NationStates Jolt Archive

ok, i lost my post last time and i'm not gonna re-post it ALL again. so anyways.

I'm sorry if i came off as a racist, it's not that i hate japenese people or anything(heck i can't an entire side of my family IS japenese), it's just i get highly annoyed at american idolization of it. Honestly there are other equally, if not more, facsinating cultures out there. sorry if i angered anyone, i get a little frustrated when everyone gives japan kudos and forgets about their misdeeds, whilst bashing china and not recognizing their historical achivments.

anywho, laenis is someone i really agree with, chivalry and bushido were both devolped in the same way, not that far from each other actually, both the product of people haveing to much time on their hands and haveing noone to fight (though i'm not sure on that theroy for europeans but for the japenese it was true).

The whole army thing depends on a general's abilty to lead his forces (if you don't consider time period streangth for each civilaztion) and if you do i'd think rome would decimate japan any day.

also, please don't associate me with that moron who said all japs are liars, i'm living proof (kinda) and i know many who are quite upstanding citezens.

and both have commited misdeeds (to put it mildly) and have given back to the world, though i think china's invented more (and it was NOT the mongol's who gave us paper money, the printing press, and gunpowder, and yess that is something to be proud of, those are quite some achivments!)

but you can't say which civilaztion is greater and which people better, you can't do it for any culture. They're all uniqe and all have pros and cons and really it's a matter of opinoin but personally i find china, historically and currently facsinateing, and much more so than japan (but thats just my opinoin) and i think that they'll be playing a greater role in world politics in the comeing years.. but as countrie's you CAN argue which is better, and china is getting up there.

Also i think what the chinese did that everyone else didn't is survive as a culture and a nation since Before (or after i'm not to great with timelines) egypt was around right into the information age today. noone else has done that.

um... Have you read any recent books? Japan's armed forces were destroyed during WW2 There is no way it can have a navy that matches the us on top of that they have no millitary presence other than a security force

as for you second statement Japan was on the brink of surrendering after the 1st nuclear bomb I have always thought the second bomb was uncalled for but thanks to people like you I now think there should have been more bombs droped on that island

regarding your views on taiwan It is not an independant country its headed by a rogue government that abandoned the main land as a result of a civil war. That war is on a perminant cease fire but its not over. therefore it is considered a part of china. if the korean war did not start china would have carried through the war and took back taiwan
if you are the leader of your country and a parts of it want to gain its independence wouldn't want to stop that? if you let it go I'm sure that you would be hated by all of your countrymen

Taiwan want more military supplies but china is not really making much threats to taiwan the only think they did was rattle the saber. the americans made clear that they did not want any side to change the present situation. China had not done anything it is taiwan that want to change it all.

Okay. What you have to realize is that there was a time when we sold many weapons to Japan. Under what they called, "Security force." Yes, they do have the M1 Abrams, which is the second best tank (first is the british challenger). Only they did not call it the, "Main battle tank," they called it the, "Heavy defence vehicle."

And yes, Japan actually DOES have a hediously powerful navy. They also put that under their defence forces. Actually, Japan's military is still something to be reckoned with, because their so called, "defence force," is almost a fully fledged military. Their navy is missing a few key things. Such as an aircraft carrier. But as for Battle ships and subs, Japan has.

It's like the IDF. Israeli Defence Force. Surprisingly kick-ass as a defence force. Nothing like what the Romans had.

And yeah, more bombs should have been dropped on Japan if the Prime Minister didn't do something about it.

As for Taiwan being a rouge nation and letting that go. Russia let Chechnya go, and so far the Russian population does not hate Russia. The Cechnyan people DO hate Russia...STILL, but that only gives me an incentive to commit mass geonicide. However, Taiwan is in no position to attack China. Giving them independence is like getting rid of something that will not benefit you at all. And so far, China HAS been making threats. The entire missle thing pointing to Taiwan, that's a pretty big threat. Oh yeah, and China complaining about the ratification of the Constutiton in Taiwan last year. That too is threatening.

If the Taiwanese people did not bother with American politicians, at this current situations, there would be nukes pointing at the 3 gorges dam, Beijing, and Shang Hai (Yes I know taiwan has no nukes, but technically neither does Japan).

Every nation has it's plus points and bad points, and I find the tendancy of people to ignore Japans bad points a bit annoying.

I know. I feel the same way. I love (some) anime, but I certainly don't pretend Japan is perfect.

no way, in japan peasants remained peasants and the japanese ashigaru (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashigaru) wouldnt have had a prayer against european landsknechte (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landsknecht).

ninja werent soldiers, they were assassins.

I think that what you mean when you say "ninja" is "shinobi". The number of operations carried out by "ninja" which involved spying far out-numbered those which involved assassination or sabotage. Why? Because "ninja" ain't cheap and their skills are best used for low-risk, high-profit ventures: like spying. "Ninja" were basically the Special Forces of pre-Tokugawa, and like modern special forces, their main tasks were reconnaisance and information gathering. But, also like special forces, they could be called upon to act as a military unit, generally attacking enemy troop convoys, poisoning water supplies, and other acts of sabotage behind enemy lines.

In reference to the charge of Gothic knights, samurai were samurai, not idiots. They developed pike and gun techniques that were extremely successful against samurai heavy cavalry (similar techniques won King Gustov Adolf of Sweden many victories in Europe at around the same time). Given that Japanese firearms were of superior quality to their Western counterparts, your Gothic knights just got creamed. By a buncha peasants! While Japanese armor and melee weapons may not be perfect for dealing with European knights, if the two came into contact, the samurai would have developed newer weapons (like fancy tetsubo) and relied more on guns and pikes to win (with light cavalry to ride down the enemy as he flees or to get a flank on the enemy).

For Mongols vs. Samurai and Mongols vs. Knights, the Mongols owned both of them. The Mongols bred the fastest horses, lived off the land in ways samurai and knights couldn't even dream of and were propelled by religious conviction to only enage their foes in ranged combat. Whenever knights and Mongols squared off, the Mongols always won. That's how Kiev and Moscow fell to the Mongols. Add on top of that, the Mongols mastery of siege warfare, and nothing stands up against them for long. The only times samurai won against the Mongols was during the second invasion, when samurai on boats, using hit and run tactics, gradually wore down the Mongols to the point where they finally decided to anchor in deeper waters (which was when taifun number two rolled up). And if you're going to say that the Mongols never fought Western European knights, that's BS. They utterly slaughtered Prussian knights, including those of the Teutonic Order. And all the close combat weaponry in the world means precisely dick when the other guy is punching holes through your armor at one hundred meters, with a faster horse bearing less weight than your horse.

On Mongol Cavalry Archers and Samurai Cavalry Archers: In this case, the Mongols win out through sheer expirience (and differences in training environments). Mongols were, as it is so often said, born in the saddle. To this day, young Mongol boys can do incredible feats on horseback, things that would make any cavallier green with envy. On top of that, samurai archers were taught to loose their bows at nigh point blank range, while one is riding amongst the enemy. The Mongols, on the other hand, would ride around their enemy, bombarding them with arrows from a longer range.

Lastly, the difference between bushido and the Code of Chivalry: Bushido was completely open to interpretation. All of the seven virtues were simply concepts which could be (and were) interpreted as the person in question willed it. Chivalry, however, was not open to interpretation. It was set in stone. No killing women, children, or old men. No killing clergy. No attacking church property. Not a whole lot to interprete there.

Okay. What you have to realize is that there was a time when we sold many weapons to Japan. Under what they called, "Security force." Yes, they do have the M1 Abrams, which is the second best tank (first is the british challenger). Only they did not call it the, "Main battle tank," they called it the, "Heavy defence vehicle."

The Japanese actually rely on a locally produced tank: the Type-90 MBT.

And whether or not the Challenger II is better than the M1A2 is up for debate: while the Challenger II has thicker armor and a better suspension system, the M1A2 has a higher top speed, and a smoothbore cannon (giving the tank greater versitility in target selection).

And yes, Japan actually DOES have a hediously powerful navy. They also put that under their defence forces. Actually, Japan's military is still something to be reckoned with, because their so called, "defence force," is almost a fully fledged military. Their navy is missing a few key things. Such as an aircraft carrier. But as for Battle ships and subs, Japan has.

The largest vessels the JMSDF has are missile destroyers, most of which are retrofitted WWII-era vessels.

As for Taiwan being a rouge nation and letting that go. Russia let Chechnya go, and so far the Russian population does not hate Russia. The Cechnyan people DO hate Russia...STILL, but that only gives me an incentive to commit mass geonicide. However, Taiwan is in no position to attack China. Giving them independence is like getting rid of something that will not benefit you at all. And so far, China HAS been making threats. The entire missle thing pointing to Taiwan, that's a pretty big threat. Oh yeah, and China complaining about the ratification of the Constutiton in Taiwan last year. That too is threatening.

When did Russia let Chechnya go? Have a source on that?

If the Taiwanese people did not bother with American politicians, at this current situations, there would be nukes pointing at the 3 gorges dam, Beijing, and Shang Hai (Yes I know taiwan has no nukes, but technically neither does Japan).

Er... Japan doesn't have any nukes, period. Nor does Taiwan. Taiwan's military, like the JSDF, is primarily built around defense.

Making a nuclear bomb is a lot easier if you're in posession of a Breeder Reactor. Nuff said.

"The JMSDF (Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force) is arguably the second-best navy in the Pacific, trailing only the United States Navy. The JMSDF has a large number of modern surface warships and the third-largest submarine force in the Pacific, and it could be a potential player in any fight in the Formosa Strait, due to the fact that Japan’s ties with Taiwan have become much closer."

"There are not many other modern tanks in the Abrams's class; the Leopard II from Germany, the LeClerc from France, the Challenger from the UK, the Type 1990 from Japan and the Merkava from Israel are the only ones that come immediately to mind. The Russian T90 isn't in the same class, neither is the Chinese Type 1998."

Laenis, I am right now studying in Osaka,Japan going further into the history of the Sengoku Jidai period. (I happen to be an otaku on the subject, very facinating) And while your arguement holds some weight, Khalivad and Thrashia are correct. Not to say that they are entirely right. Khalivad is mistaken in that all Ashigaru (footman in japanese) were fanatics. (Unless you count those who served under Oda Nobunaga in the later 16th century period, my nations name-sake, who viewed their lord as unbeatable)

If I recall properly, Oda's only fanatical troops were the Lotus sect warrior-monks. Who were more allies than anything and with whom he eventually had a 'reckoning'.

Thrashia is correct as well as Khalivad in their point on 'mind sets'. The Japanese are a people apart. If you were to paint the world in colors according to their idealogies, Japan would be a singular colored nation. Their life style, minds, history, and sense of honor is above any which has yet surfaced on the earth.

The Japanese would have you color it in one color. Actual history, particularly pre-modern, and even modern, it would be a riot of colors. Until the Meiji Restoration, there was no sense of being Japanese among the Japanese. They came from whichever province they hailed from and, in fact, they really didn't have a name for themselves as a whole, except for the occasional mention of Japan as being where the Sun Rises (Nihon-Nippon-Japan) which actually does little but tell us where Japan is, in relation to China. Added on top of all of these regional alliegences are the aboriginal Ainu, Okinawans, &c. and the more recent Chinese, Korean, and Western populations, and you don't get a very unified mix. The Japanese would, of course, have you believe otherwise.

On the question of a European army vs a Japanese one. Once thing I found is that, should you arm a Japanese army with guns and the like, in a European fashion; they would destroy any European army. You have to understand that some daimyo (fuedal lords) fielded larger armies than the King of France and England combined. From just that time period it would require the uniting of the entire Holy Roman Empire, Italian Princeps, France, England, and all the smaller nations at the time to be able to even get close to the large armies that Toyotomi Hideyoshi or Tokugawa Ieyasu fielded. It would have been quite easy, had the japanese been united and had a 'time period-modern' navy, for them to over-run Europe.

They did have a modern (for their time period) navy. And they invaded Korea. And got run over for it: they flat out failed. Given that European warships of the time were very similar (in mission profile) to the Korean ones (which kicked the tail of the Japanese warships in nearly every engagement), the Japanese's chances start to wane. Throw into that the massive distances required to travel to Europe, especially when they couldn't even keep their troops in Korea supplied! and you have a recipe for disaster.

But, you are correct in saying that Japan was much wealthier at the time than Europe.

no way, in japan peasants remained peasants and the japanese ashigaru (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashigaru) wouldnt have had a prayer against european landsknechte (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landsknecht).
Didn't read your own article didja? Hideyoshi wasn't samurai when he started, he was when he finished. It was in the EDO Period that the social ranks became rigged, and even then, there was a lot of social mobility, just not from lower class to samurai or samurai to lower class (actually the class system really only worked to keep samurai in power, and to keep them broke by being samurai so they couldn't fight each other any more. Tokugawa wasn't a nice man, but he WAS a very effective leader and canny politician).

And it would be a toss up I would say, as the Japanese firearms during the very begining of the Edo period were actually better than their European counterparts.

I very much doubt it made any difference, and I don't think Ashigaru and German Pikemen are a really fair comparison. Whilst Ashigaru WERE peasants and whilst trained, they were not exactly brilliant warriors on any level. The pikemen of central europe were legendary in their professionalism and discipline. They were often veterans of countless battles. The Ashigaru were mainly badly equipped sword fodder, although some may have being more trained and drilled than others .
Not so badly equiped actually, or trained. During the Waring States period, these were professionals. However, the pikemen were a full timed army so the comparison would be more towards the conscripted serf armies and the Ashigaru.

The largest vessels the JMSDF has are missile destroyers, most of which are retrofitted WWII-era vessels.
Japan has a number of AEGIS destroyers from the US. It IS a blue water navy (mater of fact, there a chunk of it in the Indian Ocean right now). China doesn't have the ability to leave the shelf area (which is why I always laugh about the dread Red China Threat. It might have a very large army, but it has no way of getting it anywhere).

The SDF is still the second best funded, and second best equiped force in the area, if not the world.

Of course, the point is a silly one anyway, if China was ever stupid enough to actually attack Japan, America would take it as an attack on itself (being there's HOW many US military bases in Japan?). From there, China would be facing a combined JMSDF and US Navy at sea, a combined JASDF and US Air Force in the air, and a combined JGSDF and US Army/Marines on the ground, and all groups have extensive training with each other. That's not a plesant way to spend your time.

Of course, the point is a silly one anyway, if China was ever stupid enough to actually attack Japan, America would take it as an attack on itself (being there's HOW many US military bases in Japan?). From there, China would be facing a combined JMSDF and US Navy at sea, a combined JASDF and US Air Force in the air, and a combined JGSDF and US Army/Marines on the ground, and all groups have extensive training with each other. That's not a plesant way to spend your time.

I think there's just the one in Okinawa, although I think there may be one in Yokohama. But it would also have to do with the fact that Japan and the US signed a treaty at the end of the Occupation, which bound us to their defense and them to ours.

I think there's just the one in Okinawa, although I think there may be one in Yokohama.
Just ONE in Okinawa, and MAYBE one in Yokohama...?

Ok, I give up. You have no bloody idea what on earth you're talking about.

I think there's just the one in Okinawa, although I think there may be one in Yokohama. But it would also have to do with the fact that Japan and the US signed a treaty at the end of the Occupation, which bound us to their defense and them to ours.




Isn't that a bit outdated? I have long felt it is time for american to bring their troops home, Japan can take care of itself.

Just ONE in Okinawa, and MAYBE one in Yokohama...?

Ok, I give up. You have no bloody idea what on earth you're talking about.

That could be because I've served this many times in the armed forces: 0
Or maybe because I've visited Japan this many times: 0

The only base I ever hear of is the USN/USMC and USAF base(s) on Okinawa and I've heard of American base(s) in Yokohama once. In all my studies of Japan, no bases other than those two have ever been discussed.

EDIT: In fact, I've never even heard of a base in Yokohama. All I've heard about is the American community living there, where things are practically identical to the US. I'll be checking my Cold War-era map of bases around the globe, now....

USMC base on Okinawa (Camp SD Butler), USA base 25 mi SW of Tokyo (Camp Zama), USN base in Sasebo (FLTACT Sasebo), USAF base on Okinawa (Kadena AB), USMC base in Iwakuni (MCAS Iwakuni), USAF/JASDF base in Misawa (Misawa AB), USN base in Kamiseya (NAF Atsugi), USA base on Okinawa (Torii Station), USN base near Tokyo (Yokosuka), USAF base 28 mi NW of Tokyo (Yokota AB). So I was off. By a wee bit. :eek:

Isn't that a bit outdated? I have long felt it is time for american to bring their troops home, Japan can take care of itself.

Maybe. Given that Japan has descreased spending on the JSDF, and given that Japan's entire defense policy is based on Marines in Kevlar armor showing up, that isn't very likely. Afterall, why would Japan want to pay for their own military, when they have one of the world's best parked in it.

The Japanese actually rely on a locally produced tank: the Type-90 MBT.

And whether or not the Challenger II is better than the M1A2 is up for debate: while the Challenger II has thicker armor and a better suspension system, the M1A2 has a higher top speed, and a smoothbore cannon (giving the tank greater versitility in target selection).


M1A2 maybe quick but the tourbine engine is a hell of a drinker. Challenger maybe a lot heavier but the service distance per tank of fuel it is actually longer than the M1A2 (which is only 391km for the m1 vs 450 in the challenger)

the hydropneumatic suspension means it can shoot while moving (the type 90 can also shoot while moving, something m1 can't do.

speaking of MBTs, Leopard 2 is the best available, ability to hunt and kill while moving at 50kph in superb.

Also the 120 mm gun in the M1A2 and type-90 is "MADE IN GERMANY" (export version of course) while the leopard uses the domastic version.

:mp5: GOTH POWER!:mp5:

Isn't that a bit outdated? I have long felt it is time for american to bring their troops home, Japan can take care of itself.

Doubtfull seeing as they have to face two rival powers in their direct vicinity China and North-Korea.

I dislike both China and Japan.

That kind of view worries me - I really don't see their lifestyle, mindset or sense of honour as 'above any which has yet surfaced on the earth' in any way to any other. In fact, to me, a lot of it is incredibly stupid. The whole overly strict politeness codes for example...that doesn't show respect, it just is being reallytedious. I thought us British were too polite, but in Japan it's always being such a big thing, it restricts social discourse in my view. I also think that the way they treat women is hardly 'honourable', as well as their racist tendancies which obviously are a strong undercurrent judging from the "No non-japanese" signs shown on that website. They also have a worrying history of opressing the Chinese and regarding 'gaijin' as sub human - just look at how they treated POWs. They seemed to have shaped up since then, but it's not completely gone.

Every nation has it's plus points and bad points, and I find the tendancy of people to ignore Japans bad points a bit annoying.

1) Name a race or civilization that holds or historically ever held for an extended period of time the same level of 'honor code' that the Japanese had.

Answer: There are none. The closests to consider would be the Muslims during the Ottoman Empire's golden age, before it became corrupt and the 'Sick Man of Europe'.





If I recall properly, Oda's only fanatical troops were the Lotus sect warrior-monks. Who were more allies than anything and with whom he eventually had a 'reckoning'.

The Lotus sect warriors were in effect his most fanatical, however Oda was not undermissible to the point that he only had a small group of fanatics. Many of troops were fanatically loyal. To say that all of them were is an obvious overstatement; I was mearly making a point that their loyalty to their general or leige lord would be higher than that of hired European mercenaries.


The Japanese would have you color it in one color. Actual history, particularly pre-modern, and even modern, it would be a riot of colors. Until the Meiji Restoration, there was no sense of being Japanese among the Japanese. They came from whichever province they hailed from and, in fact, they really didn't have a name for themselves as a whole, except for the occasional mention of Japan as being where the Sun Rises (Nihon-Nippon-Japan) which actually does little but tell us where Japan is, in relation to China. Added on top of all of these regional alliegences are the aboriginal Ainu, Okinawans, &c. and the more recent Chinese, Korean, and Western populations, and you don't get a very unified mix. The Japanese would, of course, have you believe otherwise.

Here you are quite wrong. All Japanese considered themselves united and a people under the Emperor, the Son of Heaven. They considered and still do the Japan or Nippon is legendarily known as the 'Land of the Gods'. The Ainu are in truth very different, as you point out, however their being regionally located in Hokkaido and less 'war-like' tendencies led them to be driven further north and become servants or serfs in all sense of the term. As I am aware of modern times there is no need to respond to that, since this arguement pertains to history.



They did have a modern (for their time period) navy. And they invaded Korea. And got run over for it: they flat out failed. Given that European warships of the time were very similar (in mission profile) to the Korean ones (which kicked the tail of the Japanese warships in nearly every engagement), the Japanese's chances start to wane. Throw into that the massive distances required to travel to Europe, especially when they couldn't even keep their troops in Korea supplied! and you have a recipe for disaster.

But, you are correct in saying that Japan was much wealthier at the time than Europe.

I think he meant modern as in concept comparison to European ships. They did not have the decked levels with cannon like the Spanish and Portugease; nor were they good at deep sea seafaring, good coastal sailors; but not up to 'snuff' by European standards. Korean ships were copies of those made by the Chinese, Korea at this time being a sub-servient state to the Chinese whose intervention during the Japanese invasion caused them to be overwhelmed. Not to mention, as I said, that the Japanese do not make the best of sailors (at the time) and thus their score mark for naval battles would undoubtablely be low.

I would say that had Japan been successful in uniting earlier than the late 16th century and having made more cocentrated efforts to take over Korea, that they could varily have taken on China in say the middle 1400s (China at this time was suffering huge famine and other such upheavals such as rebellion and the like) and controlled them. Then whose to say that they couldn't then re-trace the mongel's steps and find their way to Europe? Its an interesting idea, but I'm not going to start that up, thats for another thread topic and discussion.

1) Name a race or civilization that holds or historically ever held for an extended period of time the same level of 'honor code' that the Japanese had.

Answer: There are none. The closests to consider would be the Muslims during the Ottoman Empire's golden age, before it became corrupt and the 'Sick Man of Europe'.


What do you mean by "the same level of honor code"? There are levels of honour that you can quantify? I don't know if any other cultures have held the same code of honour for the same amount of time (Which would be a bad thing, in my opinion), but I certainly don't think the Japanese code of honour is in any way superiour to any other. Like I say, a lot of it is pretty disgusting to me. Someone once told me this story of a samurai who killed himself simply for getting a small part of etiquette wrong, to exemplify how honourable they were. That doesn't seem honourable to me - that just seems plain moronic and petty. I'd hate to live in a culture where that was considered anything above pathetic - in most cultures someone who did that would be mocked, not revered, and rightly so.

M1A2 maybe quick but the tourbine engine is a hell of a drinker. Challenger maybe a lot heavier but the service distance per tank of fuel it is actually longer than the M1A2 (which is only 391km for the m1 vs 450 in the challenger)

the hydropneumatic suspension means it can shoot while moving (the type 90 can also shoot while moving, something m1 can't do.

speaking of MBTs, Leopard 2 is the best available, ability to hunt and kill while moving at 50kph in superb.

Also the 120 mm gun in the M1A2 and type-90 is "MADE IN GERMANY" (export version of course) while the leopard uses the domastic version.

:mp5: GOTH POWER!:mp5:

The main reason the M1 Abrams consumes so much fuel is because it uses a turbine, which is smaller than the diesel engines favored on other tanks. Of course, as it is so often pointed out, the gains made by having the smaller engine are counter-weighted by the greater amount of fuel required to power it. However, the engine is so quiet compared to those of its competitors, that many people have called it a "stealth" tank!

Your information concerning the Abrams's apparent inability to move and shoot is highly inaccurate. We Americans invented the ability during the Second World War. Our tanks still have the damned things, only now they're controlled by computers. The Abrams can clip along at a healthy 50mph and put a 120mm Sabot down range two clicks with perfect accuracy: like the Leopard IIA6, the Merkava Mk. 4, &c.

Strictly speaking, the only real advantage the Leopard IIA5 has over the Abrams is that its armor is cheaper, being made primarily out of steel, instead of kevlar, depleted uranium, &c. Which is the same advantage is holds over the Challenger II. Like the Challenger II, the Leopard IIA6 is actually a good deal slower than the Abrams. The main advantage in concrete terms between the Leopard IIA6 is that the Leopard mounts a 120mm/L55 cannon, where the Abrams mounts a cannon identical to the Leopard IIA5's 120mm/L44 cannon. Odds are that the next variant of the Abrams will mount the L55 cannon (and probably the next variant of the Merkava, as well).

In terms of which one is available, most agree that they are too similar to make a difference, but many lean towards the Merkava Mk IV, due to firepower (120mm/L44 cannon capable of firing IMI-manufactured AT and AA missiles, co-ax 7.62mm MG, two remote-controlled copolla-mounted 7.62mm MGs, and a 60mm mortar) and crew survivability (the engine on the Merkava is mid-mounted, making it act as a shield for the crew against any hits to the front armor of the tank), and the addition of virtually standard (in Western tanks, but notably lacking in Russian and Chinese tanks) CASE ammunition storage.

Here you are quite wrong. All Japanese considered themselves united and a people under the Emperor, the Son of Heaven. They considered and still do the Japan or Nippon is legendarily known as the 'Land of the Gods'. The Ainu are in truth very different, as you point out, however their being regionally located in Hokkaido and less 'war-like' tendencies led them to be driven further north and become servants or serfs in all sense of the term. As I am aware of modern times there is no need to respond to that, since this arguement pertains to history.

The Ainu once controlled all of Honshu, and probably more than that originally. They have been slowly driven north and exterminated by the "Japanese" Japanese constantly, until recently, when they were caught red-handed doing so.

And if what you say about the Japanese is true, why is it that the Emperor was living in abject poverty by the time of the Onin Wars? Simply put, the idea of Japan as a united realm is a very recent idea. Anyone who says that the Japanese have always felt united is revising history or buying into the nationalistic pinings of the Meiji era militarists. Even though the shogun claimed control over all Japan, the reality was much different. No one really controlled all of Japan until the Meiji Restoration.

I think he meant modern as in concept comparison to European ships. They did not have the decked levels with cannon like the Spanish and Portugease; nor were they good at deep sea seafaring, good coastal sailors; but not up to 'snuff' by European standards. Korean ships were copies of those made by the Chinese, Korea at this time being a sub-servient state to the Chinese whose intervention during the Japanese invasion caused them to be overwhelmed. Not to mention, as I said, that the Japanese do not make the best of sailors (at the time) and thus their score mark for naval battles would undoubtablely be low.

The Korean warships were not copies of their Chinese counter parts. The warships the Koreans made were unique to Korea, though no doubt influenced by those of the Chinese. Korean warships were primarily of two varieties, of which we see none similar to those used by the Chinese. The most famous of these two is the "turtle ship". A Korean-only design, which many historians believe was invented by the famous Admiral Yi, who is widely acknowledged in Korea as being the "Savior of Korea". He saved them from the Japanese, and was never once defeated in battle by them.

You are, however, wrong about Japanese sailors. They were some of the best in the region and their pirates were a regular plague and very feared by the Koreans and the Chinese (among others). The problem with the Japanese was that they allowed bushido and the tactics favored by their piratical kin to get in the way of intelligence and logic and effect how they designed their vessels: they relied on boarding parties, not long range bombardment, a fatal flaw which meant that they never once defeated a fleet under the command of Admiral Yi.

I would say that had Japan been successful in uniting earlier than the late 16th century and having made more cocentrated efforts to take over Korea, that they could varily have taken on China in say the middle 1400s (China at this time was suffering huge famine and other such upheavals such as rebellion and the like) and controlled them. Then whose to say that they couldn't then re-trace the mongel's steps and find their way to Europe? Its an interesting idea, but I'm not going to start that up, thats for another thread topic and discussion.

As I stated, the Japanese were never truly united until the 1850s. Given the Korean's excellence at sea, it is doubtable that the Japanese would have made many inroads to the mainland. Given the chear size of China and their memory of the Mongols, nothing would have united them faster than a Japanese invasion. Given Japanese inferiority in numbers of men, they'd have to settle for Manchuria, or else they'd stretch themselves too thin. And, if we're going to say the 1400s, then the Japanese have been double-screwed at sea: this was the time of the Ming Dynasty, who was founded by a man who made his empire as a naval commander.

The Japanese also lacked the Mongol lifestyle, which enabled the Mongols to succeed so often. The Japanese would have fallen flat on their face, expiriencing winters colder than those they had ever expirienced and summers hotter and dryer. More likely the Chinese would have made contact with the Europeans, had the Ming Dynasty chosen to continue Zheng He's expeditions beyond Africa.

1) Name a race or civilization that holds or historically ever held for an extended period of time the same level of 'honor code' that the Japanese had.

Answer: There are none. The closests to consider would be the Muslims during the Ottoman Empire's golden age, before it became corrupt and the 'Sick Man of Europe'.

The Amerindians, the Mongols, the Bedoin, and the Gypsies.

The Amerindians, the Mongols, the Bedoin, and the Gypsies.

Romans? Spartans?

Romans? Spartans?

Neither of those were around for quite as long. And I'd say that the Roman code of honor was "Win or die!". Not much of one, if you ask me. :/

Neither of those were around for quite as long. And I'd say that the Roman code of honor was "Win or die!". Not much of one, if you ask me. :/

Eh. At least the Romans didn't glorify suicide. I know which culture i'd prefer to live in ;)

Not trying to start nationalism on either side, I just want to know how you view china and japan.

I am half chinese and half white and i have lived in Japan for 5 years and China for 6 years...
I, without even thinking about it know that I loved Japan much more than China. The people are friendlier, more polite, kind, etc. The country is more developed. I am only 13 years old and when I lived in Japan, I could have lots of freedoms, i could travel over 100 miles on the trains and do almost whatever I could want because of the wonderful public transportation systems and because Japan especially Tokyo (where I lived) is definetley one of the safest placest on Earth....

GO JAPAN!

Eh. At least the Romans didn't glorify suicide. I know which culture i'd prefer to live in ;)

"In certain, older cultures, when men failed as completely as you have, they would throw themselves on their swords."

Suicide wasn't glorified because of honor, but it was certainly done when one was dishonored. The only reason is wasn't glorified was because those who committed suicide were failures. In Japan suicide was seen as a way of regaining lost honor.

Doubtfull seeing as they have to face two rival powers in their direct vicinity China and North-Korea.


China won't attack Japan and North Korea is to weak to cause problems. Japan can take care of itself and its about time we did.

I voted China, because anime is evil. Especially Inuyasha...

I don't think any country in asia can afford a big war right now without screwing alotta stuff up.

I voted China, because anime is evil. Especially Inuyasha...

XD

You win a cookie.

XD

You win a cookie.


No, he wins a slap upside the head. I get the cookie.




http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/sauer/angry-smiley-046.gif

No, he wins a slap upside the head. I get the cookie.




http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/sauer/angry-smiley-046.gif

OK. You have won the Trial of Possession for the cookie. Let none despute that the cookie is rightfully Kishijoten's, and to this shall we hold until we all shall fall. Seyla!

OK. You have won the Trial of Possession for the cookie. Let none despute that the cookie is rightfully Kishijoten's, and to this shall we hold until we all shall fall. Seyla!


HOLLA!! HOLLA!!

I voted China, because anime is evil. Especially Inuyasha...

Inuyasha is the Napolean Dynamite of anime (well, I'm not sure about that, but you get my point). There is some really good anime like Neon Genesis Evangelion and Elfen Lied, though.

Inuyasha is the Napolean Dynamite of anime (well, I'm not sure about that, but you get my point). There is some really good anime like Neon Genesis Evangelion and Elfen Lied, though.

The hell are you smoking? Neon Genesis Evangelion? Good? What? Where do you get that? Ghost in the Shell is good. But NGE? FLCL does less to make one question what the writers were smoking.

"In certain, older cultures, when men failed as completely as you have, they would throw themselves on their swords."

Suicide wasn't glorified because of honor, but it was certainly done when one was dishonored. The only reason is wasn't glorified was because those who committed suicide were failures. In Japan suicide was seen as a way of regaining lost honor.

Well then - I wouldn't want to live in a culture that regarded breaking a rule of etiquette as such a dishonourable offence as to necessitate suicide. I mean, at least I could have a bit of a laugh with the Romans.

Though i'm taking the story the guy told me as fact - it seemed a bit absurd to me. I can understand suicide being regarded as a way to regain honour if you'd done something absolutely unforgiveable, but the "offence" was something along the lines of forgetting to take his shoes off before entering some building.

Well then - I wouldn't want to live in a culture that regarded breaking a rule of etiquette as such a dishonourable offence as to necessitate suicide. I mean, at least I could have a bit of a laugh with the Romans.

Though i'm taking the story the guy told me as fact - it seemed a bit absurd to me. I can understand suicide being regarded as a way to regain honour if you'd done something absolutely unforgiveable, but the "offence" was something along the lines of forgetting to take his shoes off before entering some building.

I think that was the exception, not the rule. And it probably occured during the Tokugawa period which was... not the best of times to be living in Japan.

In Japan, it was more likely that one would commit suicide over something like losing a battle or getting into a drunken brawl (you're not supposed to get drunk, nor get into fights, unless commanded to do so by your Lord, as a samurai). Even then, you wouldn't have to commit suicide, although you might be forced to become ronin.

And if what you say about the Japanese is true, why is it that the Emperor was living in abject poverty by the time of the Onin Wars? Simply put, the idea of Japan as a united realm is a very recent idea. Anyone who says that the Japanese have always felt united is revising history or buying into the nationalistic pinings of the Meiji era militarists. Even though the shogun claimed control over all Japan, the reality was much different. No one really controlled all of Japan until the Meiji Restoration.
Wrong, the Tokugawa goverment had an iron control over Japan (not the current borders, but all of Honshyu, Shikoku, and Kyushyu). The Edo Period was a time of control, which is why the culture flowered the way it hadn't done since the Heian and Nara periods. The Emperor has gone from absolute monarch, to figurehead, to absolute, to symbol, and back again throughout the whole history of Japan. However, Japanese customs dictated that the Emeperor was treated with the upmost respect at all times. During the Shougunate for example, the Tokugawa goverment made a great effort to go to Kyoto to recieve the mandate of Heaven for actions. It was ceremony, the Emperor didn't withhold the mandate (until much later), but he was used as the athority and symbol of the country.

You are, however, wrong about Japanese sailors. They were some of the best in the region and their pirates were a regular plague and very feared by the Koreans and the Chinese (among others).
Uh... okay... I guess the best way to put that would be to say it depends upon the time period. Edo Period had the Japanese sticking to their coast lines and unable to leave them.

As I stated, the Japanese were never truly united until the 1850s.
Wrong. They were united, during many times in their history. You're thinking warning states when they were not. Don't take the isolation of the Edo Period as disunification. If they were REALLY disunified, some would have been more than willing to invite in the Europeans for the weapons to defeat Tokugawa.

The Japanese also lacked the Mongol lifestyle, which enabled the Mongols to succeed so often. The Japanese would have fallen flat on their face, expiriencing winters colder than those they had ever expirienced and summers hotter and dryer.
Drier? Yes, hotter...? And you've never seen the Snow Country or northern Japan if you think colder.

Though i'm taking the story the guy told me as fact - it seemed a bit absurd to me. I can understand suicide being regarded as a way to regain honour if you'd done something absolutely unforgiveable, but the "offence" was something along the lines of forgetting to take his shoes off before entering some building.
Well, actually I can see that as it's incredably rude to not take your shoes off when you enter into buildings. This is actually part of the Shinto faith (having to deal with purity). Actually, one of the biggest insults you can deliever is to walk into someones house with your shoes on.

I think the equivlent would be to go into someone's house (or a church) zip open your fly and pee on the floor.

Wrong, the Tokugawa goverment had an iron control over Japan (not the current borders, but all of Honshyu, Shikoku, and Kyushyu). The Edo Period was a time of control, which is why the culture flowered the way it hadn't done since the Heian and Nara periods. The Emperor has gone from absolute monarch, to figurehead, to absolute, to symbol, and back again throughout the whole history of Japan. However, Japanese customs dictated that the Emeperor was treated with the upmost respect at all times. During the Shougunate for example, the Tokugawa goverment made a great effort to go to Kyoto to recieve the mandate of Heaven for actions. It was ceremony, the Emperor didn't withhold the mandate (until much later), but he was used as the athority and symbol of the country.

And no one in Japan was under any delusion, what-so-ever as to who held the real power in Japan.

Uh... okay... I guess the best way to put that would be to say it depends upon the time period. Edo Period had the Japanese sticking to their coast lines and unable to leave them.

I meant up until 1615.

Wrong. They were united, during many times in their history. You're thinking warning states when they were not. Don't take the isolation of the Edo Period as disunification. If they were REALLY disunified, some would have been more than willing to invite in the Europeans for the weapons to defeat Tokugawa.

If the Tokugawa had such complete control, why were bandits a problem until the 1850s? If the Tokugawa had such complete control, how was it that they were unable to nip the Imperialists in the bud?

"And even in during the era of Tokugawa rule, famous for its political order and peace, local rulers retained much autonomy. The extent to which the masses of common people shared an identity as possessors of a common Japanese culture was quite limited. In many ways, the idea that Japan is a unified place whose people comprise a coherent nation is a creation of modern times."
-Andrew Gordon's A Modern History of Japan: From Tokugawa Times to the Present

Drier? Yes, hotter...? And you've never seen the Snow Country or northern Japan if you think colder.

And you've never been to Korea.

And no one in Japan was under any delusion, what-so-ever as to who held the real power in Japan.
Of course not, but he was used as a symbol, just as Meiji himself was, and Showa, and Taisho, and (now) Heisei. Everyone knew who held the power, but he was a ralling point.

I meant up until 1615.
Then say what you mean.

If the Tokugawa had such complete control, why were bandits a problem until the 1850s? If the Tokugawa had such complete control, how was it that they were unable to nip the Imperialists in the bud?
One, by the time the Imperialists came along, the goverment had been weakened considerably. That was one of the points for the Imperialists, the Tokugawa goverment showed how weak it was by being unable to resist Perry. As for the bandits, many of them were out of work samurai, ronin and the like. Why were their so many? Mainly because Tokugawa kept the peace. There was no reason to keep such large armed forces when there was no fighting.

If it was as weak as you say, could the goverment have demanded (and recived compliance on) that the lords change houses every other year from Edo to their provence? Left their sons, wives, and daughters in Edo as hostages? Rearanged the lords at whim? Closed off the country for almost 300years?

Yes, the lords were the lords within their provences, but if you think they were going to challenge the central goverment, no, you are really off base.

And you've never been to Korea.
Well, tomorrow my town will be at -14c, what have you got?

The Ainu once controlled all of Honshu, and probably more than that originally. They have been slowly driven north and exterminated by the "Japanese" Japanese constantly, until recently, when they were caught red-handed doing so.

Actually they were located more in the north, in Hokkaido. There were a few in Honshu, around the province of Etchu, but they never controlled the entire island in the fashion your seeming to impart.


And if what you say about the Japanese is true, why is it that the Emperor was living in abject poverty by the time of the Onin Wars? Simply put, the idea of Japan as a united realm is a very recent idea. Anyone who says that the Japanese have always felt united is revising history or buying into the nationalistic pinings of the Meiji era militarists. Even though the shogun claimed control over all Japan, the reality was much different. No one really controlled all of Japan until the Meiji Restoration.

The reason the Emperor was living in poverty would be that he had become a figure head, like the Pope. Samurai where the only ones allowed to own land. The Emperor could not, thus was dependant on loyal samurai to give him tithes.

I guess the whole thing called the Tokugawa Shogunate doesn't mean anything to you? Or the fact that it stayed in firm power for 300 years before the Meiji revolution. The Shogun was second under the Emperor, having his Imperial Mandate of Rule to do so. He controlled all samurai from the highest court to the lowest daimyo, indirectly of course but he had full rights to take command of each. Thats unitity if I've ever heard of it.




The Korean warships were not copies of their Chinese counter parts. The warships the Koreans made were unique to Korea, though no doubt influenced by those of the Chinese. Korean warships were primarily of two varieties, of which we see none similar to those used by the Chinese. The most famous of these two is the "turtle ship". A Korean-only design, which many historians believe was invented by the famous Admiral Yi, who is widely acknowledged in Korea as being the "Savior of Korea". He saved them from the Japanese, and was never once defeated in battle by them.

Seeing as Korea is not my field of expertise I ceed that point to you.


You are, however, wrong about Japanese sailors. They were some of the best in the region and their pirates were a regular plague and very feared by the Koreans and the Chinese (among others). The problem with the Japanese was that they allowed bushido and the tactics favored by their piratical kin to get in the way of intelligence and logic and effect how they designed their vessels: they relied on boarding parties, not long range bombardment, a fatal flaw which meant that they never once defeated a fleet under the command of Admiral Yi.

When I say fleets and sailors, I mean as in a daimyo making a concentrated effort on the part of the realm. Not individual pirate groups.

The Romans had the same type of strategy at sea, as you show the Japanese having, and they ruled the Meditereanean for a long time.


As I stated, the Japanese were never truly united until the 1850s. Given the Korean's excellence at sea, it is doubtable that the Japanese would have made many inroads to the mainland. Given the chear size of China and their memory of the Mongols, nothing would have united them faster than a Japanese invasion. Given Japanese inferiority in numbers of men, they'd have to settle for Manchuria, or else they'd stretch themselves too thin. And, if we're going to say the 1400s, then the Japanese have been double-screwed at sea: this was the time of the Ming Dynasty, who was founded by a man who made his empire as a naval commander.

I know very well how the Ming Dynasty came about. The great 'Treasure' Ships were indeed large and China's fleets large. However by the yer 1930, China was swirling in mire. Vietnam and Cambodia were rebelling against rule. The ex-mongol rulers of Japan had ceased sending tribute. And the Emperor's finances were in shambles from building the Forbidden City. Thats why I said 'mid 1400s'.


The Japanese also lacked the Mongol lifestyle, which enabled the Mongols to succeed so often. The Japanese would have fallen flat on their face, expiriencing winters colder than those they had ever expirienced and summers hotter and dryer. More likely the Chinese would have made contact with the Europeans, had the Ming Dynasty chosen to continue Zheng He's expeditions beyond Africa.

The foreign policy of the time of the Ming Dynasty was that of establishing contact and trade, before it was believed that the Emperor had lost the Mandate of Heaven. And do not underestimate your own will to surive and adapt, something that people in medieval times did much better than we do today.

And you've never been to Korea.

I come from the South of the United States, and right now I'm living in Poland Europe where its right now at an average of -20c. And I'm moving to Alaska! Where its even colder. So if I can survive, I am sure that people in the past could.

He's quite correct. Winters in northern Hokkaido are very brutal. And the fact that Samurai trainging included ignoring ones pain and surroundings...means nothing to you, then we're arguing with a brick wall painted with Meiji colors.


And laenis, I get your point. You wouldn't want to live in a culture like the japanese. That doesn't mean their achievements or ways of living or code of honor is lessened because of that. Just because your baised against a man who considers his honor the most important thing, just goes to show that your not very open minded or receptive to an alien culture.

The hell are you smoking? Neon Genesis Evangelion? Good? What? Where do you get that? Ghost in the Shell is good. But NGE? FLCL does less to make one question what the writers were smoking.

Ghost in the shell is a bunch of still frames where they only animate the mouths. I liked it before I realised that, now I can't stand it. Watch and see.

The Amerindians, the Mongols, the Bedoin, and the Gypsies.

The Amerindians, eh? Well in that case the Europeans, the Africans, the Asians and the Oceanians. How about we narrow that down a bit?

The Amerindians, eh? Well in that case the Europeans, the Africans, the Asians and the Oceanians. How about we narrow that down a bit?

Indeed. And explain exactly what it is that makes you put Gypsies and the Bedoin in that category New Rafnaland?

Well, actually I can see that as it's incredably rude to not take your shoes off when you enter into buildings. This is actually part of the Shinto faith (having to deal with purity). Actually, one of the biggest insults you can deliever is to walk into someones house with your shoes on.

I think the equivlent would be to go into someone's house (or a church) zip open your fly and pee on the floor.

Um, Im no Shinto person but wouldn't the equivalent of going into a church and peeing be going into a shinto temple and peeing? I think leaving your shoes on in Japan is more akin to putting your shoes all over someone's couch in the west.

Imperial Japan had better ambitions, plus they had an emperor. Socialist China deserves respect simply for being socialist and staying that way in the world were in.

Um, Im no Shinto person but wouldn't the equivalent of going into a church and peeing be going into a shinto temple and peeing? I think leaving your shoes on in Japan is more akin to putting your shoes all over someone's couch in the west.
Not actually. See, Shinto isn't a devloped religion per say. There's no real doctrine, there's not a code of behavor, and there's barely rank within the various shrines and the kami. However, this is a religion that venerates nature (kami can be anything, inlcuding an interesting looking rock outside my school has a small shrine to worship the kami in the rock), AND purity. A lot of Shinto has to do with being bodily and spiritually pure (it's part of the reaon Japanese have a bathing culture). It used to be that you bathed before going into a shrine for worship, now you rince off your hands and wash out your mouth.

The removal of shoes, in Japan at least, is a reflection on this custom. You don't track the uncleanliness of outside indoors (in Japanese style buildings or certian goverment offices. Heck, I have to change shoes everyday from my street shoes to shoes for inside the school only. If I want to go outside, I have to change again).

Seriously, you can watch a news vid of a police raid, and the cops will, after breaking the door down, rush in, and then stop to carefully get their shoes off before going into a house. It really is that serious here.

For the church thing, I wasn't sure where the guy went. It COULD have been someone's house, or he could have attempted to enter into a temple or shrine with his shoes on, that's why I added the church bit.

And laenis, I get your point. You wouldn't want to live in a culture like the japanese. That doesn't mean their achievements or ways of living or code of honor is lessened because of that. Just because your baised against a man who considers his honor the most important thing, just goes to show that your not very open minded or receptive to an alien culture.

You seem to be defining honour as an objective thing which the Japanese all had expert knowledge of, but no one else in the world did.

Honour is a human construct, and the Japanese idea of honour is very different from the western idea of honour. I'm just saying that personally I find the whole idea of committing suicide because you forget the formal shoewear arrangements of entering an abode hardly honourable. If someone did that today it would probably be posted up on here and everyone would have a great laugh about how much of a idiot that person was. It's the same with the Japanese racism and sexism - it's pretty dishonourable from my point of view.

I'm not saying the Japanese culture is inferiour, just not superiour to any other like you seem to think it is. Every old culture has traditions which nowadays seem horrible, and most people recognise that. Over time, these traditions wane - morality is after all an ever evolving concept. The problem is that people tend to say "OMG! Samurai = teh honourable. They were so perfect in every way!". No...they weren't. From modern day perspectives they were evil, petty little men - just like knights were complete elitist bastards who treated peasants like cattle.

It's the same with Native American culture to an extent - people go on about how perfect they were...but at the end of the day they didn't advance much because they were constantly killing each other - obviously their culture wasn't perfect.

This is the reason I voted China in the poll - people look at Japanese culture through rose tinted glasses and glorify it, when it was just as bad as all the other backward traditions that thankfully the developed world has gotten rid of.

It's the same with Native American culture to an extent - people go on about how perfect they were...but at the end of the day they didn't advance much because they were constantly killing each other - obviously their culture wasn't perfect.

Although I disagree with you on a number of counts, and even though I have a great love for both Samurai and the Knights of olden times, I will agree with you on this. Its pretty much the same in Africa. They had thousands of years to evolve their society before they were colonised, yet most of the time they spent eliminating each other in brutal tribal wars.

As for China, trust me, its got a long way to go as well. Some of its practices are highly questionable, and its behind Japan in many respects.

China won't attack Japan and North Korea is to weak to cause problems. Japan can take care of itself and its about time we did.

I must disagree on the fact that North Korea is too weak. Let us not make assumptions without any relevant factual basis especially when the very real fact is that North Korea has the ability to blow away any city within range of the demilititerized zone (including Seoul).

As for Japan taking care of itself perhaps. However it's current role within the international community as a role model for peacefull nations would be severely damaged when they start advancing their militairy program.

And let's assume China won't attack and that North Korea indeed is too weak as you claim. Then why on earth would you want a militairy machine at all?

I voted China on this one, because of its long and imo fascinating history. And its success in the modern world is nothing short of astounding. Plus I would rather have the US build up relations with China, because you know, we really don't need a global confrontation with China someday.

You seem to be defining honour as an objective thing which the Japanese all had expert knowledge of, but no one else in the world did.
You are quite correct sir. The code of honor and levels of respect was and is taught to young children just like we are taught nursy school songs.


Honour is a human construct, and the Japanese idea of honour is very different from the western idea of honour. I'm just saying that personally I find the whole idea of committing suicide because you forget the formal shoewear arrangements of entering an abode hardly honourable. If someone did that today it would probably be posted up on here and everyone would have a great laugh about how much of a idiot that person was. It's the same with the Japanese racism and sexism - it's pretty dishonourable from my point of view.

You keep stating over in your very point the answer or counter example of why you will never understand. And that remark in italics is rather distasteful.


I'm not saying the Japanese culture is inferiour, just not superiour to any other like you seem to think it is. Every old culture has traditions which nowadays seem horrible, and most people recognise that. Over time, these traditions wane - morality is after all an ever evolving concept. The problem is that people tend to say "OMG! Samurai = teh honourable. They were so perfect in every way!". No...they weren't. From modern day perspectives they were evil, petty little men - just like knights were complete elitist bastards who treated peasants like cattle.

You have the descriptions of Samurai and Knights mixed up there. And did you ever wonder WHY it is that people tend to say "OMG! Samurai = teh honourable"?


It's the same with Native American culture to an extent - people go on about how perfect they were...but at the end of the day they didn't advance much because they were constantly killing each other - obviously their culture wasn't perfect.

This is the reason I voted China in the poll - people look at Japanese culture through rose tinted glasses and glorify it, when it was just as bad as all the other backward traditions that thankfully the developed world has gotten rid of.

The Indian culture in my opinion was one centered around Earth. If any peoples of the earth could be called elves, it would be them. They believed all life precious, same as the Samurai did. And they didn't advance much because of 'need'. The European continent is so small, that the need for land and sustinance has caused hundreds of wars. The open plains are different with plenty of land thus meaning that many tribes had no real need to fight, and fighting is proven to be the best condition in which to advane science. Thus no wars (major ones, not those pussy tribe dispute) = no need to advance beyond their need.

I respect the fact that you voted China. Their history is just as inately valuable and their culture more so. But you must realise that because you grew up in seperate and entirely different society and ideological background you seem to not accept what others different from you have done. I'm half-japanese, so I have some small understanding. And I am currently studying to have a Masters in Japanese Studies and History.

Its not that your wrong. The fact that your comparing the culture and ways with other societies proves that your one foot outside the box. But you have to be out of the box and entirely in a different one.

unlike you we didn't kill 20 million of our own people.;)


yes, because instead Japan killed more than 20 million of Chinese people.

who the hell told you chinese gov killed 20million of its own people?

yes, because Japan killed more than 20 million of Chinese people.

who the hell tell you chinese gov killed 20million of its own people?

They did not intend to kill them.

yes, because instead Japan killed more than 20 million of Chinese people.

who the hell told you chinese gov killed 20million of its own people?



Its a documented fact. Go look it up.

I like Japan more because they ain't commies and look more normal and appear to have manners.

Indeed. And explain exactly what it is that makes you put Gypsies and the Bedoin in that category New Rafnaland?

They have their own codes of honor and have been around for as long as anyone can tell.

Actually they were located more in the north, in Hokkaido. There were a few in Honshu, around the province of Etchu, but they never controlled the entire island in the fashion your seeming to impart.

And the land the thirteen colonies was built on never had Amerindians living on them!

Considering that we don't know how far back the "Japanese" Japanese started living on Honshu, that isn't nessesarily true. Never is a long time, as they say. Considering that we don't have any written records of Japan until the 700's CE and considering that those documents came from the "Japanese" Japanese, not from the Ainu, we must take what they say of the Ainu with a grain of salt. Reading the Yamato dynasty's history of Japan for a history of the Ainu pre-700s is like reading Mein Kampf as a keystone of Jewish history before 1935.

The reason the Emperor was living in poverty would be that he had become a figure head, like the Pope. Samurai where the only ones allowed to own land. The Emperor could not, thus was dependant on loyal samurai to give him tithes.

It was because no one respected him. The Pope lived (and lives) like a king... so long as people respected him and he managed his finances. The Emperor did not enjoy such wealth.

And if only the samurai could own land, I guess that must mean that shinto shrines popped up from the ground fully formed.

I guess the whole thing called the Tokugawa Shogunate doesn't mean anything to you? Or the fact that it stayed in firm power for 300 years before the Meiji revolution. The Shogun was second under the Emperor, having his Imperial Mandate of Rule to do so. He controlled all samurai from the highest court to the lowest daimyo, indirectly of course but he had full rights to take command of each. Thats unitity if I've ever heard of it.

If Tokugawa rule over Japan was so firm, why did it fall with out a fight and so easily? The Tokugawa Shogunate was a joke after Ieyasu died: it was a house of cards. And when the wind blew slightly, it tumbled just like one.

When I say fleets and sailors, I mean as in a daimyo making a concentrated effort on the part of the realm. Not individual pirate groups.

Many daimyo became important because they were successful pirates. Every daimyo whose lands had a shoreline had at least a respectable, if not an awe-inspiring fleet of warships, to protect their own coasts and raid those of their neighbors.

The Romans had the same type of strategy at sea, as you show the Japanese having, and they ruled the Meditereanean for a long time.

The Cartheginians and Athenians didn't have cannon, swivel guns, or arquebi on their ships, though, did they?

I know very well how the Ming Dynasty came about. The great 'Treasure' Ships were indeed large and China's fleets large. However by the yer 1930, China was swirling in mire. Vietnam and Cambodia were rebelling against rule. The ex-mongol rulers of Japan had ceased sending tribute. And the Emperor's finances were in shambles from building the Forbidden City. Thats why I said 'mid 1400s'.

By the mid 1930s, China was in the middle of a civil war between the Communists and the Nationalists and trying, but failing spectacularly, to hold the Japanese off.

No Mongols nor "former" Mongols ever ruled Japan.

In the mid-1400s, the Ashikaga shogunate was bankrupt and collapsing. The Onin War was breaking out which was to herald the next century and a half of unending wars. Sounds like Japan and China would be in the same boat, assuming what you said was true.

Then say what you mean.

My assumption was that we were talking about pre-Tokugawa times, and that you'd be smart enough to realize that I knew there was very little to no external activity on the part of Japan. Except for the decay of the Nihon-maru, anyway.

One, by the time the Imperialists came along, the goverment had been weakened considerably. That was one of the points for the Imperialists, the Tokugawa goverment showed how weak it was by being unable to resist Perry. As for the bandits, many of them were out of work samurai, ronin and the like. Why were their so many? Mainly because Tokugawa kept the peace. There was no reason to keep such large armed forces when there was no fighting.

They did about as good a job of keeping the peace as the Texas Rangers did, you're saying?

Of course, the weakness was because of technological stagnation. Samurai were poor and out of work, because there were too many of them and not enough peasant-farmers (the Shimatsu or Shimazu (I get the province mixed up with the clan, what can I say?), in particular, who served as catalysts for the Meiji Restoration, were noted for the fact that there were way too many samurai) and the merchants made money off of the samurai. As a futher aside on this, the samurai:everyone-else ratio was something along the lines of 1:10, which is a much higher ratio of aristocrats than seen anywhere else on earth for any time period. And then, of course, there was the whole bit where samurai believed that farmers were like sesame seeds and believed that the more you squeezed them, the more came out.

If it was as weak as you say, could the goverment have demanded (and recived compliance on) that the lords change houses every other year from Edo to their provence? Left their sons, wives, and daughters in Edo as hostages? Rearanged the lords at whim? Closed off the country for almost 300years?

Because Ieyasu was a skilled general and warlord and could demand it. Once the other daimyos' wives and children were there, all he had to do was to keep them in Edo and keep daimyo from starting rebellions in Edo. Which is, of course, what eventually happened.

And if the Tokugawa shogunate was so strong as you say, why were they able to keep on doing that for a few months after Perry?

Yes, the lords were the lords within their provences, but if you think they were going to challenge the central goverment, no, you are really off base.

They were the ones who restored the Emperor. Obviously, I'm not off base.

Well, tomorrow my town will be at -14c, what have you got?

~-30C

China won't attack Japan and North Korea is to weak to cause problems. Japan can take care of itself and its about time we did.

Japan can take care of itself militarily about as well as a toddler can cross I-90 with out getting hit by a car: The odds aren't good, but it might happen.

Of course, if you think China wouldn't want war with Japan, you must be smoking something. It doesn't take them much to get their populace worked up over Japan and someday they'll smile at a Japan unspoorted by America and say, "We have a present for you...." And then land the PLA on your shores. Even if they're defeated, they could force a surrender by threatening the use of nuclear weapons and, either way, Japan's cities and her fragile economy would be devastated for years and years to come afterwards.

If you think North Korea's no threat, you don't know anything about that nation. They possess nuclear weapons and missiles which happen to have just enough range to reach Japan: to top it off, their entire populace is either starving or in the NKA. If the US stopped supporting and pulled out of Japan and South Korea, North Korea would invade the South and nuke Japan just because they can.

Ghost in the shell is a bunch of still frames where they only animate the mouths. I liked it before I realised that, now I can't stand it. Watch and see.

:eek:

He's quite correct. Winters in northern Hokkaido are very brutal. And the fact that Samurai trainging included ignoring ones pain and surroundings...means nothing to you, then we're arguing with a brick wall painted with Meiji colors.

All soldiers are trained to do that. Or, at least, they're glorified to do that. Hitler claimed that of his soldiers, they were driven from Russia by Winter and T-34s. Napoleon just lost because of the winter. I assure you that any winter in the middle of a continent will be much colder than a winter that is enjoyed on an island less that 100 miles from the nearest warm ocean current.

Which is on top of the fact that the Hokkaido argument is a moot point: Hokkaido wasn't part of Japan until the mid-19th Century.

Of course, this is all ignoring another part of my argument why it could not have happened: because of the samurai lifestyle.

My assumption was that we were talking about pre-Tokugawa times, and that you'd be smart enough to realize that I knew there was very little to no external activity on the part of Japan. Except for the decay of the Nihon-maru, anyway.
You know what they say about assuming, especially when you make broad statements regarding a country's history.

Because Ieyasu was a skilled general and warlord and could demand it. Once the other daimyos' wives and children were there, all he had to do was to keep them in Edo and keep daimyo from starting rebellions in Edo. Which is, of course, what eventually happened.
And because he had the power to do so.

And if the Tokugawa shogunate was so strong as you say, why were they able to keep on doing that for a few months after Perry?
As I said, they were weak after 260+ years. You find me a goverment that has remained as strong after 260+ years without some sort of coup. China and Rome kept having dynasty changes, so did just about every other empire on the planet.

Also, there's the difference in technology. The Tokugawa goverment saw that it no way of stopping Perry. After being closed off for so long, Japan could no longer enforce it. In attempting to find a way out of the mess that it found itself in, it was persived as weak and attacked by internal forces (and actually, there was very little fighting. Not for what could have blown up into a major civil war).

They were the ones who restored the Emperor. Obviously, I'm not off base.
After 260+ years. Can you wrap your mind around that? It wasn't as if Tokugawa died and THEN Meiji was restored. No, 260+ longer than the history of the United States as a nation. Got it?

Until Perry came though, NO ONE challenged the Tokugawa Goverment. Again, think about how many countries have gone 260+ years without a major challenge to the goverment, internally or externally. Yes, you ARE off base.

I assure you that any winter in the middle of a continent will be much colder than a winter that is enjoyed on an island less that 100 miles from the nearest warm ocean current.
Japan gets the same Siberian winds and currents in the winter that Korea does. Every winter the currents shift and blow (like they're doing now) over Japan.

BTW, Hokkaido isn't the coldest part of Japan, THAT honor goes to the Snow Country, the Sea of Japan side of the Japan Alps. And yes, the Japanese were up there during the Edo Period.

If you have a few minutes, this is a very nice article about China and the US in the past and in the future. On the first page, a paragraph repeats itself for some reason, but other than that, it's very good.

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,398844,00.html

Europeans all had cannons long before 1453. The Byzantines had cannons to defend against the Turks during that siege, although they were a lot smaller. The Turkish cannons (incidently built by Hungarian engineers) were not technologically innovative, they were just massive.

Ah, but the roots of European offensive gunpowder technology almost certainly lie (even excepting the formulae of transitional Arab inheritors) in devices of Chinese origin. Note Roger Bacon's 1248 mention of such weaponry's employment (likely the first for the continent) as an element of the Mongols' Eastern European campaigns.

Oh, as an edit to what I posted earlier about the Chinese inventing the trebuchet: They didn't. At least not the traditional counter-weight trebuchet: that was invented by the Arabs (and was commonly known as a "Muslim" trebuchet in China). It was the traction trebuchet, or perrier, which the Chinese invented.

On the issue of textbooks for Japanese junior high school students, these are the offical English (though for the Chinese on the board, they have Chinese) langauge translations of all MEXT approved textbooks. Read and enjoy.
http://www.je-kaleidoscope.jp/english/index.html

In case you haven't realized, the website is a Japanese.

We are also forgetting the effects of Western propaganda here. The US, being the superpower of our generation, naturally do not want to share power. however they can't do anything about China, because it would completely destroy their economy. Therefore, they use propaganda to antagonize the Chinese government.

Now, i am not saying that the Chinese government is good. In fact, i hate it with passion. But you have to admit that in a country of 1.3 billion people, elections would create chaos, and possibly anarchy. I strongly believe that the current Communist dictatorship is just a transition period. When the people are ready for the change into democracy, it will come. For now, they are still busy developing.

As for Japan, i really do love their culture and their surpremcy in technological innovations. However, compared to the 10 million civilians they kills in WWII (correct me if i'm wrong), the civilian casualties in the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki don't even scratch the surface of what they have done. All in all, both countries have their goods and their bads. That's why my vote goes to Canada, where almost every race in the world are currently living in harmony (not counting the French in Quebec)

Now, i am not saying that the Chinese government is good. In fact, i hate it with passion. But you have to admit that in a country of 1.3 billion people, elections would create chaos, and possibly anarchy.

That's what the South said about letting black people vote.

I strongly believe that the current Communist dictatorship is just a transition period. When the people are ready for the change into democracy, it will come. For now, they are still busy developing.

A transition they've been going through for the better part of three millenia.

Japan can take care of itself militarily about as well as a toddler can cross I-90 with out getting hit by a car: The odds aren't good, but it might happen.

Of course, if you think China wouldn't want war with Japan, you must be smoking something. It doesn't take them much to get their populace worked up over Japan and someday they'll smile at a Japan unspoorted by America and say, "We have a present for you...." And then land the PLA on your shores. Even if they're defeated, they could force a surrender by threatening the use of nuclear weapons and, either way, Japan's cities and her fragile economy would be devastated for years and years to come afterwards.

If you think North Korea's no threat, you don't know anything about that nation. They possess nuclear weapons and missiles which happen to have just enough range to reach Japan: to top it off, their entire populace is either starving or in the NKA. If the US stopped supporting and pulled out of Japan and South Korea, North Korea would invade the South and nuke Japan just because they can.


If you think China would risk undermining their economic growth and starting WW3 by attacking Japan, You must be on some strong drugs. China may have some issues with Japan, but they will not invade us.

If you think China would risk undermining their economic growth and starting WW3 by attacking Japan, You must be on some strong drugs. China may have some issues with Japan, but they will not invade us.

And who would back Japan, if not the US? Japan's closest friends in the region are the US (far away), Australia (far away), and South Korea (where people still haven't forgotten about Japanese occupation). The only two that could do anything would be the US and Australia, and a response from either of them would be slow or really slow (respectively). The only thing Japan would be able to count on, if they're lucky, in the case of a People attack is an American carrier group which, if the Chinese really want to start WWIII, will be near the top of their hit list. And then, as Japan is slowly swallowed by the PLA, the US and Australia would finally, and very slowly, manage to get significant assets in place to fight back the PLA. It makes much more sense for the Japanese to allow the American bases to stay, even if they do get their own true military. (That and it acts as a JET for the men-at-arms! Only the US pays for this one, instead of the Japanese government.)

And you forget the major advancements to China's technology base that they could get if they sacked Japan in one large gulp: their technology would leapfrog past that of the West for at least a generation.

Oh, and the reason Japan doesn't have a military is because most Japanese don't want one. Nevermind the fact that amending their Constitution such that they can possess one would result in most of East Asia going threw the roof in anger. And you might wish to be a little careful about expressing your wish to people in Japan, as it has been my expirience that those who espress such sentiments are viewed as being Ultra-Nationalists.

However, I fully agree with you on the fact that Japan should be allowed to possess a military. (Even if I doubt that military would be, functionally, little different than the JSDF.)

Its a little lengthy but reading the first page or two should be sufficient for an informed position on the issue at hand. Also, feel free to check all the facts presented, everything I background checked came out correct.

http://www.uwsa.com/issues/trade/japanyes.html

Not saying I hate Japan for this, but they are almost cheating at trade with other countries with their anti-foreigner politics and their extremely biased business strategies against foreigner nations that they needed to be brought about as a foreign power.

And because he had the power to do so.

Gee, isn't that just kinda what I said?

As I said, they were weak after 260+ years. You find me a goverment that has remained as strong after 260+ years without some sort of coup. China and Rome kept having dynasty changes, so did just about every other empire on the planet.

"Some sort of coup" is a little vague. I mean, under that definition, a coup is carried out in the United States every two years.

Of course, if you were a daimyo, who had no connexion to the people he ruled, whose wife and children were held hostage, I suppose you'd be ready, willing, and able to launch a campaign against the Tokugawa shogunate, wouldn't you? Nevermind the fact that even if you succeed completely and with out any losses to your army, your wife would be dead, along with your children. Of course, the problem with recruiting your army in the first place is that you don't identify with them, they don't identify with you. They don't trust you to lead them and you don't trust them to follow your orders.

Also, there's the difference in technology. The Tokugawa goverment saw that it no way of stopping Perry. After being closed off for so long, Japan could no longer enforce it. In attempting to find a way out of the mess that it found itself in, it was persived as weak and attacked by internal forces (and actually, there was very little fighting. Not for what could have blown up into a major civil war).

And the perception was obviously correct, given that there was so little fighting.

After 260+ years. Can you wrap your mind around that? It wasn't as if Tokugawa died and THEN Meiji was restored. No, 260+ longer than the history of the United States as a nation. Got it?

As I recall, the last Tokugawa shogun didn't die: he was given some comfortable estates and a stipend and asked to go bugger off.

Until Perry came though, NO ONE challenged the Tokugawa Goverment. Again, think about how many countries have gone 260+ years without a major challenge to the goverment, internally or externally. Yes, you ARE off base.

Actually, the Tokugawa government was under light external stress on and off through out the Tokugawa period.

Which is beside the fact that what Ieyasu did in Japan was all but identical to what Louis XIV did in France. In both cases, their children were incompetent. In both cases, their governments were card houses. In both cases their governments collapsed at the slightest internal pressures.

BTW, Hokkaido isn't the coldest part of Japan, THAT honor goes to the Snow Country, the Sea of Japan side of the Japan Alps. And yes, the Japanese were up there during the Edo Period.

And Americans are in Japan. That doesn't make Japan part of the United States, now, does it?

Ah, but the roots of European offensive gunpowder technology almost certainly lie (even excepting the formulae of transitional Arab inheritors) in devices of Chinese origin. Note Roger Bacon's 1248 mention of such weaponry's employment (likely the first for the continent) as an element of the Mongols' Eastern European campaigns.
Where did I say that gun technology wasn't derived from Chinese designs? In this thread I've repeated over and over again that China invented gunpowder and guns....

http://www.uwsa.com/issues/trade/japanyes.html

Not saying I hate Japan for this, but they are almost cheating at trade with other countries with their anti-foreigner politics and their extremely biased business strategies against foreigner nations that they needed to be brought about as a foreign power.

Yes, which is why free trade is so important. By eliminating as many subsidies and tariffs as possible, we can compete with Japan on equal footing; business-industry cooperation doesn't work very well, as the aftermath of the Nikkei bubble has shown us.

The reason why Japan was able to dominate the American market was because of the tariffs imposed on their products, which actually made them more profitable and enabled them to invest in the efficency upgrades and competitive pricing that spelled doom for American automakers after the tariffs were removed.

Simply put, tariffs aren't the answer. All those do is hurt the American economy, and drive up prices for consumers while reducing the amount of selection they can have...and the people hit hardest are the poor and lower classes.

That's what the South said about letting black people vote.

except that was a white minority controlling a black majority country, and this is, despite all the dictatorship and censorship, an equal treatment of all people within the country.

A transition they've been going through for the better part of three millenia.

Just like the transition of Europeans countries that also took a number of millenia.

except that was a white minority controlling a black majority country, and this is, despite all the dictatorship and censorship, an equal treatment of all people within the country.

Are you or are you not Chinese?

Just like the transition of Europeans countries that also took a number of millenia.

Most historians agree that democracy came from Europe. If your idea of good is democracy, then it began in Athens, a looooong time ago. And then it was kept alive in various forms (Roman Republic, Holy Roman Empire, England's Parliament, United States, &c.), although it did not reach its modern form until the end of World War II. China has a long way to go, yet.

And who would back Japan, if not the US? Japan's closest friends in the region are the US (far away), Australia (far away), and South Korea (where people still haven't forgotten about Japanese occupation). The only two that could do anything would be the US and Australia, and a response from either of them would be slow or really slow (respectively). The only thing Japan would be able to count on, if they're lucky, in the case of a People attack is an American carrier group which, if the Chinese really want to start WWIII, will be near the top of their hit list. And then, as Japan is slowly swallowed by the PLA, the US and Australia would finally, and very slowly, manage to get significant assets in place to fight back the PLA. It makes much more sense for the Japanese to allow the American bases to stay, even if they do get their own true military. (That and it acts as a JET for the men-at-arms! Only the US pays for this one, instead of the Japanese government.)

And you forget the major advancements to China's technology base that they could get if they sacked Japan in one large gulp: their technology would leapfrog past that of the West for at least a generation.

Oh, and the reason Japan doesn't have a military is because most Japanese don't want one. Nevermind the fact that amending their Constitution such that they can possess one would result in most of East Asia going threw the roof in anger. And you might wish to be a little careful about expressing your wish to people in Japan, as it has been my expirience that those who espress such sentiments are viewed as being Ultra-Nationalists.

However, I fully agree with you on the fact that Japan should be allowed to possess a military. (Even if I doubt that military would be, functionally, little different than the JSDF.)


They couldn't legally send troops overseas until they changed it so they can send them to Iraq. (Not happy) I am one Japanese that wants Japan to have a military to protect ourselfs, not an aggressive one. I for one say that the whole china will blow us up thing is a lie and not used much, North Korea is used to justify US troops in Japan. The main reason they use this is so the US can keep its military might in the region and so Japan doesn't have to pay for a bigger military, which our governemnt doesn't really want to pay for. I am not happy about that and think I am being lied to and want US troops gone.

They couldn't legally send troops overseas until they changed it so they can send them to Iraq. (Not happy) I am one Japanese that wants Japan to have a military to protect ourselfs, not an aggressive one. I for one say that the whole china will blow us up thing is a lie and not used much, North Korea is used to justify US troops in Japan. The main reason they use this is so the US can keep its military might in the region and so Japan doesn't have to pay for a bigger military, which our governemnt doesn't really want to pay for. I am not happy about that and think I am being lied to and want US troops gone.

Japan has a defensive military: the JSDF. Granted they're officially policemen, but as I've mentioned, they're policemen with F-15s and Type-90 tanks. (And the Diet recently lowered spending on the JSDF, by the by.)

Why do you think you're being lied to?

Hypothetically, wouldn't it promote international peace to have the armies loyal to other nations in another nation?

And, as I mentioned, militaries aren't popular in Japan. Frankly, I'm surprised that they can find anyone to serve in the JSDF.

Japan has a defensive military: the JSDF. Granted they're officially policemen, but as I've mentioned, they're policemen with F-15s and Type-90 tanks. (And the Diet recently lowered spending on the JSDF, by the by.)

Why do you think you're being lied to?

Hypothetically, wouldn't it promote international peace to have the armies loyal to other nations in another nation?

And, as I mentioned, militaries aren't popular in Japan. Frankly, I'm surprised that they can find anyone to serve in the JSDF.


Are you even Japanese?

Are you even Japanese?

Aren't you American?

Aren't you American?



No. I am Japanese. I live in America but I am ethnic Japanese. Born there.

No. I am Japanese. I live in America but I am ethnic Japanese. Born there.

I knew that. The question was rhetorical.

I knew that. The question was rhetorical.




Right.......Rhetorical.;)

Right.......Rhetorical.;)

Well why the hell would I need to ask, since it's posted on your "Location"? :p

No. I am Japanese. I live in America but I am ethnic Japanese. Born there.Yeah, I'm Chinese-Canadian. Decendent of a head-tax taxpayer. Nice to meet you my asian friend. :D

And the land the thirteen colonies was built on never had Amerindians living on them!

...Do I care?


Considering that we don't know how far back the "Japanese" Japanese started living on Honshu, that isn't nessesarily true. Never is a long time, as they say. Considering that we don't have any written records of Japan until the 700's CE and considering that those documents came from the "Japanese" Japanese, not from the Ainu, we must take what they say of the Ainu with a grain of salt. Reading the Yamato dynasty's history of Japan for a history of the Ainu pre-700s is like reading Mein Kampf as a keystone of Jewish history before 1935.

Considering that history is written by the victors, it doesn't seem very relevent to the arguement if the Ainu ever ruled any part of Japan now is it?


It was because no one respected him. The Pope lived (and lives) like a king... so long as people respected him and he managed his finances. The Emperor did not enjoy such wealth.

And if only the samurai could own land, I guess that must mean that shinto shrines popped up from the ground fully formed.

Samurai had ultimate respect for the Emperor, and if given a direct order from him, they would be bound by law and ethics to follow it. Such as if they were asked to present themselves in Kyoto or something to that relevence.

Most shinto shrines were constructed by samurai...ever seen the one that Tokugawa Ieyasu made? Its huge, and been there for 300+ years. I've visited it and others like it. Those samurai who practised Shinto would often times build a shrine in honor of different things; like a son being born or to honor a dead friend or family member.


If Tokugawa rule over Japan was so firm, why did it fall with out a fight and so easily? The Tokugawa Shogunate was a joke after Ieyasu died: it was a house of cards. And when the wind blew slightly, it tumbled just like one.


As soon as Tokugawa Ieyasu took power after Toyotomi Hideyoshi, he decreed all foreign weapons outlawed and ordered that peasents were not allowed to hold arms. He for all time set the class system; it was the last chance to decide if you wanted to be a samurai or a peasent, or anything else.

Then since samurai were left with hardly any fighting to do, they went to peaceful ways; writing poetry, learning the Cha-nan-yu (tea ceremony), and other things. In the next 200 years Samurai became more relaxed and the skills that most samurai had honed in the Sengoku Jidai faded and could only be found in a few scattered dojos.

When Perry arrived Tokugawa retainers pulled out aged old arquibuises but no one living knew how to work them; thus they were not able to fight against Perry who had with him a few hundred marines and cannon. The Shogunate was forced to open its borders.

Soon after the quick Meiji revolution took place. Believing that the Shogunate had lost power, many daimyo and others gave power to the young Emperor Meiji which started the initial first industrial revolution in Japan.


Many daimyo became important because they were successful pirates. Every daimyo whose lands had a shoreline had at least a respectable, if not an awe-inspiring fleet of warships, to protect their own coasts and raid those of their neighbors.


It might surprise you but many daimyo were more concerned with having as many samurai armed and under their banner as possible. Ships can do nothing to land unless they have raiding parties to come onto land. Daimyo would then simply garrison port towns with a heavy amount of samurai than in-land towns.


The Cartheginians and Athenians didn't have cannon, swivel guns, or arquebi on their ships, though, did they?


So? It was a comparison between the two, not saying that it was the same.


By the mid 1930s, China was in the middle of a civil war between the Communists and the Nationalists and trying, but failing spectacularly, to hold the Japanese off.

No Mongols nor "former" Mongols ever ruled Japan.


The arguement pertains to the past, and I never once read anyone saying that Japan was ruled by the Mongols...did you NERVUN?

And I think Thrashia meant "ex-rulers of China" I am quite sure since the son or grandson of Tamerlane was the one who cut off sending tribute in 1428-1429.


In the mid-1400s, the Ashikaga shogunate was bankrupt and collapsing. The Onin War was breaking out which was to herald the next century and a half of unending wars. Sounds like Japan and China would be in the same boat, assuming what you said was true.

Maybe if you re-read you'd notice that he said:

I would say that had Japan been successful in uniting earlier than the late 16th century and having made more cocentrated efforts to take over Korea, that they could varily have taken on China in say the early 1430s (China at this time was suffering huge famine and other such upheavals such as rebellion and the like) and controlled them. Then whose to say that they couldn't then re-trace the mongel's steps and find their way to Europe? Its an interesting idea, but I'm not going to start that up, thats for another thread topic and discussion.

You'll notice that he doesn't say anything about them being historically able to, but 'If' they had been united. Read more careful next time so as to make your arguement more valid.

...Do I care?

Depends on whether or not genocide turns you on, I guess.

Considering that history is written by the victors, it doesn't seem very relevent to the arguement if the Ainu ever ruled any part of Japan now is it?

I vaguely recall someone saying that Japan was completely unified, homogenous, whatever. My point was that it wasn't.

Samurai had ultimate respect for the Emperor, and if given a direct order from him, they would be bound by law and ethics to follow it. Such as if they were asked to present themselves in Kyoto or something to that relevence.

Ultimate respect? If they held so much respect for the man, why was he often poorer than dirt? If they held so much respect for the man, why was it that the samurai ran Japan, not the Emperor? Unless by respect, you mean the type of respect you give your dog: You find their loyalty admirable, but would never even begin to ponder giving them the reigns to your nation.

Most shinto shrines were constructed by samurai...ever seen the one that Tokugawa Ieyasu made? Its huge, and been there for 300+ years. I've visited it and others like it. Those samurai who practised Shinto would often times build a shrine in honor of different things; like a son being born or to honor a dead friend or family member.

Carnegie was a bastard and he built libraries. Point?

As soon as Tokugawa Ieyasu took power after Toyotomi Hideyoshi, he decreed all foreign weapons outlawed and ordered that peasents were not allowed to hold arms. He for all time set the class system; it was the last chance to decide if you wanted to be a samurai or a peasent, or anything else.

We could keep on walking around in circles all day, if you want.

Then since samurai were left with hardly any fighting to do, they went to peaceful ways; writing poetry, learning the Cha-nan-yu (tea ceremony), and other things. In the next 200 years Samurai became more relaxed and the skills that most samurai had honed in the Sengoku Jidai faded and could only be found in a few scattered dojos.

Can you see how new that is to me? Can you see the shock and awe in my face? Maybe it's because there isn't any, or maybe it's because you're staring at a computer screen: either way I already knew this.

When Perry arrived Tokugawa retainers pulled out aged old arquibuises but no one living knew how to work them; thus they were not able to fight against Perry who had with him a few hundred marines and cannon. The Shogunate was forced to open its borders.

NERVUN already posted this.

Soon after the quick Meiji revolution took place. Believing that the Shogunate had lost power, many daimyo and others gave power to the young Emperor Meiji which started the initial first industrial revolution in Japan.

Gee, that rock looks familiar....

It might surprise you but many daimyo were more concerned with having as many samurai armed and under their banner as possible. Ships can do nothing to land unless they have raiding parties to come onto land. Daimyo would then simply garrison port towns with a heavy amount of samurai than in-land towns.

It would surprise me about as much as the sun rising in the East tomorrow. I'm still wondering whether or not you think you're telling me anything I don't already know.

So? It was a comparison between the two, not saying that it was the same.

And that does nothing to diminish my point. It's one thing for the Romans to have naval supremecy on the Med using boarding tactics against other nations whose vessels best defense consisted of a ram.

The arguement pertains to the past, and I never once read anyone saying that Japan was ruled by the Mongols...did you NERVUN?

Is that so? Then explain this:

And I think Thrashia meant "ex-rulers of China" I am quite sure since the son or grandson of Tamerlane was the one who cut off sending tribute in 1428-1429.

If he meant it, he should have written it. If he meant it, he should have spoken up about it.

Maybe if you re-read you'd notice that he said:

If that's the case, then we may as well argue whether or not Japan could have spontaneously invented the M1A2 Abrams battle tank in the 600s.

You'll notice that he doesn't say anything about them being historically able to, but 'If' they had been united. Read more careful next time so as to make your arguement more valid.

Playing the game of "What if" is great: so long as you keep in mind that it's only a game. Honestly, I don't think the odds of Japan being united following the 1430's were high enough for any such "what if" to amount to much more than my previously stated example of the spontaneous tank.

Maybe you'd notice, but I am Thrashia. And personally if we happened to be having this conversation face to face, at this moment I would be considering nocking you in the head and saying not to be speaking like a punk to your betters. (I'm 24) And I'm simply reinforcing NERVUN's arguement against yours.


Ultimate respect? If they held so much respect for the man, why was he often poorer than dirt? If they held so much respect for the man, why was it that the samurai ran Japan, not the Emperor? Unless by respect, you mean the type of respect you give your dog: You find their loyalty admirable, but would never even begin to ponder giving them the reigns to your nation.


There are fine lines of respect. The Samurai ran Japan simply because only they were allowed to own land. As I have explained many times.


And thats the end of today's arguement. I think you've insulted me and my ethinicity enough to last me for a while.