tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35894930.post9133100787973881268..comments2023-12-31T15:40:06.675-08:00Comments on Peace Philosophy Centre: Pearl Harbor was not the first or the only place that Japan attacked on December 7/8, 1941 - Professor Nobuyoshi TAKASHIMA's Talk in Vancouver (English Translation) 真珠湾攻撃は、当日の日本軍によるアジア太平洋地域での同時多発的攻撃の一つに過ぎない。高嶋伸欣バンクーバー講演英語版Peace Philosopherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03884294048618803206noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35894930.post-14591479084281471562016-12-10T16:49:49.224-08:002016-12-10T16:49:49.224-08:00Thanks to prof.Takashima's research in Malaysi... Thanks to prof.Takashima's research in Malaysia, it becomes apparent that Japanese army selectively attacked and killed the Chinese residents and stimulated the hostility between Chinese and Malaysian. I have to realize again how brutal and cruel Japan had been against China and Chinese people and at the same time I myself have not understood the situation reported here in this research.<br /><br /> I have one point to point out. I think the historical revisionism of the Japanese government has far deeper root than the sentiment regarding the emperor as an absolute being. Japan had invaded the Korean peninsula in the 16th. century. The ultimate aim of the invasion was to possess China. At that time the emperor had not been an absolute being yet, so the aim had been of the ruling class as a whole. The ambition to possess China could have been survived for long time because of the geographical location and diplomatic isolation and the lack of diplomatic experience of Japan. For China Japan had been one of many neighboring countries, consequently China had shown no positive concern to Japan. But for Japan China had been the rival and the possessor of the land which only Japan had the capacity to control. When Japan was forced to have diplomatic relation with the U.S. and the European countries, Japan found the chance to carry out its life-long ambition.<br /><br />Haruyo Kobayashinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35894930.post-24761430372345003542016-12-10T08:42:23.976-08:002016-12-10T08:42:23.976-08:00Thank you, Satoko, for making this speech availabl... Thank you, Satoko, for making this speech available. I didn't know Kota Bharu was beginning to appear in history textbooks--what a good sign, when there are so few.<br />Norma Fieldnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35894930.post-20523573003369538892016-12-10T08:40:13.788-08:002016-12-10T08:40:13.788-08:00Satoko---your sharp reminder of the narrow mytholo...Satoko---your sharp reminder of the narrow mythologizing of the Pearl Harbor attack - and its current consequences -- is sooooo valuable!Cynthia Enloenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35894930.post-77173950306127677522016-12-09T21:08:54.023-08:002016-12-09T21:08:54.023-08:00It is true that Pearl Harbour was not the only tar...It is true that Pearl Harbour was not the only target that day. The reason for its emphasis is because it was an important US Pacific naval base. As a boy I remember my father told me<br />about the attack and invasion of southern Thailand and Kota Bahru on the same day. I can't understand why there are still Japanese like Shinzo Abe who refuses to accept historical truth.<br />Charles C S Tohnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35894930.post-72166905086481693632016-12-08T14:31:07.759-08:002016-12-08T14:31:07.759-08:00Thank you for this reminder. Yes, the hypervisibil...Thank you for this reminder. Yes, the hypervisibility of Pearl Harbor conceals the other sites of Japanese aggression and it does work for the U.S. to legitimize its claim to Hawaiʻi as "American territory" rather than an occupied country, and as you point out it sets up the U.S. as the only "liberator" and therefore the one with the right to claim the Pacific as the "American Lake".Kyle Kajihironoreply@blogger.com