Japan

[Lyka]

most anime includes some sort of fighting right? well aren't the japanese pacifists (ppl against violence)? i thought that it was a bit odd thats all.....

[Lady Macaiodh]

i don't know if they're pacifists or not, but anime is just entertainment so i don't think it has anything to do w/ it.

[coolkam007]

pacifism is a personal choice..

saying that all japanese people are pacifists is like a stereotype..

[Lyka]

i mean they have pacifist laws, not to get involved in wars and such, they r assisting the US but not by fighting

[James]

[color=crimson][size=1]Yes, the Japanese are basically pacifists...ever since WWII, their military has greatly been reduced over time.

However, I think that they are a double edged sword for the most part.

I mean...some of those Japanese game shows border on being sick and disturbing lol...like the one where you have to get bitten by as many mosquitoes as possible...I mean...it's pretty sick stuff sometimes.

And Japanese schools are hardly pacifist. I've read so many stories about how teachers physically hurt students who either don't do the right thing, or are not performing well in class. There was a story of a school where they forced young men to jump into a freezing, raging river...to prove their "manhood and honor". I mean, I know Japanese culture is based on honor...but that practice has no diginity whatsoever.

And during WWII, the Japanese did some incredibly ferocious things. For example, they used to arrest Chinese people and test all kinds of bombs on them to see what effects they had. And in the POW camps, they would become involved in everything from rape to torture.

So personally, I find it strange how most Japanese people are quiet and peaceful, yet the country has been (and still is, to some extent) home to some of the most violent and gruesome practices known to man.

Having said all of that, don't get me wrong...

Japan is a beautiful country, and I love Japanese culture (afterall, my idol is Shigeru Miyamoto). So I have tremendous respect for Japan and its people. I'm just saying that, like any country in the world, it's not all sweetness and light lol.

But yeah...I would say that these days, they are basically pacifists.[/color][/size]

[Transtic Nerve]

Well..... the Japanese government is pacifist, but the majority of people are not. It is of the buddhist religion to promote peace and not to fight, that all are good, but not everyone in Japanee fully believes this.

And just because they are pacifist doesn't mean they can't make anime about war or whatever. I'm pacifist and I enjoy learning about war and writing about it.

[Lady Macaiodh]

this is kind of a ridiculous topic to post, b/c no country is really pacifist... don't tell me all governments don't perform secret experiments on human beings... you know they do.. how else could we perfect bio-chemical warfare? somewhere, in america, there is a military, or otherwise, complex performing warped experiments on human beings right now...

don't deny it. just think of 1972.

[coolkam007]

humans?.. why humans when you can make clones.. for all we know they could be genetically engenering clones, to make the perfect soldier, just imagin if they cloned a person enough that they woudn't need to use the draft.. they could just clone as many as they need, and you technically arnt killing any one.. besides the badguys that is..

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Lady Macaiodh [/i]
[B]this is kind of a ridiculous topic to post, b/c no country is really pacifist... don't tell me all governments don't perform secret experiments on human beings... you know they do.. how else could we perfect bio-chemical warfare? somewhere, in america, there is a military, or otherwise, complex performing warped experiments on human beings right now...

don't deny it. just think of 1972. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=crimson][size=1]You're partly right there. However, I think that countries can be "mostly" pacifist. I mean, obviously you can't call 100% of the country pacifist short of asking individual people...but you can make a generalization about the country.

I don't think all governments experiment on human beings though. Usually bio-experiments are done on labs...and not on actual people.

I mean, I don't support the idea that the US Government is involved in top secret, psychotic nasty tests on humans...I've always thought that was a paranoid fear that some people have.

However, I was just pointing out that Japan was particularly sadistic during WWII.[/color][/size]

[Harry]

i don't really see how you can consider them pacifists. like james has pointed out, they do really nasty stuff, and the schools are like prisons from what i've heard. and them testing it on human beings, that's the most paranoid thing i've ever heard

[BabyGirl]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Harry [/i]
[B]and them testing it on human beings, that's the most paranoid thing i've ever heard [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=deeppink]How is that paranoid? It is just plain sick, like how the Nazi doctors used concentration camp prisoners to test medical stuff on...

But I guess there are things to remember. It was a time of war, and during war...sometimes the rules don't count. The US were the ones that put Japanese in holding camps for the remainder of the war, and had the Allies lost, the US probably would have gotten in a lot of trouble for it. But the truth of it was, we [i]won[/i].

Think about this, "It's war, Ana. In the end, only one side wins. The other side, while doing something repeatedly throughout the conflict gets hunted down by those looking to claim a prize, and is punished for the acts in which they tried to make their statement with in the first place..."

It all makes sense if you read it carefully...[/color]

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by BabyGirl [/i]
[B]

[color=deeppink]How is that paranoid? It is just plain sick, like how the Nazi doctors used concentration camp prisoners to test medical stuff on...

But I guess there are things to remember. It was a time of war, and during war...sometimes the rules don't count. The US were the ones that put Japanese in holding camps for the remainder of the war, and had the Allies lost, the US probably would have gotten in a lot of trouble for it. But the truth of it was, we [i]won[/i].

Think about this, "It's war, Ana. In the end, only one side wins. The other side, while doing something repeatedly throughout the conflict gets hunted down by those looking to claim a prize, and is punished for the acts in which they tried to make their statement with in the first place..."

It all makes sense if you read it carefully...[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=crimson][size=1]It's true that in times of war, people do things that they would not normally do.

But there are two things here.

One is that both sides had POW camps. That's true. But the Japanese were incredibly satanic -- they were involved in all kinds of weird torture. Whereas the Americans weren't.

Also, the Japanese were the aggressors in WWII, not the Americans.

I mean...you guys think that Pearl Harbour was so big. But imagine the WTC attacks multiplied by three. That's what happened to Australia during WWII.

Japan bombed Darwin (northern most city) and they sent submarines into Sydney Harbour and started attacking it...

Luckily we, along with New Zealand and New Guinea were able to buffer them and stop them from advancing further. But America was purely a defensive force in WWII...they weren't the "attackers". So I guess that's where I draw the distinction.[/color][/size]

[Transtic Nerve]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B]

[color=crimson][size=1]It's true that in times of war, people do things that they would not normally do.

But there are two things here.

One is that both sides had POW camps. That's true. But the Japanese were incredibly satanic -- they were involved in all kinds of weird torture. Whereas the Americans weren't.

Also, the Japanese were the aggressors in WWII, not the Americans.

I mean...you guys think that Pearl Harbour was so big. But imagine the WTC attacks multiplied by three. That's what happened to Australia during WWII.

Japan bombed Darwin (northern most city) and they sent submarines into Sydney Harbour and started attacking it...

Luckily we, along with New Zealand and New Guinea were able to buffer them and stop them from advancing further. But America was purely a defensive force in WWII...they weren't the "attackers". So I guess that's where I draw the distinction.[/color][/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

Americans are always the defencive ones in war... HOWEVER we wouldn't be defending anything if we wouldn't be agressive in other people's business. The only reason Osama hates Americans is because we put our troops on holy land.... in a conflict that was none of our business.

We, Americans, always do something some other country or group doesn't like.... except in WWI and WWII... well yeah... we did do something the Germans didn't like in WWII, we sent supplies to Britian after claiming we were "neutral".... I don't recal anything we did other countries didn't like during WWI though....

[Lyka]

i wasn't really expecting such contreversial answers....... but, cool thanx for the history lesson.:D :D

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]

Americans are always the defencive ones in war... HOWEVER we wouldn't be defending anything if we wouldn't be agressive in other people's business. The only reason Osama hates Americans is because we put our troops on holy land.... in a conflict that was none of our business.

We, Americans, always do something some other country or group doesn't like.... except in WWI and WWII... well yeah... we did do something the Germans didn't like in WWII, we sent supplies to Britian after claiming we were "neutral".... I don't recal anything we did other countries didn't like during WWI though.... [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=crimson][size=1]Well, the thing is, America is often accused of being a fairweather friend.

On the one hand, America likes to be involved in world politics and take a leadership role. But in many cases, when there are problems/conflicts, America isn't interested.

So really, I think the biggest beef people have with America is that it often gets deeply involved in their affairs, and then never stays around to pick up the pieces.

I think that America needs to change its stance there a little (despite what officials tell you, one of the main reasons America defended Kuwait in the Gulf War was to protect its own Middle Eastern oil interests). So there does have to be a change in policy.

But I do think that America, as a world leader, kind of has that obligation to help smaller countries and to get involved.

I mean really, you have to be one or the other. You either lead and then take responsibility for that leadership...or you don't do either.[/color][/size]

[Transtic Nerve]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B]

[color=crimson][size=1]Well, the thing is, America is often accused of being a fairweather friend.

On the one hand, America likes to be involved in world politics and take a leadership role. But in many cases, when there are problems/conflicts, America isn't interested.

So really, I think the biggest beef people have with America is that it often gets deeply involved in their affairs, and then never stays around to pick up the pieces.

I think that America needs to change its stance there a little (despite what officials tell you, one of the main reasons America defended Kuwait in the Gulf War was to protect its own Middle Eastern oil interests). So there does have to be a change in policy.

But I do think that America, as a world leader, kind of has that obligation to help smaller countries and to get involved.

I mean really, you have to be one or the other. You either lead and then take responsibility for that leadership...or you don't do either.[/color][/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

yeah I know.... I'm not exactly fond of that aspect in our goverment and foriegn affairs department... I think, persoanlly, we should take a Switzerland approach to everything.... stay the hell away for it.... I mean seriously.... who hate Switzerland? No one.... because they stayed out of everything..... even if they were in the dead middle of it (WWI and WWII)... which I must say, sets an example, and a damn good one too. They are a role model country to me.

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]

yeah I know.... I'm not exactly fond of that aspect in our goverment and foriegn affairs department... I think, persoanlly, we should take a Switzerland approach to everything.... stay the hell away for it.... I mean seriously.... who hate Switzerland? No one.... because they stayed out of everything..... even if they were in the dead middle of it (WWI and WWII)... which I must say, sets an example, and a damn good one too. They are a role model country to me. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=crimson][size=1]Nope, Switzerland is NOT the model country. While I agree with much of what they do, staying neutral is an utter joke.

I mean, for the most part...for small specific things you can be neutral. But America has already "put its foot in" so to speak. If it were to become neutral now...well...it'd be even more disliked and would probably suffer greater terrorism threat.

Switzerland has no business being neutral on the issue of terrorism. As far as I'm concerned, being neutral means that you support terrorists. It is insane, in my opinion, for any country to be neutral in the face of something which threatens the entire planet.[/color][/size]

[Transtic Nerve]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B]

[color=crimson][size=1]Nope, Switzerland is NOT the model country. While I agree with much of what they do, staying neutral is an utter joke.

I mean, for the most part...for small specific things you can be neutral. But America has already "put its foot in" so to speak. If it were to become neutral now...well...it'd be even more disliked and would probably suffer greater terrorism threat.

Switzerland has no business being neutral on the issue of terrorism. As far as I'm concerned, being neutral means that you support terrorists. It is insane, in my opinion, for any country to be neutral in the face of something which threatens the entire planet.[/color][/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

Well thats not exactly what I meant.... I think we should obviosuly be against terrorism.... I mean... who would, in their right mind, support it?.... I mean on things like getting involved in foreign affairs that don't need you or that have nothing to do with you.

Switzerland DOESN'T even go as far to put their foot in.... in WWI and WWII they stayed nuetral and nobody harmed them.... I mean, by saying they were nuetral in WWII does that mean they supported the Nazi beliefs?.... no.... it's just how they run a pacifist government.... I Know they don't support terrorism, but thats not what I was refering to, and I don't think they are going to do anything that would involve violence to stop terrorism.... but I know they support the US in it's Anti-terrorism campain however I don't think they'll participate anyway in any attack preformed by the US or it's allied nations.

[Lady Macaiodh]

it would be nice if the us could remain neutral, but it's just not realistic. we are one of the biggest, most powerful countries on the planet. we will naturally be targeted no matter what we do.