Loudmouth,
Japan was suddenly thrown into the age of rampant Westerm imperialism.
To fend it off and protect Japanese independence reqired more or less an imperialistic policy. If Japan had been situated geographically where Switzerland or Norway is, she would have been modernised herself without developing imperialistic response.

I do not think I said Japan had to take Taiwan to keep herself independent; details aside, Japan had to release Korea from Chinese suzerainty and to make her an independent country (and this is why Qing China and Japan fought the war of 1894-95,) so that Japan would not be carved up and partioned in the Russo-British imperialistic rivalry. Taiwan was a war booty that Japan got from Qing China. It would have been perfectly superb if she had not demanded and taken Taiwan and reparations from China after the war.

As I said, I do not deny that Manchukuo was the product of Japanese imperialism. Japan spent far more money on Manchurian economic development than she drew out from it, and it was the most industrialised part of China in 1945; Mao took it and it was one big reason for the communists' victory and also a big reason why they could fight the Koean War and why General MacArthur insisted on bombing it beyond the Yalu River which ran between Manchuria and North Korea. To be continued.

Loudmouth,
"...the best colonial master of all time has been Japan, for no ex-colonies have done so well as (South) Korea, and Taiwan,...(David S. Landes, The Wealth and Poverty of Nations)." Manchuria should have been added on the list. (This book has many misinterpretations of Japan, though.)
North Korea was well-industrialised due to Japanese rule and the South was an agrarian country, and this was why Kim started war of aggression in June,1950.

All is forgiven. Yes, a person or a country should be punished for the crime he/she/it committed, but Japan was penalized even for the crimes she did not commit, and seventy years is the time for reappraial of the past.

Initially Japan was not at all ambitiously intent on China. Japan was frightened with the West, so she asked Qing China to take the lead in setting up a common front to stand up to the Western imperialism. But China simply snubbed it with ridicule, so Japan had to do it for herself, and the imminent job to do was to separate Korea from China and make her an independent country.

China had not awakened at the defeat of the Opium Wars. She continued in her happy slumber of "These blue-eyed Western barbarian will soon admit her charm and greatness and and kneel down and kowtow."
It was the defeat of the 1894-95 war in the hands of Japan that really shocked and awakened and made her realise that something was awry with the Middle Kingdom, like a heavy-weight class boxing world champion who was knocked down by a novice who just started to learn boxing. A lot of people like Liang Qichao, Sun Yatsen, Chiang Kaishek, and Zhou Enlai came to Japan to learn the secret of modernisation. "...the Chinese have never reciprocated the warm feelings of the Japanese, viewing them with distrust and more than a little contempt (E. O. Reischauer, The Japanese)." Chinese school teaches children and young people that the Opium Wars taught a lesson and the need for change and of course that communists were the vanguard.

Evidence of Chinese media rhetoric about attacking Australian defense forces in the south china sea because of "freedom of navigation" activities in the region. > http://www.businessinsider.com.au/major-chinese-state-paper-calls-for-a-military-strike-on-australian-ships-that-enter-the-south-china-sea-2016-7

Also, news of china getting friendly with Russia over this issue as well. > http://www.smh.com.au/world/experts-wary-about-chinas-new-coziness-with-russia-in-the-south-china-sea-20160730-gqh99x.html

The situation is what it is, and it ain't going away anytime soon.

Hi Rojama,

I'm very disappointed with Vietnam's stance on all this, over-reaching only a bit less than China itself does.

Other states in the area, the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia and Indonesia, seem to be quite rightly defending the internationally-recognised 200-mile Economic Exclusion Zones out from their coasts. But Vietnam is making a very similar claim as China's to the Paracels, which any sane person would agree should be recognised as coming within the EEZs of the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei, and differentiated accordingly.

Vietnam's position compromises any united effort to get it through to the Chinese that what they are trying to do blatantly breaches international law. I can't imagine what Vietnam's rationale might be for their claims, but if they rely on some historical evidence of fishing in those areas, then they can join the plethora of historical fishermen from many kingdoms across early Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Burmese states, the Indianised kingdoms across Indo-China, who all fished in each others' waters, going back for more than thousand years. As they still do.

Or are we to support some claim from Java that their fishermen used to fish along the north coast of Australia as evidence that Australia should now belong to Indonesia ? Where does imperialism end, and common sense begin ?

Take note, Michi :)

Joe

Hi Loudmouth, I understand what your saying but when you or anyone for that matter use terms like "sane" and "commonsense" they are open to individual interpretations.
One of the reasons why I avoid using these terms in any online discussion anywhere.

US thinktank, Rand corporation, has outlined a worse case scenario of war between US and China, although highly unlikely, I would never rule it out altogeather no matter what the so called trade links are between the two at the current time.
http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1140.html

Obviously, after the US presidential elections in November, this game could take serious deviations in any direction.

Hi Rojama,

Points taken :)

It's interesting that Taiwan's President has just apologised for four hundred years of oppression of the Indigenous people there. That puts the Ming invasion of Taiwan at around 1610-1620, some thirty years before the Manchu invasion of China itself.

If Taiwan was not part of China four hundred years ago, then how can we take seriously present-day Chinese claims of much further reach, much earlier, down into the South China Sea ?

Cheers,

Joe