Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: -tronski- on February 23, 2005, 01:58:11 AM
-
What are the current rules for Japanese servicemen in Iraq?
Aren't their engineers etc. armed, or not allowed to provide their own protection?
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by -tronski-
What are the current rules for Japanese servicemen in Iraq?
Aren't their engineers etc. armed, or not allowed to provide their own protection?
Tronsky
They armed but are not allowed to initiate combat: i.e. they have to wait to be attacked before firing back.
-
So why do they need Aussies to protect 'em?
-
^
Politics.
-
What do Japanesse in Tokyo say upon seeing a UFO?
"Rook, Rook!!!"
:D
-
Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution states:
Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes. 2) In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.
-
Originally posted by Rolex
Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution states:
... In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. ...
and the US will protect us, so help me God.;)
-
"the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes"
they are not there to wage war and they are not there to use force to settle an international dispute (its already been settled by the coalition, this is post-dispute). Thus it is 'legal' for them to be there.
-
wonder how they feel about the suicide bombers.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
wonder how they feel about the suicide bombers.
Oh Im sure that they love them...... :rolleyes:
-
Each member if the JDF is a licensed 'Trade Representive' of the Japanese Department of Commerce. They have the authority to make binding agreements in any form of International Trade and are prepared to offer long and short term solutions to a wide range of problems facing the new Iraqi government.
-
The question remains.....if they are in fact armed, and they are no doubt fully versed in the use of the weaponry they employ, why then do they require foreign troops to protect them?
Why can't they do it themselves?.
Why not deploy some Japanese infantry to protect them?
Is it due to the 'can't initiate combat' clause regarding the Japanese military, whereas Aussie infantry can be employed on active patrolling duties, and may in fact fire the first angry shot in an engagement?
The story we here in Australia are hearing is that unless Aussie troops are sent to guard the Japanese contingent in Iraq helping with the rebuilding process, those Japanese engineers will be pulling out.
Little Johnny therefore has authorised the deployment for twelve months to Iraq of another contingent of Australian troops.......only about two or three months after his election promise to 'not increase Australia's commitment in the Middle East'.
Quite understandably, Aussie taxpayers and voters are a little peeved.
-
The reason is this:
Japan does not have a military. They are designated as Self Defense Forces and exist for the sole purpose of defending Japan, according to their constitution. They are prohibited by law from acting as a military force outside of Japan.
I don't know how much simpler I can explain it.
As far as Aussies being peeved, this is all about economics anyway and Japan is a major trading partner for Australia. Military forces have always been used for economic reasons and Iraq is no different.
-
Bluedog being a military type myself I would have to conclude that these are in fact engineers and the likes and not actual combat troops.
That being said "garrison" type troops do have the means and the knowledge to defend themselvs but they are usually far from being effective combat troops. The aussies are probably MPs or actual infantry types wich are better equiped to mount a formidable deffense.
This is pure speculation on my part but it is based on the fact that I myself am a "garrison" type and wouldnt want to depend on MY troops for a first line deffense. Last ditch effort sure ;)
-
Obviously this is just too hard to grasp. Let's try one sentence:
They are constitutionally prohibited from acting as a military force outside of Japan.
-
The japanese will not be willing to attack unless this is seen in Iraq
(http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/2063/small.jpg)
LOOK IT GODZILLA!!!
(http://www.gojistomp.org/photos/gmk_gallery/citytrample.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Rolex
Obviously this is just too hard to grasp. Let's try one sentence:
They are constitutionally prohibited from acting as a military force outside of Japan.
OK, so Japan isnt allowed to send her troops anywhere.
So please explain the presence in Iraq of Japanese military engineers.
Or am I way off track here, and they are in fact civilian engineers who just happen to be Japanese, not a military engineering corps unit.(Sure looked like JDF equiment and markings on TV)
Its fine by me if they deploy troops to Iraq, but why the half measure? Dont we trust them to behave themselves? Worried about the Greater Middle Eastern Co-prosperity Sphere?
All or nothing, either let them deploy their own troops, or don't let them deploy anyone.
After all, we are talking about ~500 soldiers here, it's not like they are going to suddenly jack up and try and over run Iraq or anything.
A bit of a slap in the face to the Japanese isnt it? "Yes, we will gladly recieve your help with the engineers, but don't even think about deploying any basic infantrymen to ensure their safety while they help"
BTW, the reason Aussie taxpayers are pissed off is because our PM has just proved himself to be a blatant liar.(not that that was ever really in doubt, he is, after all,a politician )
It was only a few weeks ago he was promising not to send any more troops overseas.
Gunslinger : That's pretty much the conclusion I came to, they are engineers, they build stuff, fix it, or blow it up, infantry combat is not their role, where the guys we are sending are a rapid deployment force, trained in infantry combat, patrolling, security measures, counter-insurgency tactics etc. etc. and will be filling a role for which they are fully prepared, equiped and trained.
The part I dont get is that the Japanese no doubt have infantrymen of the same calibre, why is it OK to deploy engineers to a foriegn country, but not the troops to keep 'em safe.
Bit of an honour for Australia that they specifically requested Aussie troops though.
-
By the way, I think its about time Japan got the opportunity to show the world that the past is the past, and that Japanese forces are quite capable of being deployed wherever there is a need for them, without people worrying that they might try to take over the world or anything.
Iraq is the ideal place for that to happen, or certainly a better place than somewhere that was either occupied by, or fought over by Japanese forces in WWII.
I can see that sending Japanese troops as peace keepers to somewhere like Korea, or the Phillipines may not be exactly wellcomed by the locals, but the Middle East has no such history of conflict with the Japanese, and could benefit greatly by the use of some of their technical expertise. lets face it, its rather obvious Japanese engineers know their stuff.
after third edit attempt So I cant spell, just shoot me :)
-
I know this the insurgents will probably get....JAPWNED!
I said before and I say again Just wait until the Japanese release their Super Dimensional Fortress Macross!!!
-
I don't think too many people would disagree that they should be able to support their own engineers, Bluedog. Most Japanese agree with that.
Unfortunately, their constitution does not allow them to deploy a (fighting) military force overseas. How many times have I said that now?
Maybe I should say it again just in case someone still doesn't get it.
The constitution does not allow them to deploy a military (as in fighting) force overseas.
They are not allowed to participate as a military force in a military coalition outside of Japan either.
Until their constitution is changed, the cannot deploy a military force overseas. Maybe I should say it again, because it still seems to be difficult to comprehend:
The constitution does not allow them to deploy a military (as in fighting) force overseas.
Should I say it again? :D
-
the one that we helped them write.
:aok
-
Actually, no, 88. It was written in English by a committee appointed by General MacArthur and translated into Japanese for the Diet to approve. While a few Japanese were consulted during the drafting of it, none of their input was included. It was approved as written, which is what the defeated nation accepted as their fate.
-
Originally posted by Bluedog
By the way, I think its about time Japan got the opportunity to show the world that the past is the past, and that Japanese forces are quite capable of being deployed wherever there is a need for them, without people worrying that they might try to take over the world or anything.
Iraq is the ideal place for that to happen, or certainly a better place than somewhere that was either occupied by, or fought over by Japanese forces in WWII.
I can see that sending Japanese troops as peace keepers to somewhere like Korea, or the Phillipines may not be exactly wellcomed by the locals, but the Middle East has no such history of conflict with the Japanese, and could benefit greatly by the use of some of their technical expertise. lets face it, its rather obvious Japanese engineers know their stuff.
I]after third edit attempt[/I] So I cant spell, just shoot me :)
To be honest Bluey, I asked the question cause it didn't really add up to me that the Japanese would deploy 800 odd engineers and totally rely on foreign protection without also deploying an integral defensive component. Our diggers are being sent to replace the 1200 dutch soldiers (who are withdrawing out of Iraq) and the British who were going to replace them requested (with the Japanese) us to help their already stretched responsibilties.
I have many issues with this new deployment...obviously Johnny further increasing our numbers whilst denying that it would happen is just more typical howard arse licking...the only difference it's not the americans this time.
But to be honest I am really uncomfortable that Australian soldiers are being sent to Iraq to protect Japanese engineers when there are still so many old diggers who suffered greatly under the hands of the Japanese as POWS. This is obviously more an emotive response than common sense as Australian soldiers are second to none, and the Japanese recognise this themselves, and consider our relationship to strong enough to make such a request. After all this isn't even the first time Australian diggers have served along side the Japanese... (as recent as East Timor INTERFET/UNTAET)
Tronsky
-
I know where you're coming from Tronski, I struggled with that whole concept myself, more than one member of my family died by Japanese hands, and not all of them in combat.
No doubt most of the young blokes they are sending over have similar family histories, and if they themselves have no problem with it, then I cant see that I have a right to.
I think that the right to be angry at, or hate the Japanese for what they did, belongs to those old Diggers you spoke of, and will die completely with the last of them when they pass.
They earned that right with their blood, for us to assume it and continue, would be to cheapen their efforts and sacrifices.
A Milne Bay veteran once said to me "I will never forgive them, or forget what they did, but you son, you should forgive them, and remember us, we fought to stop the war, not continue it. I have the right to hate, I earned it in New Guinea, you young blokes have a right to the freedom we bought for you, dont waste it on hate, it was too expensive for that"
It made me feel ashamed when he said that, and I have never forgotten it, and never will.
I think he was a very wise man.
BTW, I had no idea Japan had sent troops to Timor, I would have thought it would be one of the places that they were less than wellcome in a military sense.
-
Rolex, I fully understand that the Japanese arent allowed to use their armed forces in an aggresive manner, but I do not understand why the distinction between that and providing their own integral security when on deployments such as this isnt made, it is quite obviously an entirely differant thing.
Further, if their constitution is so rigid in this regard and cannot be altered, why then are they allowed to send anyone at all, engineers are still soldiers, and are indeed a military force.
Further again, if this whole deployment is a way of easing the Japanese military back into world affairs, why not allow them the dignity of providing their own defence, it's not as though they would present any threat whatsoever to the Coalition troops in the area, they are sort of outgunned.
Its not really a question, in that I'm not so much looking for an answer, just discussing something which confuses me, and apparently, Im not alone.
-
Originally posted by Otto
Each member if the JDF is a licensed 'Trade Representive' of the Japanese Department of Commerce. They have the authority to make binding agreements in any form of International Trade and are prepared to offer long and short term solutions to a wide range of problems facing the new Iraqi government.
So really they are Japanese bussinesmen, the whole uniform and 'engineers' thing is just a clever ruse ;)
-
Actually Bluedog, you've pretty much got it. It is a clever ruse, and a pretty cynical one at that (Trade Representatives indeed...) about which many Japanese feel upset.
Just as you've pointed out, many folks in Japan would stress that their constitution is rigid in this regard and cannot be altered, and that they should not be allowed to send anyone at all. After all, as you say, engineers are still soldiers, and are indeed a military force.
The government (well, the Liberal Democratic Party, which contains some pretty ancient and powerful hawks), is pushing for a greater international role for Japan, including a seat on the UN Security Council. The presence in Iraq of SDF personnel is one manifestation of that push. They've pushed the SDF into Iraq over the very deep objections of many ordinary Japanese - the very worst thing which could happen, including for the hawks, is for the JDF personnel to become involved in gunfights.
"This is black."
"No, no, it's white."
"Come off it, it's clearly black."
"No, we passed an administrative order which states that, in certain special cases, this will be designated white. This is one such case."
"It's still black though."
-
Originally posted by Bluedog
"I will never forgive them, or forget what they did, but you son, you should forgive them, and remember us, we fought to stop the war, not continue it. I have the right to hate, I earned it in New Guinea, you young blokes have a right to the freedom we bought for you, dont waste it on hate, it was too expensive for that"
WOW.
-
I mean if we don't let the Japanese have a military force how else could we see gigantic robotic battle space suits.
Huh,huh?
-
I wouldnt mind having a Gundam as an recreation vehicle.
-
What strikes me is the "preparedness" of the West to fight.
The Pentagon data shows that 708,000 of the troops who have served in war come from the active duty force. That means that roughly half of the United States' 1.4 million active duty troops have gone to war. Slightly more than 245,000 troops from reserve and National Guard units have also been deployed.
The Pentagon, through all political administrations has clearly stated that the US is ready to fight two conflicts simultaneously. Recently of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs said we still could.
Under Defense Department doctrine, the military must be able to simultaneously fight and swiftly defeat two enemies in two different parts of the world. One of those conflicts can be an enduring one, such as Iraq. "We can still do that," Myers insisted.
I seriously doubt that he is correct.
Beyond that, what Western country is ready to go to war? From what we're reading, deploying 1000 troops for any length of time is a major difficulty for almost all of the countries.
Doesn't say much for preparedness. Sounds like 1939 in fact. Weakness tempts the bad guys, I think.
-
Originally posted by Scherf
Actually Bluedog, you've pretty much got it. It is a clever ruse, and a pretty cynical one at that (Trade Representatives indeed...) about which many Japanese feel upset.
Just as you've pointed out, many folks in Japan would stress that their constitution is rigid in this regard and cannot be altered, and that they should not be allowed to send anyone at all. After all, as you say, engineers are still soldiers, and are indeed a military force.
The government (well, the Liberal Democratic Party, which contains some pretty ancient and powerful hawks), is pushing for a greater international role for Japan, including a seat on the UN Security Council. The presence in Iraq of SDF personnel is one manifestation of that push. They've pushed the SDF into Iraq over the very deep objections of many ordinary Japanese - the very worst thing which could happen, including for the hawks, is for the JDF personnel to become involved in gunfights.
"This is black."
"No, no, it's white."
"Come off it, it's clearly black."
"No, we passed an administrative order which states that, in certain special cases, this will be designated white. This is one such case."
"It's still black though."
Exactly correct. One point though, the Japanese in Iraq CAN use weapons to defend themselves, but only in certain conditions. Basically (and it really stretches all the definitions of all the terms invovled), since they consider those people to be part of a muti-national force, the areas occupied by them and assigned to them to work in are part of Japan, consider it a roving Japanese Embassy. Its not. But politics often becomes the world of make believe.
Even 5 years ago the voices in Japan that wanted to change their Constitution were very few and not very loud. N. Korea helped change that, and while change may not happen soon or easily (if at all), I would bet we will see a vote on it before too many years pass. Besides N. Korea's threat, Japan really does want that seat on the Security Council, and they cant have it the way things are now.
-
And you are right, Bluedog, about why they are even there at all, since the deployment already seems to violate the constitution.
When it comes to understanding Japanese politics, I find it's easier if I suspend all common sense. The 'it's black, no it's white' thing is done with no shame or embarrassment.
-
I think Japanese foreign policy can be seen in most Off the Shelf Anime series... They have no point, they are silly and are fun to watch, if you're a stoner, not me though it hurts when I try to understand it. So I just stare in awe an amazement , as to what genious can be done from such people in a completely incoherent sense, sort of like this post .
So just get ready SF when the Mecha come it'll be a world to pay MAJINGA ZETTO!
-
Thanks for that Star.
I'd been mulling over my reply last night, and was thinking to myself that what I really meant was: "The official line is that Japan doesn't really have an army, that these guys aren't really soldiers, and they're not really part of a military coalition. The only thing which would complete the picture would be if they were considered to be 'Not really outside Japan.' "
Truth is stranger than fiction, I guess.
-
Originally posted by Bluedog
I know where you're coming from Tronski, I struggled with that whole concept myself, more than one member of my family died by Japanese hands, and not all of them in combat.
No doubt most of the young blokes they are sending over have similar family histories, and if they themselves have no problem with it, then I cant see that I have a right to.
I think that the right to be angry at, or hate the Japanese for what they did, belongs to those old Diggers you spoke of, and will die completely with the last of them when they pass.
They earned that right with their blood, for us to assume it and continue, would be to cheapen their efforts and sacrifices.
A Milne Bay veteran once said to me "I will never forgive them, or forget what they did, but you son, you should forgive them, and remember us, we fought to stop the war, not continue it. I have the right to hate, I earned it in New Guinea, you young blokes have a right to the freedom we bought for you, dont waste it on hate, it was too expensive for that"
It made me feel ashamed when he said that, and I have never forgotten it, and never will.
I think he was a very wise man.
BTW, I had no idea Japan had sent troops to Timor, I would have thought it would be one of the places that they were less than wellcome in a military sense.
Yeah your pretty spot on mate...I have so much respect for those blokes, I should always remember to also respect why they went through those things as well.
A mate at work is ex-army and was in East timor (with 2RAR i think), and we spoke at length abou this new Iraq deployment. He said that there were Japanese engineers in Timor...I also remarked that considering ET was occupied by the Japanese the locals wouldn't have too happy, but he said they hated the indonesians more!
Tronsky