisted the invasion, but Field Marshal Phibunsongkhram, the prime minister, ordered the cessation of resistance.

    [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_Powers#Thailand]

    Ponta, taking surveys of countries that were occupied for only three years and comparing them to Korea doesn’t prove that much. Indeed, that such a high percentage of Southeast Asia perceive the Yasukuni visits as negative, is indicative of Japan’s deplorable behavior in Southeast Asia at the time.

    So Korea’s 35 years (36 if you can’t count) are on a completely different level then anything imaginable to anyone other then Koreans huh?

    Shall we compare this to say, I dunno, a country who’s people had been colonized for say, hundreds of years?

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=-tDNx3GobLg

    I’m not sure what your level of comprehension for Japanese is, but the just of it is some people who’s people have been through colonization and enslavement, rape of the land and people for 400+ years look at the way Korea and China are reacting to Japan, and think Korea and China are crazy. In actuality, they commend Japan for doing more to right it’s wrongs then any other nation in the world has, yet no grudges are held against the former European colonizers, they do not try and tell their former colonizers how to run their country because, “that was then, and this is now.”

    So, if 35>4 means that nothing other then Korea counts. Then 400>35, and you’ve got no leg to stand on.

  8. comment number 8 by: tomato

    >Darin

    And if compared with Taiwan’s attitude towards Japanese rule, it’s pretty much obvious that the Korean view of things are alarmingly distorted. I think the reason for this is because the Koreans being overly proud of themselves, they just can’t take the fact that Japan, who they long thought to be inferior, administered them and even brought western industrial civilization to them. That’s why they try to erase every trace of Japanese rule…which is failing because it’s throughly incorporated in almost everything they use…the law (Korean law is in fact mere translation of Japanse law), the words (the Japanese translated many western ideas in to 漢字), the food…which just shows that it was Japan that brought modern civilization to Korea.

    But so what about foreingn influences? Nobody else really cares, except for Koreans. Distorting history and telling half-lies won’t help much…I wonder why they don’t ever feel miserable. I would if I knew I was telling lies just for the purpose of making me look good…it’s like falsifying your academic records, claiming degrees that you never earned.

  9. comment number 9 by: YoungRocco

    Darin:

    Thanks for the post.

    Now I’m going to review your statement point by point and then help you re-evaluate your position.

    That’s debatable:

    Not really. Read the encyclopedia reference below:

    Japan invaded the country and engaged the Thai army for six to eight hours before Phibun ordered an armistice. Shortly thereafter Japan was granted free passage, and on December 21, 1941, Thailand and Japan signed a military alliance with a secret protocol wherein Tokyo agreed to help Thailand get back territories lost to the British and French colonial powers and Thailand undertook to assist Japan in her war against the Allies.

    This is not what would technically be considered an occupation. It was, as you can see, a military alliance.

    So Korea’s 35 years (36 if you can’t count) are on a completely different level then anything imaginable to anyone other then Koreans huh?

    If this is how you’ve interpreted my words, then perhaps you should re-read what I’ve written.

    You’re more than slightly off the mark.

    This is the main thrust of my argument: The occupations of Korea and Southeast Asia were qualitatively different, and one of the defining points of difference was the length of occupation.

    One would expect that the feelings toward occupation in the two regions will differ.

    Therefore, you and Ponta are in error when you use these reactions to indict the Korean people.

    I shall take the time to put you on the right path: Compare the bilateral relationships between Japan and its immediate neighbors: South Korea, North Korea, the PRC and Taiwan. If you do, you’ll see that of all Japan’s closest neighbors, only Taiwan’s reactions to colonialism are different.

    Shall we compare this to say, I dunno, a country who’s people had been colonized for say, hundreds of years?

    Good idea. I’ll do you one better and compare to three countries:

    Zimbabwe’s reaction to Colonialism:

    Almost immediately, self-styled “war veterans”, led by Chenjerai ‘Hitler’ Hunzvi, began invading white-owned farms. On April 6, 2000, parliament pushed through an amendment, taken word for word from the draft constitution that was rejected by voters, allowing the seizure of white-owned farmlands without due reimbursement or payment.

    Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Mugabe

    South Africa’s reaction to Colonialism:

    As South Africa begins its second decade after apartheid’s dismantlement in 1994, the ruling Marxist African National Congress has rapidly escalated what some call “the Zimbabwe paradigm” – moving to more aggressively seize its white citizens’ farms, possessions and futures.

    Reference:
    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46117

    Colonial Resentment in Kenya:

    A photo of Cholmondeley flashing a thumbs-up after charges were dropped enraged many Kenyans who saw it as proof of continued white privilege 40 years after Kenya’s independence.

    Reference:

    http://www.iol.co.za/index.php
    set_id=1&click_id=68&art_id=qw1159101180331B265

    What the above links demonstrate, Darin, is that resentment to colonialism is not limited to Korea. The second critical factor you’ll notice is that these feelings of resentment are touched off when an event “re-opens” colonial wounds.

    Both the Dokdo and Yasukune issues are examples of re-opening historical wounds, and so it is only logical that Koreans would have somewhat negative feelings toward Japan.

    If you need any more assisstance in firming up your argument, feel free to send me another post. My door is always open.

    Have a great day.

  10. comment number 10 by: tomato

    Both the Dokdo and Yasukune issues are examples of re-opening historical wounds, and so it is only logical that Koreans would have somewhat negative feelings toward Japan.

    Nope.

    Dok-do issue was created by the Koreans to fuel hatred towards Japan. As Gerry have shown, it has never been Korean territoty. All that issue about Dok-do is pure Korean propaganda. It’s baloney like many of the Korean claims.

    For Yasukuni, there is nothing that the Koreans should be nuanced about, since there was never a war between Japan and Korea. The shrine dose not remember any soldier that killed Koreans. Koreans who are enshrined there fought as fellow soldiers in the Japanese Army/Navy. Koreans are just taking a free ride on the China-Japan row.

    Besides, who is re-opening? You Koreans are the ones making so much fuss about it….go home and grab a mirror.

  11. comment number 11 by: tomato

    For Yasukuni, there is nothing that the Koreans should be nuanced about

    Oops…be annoyed about

  12. comment number 12 by: sqz

    Both the Dokdo and Yasukune issues are examples of re-opening historical wounds, and so it is only logical that Koreans would have somewhat negative feelings toward Japan.

    中国と韓国こそが、歴史の傷を広げているのでしょ。
    China and Korea re-opening historical wounds.
    いわゆるA級戦犯合祀が報道されたのは1978年。
    It is 1978 that so-called class-A war criminal enshrining together was reported.
    中国からの抗議が始まったのは1985年。
    It is 1985 that protest from China began.
    韓国からの抗議が始まったのは2001年。
    It is 2001 that protest from Korea began.
    なぜ報道直後に抗議しなかったのかね?
    Why did not they protest it just after report?
    しかも韓国は歴史の傷をさらに広げようとしている。
    Besides, Korea re-opening historical wounds more.
    A級戦犯分祀では靖国問題解決できず、政府方針

  13. comment number 13 by: ponta

    Ponta:

    Thanks for your reply.

    Ponta, you’re a pretty clever guy most of the time, but this time you’ve slipped up.

    And slipped up badly. ………………………..
    You haven’t proven that.

    And you can’t.

    Hope that helps

    Wow, I did not know the I was proving something by linking to the survey.
    YoungRocco
    It is elementary knowledge that
    p1,p2,p3 therefore P can be regarded as a form of proof.

    P1 itself is a premise, it does not prove anything.

    I showed p1, the survey. I did not present any conclusion.

    I think this is elementary logic, YoungRocco

    (Calm down, YoungRocco, How old are you?
    Glad help clarify your ignorance. Take care——if you do not like this style of writing, I hope you stop your style of writing too)

  14. comment number 14 by: Darin

    YoungRocco,

    I’ve brought something showing people directly referencing China and Korea, it would be best for you to show something that also has the people directly referencing China and Korea to negate it.

  15. comment number 15 by: ponta

    Tomato

    For Yasukuni, there is nothing that the Koreans should be nuanced about, since there was never a war between Japan and Korea. The shrine dose not remember any soldier that killed Koreans. Koreans who are enshrined there fought as fellow soldiers in the Japanese Army/Navy. Koreans are just taking a free ride on the China-Japan row.

    A good point.
    Korean people should realise that Roh is using this issue to deceive Korean people.

  16. comment number 16 by: ponta

    youngroocor wrote

    I’ll do you one better and compare to three countries:

    African’s reaction to colonialism

    Japan has made reparation payments to South Korea for acts committed during the period of invasion and occupation of Korea by Japan

    link

    And there were slave before the colonization; Koreans enslaved Koreans.but nobi, Korean slave in Korea system, were liberated afther the colonization.

    Koreans in Japan had right to vote, Koreans became congressmen in Japan during the colonization, Koreans in Korea became the governers.
    Korea royalty were repected.

    The comparison is okay, but the difference is obvious.

  17. comment number 17 by: ponta

    youngroocor wrote

    This is the main thrust of my argument: The occupations of Korea and Southeast Asia were qualitatively different,

    Yes it is qualitatively different.
    There wree more Korean people who supported Japan than people think, and Koreans soldiers were known as more cruel than Japanese soldiers.
    South East Asian people should be warned that Korean is a country that is hiding the dark past in which Koreans invaded Asia together with Japan.
    Japan faced the history and apologized to Asian country.
    Korean government has been hiding the truth.
    Which is more threat to Asian people?

  18. comment number 18 by: void

    It is clear that someone ran poll bot, and CNN system couldn’t reject such request.
    BTW, I polled to “YES”, just once 🙂

  19. comment number 19 by: Gerry-Bevers

    The “No” vote is now 5% and growing.

  20. comment number 20 by: YoungRocco

    Tomato:

    Glad you are here to join in this rousing discussion.

    I’ll tread lightly while I pick apart the flaws in your statement.

    Dok-do issue was created by the Koreans to fuel hatred towards Japan.

    False. Syngman Rhee incorporated Dokdo into Korean territory as a result of Japan’s defeat in World War II.

    or Yasukuni, there is nothing that the Koreans should be nuanced about, since there was never a war between Japan and Korea.

    False. The provisional government of the Republic of Korea declared war on Japan and Nazi Germany on December 9th 1941.

    Secondly, your argument is disingenuous. Crimes committed against humanity are separate from crimes against the state. For example, Nazi Germany never declared war on the jews in the holocaust. Likewise, the Confederacy never declared war on African-Americans. However, symbols glorifying either the Nazi Party or the Confederacy are likely to cause rancor among both Jews and Blacks.

    Concerning Yasukuni, there are two crucial ideas at hand.

    First, the Class A War Criminals interred at Yasukuni, as agents of the state, were responsible for the forceful conscription of Korean men into the Japanese Army, sexual slavery

    These should be conservative rates, given that near 9 percent died in Japan where work conditions can be assumed better than in Korea or Manchuria; and that the rates are much less than half those for China and Indonesia. Even at these low rates, however, the forced labor toll for Korea comes to 270,000 to 810,000 dead in seven years.

    References: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes

    Secondly, there are Korean soldiers interned at Yasukune who have been interred there without the permission of their families. The shrine represents religious conflicts as well as state sanctioned racial discrimination:

    ”The state has enshrined those who died in the war in Yasukuni Shrine, which is a violation of a constitutional provision banning the state from engaging any religious activities,” the suit says.
    Advertisement

    The suit also says enshrining someone against their beliefs in life also constitutes an infringement of the Constitution.

    Some families of former soldiers who died in action never received official death notices, and they are demanding an investigation into how their loved ones died and the return of their remains.

    The compensation sought covers payments of unpaid salary for those who served in the army and consolation money.

    References: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0WDQ/is_2001_July_2/ai_76443926

    So when the Prime Minister visits the shrine, he is honoring war criminals. This would be the same as the Prime Minister of Germany annually visiting Hitler’s gravesite.

    Not so fast, young one. Before you claim that the analogy is different because Japan did not commit a holocaust, keep in mind that the issue is not so much the intent behind the killing as the killing itself. The Japanese are estimated to have killed 6,000,000 Chinese. Deaths for Koreans are hard to come by, but conservative estimates for Korean deaths by forced labor alone stand at about 270,000.

    Hope that helps you re-evaluate your thought process.

    Anytime you need more guidance, just send me a note.

  21. comment number 21 by: YoungRocco

    SQZ:

    Glad you could join us.

    Upon reading your post, I immediately noticed a glaring error in logic.

    If you’ll excuse me, I’ll point it out to you in the hope that you won’t commit similar errors in the future.

    It is 1978 that so-called class-A war criminal enshrining together was reported.
    中国からの抗議が始まったのは1985年。
    It is 1985 that protest from China began.
    韓国からの抗議が始まったのは2001年。
    It is 2001 that protest from Korea began.

    “So-Called?” Sorry, buddy. I don’t mean to hurt you, but you must face the fact that Japan lost the war. As a victorious power, the allies had a right to make Japan’s military leaders accountable for what they had done.

    There is no disputing the fact that the individuals were war criminals and committted, sanctioned or at the very least oversaw war crimes and crimes against humanity.

    But I digress.

    Your main error in logic comes in citing the period of time it took to protest the visits.

    SQZ, an immoral act is an immoral act, and those who witness such acts have a right to point them out.

    Your error in logic is predicated on the belief that immoral acts must be condemned immediately after they are committed. Your belief is false because it presupposes that the truth of such condemnations lose validity over time.

    Let me illustrate my point by anecdote.

    Bob Horton witnesses the theft of a cow. Bob is horrified at such an immoral act and says to himself, “the theft of this cow is wrong.”

    Next week, Bob Horton reflects on what has happened and says to himself again, “theft is wrong.”

    Next year, Bob Horton, while sitting on the beach, remembers what happened and says to himself, “theft is wrong.”

    I think this simple analogy illustrates my point adquately. Stealing is wrong regardless of when it occurs. Therefore, those who are aggrieved at stealing can label an act of theft as wrong regardless of how far in the past it has occurred.

    Likewise with Yasukuni. If honoring war criminals is immoral, then a person can call honoring war criminals immoral at anytime.

    Glad I could help a valued friend.

  22. comment number 22 by: ponta

    YoungRocco

    If honoring war criminals is immoral, then a person can call honoring war criminals immoral at anytime

    Suppose if p, then q is true. it does not follow that q is true.

    Suppose your claim is true.
    It does not follow that the statement that “a person can call honoring war criminals immoral anytime” is true.

    This is really elementary logic, YoungRocco .

    YoungRocco,
    You need to show,
    (1) Japanese Prime minister visiting is honoring the crime they committed rather than pacifying the war deads which is fearful unless enshrined according to Shinto religion.
    (2)Korea has right to interfere the domestic issue like PM as a citizen visiting the religious place.

    Korea is deceiving people.
    To borrow Tomato’s excellent logic,
    Yasukuni is the shrine for war deads after 19 century.
    Japan and Korea had no war after 19 century.
    Therefore, Korea is in no position to protest against it.

    Moreover many Korean people were rather on Japan’s side during WWⅡ
    More than 300000 Korea applied voluntarily for Japanese army in 1943, when Tojou, A criminals, were prime minister.
    And Korean guards were known as more cruel than Japanese.
    I do not think it is unreasonable to pray for Korean war deads who sacrificed their life.
    I think Korean government is deceiving Asian people. I think Korean government is deceiving Korean people.

  23. comment number 23 by: sqz

    YoungRocco

    “So-Called?” Sorry, buddy. I don’t mean to hurt you, but you must face the fact that Japan lost the war. As a victorious power, the allies had a right to make Japan’s military leaders accountable for what they had done.

    There is no disputing the fact that the individuals were war criminals and committted, sanctioned or at the very least oversaw war crimes and crimes against humanity.

    刑罰は終了しました。
    The penalty was finished.
    今現在、戦犯はいません。
    Now, there is not a war crime.

    I think this simple analogy illustrates my point adquately. Stealing is wrong regardless of when it occurs. Therefore, those who are aggrieved at stealing can label an act of theft as wrong regardless of how far in the past it has occurred.

    Likewise with Yasukuni. If honoring war criminals is immoral, then a person can call honoring war criminals immoral at anytime.

    Glad I could help a valued friend.

    個人と国家は違います。
    The nation is different from an individual.
    知っているのに抗議しないのは、黙認した事になります。
    Korea would consent tacitly to what Korea did not protest to know it.
    もし抗議すると、韓国に危険が及ぶのですか?
    Does danger extend to Korea when Korea protested it?

  24. comment number 24 by: sqz

    そうそう、思い出しました。
    By the way, I remembered.
    YoungRocco は、他のスレでこんなこと言ってましたね。
    In other thread, YoungRocco said;

    However, because China, a victorious power in the Second World War, was not invited to the conference, the validity of the treaty could be considered questionable.

    If the San Francisco treaty was signed without participation by China, then it s declarations could be considered as questionable, including the provision that awards Tsushima to Japan.

    戦犯も有効性が疑わしいですね。
    The validity of the war crime could be considered questionable.

  25. comment number 25 by: Rose

    There’s a Korean man I know who I think is a very inteligent man. Yet he limits his way of thinking by thinking like how typical Koreans think.

    That is, his conclusion takes precedence over logic and facts.
    He just does it in a sophisticated way.
    It’s unfortunate that his inteligence and generally good character don’t lead him to break his mental barrier.

    He’s confident that he can come up with the conclusion faster than those who were raised outside of Korea yet he does not recognize that’s because most others would come up with the conclusion after considering all the facts.

    Glad I could help a valued friend.

    Helping others is good but helping himself first correcting his mental habit of starting his thinking process with his conclusion first would be more appreciated, I think.

  26. comment number 26 by: Errol

    That is, his conclusion takes precedence over logic and facts.

    Most intelligent Koreans are well aware of the problems in Korea but they will contort logic to provide a face saving solution for Korea.

    e.g. Not our fault but the foreign investors.

    The old men running the public service and the Korean education system aren’t going to give up their cushy jobs for anyone.

    Even the fabled FEZs are an excuse to engage in corruption by senior public servants and construction companies. The (female) editor of the Korea Herald and almost everyone without a vested interest in real estate corruption is aware that there are simpler more cost effective solutions to some of these problems.

    Fluency in English is a privilege of the wealthy they have no desire to rearrange the status quo by making it more affordable. To find out what’s really going on talk to a Korean in Korean not an English speaking Korean who needs to maintain his or her veneer of sophistication and outrage against the Japanese. After all, the Korean peasants were the major supporters of the Japanese incursions in the 16th C.

  27. comment number 27 by: YoungRocco

    Ponta:

    Let me just start out by saying that you are moving in the right direction.

    You’re making visible strides toward critical and rational thought.

    We’ve got a lot of work to do to get you to an appropriate level of clear thought, but I am glad to see that my efforts have not completely been in vain.

    Let’s get to work.

    (1) Japanese Prime minister visiting is honoring the crime they committed rather than pacifying the war deads which is fearful unless enshrined according to Shinto religion.

    This is a common tactic: separating the crime from the criminal. Similar to the famous phrase from the New Testament: Hate the Sin but love the sinner. I suppose you can rationalize Koizumi actions by saying that he honors the war criminals rather than the war crimes and crimes against humanity.

    The world would be a wonderful place if everyone thought the way you did. Hate the murder, but the love murderer and pacify his spirit. Hate the theft, but the love the thief and pacify his spirit. Hate the genoicide, but love the genoicidal maniac and pacify his sprit.

    Indeed, under your moral framework, jails would be empty–containing 0 people, but millions of deeds.

    Unfortunately, however, the real world doesn’t work by your moral framework.

    You see, Ponta, in the real world, people are defined by what they do. Picasso is identified with his paintings. Shakespeare with his plays, Yi Sun Sin with sending Hideyoshi back to Japan in shame.

    Likewise, the 14 class A war criminals are defined by the brutality of the regimes they ruled and the shame and defeat they brought to Japan.

    So when Koizumi visits Yasukuni, he is, whether he likes to or not, implicitly endorsing their actions. Actions which included the murder of millions of Chinese, slavery, the murder of POWs and human experimentation.

    Likewise, if Angela Merkel visited Erwin Rommels grave in order to “pray for peace” she too would be tacitly endorsing the third reich.

    So you see, Ponta the bottom line is this: Koizumi’s visits to Yasukuni Shrine implicitly endorse the actions of the Class A War criminals. Since the actions these men committed was wrong, Koizumi should not visit that shrine and neither should Shinzo Abe.

    Ah, I have an appoint I must attend to. You’ll excuse me.

    In any event, I hope that you’ll be able to see why Koizumi’s actions are wrong. It is also my wish that you will be able to turn a critical eye toward your own country sometime in the future.

    No worries.

    Enjoy the rest of your day.

  28. comment number 28 by: Gerry-Bevers

    Prime Minister Abe should ignore the childish antics of the Koreans and Chinese and visit the Yasukuni Shine whenever he feels it appropriate. The shine is not honoring war criminals; it is honoring dead soldiers. Korea, China, and even the United States have war criminals buried in their national cemeteries, yet that does not mean those cemeteries are honoring war criminals, just as it does not mean Japan’s shine is.

    Koreans are being especiallly hypocritically since they fought on the side of Japan in the Asian and Pacific wars, which would mean that Koreans were not the victims of Japanese war crimes, but the abettors. In fact, Koreans were executed and imprisoned as war criminals after World War II, and one Korean general was even hanged as a Class A war criminal. By the way, those facts are not mentioned in Korean history books, at least not the middle school textbooks, which brings me to another Korean hypocrisy.

    Koreans complain that Japanese history textbooks are “distorted,” but you rarely see them give any details because if they gave the details, then people would see just how silly Koreans were being. For example, Japan textbooks’ claiming that Dokdo is historically Japanese territory is not a distortion; it is a fact. Compared to Japanese history textbooks, Korea’s textbooks are books of fairytales.

    I have a copy of the Korean Ministry of Education’s Middle School History textbook (2001), and it does not mention anything anything about Korean war crimes in World II; in fact, it hardly mentions anything about World War II. The textbook is essentially a propaganda text that focuses on convincing Korean students of three things: One, that Korea has been abused by and taken advantage of by foreign powers, especially by Japan. Two, that Koreans did not support Japan during the colonial period, And three, that Koreans essentially achieved independence on their own. Little, if any, credit is given to foreign countries for Korea’s develop, and no credit is given to Japan, yet blame for Korea’s problems is showered on them.

    As for Korea’s historical claim on “Dokdo,” that is just a big, fat lie. Koreans need to shut up and stop worrying about Yasukuni, Japanese textbooks, and Dokdo, and start worrying about North Korea and China.

    By the way, I watched the Korean movie “Hanbando” last night. What a load of crap! If that movie is typical of Korean thinking, then Korean society is in bad shape.

  29. comment number 29 by: Two Cents

    Gerry,
    Lieutenant General Ko Shiyoku was not executed as a Class A war criminal (crime against humanity), but Class B for his role in torturing POWs. He was in charge of securing supplies, which became an impossible task near the end of the war since the entire Japanese fleet (including commercially-owned ships) had been destroyed. He was accused and found guilty of having starved the POWs. That is why I find the war tribunals a joke. The man did not intenionally starve the POWs. He couldn’t send them food even if he had wanted to.

  30. comment number 30 by: ponta

    YoungRocco
    thanks, but regretably you are going far away from the truth.

    .The world would be a wonderful place if everyone thought the way you did. Hate the murder, but the love murderer and pacify his spirit. Hate the theft, but the love the thief and pacify his spirit. Hate the genoicide, but love the genoicidal maniac and pacify his sprit

    A-war criminals were hanged dead. They took responsibility for what they did. And remember more than 300000 Koreans applied for Japanese army when Tojou, A criminals was a prime minister.

    Tojou was hanged deads. Few would praise him as a great leader, he himself apologized for the atrocity while he was detained.
    Nobody is saying let’s save Tojou, no he was hanged dead. he paid his due. His crime was punished and the criminal was hanged dead.

    Nanjin massacre took place, there was 731 troop, and the Battar death march was horrible. We should know what happened and should not repeat
    the tragedy. Those who committed crimes were tried and sentenced,
    Nobody is saying let’s save them.

    Koreans have been hiding the truth that more Korean people that anybody can think of expressed the will to support what you call the brutal regime.
    Koreans should know the truth, and Koreans should not repeat it.

    Koreans have not been facing the truth about Korean war and have not tried war criminals.
    South Korean agents are visiting War museum in the North Korea to pay tribute to the war-deads.
    Korean general public is silent about it.
    Japanese Prime Minister is not asking Korea agents to visit Yasukuni, it is just that JPM is vising Yasukuni privately and making his intention clear that he visited the Shrine for peace, for no more war, but Korea public went crazy.

    So when Koizumi visits Yasukuni, he is, whether he likes to or not, implicitly endorsing their actions. Actions which included the murder of millions of Chinese, slavery, the murder of POWs and human experimentation.

    Is that so?
    Syngman Rhee,.under whose regime “South Korean military and police, often with US military knowledge, executed without trial tens of thousands of alleged “Communist sympathizers” during the Daejeon Massacre and the Jeju Massacre, among others. The bodies of these civilians were often dumped into mass graves”wiki,
    is honored at the national cemetery.wiki
    Do Korean government endorse the genocidal maniac, the massacre of Korean civilians?????
    Do they worship what he did, the massacre of civilians?
    Do Korean people want to be killed by North Koreans soldiers as well as your own leader?
    Wow, I did not know that. It is sort of death wish? suicide wish or something?
    That sounds creepy and it is hard to understand for me.

    But in case of Japan, Yasukuni is based on Shinto religion. And the point is not how you look at what they did while alive, but how traditional religion Shinto look at the deads; It views the deads as fearful whether they were good or bad while they were alive, it views them as someone who should be talked to , who should be pacified. They are not zombie but they are fearful entity to be enshrined according to Shinto.

    Traditional Shinto does not have the hate power like Korean people, so they don’t hate the deads, but they fear the deads. And that is one reason Yasukuni enshrine the deads of the enemy. The deads, whether they were good or bad, whether they were on our side or not, are fearful, to be pacified, to be enshrined, otherwise they might cause trouble to this world according the Shinto.. I think that is the basic idea.

    Of course you don’t have to believe in it, but you need to pay respect to the religions if you are living under free world. The right to faith is guaranteed.

    Japanese government can not interfere with Yasukuni nor individual right to pay respect to the Shrine. and Japanese Prime Minister as a citizen has a right to faith. it would be an violation of the constitution if the government interfered with it.
    Likewise Korean government has no right to interfere with individual religion.
    China might find it difficult because there is no freedom of religion out there, but I think Korea can understand the principle.

    Now it might be argued that Japanese PM can not visit any religious place because it would violate the separation of religion and the state, but that is the domestic issue, Korea is in no position to say something about it.

    Besides, Yasukuni shrine is the shrine for war deads.
    Japan had no war with Korea
    Koreans was not victims of Japanese army in the sense Chinese were victims. Koreans were aggressors along with Japanese soldiers.
    ,and the museum near Yasukuni called Syuyuukan does not mention the colonization.
    Koreans are in a different position from China.
    What do Koreans want to say about Yasukuni where the war-deads including Koreans are enshrined?
    All Koreans have to do with Yasukuni is the fact Koreans participated in the war as aggressor, along with Japanese and the fact that some Koreans war deads are enshrined. What is the point of Korea objecting?
    Does she want to hide the dark past by objecting to Japan together with China?
    Whatever the Korea’s intention, it is domestic matter. Just as the US the vicims of Korean War do not interfere with South Korean agents paying tributes to the war deads, probably including war criminals, don’t intervene in Japanese domestic issue. Just mind your own business, and face the history.

    140000 to 1000000 Koreans supported the annexation.
    It was Koreans who suggested it first.
    More than 30000 Koreans applied for Japanese army.
    Some are enthusiastically supported Japan.
    Majority of Koreans who lived during Japanese rule said “nothing much happened.”

    And now South Korean people are beginning to support North Korea, the state ruled by meciless dictator.

  31. comment number 31 by: Gerry-Bevers

    Two Cents,

    Is “Ko Shiyokku” the Japanese pronunciation for Hong Sa-ik (洪思翊 – 홍사익)? If it is, then you may be right about his being a Class B war criminal. I had believed him to be a Class A because he was hanged, which I understood was the punishment reserved for Class A war criminals. However, after doing a little research, I found that hanging was common.

    Hong Sa-ik was in charge of POW camps in the Philippines, where prisoners died from more than just starvation. I do not know if he knew about the abuses in the camps, but Philippine POW camps were infamous.

    I do agree that the war crime trials were unfair, especially since no Allied military members were tried for war crimes. It was basically just a way of getting revenge. For example, how could the Allies come up with a list of more than 300,000 class B & C Japanese war criminals? It sounds like they just took down the name of every Japanese they found. Even though they ended up trying only 5,700 plus from the list, does anyone really think they all got fair trials, especially in countries like the Philippines, Singapore, and China? In fact, many were executed without trials.

    Anyway, I think people should know that the Japanese were not the only ones committing war crimes.

  32. comment number 32 by: Two Cents

    Gerry,
    Yes, it’s 洪思翊. Although I know abuses were common in POW camps, I really doubt such a high-ranking officer would have been involved in it. Maybe the Allies found him guilty of ignoring the abuses or simply found him responsible for whatever conditions that were present.

  33. comment number 33 by: YoungRocco

    Ponta and Mr. Bevers:

    Thank You.

    Listen Well.

    There is much I have left to teach you.

    Let’s Begin.

    Mr. Bevers’ Quote:

    Prime Minister Abe should ignore the childish antics of the Koreans and Chinese and visit the Yasukuni Shine whenever he feels it appropriate. The shine is not honoring war criminals; it is honoring dead soldiers

    You’ve set up a false dichotomy, Mr. Bevers. Dead soldiers and war criminals are not mutually opposing concepts. In essence, a dead soldier can sometimes be a war criminal as well. The 14 War Criminals honored at Yasukuni are dead soldiers as well as war criminals.

    Moving along.

    Korea, China, and even the United States have war criminals buried in their national cemeteries, yet that does not mean those cemeteries are honoring war criminals, just as it does not mean Japan’s shine is.

    The fact that China, Korea and the United States have war criminals does not acquit the Japanese War criminals of the acts they committed. Thus, you do not aid your case by mentioning other countries with war criminals.

    Secondly, their are fundamental differences between the Yasukuni shrine and the national cemeteries in both the United States and Korea.

    1. At a national cemetery, individual veterans can be grieved and mourned
    for. At Yasukuni, all spirits are considered merge. Therefore, when you
    mourn for spirits at Yasukuni, you necessarilly mourn for all of them.

    2. The shrine grounds contain a museum which adheres to a revisionist
    interpretation of history. The shrine denies that the Nanjing Massacre
    took place and interprets Japan’s imperial projects as a war of defense
    against Western Imperialism. In addition, it labels the War Crimes
    Tribunal as a “sham trial.”

    The Korean and American cemeteries, however, do not send politically
    charged messages excusing their respective nations of wrongdoing.

    These two differences make visits to Yasukuni fundamentally different
    from visits to the Korean and American national cemeteries.

    Going further.

    Koreans are being especiallly hypocritically since they fought on the side of Japan in the Asian and Pacific wars

    Now you’re simply bandying about rhetoric, Mr. Bevers. You are well aware that Korea was not a sovereign nation during World War II. You should also consider that the Korean Government in Exile, declared war on Japan.

    which would mean that Koreans were not the victims of Japanese war crimes, but the abettors.

    Here you make a gross error in logic. Gerry, if, Ponta’s figures are correct then 300,000 Koreans volunteered for service in the Japanese Imperial Army.(Which, means that 14,200,000 didn’t volunteer for service). Gerry, don’t let your desperation to make a point deter you from logical argument. The presence of a minority of Koreans in the Japanese Imperial Army does not preclude criticism of Japan by today’s 48,500,000 Koreans.

    Little, if any, credit is given to foreign countries for Korea’s develop

    Your view of Korea’s lack of credit citation is interesting, Mr. Bevers. Especially in light of the fact that you are from the United States.

    Mr. Bevers, how many American history textbooks mention that British capital was responsible for the financing of the Eerie Canal?

    Mr. Bevers, how many American textbooks make more than a passing mention of the contributions of Native Americans in the fight for American Independence?

    The answer: frighteningly few.

    Mr. Bevers, a country’s history textbooks have a responsibility to focus on domestic history and Korean textbooks do that very well.

    yet blame for Korea’s problems is showered on them.

    More platitudes, Mr. Bevers. Name the problems which Korean textbooks blame on Japan.

    As for Korea’s historical claim on “Dokdo,” that is just a big, fat lie. Koreans need to shut up and stop worrying about Yasukuni, Japanese textbooks, and Dokdo, and start worrying about North Korea and China.

    Mr. Bevers, you’ll excuse my pointing out that you are in no position to advise Korea on its foreign policy.

    Plus, Mr. Bevers, I’ve already outlined my position on why China is not a threat to South Korea.

    I believe your response to my argument was “com’on.”

    By the way, I watched the Korean movie “Hanbando” last night. What a load of crap!

    please keep the profanity to a minimum, Mr. Bevers. The use of foul language indicates a lack of self control.

    Thank you for your time.

  34. comment number 34 by: ponta

    YoungRoccoThank You.

    Listen Well.

    There is much I have left to teach you.

    Let’s Begin.

    Dead soldiers and war criminals are not mutually opposing concepts. In essence, a dead soldier can sometimes be a war criminal as well. The 14 War Criminals honored at Yasukuni are dead soldiers as well as war criminals.

    They WERE war criminals, and they ARE deads.
    Japanese PM do not worship crimes unlike Korean government worship genocide maniac in Korean natinoal cemetry.
    Moving along.

    The fact that China, Korea and the United States have war criminals does not acquit the Japanese War criminals of the acts they committed.

    And you are morally inconsistent if you blame one and you don’t blame others.

    Secondly, their are fundamental differences between the Yasukuni shrine and the national cemeteries in both the United States and Korea.

    Yes, Korean national cemetery is founded by Korean government. Korean government endorse it.
    Yasukuni and the museum are run privately.

    1. At a national cemetery, individual veterans can be grieved and mourned
    for. At Yasukuni, all spirits are considered merge. Therefore, when you
    mourn for spirits at Yasukuni, you necessarily mourn for all of them.

    so what?

    2. The shrine grounds contain a museum which adheres to a revisionist
    interpretation of history. The shrine denies that the Nanjing Massacre
    took place and interprets Japan’s imperial projects as a war of defense
    against Western Imperialism. In addition, it labels the War Crimes
    Tribunal as a “sham trial.”

    PM does not endorse the museum’s historical view.He does not visit the museum.
    For your reference,

    Operation Iraqi Freedom

    The following American casualites of the war to free Iraq are being laid to rest in Arlington National Cemetery.
    May God Bless them and their loved ones.link

    Does Korean

    museum

    put up the articles by hankyore depicting massacre of civilians in Vietnam by Koreans?
    Here is history text book of North Korea.

    THE KOREAN WAR
    NORTH KOREA (JUNIOR HIGH)
    The American invaders who had been preparing the war of a long time,
    accompanied by their puppets, finally waged the war against the North half
    of the Republic on June 25th of the 39th year of the Junche
    calendar(1950).The bastards who crossed the 38th parallel at dawn were
    stoking the flames of war, jumping around mad men, yearning to invade the
    North under any pretext. And so our peaceful homeland was surrounded by the
    roar of cannons and the clouds of war.
    His Excellency, the great leader Kim Il-sung, summoned immediately as
    emergency council of the Cabinet. The great voice of his Excellency echoed in
    the room.
    “…….Those bastards are unparalleled in their ignorance. The American
    bastards were mistaken regarding our Chosun People.”
    “The American bastards look down upon Chuson People.As the saying goes
    wolf-dogs should be conquered with clubs, we should show to those ignorant
    invaders what our true color is.”

    Actually, the war between our newly founded country and the USーーrecognized
    worldwide as the world’s most powerful countryーーwas a tremendously unfair
    conflict. So the people around the world worriedly watched us, wondering how
    our people would fight against the US.

    “We have to fight against our enemies in order to defend the independence of
    our country, the freedom and honor of our people. We have to respond to their
    barbarous invasion by a war of independence. Our people’s Army will have to
    disable the attacks of the enemies and set out immediately a defence combat
    in order to get rid of the forceful invader.”
    page 266

    And South Korea agents bothered to pay tribute to the war shrine in North Korea where the above is her historical view on Korean War.

    These two differences make visits to Yasukuni fundamentally different
    from visits to the Korean and American national cemeteries.

    The case of Koreans are worse, because the government endorsed the criminals who massacred a million of Koreans in the national cemetery while Yasukuni is private entity.
    Japan did not ask South Korean agents to pay respect to Yasukuni while
    South Korean agents bothering to pay respects to war deads of Korean war in the North Korea which hold extremely distorted view is insulting to those who sacrificed their lives for Korea.

    Going further.

    You are well aware that Korea was not a sovereign nation during World War II. You should also consider that the Korean Government in Exile, declared war on Japan.

    That Korea was not a sovereign nation does not cancel the fact that more than 300,000 Koreans applied volountarily for Japanese army when Tojou, A criminal was a Prime Minister. The so called Korean government was not approved by the Allies.

    if, Ponta’s figures are correct then 300,000 Koreans volunteered for service in the Japanese Imperial Army.(Which, means that 14,200,000 didn’t volunteer for service).

    It is misleading.
    The total population of that year is supposedly around 25000000. We get 1250000 for male. Now not every male fit for applying for soldiers. They must be young. I am not sure how the population at the time was distributed.
    This is the distribution of Korea population as of 2004

    15 ~ 19 ….6.4%
    20 ~ 24….7.4%
    25 ~ 29…..8.1%

    The total is 21,9%
    Now Korea (as well as Japan) is aging society, so maybe there were more young men at the time. Let’s suppose 50% was young men.
    Then we get 62.5000 for young Korean male. Among them 300,000 male volountarily applied for Japanese army. You can not deny that is large number and it is by no means minority as you claim.

    Mr. Bevers, a country’s history textbooks have a responsibility to focus on domestic history and Korean textbooks do that very well.

    Oh my, Korean history textbookas of 1996 does not mention Jesu massacre, Vietnam Massacre etc. In other words, it is whitewashing history. That is why you did not know the massacre before Korean War in Korea. Can you name other incidents in south Korea where Koreans were killed before Korean War?

    I’ve already outlined my position on why China is not a threat to South Korea.

    As you please.

    But please keep the hypocrisy to a minimum, The lack of self-criticism
    indicates a lack of maturity.
    Thanks.

  35. comment number 35 by: Gerry-Bevers

    Young Rocco,

    Do you realize that you waste much time and space by writing silly things like “a dead soldier can sometimes be a war criminal as well”?

    I mentioned that Korea, China, and the US had war criminals buried in national cemeteries that their political leaders regularly visit not to excuse Japanese war criminals, but to point out the hypocrisy of complaining about Japanese leaders visiting Yasukuni Shine.

    At a national cemetery, individual veterans can be grieved and mourned for. At Yasukuni, all spirits are considered merge. Therefore, when you mourn for spirits at Yasukuni, you necessarilly mourn for all of them.

    Rocco, the above is another example of your statements that waste time and space.

    I do not know what the museum at Yasukuni says, but I understand that the Japanese prime minister does not visit the museum. On the other hand, Korean government textbooks were whitewashing massacres at Jeju and Yeosu as late as 2001. According to Bruce Cumings, the governor of Cheju privately told American intelligence that 60,000 people had died and that 40,000 had fled to Japan. Again, more hypocrisy.

    Koreans supported the Japanese war effort, even if they all did not actually fight. Koreans seem to hold all of Japan responsible for the actions of a few, yet refuse to take responsibility for their own actions. That is more hypocrisy.

    I do not know how much credit American middle and high school history books give to England, France, and other countries for the development of the United States, but I know how much Korean middle and high school history books give. They give practically none.

    Mr. Bevers, a country’s history textbooks have a responsibility to focus on domestic history and Korean textbooks do that very well.

    Have you read Korean middle and high school history books, Rocco? Well, I have. In regard to Korea’s colonial period, Korean textbooks focus almost exclusively on the resistence to Japanese rule and pretty much ignore everything else. World War II is mentioned only in passing, with the phrase, “After World War II,…” without explaining that Koreans supported Japan’s war in Asia and the Pacific. Yes, they talk about Korea’s “government in exile,” “resistence fighters, and “forced mobilization,” but they do not talk about how Koreans supported Japan’s war effort.

    More platitudes, Mr. Bevers. Name the problems which Korean textbooks blame on Japan.

    Surely you cannot be serious? Korean texbooks are anti-Japanese from almost start to finish. The word “interference” (간섭) is scattered throughout almost every chapter. It never seems to have been Korea’s fault. Things always seemed to go wrong because of “Japanese interference,” “Chinese interference,” or “American interference” without explaining that Koreans invited much of that interference. Here is how the Korean middle school history book describes the 1894 Kabo Reforms:

    “The Kabo Reforms was an opportunity for our country to modernize, as was clearly shown in the spirit of the fourteen articles of the Hongbeom. However, the reforms were not only pushed through too quickly, but Japanese interference also caused our countrymen to oppose them.

    Now here is what Bruce Cumings wrote about the reforms:

    A powerless Taewongun and a new premiership under Kim Hong-jip provided the fig leaf for Otori Keisuke, the Japanese minister, and a host of Japanese and Korean aides to send reform after reform through for the signature of Kojong (who duly signed every one, and no doubt any autumn leafs that wafted across his desk). Known as the kabo reforms, 208 separate laws were from the end of July 1894 endorsed by the king: class distinctions, slavery, the exam system, even the clothes Koreans wore, even the long pipes that symbolized yangban status, were abolished; a new State Council, with eight ministries on the Japanese model (Home Affairs, Finance, ets.) was established and new and stable coinage circulated; new tax laws unified the extration system, with rational taxes now paid in cash; the practice of punishing whole families for the transgressions of criminals came to an end. No more would the high officials ride in sedan chairs, hustled along by several groaning wretches.

    Now the man who had shepherded the fist Korean mission to new Japan, Inoue Kaoru, arrived in Seoul to replace Otori. He quickly sent the Taewongun into his last retirement. The old man hated the new reforms almost as much as he did the Japanese; he had come back to government only because he loathed Queen Min even more. (Many assumed that he had also encouraged the Tonghak revolts.) So ended the career of a remarkable Korean leader who showed the modern world the vigor of Confucian reform, almost as if history enjoyed exhaling the last hearty gasp of a dying order.

    Under Inoue still more new laws spewed forth, calling for Japanese advisers in every ministry and reorganizing the justice system. Korea now had a legal-rational court system and a countrywide national police. All of these reforms were capped in a new constitution, promulgated in January 1895. Inoue also brought from Japan two of the 1884 conspirators, Pak Yong-hyo and So Kwang-bom, placing them in high posts. Korean nationalists naturally see in these reforms and these people only the furtherance of Japan’s economic and political interests in Korea, and it is true that however indispensible the measures might have been, change under foreign auspices cannot substitute for autonomously activated reform. No one else saw Japan’s actions in this light, however. For most Westerners, Japan in this period was a shining beacon of enlightenment; for other Asians, it was a mecca of progress; and for Koreans who had groaned under the yoke of an aristocracy that, as it neared total collapse, seemed only to exact more privilege fro itself, the reforms were a welcome antidote.

    What would a slave or a butcher care for the pride of the yangban, now shamed by Japan?…

    So I am in not position to advise Korea on its foreign policy Rocco? I’ll keep that in mind.

    And you do not like my referring to the Korea movie, Hanbando, as “a load of crap”? All right, I wll try to keep my profanity to a minimum, but Hanbando was a load of crap.

    You’re welcome.

  36. comment number 36 by: YoungRocco

    Ponta:

    How are you doing?

    While I truly value the links you have provided, I must point out that you are drifting off topic.

    Keep in mind that the topic of this thread is whether Japan’s Prime Minister should visit Yasukuni Shrine.

    Your previous posts seem aimed at answering the question of whether Korea and China are justified in criticizing Japan.

    You should consider, Ponta, that not everyone who disagrees with the Japanese Prime Minister’s visits to Yasukuni is Korean. Therefore, you do not do your argument justice when you point out similarities between Korean and Japanese war criminals.

    In your next post, I would suggest that you focus on proving why you believe the Japanese Prime Minister visits to Yasukuni are justified.

    But please keep the hypocrisy to a minimum, The lack of self-criticism
    indicates a lack of maturity.

    This is where you and I have a point of departure. I am well aware of Koreas problems and have on previous occasions discussed them with you.

    Ponta, You have not mentioned a single problem with contemporary Japan. Are you capable of admitting that Japan has serious problems?

    Also, I look forward to reading the reasons behind your support for Yasukuni visits.

    Take Care.

  37. comment number 37 by: YoungRocco

    Mr. Bevers:

    Glad to hear from you once again.

    After, I read the first paragraph of your posts, I immediately spotted the central nexus of your misunderstanding:

    I mentioned that Korea, China, and the US had war criminals buried in national cemeteries that their political leaders regularly visit not to excuse Japanese war criminals, but to point out the hypocrisy of complaining about Japanese leaders visiting Yasukuni Shine.

    I welcome your pointing out the instances of whitewashing that sometimes occur in Korean textbooks, Mr. Bevers. However, you must keep in mind the topic of this thread.

    Scroll back to the top and you’ll read this poll question:

    Now that Shinzo Abe has become Japan’s prime minister, do you think it is appropriate for him to visit the Yasukuni Shrine?

    I believe that it is inappropriate for Abe to visit this shrine and have briefly outlined my reasoning.

    You have failed to provide any reasoning justifying a visit by Abe to Yasukuni shrine.

    Rather, you have tried to appeal to the “bandwagon approach.” by referring to a number of other heads of state that visit national cemeteries. You then mention Korean heads of state as among that number, and then label Koreans as “hypocrites.”

    You are well within your rights to point out instances of hypocrisy among Koreans, Mr. Bevers, but you must remember that doing so does not help your argument.

    As I am sure you are aware, it is a weak tactic indeed to focus attention on the person making the claim instead of on the claim itself, Mr. Bevers. I’ll illustrate my point by anecdote.

    An ex-convict walks into a bar and orders a pint of Ginger Ale. The waiter takes the ex-convicts order, walks to the kitchen and brings back a pint of ice-cold ginger ale. The convict finishes the pint, walks up to the counter and asks for the price. The attendant says to the ex-con that the price of the pint is $3.00. The ex-con hands the attendant a $5.00 note and receives only $1.00 in change. The ex-con says that the attendant has made an error, and that he is short $1.00.

    The attendant says, “You’re a convicted criminal. Therefore, your math is wrong.”

    (Note: The characters in this anecdote are not intended to resemble any nation.)

    Now, I think this anecdote clearly illustrates the mistake you’ve made. You’ve confused pointing out flaws in a person/nation with pointing out flaws in an argument. Mr. Bevers, when a hypocrite tells the truth, that truth is no less truthful than another persons truth:

    Stealing is immoral. If this claim is true, it is not rendered any less true when claimed by a thief.

    Murdering is immoral. If this claim is true, it is not rendered any less truthful when claimed by a murderer.

    18 multiplied by 18 equals 324. If this claim is true, it is not rendered any less true, when claimed by a mathematically illiterate student.

    Mr. Bevers, it would be in your best interests to tailor your arguments to the question. As a precursor to forming your thoughts, might I suggest tackling the issue from a cost-benefit perspective?

    In any event, I do hope that you will be able to narrow your focus to arguments supporting the propriety of Yasukuni visits.

    I look forward to reading your response.

  38. comment number 38 by: ponta

    YoungRocco
    Thanks

    You should consider, Ponta, that not everyone who disagrees with the Japanese Prime Minister’s visits to Yasukuni is Korean. Therefore, you do not do your argument justice when you point out similarities between Korean and Japanese war criminals.

    I presented the argument against the foreign nations interfering in this issue.
    1) It is domestic issue.
    2)It is a matter of private citizen.

    And I pointed out the double standard Korea holds, (for that matter, China also hold the double standard)

    1)South Korean agents bothered to pay tributes to war deads, which include war criminals in North Korea where it holds the distorted view on history.
    2)South Korea government honors the person who is responsible for the deaths of a million of Korean civilians in the national cemetery.
    3)South Korea government approve the distorted history textbook.
    Nonetheless, South Korean general public are mostly silent about them while they fiercely blame Japanese PM visiting the shrine.

    Moreover, I argued that Korea was in no position to complain of Yasukuni
    1)Yasukuni is the shrine for war-deads.
    2)Japan and Korea had no war.
    3)The museum in question does not mention the colonization because it is about the War.

    Besides, I pointed out hypocritical nature of Korean government protesting with China against JPM visiting Yasukuni.
    1) More than 300,000 Korean young men applied for Japanese army when Tojou, A criminals was Prime Minister. That is by no means minority.
    2) Korea is not a victim in the same sense that Chinese were victims with regard to the War. Korea was rather a part of aggressor.
    3)By hiding the truth to Korean people and to the world, Korea is pretending to be innocent while blaming Japan’s past injustice.

    In your next post, I would suggest that you focus on proving why you believe the Japanese Prime Minister visits to Yasukuni are justified

    First my point is not that JPM’s visit is justified but that Korean government’s
    protest is unjustified.

    Second, I don’t care if JPM visit any shrine, temple, Shinto, Islam, Buddhist, as a private person.
    But as I said before, an individual right to religion should be guaranteed. And this is the justification for JPM as a citizen has right to visit Yasukuni.
    An individual has the right to faith and .thought. It is guaranteed constitutionally.
    Visiting Yasukuni is a matter of individual right to faith and thought.
    And

    Prime Minister Koizumi is of the firm conviction that Japan’s present peace and prosperity are founded on the noble sacrifices made by those who lost their lives in the war. He visits Yasukuni Shrine to mourn and offer his respect and thanks to those who had to lay down their lives on the battlefield against their will; to reaffirm the importance of ensuring the present peace and prosperity of Japan, which those who died in the war were unable to witness; and to uphold Japan’s pledge not to engage in a war. He makes the visits as an individual citizen, not in an official capacitymofa

    Therefore PM as a citizen has the right to visit Yaskuni.
    Note that it is constitutional right rather than morally right.
    For instance, it is said DaVinci Code hurted many Christian. The author declared it was a fiction, but it still hurted them. That does not mean the author has no right to publish it. That freedom is guaranteed by the constitution.
    In view of ethics, China ‘s claim is that PM’s visiting hurt the feeling of Chinese people therefore it is morally wrong. But hurting the feeling based on arbitrary interpretation of visiting does not override the constitutional right and does not make the act morally wrong.
    Another claim is that PM vising Yaskuni symbolize the militarism therefore it is wrong, but the this claim is based on the ungrounded premise. Japan does not hold militarism.
    Still another claim, which is Roh’s , is that unless Japan change historical view, visiting is wrong. I find it hard to understand the claim itself.
    (In any case, I can not help but feel hypocrite of the two government.)
    Since it is not morally wrong to be blamed, to be sanctioned., any government, Japanese, Korean, Chinese ,protest against it is not grounded.

    Third, however in case of honoring war-deads, I personally think that there should be another religion-neutral place where all the war deads in the battle who were involved in the war with Japan are honored, where people all over the world can visit, where prime minister as an prime minister can visit.
    There is such an place already in Chidorigafuti, but political situation as it is, I think Japan might be better to construct a new place.(Still it does not mean that his/her right to visit Yasukuni as a private citizen can be violated, it is a matter of constitutional right,)

    I am well aware of Koreas problems and have on previous occasions discussed them with you.

    I am glad to hear that. But I was surprised to hear from such a person, for instance, that Masan’s claim to Tsuhima was justified. I guess even Korean central government would consider it ungrounded.

    You have not mentioned a single problem with contemporary Japan. Are you capable of admitting that Japan has serious problems?

    Sure, there are many problems in Japanese society and Japan’s diplomacy
    in international relation. But notice that for almost every issue, there are pros and cons among Japanese. For instance, as for Dokdo there are scholars who argue for Korea, that is why I know Korea’s claim. As for Yasukuni, Asahi and Yomiuri, two major newspapers, are against JPM visiting Yasukuni.
    The problem with Korea as I see it lies with fact that freedom of expression is in substance oppressed, and they have little access to the sources that reveal injustice, bias, falseness of Korean government, Korean media. Who can say in public that Dokdo belongs to Japan legally and historically in Korea? Who can say Roh’s protest against JPM’s visiting Yasukuni is a crap in Korea? Almost all Japanese agree that the earth is not flat but few would have the same opinion about historical, or political issues in Japan. I rather shudder at the fact that all the people in a country agree on the historical or political issue, do you not?
    Thanks.

    .