Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Patrick J. Buchanan: Why did Japan attack us?
Creators Syndicate ^ | Tuesday, December 11, 2001 | Patrick J. Buchanan

Posted on 12/10/2001 9:08:50 PM PST by ouroboros

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last

1 posted on 12/10/2001 9:08:50 PM PST by ouroboros
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mercuria; diotima; sheltonmac; Askel5; DoughtyOne; tex-oma; A.J.Armitage; x; Campion Moore Boru...
bump
2 posted on 12/10/2001 9:09:37 PM PST by ouroboros
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ouroboros
Though I hate Buchanan he is right about the communist Wilson.
3 posted on 12/10/2001 9:10:33 PM PST by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: madrussian; malarski; Askel5; GROUCHOTWO; Zviadist; kristinn; Free the USA; struwwelpeter...
"We gave them what they should not have." bump
4 posted on 12/10/2001 9:11:59 PM PST by CommiesOut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ouroboros
bump
5 posted on 12/10/2001 9:13:48 PM PST by IM2Phat4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IM2Phat4U
Buchanan is nuts!
6 posted on 12/10/2001 9:18:52 PM PST by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ouroboros
Pat Buchanan bump.
7 posted on 12/10/2001 9:20:33 PM PST by mafree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CommiesOut
Pat always has his own way of looking at World events. I generally disagree but still learn something.
8 posted on 12/10/2001 9:25:26 PM PST by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ouroboros
I'm assumeing that there is a point to this.

Of course I could be wrong.

9 posted on 12/10/2001 9:26:48 PM PST by Valin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: ouroboros
ummmm.......what about all the massacres of Chinese the world was screaming about thru 1941? And we imposed the embargo (incl. scrap metal) hoping to stop Japan's imperialist attacks on the sovreign chinese nation? Ummmm...that was nothing, huh? Poor Japan, really just wanted an "empire." Perhaps we should have, instead, forced China to accept Japanese rule? Buchanan is sort of a blame america firster, just coming from a different angle.
11 posted on 12/10/2001 9:32:15 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ouroboros
Now Japan is disarmed and China is an Asian giant whose military boasts of pushing the Americans back across the Pacific.

Japan is not disarmed. The SDF is probably the most modern armed forces in all of East Asia. While they may be numerically inferior to the PRC, according to Jane's, Japan is slated to spend over US$200 billion on defense in the next five years. By comparison, China spends around US$20 billion a year, though perhaps more "under the table."

12 posted on 12/10/2001 9:33:15 PM PST by dell Arpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin
We're having the same problem. The history is interesting but what is the point; how does it apply today?
13 posted on 12/10/2001 9:35:02 PM PST by AmericanVictory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ouroboros
I like Buchanan a lot, but this is entirely too superficial. The basic truth about Japan before 1945 is that it was run by homicidal-suicidal psychopaths who were able to maintain a veneer of humanity and fool us into thinking that Japan was a constitutional monarchy similar to other Western powers.
14 posted on 12/10/2001 9:47:14 PM PST by Mortimer Snavely
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
Buchanan is sort of a blame america firster, just coming from a different angle.

Ain't hindsight wonderful? Pat's rhetoric is always catchy, with his new phrase the "War Party" emerging as his latest hook. If he was as good at REAL politics, as he is at writing, he himself could sit in the seats of power.

For the sake of accuracy, it looks like the Bush administration will press Iraq to honor the 1991 Cease Fire terms, and allow WMD inspectors to again do their jobs. Would Pat Buchanan have the world just let Saddam continue with WMD, until he uses them?

15 posted on 12/10/2001 9:49:15 PM PST by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Valin
Sure there's a point. Read carefully:

"To understand why Japan lashed out, we must go back to World War I. Japan had been our ally. But when she tried to collect her share of the booty at Versailles, she ran into an obdurate Woodrow Wilson. Wilson rejected Japan's claim to German concessions in Shantung, home of Confucius, which Japan had captured at a price in blood... By appeasing the Americans, the British enraged and alienated a proud nation that had been a loyal friend."

To paraphrase, Japan won land by right of conquest, and Britain honored that right of its loyal ally. But this offended delicate American sensibilities, and so we pressured Britain to sever its relationship with Japan, then pressured (and ultimately went to war with) Japan in order to reverse that conquest. This was a mistake and led to all kinds of grief, since Japan had in fact been acting as a pro-Western counter to the virulent anti-Western forces in the region.

Now, compare that to the situation in Israel: Israel won land by right of conquest, and the U.S. has honored that right of its loyal ally. But this offends delicate European sensibilities, and so the EU is pressuring us to sever our relationship with Israel. Clearly Buchanan believes that this will lead to a war between the EU and Israel, a war which he belives will be a mistake and lead to all kinds of grief, since Israel is in fact acting as a pro-Western counter to the virulent anti-Western forces in the region. So the moral of the story is that we should continue to back Israel, no matter how much our allies across the Atlantic pressure us to do otherwise.

It's obvious, really. I'm just surprised to see Buchanan make such an about-face from his usual position on the Middle East.

16 posted on 12/10/2001 9:49:26 PM PST by Fabozz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ouroboros
bump bump bump!

Sage analysis and more importantly, a thought-provoking condemnation of the pro-Communist leanings of FDR!

17 posted on 12/10/2001 9:55:47 PM PST by bonesmccoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ouroboros
The 1937 clash at the Marco Polo bridge was faked by Japanese officers looking for a pretext to take on defiant Manchurian warlords, and contrary to what Buchannan writes it actually was in our interest to try to keep the Japanese out of SE Asia. I suppose Buchannan can be forgiven the mistake, his isolationist nature makes him view anything not in our immediate sphere of influence as "not our interest".

Otherwise, not a shabby analysis.

18 posted on 12/10/2001 10:06:18 PM PST by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fabozz
Thank you. It's late and I'm more than dense than usual(and that's saying a great deal)
19 posted on 12/10/2001 10:15:10 PM PST by Valin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ouroboros
But when she tried to collect her share of the booty at Versailles, she ran into an obdurate Woodrow Wilson.

Wilson rejected Japan's claim to German concessions in Shantung, home of Confucius, which Japan had captured at a price in blood.

Pardon my French, but Pat Buchanan is now just about the world's most insufferable dumbass. The above is impossibly stupid, umless Buchanan is channeling the ghost of Tojo.

Let's review:

British WW I dead: 908,371 wounded: 2,090,212

US WW I dead: 50,585 wounded: 205,690

JAPANESE WW I dead: 300 wounded: 907

"Price in blood" my ass, Pat. Yeah, the Japanese really suffered as our WW I ally.

And the US took NO territory from ANYONE, mind you, in WW I.

But the Japanese, at the cost of 300 dead, took from Germany, the Marshall, Mariana, Palau, and Caroline Islands, covering an immense area. In terms of surface area of the globe, I suspect the Japanese got control of MORE area than anyone else in WWI.

The US spent most of the Pacific War in bloody fighting to capture heavily fortified Islands the Japanese took from Germany in WW I....Tarawa, Pelileu, etc.

20 posted on 12/10/2001 10:26:02 PM PST by John H K
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson