Amongst white pseudo intellectuals in the west, it may be the present fashion to be completely non racist, and to treat nationalism with contempt. But this is a western fashion, not a Chinese one. The Chinese people as a whole are extremely racist and extremely nationalistic. Whenever they see or hear a western trendy mouthing off against their own race and culture, they probably nod politely, while wondering how anybody could be so stupid.

The Chinese are so racist they refuse to believe that the chinse evolved from black Africans. Chinese students are taught that the Chinese evolved in China separately from everybody else on the planet. They are unique. THAT is racism.

The richest people in the world are the Overseas Chinese who comprise around 60 million people. They are people gifted in wealth creation and they have one other enduring virtue. They are intensely nationalistic. Not to the countries in which they live in, but to China. The stupidity of allowing people to immigrate into a western country who's primary loyalties are to a religion or another nation is becoming manifest right now in Europe.

China is an emerging superpower that is now as dangerous as Imperial Germany, Nazi Germany, or Imperial Japan. It is now illegally claiming an entire ocean as it's own territory, something which no other nation has done in the history of the world. 60% of the US armed forces is being directed to Asia for the coming war. Pearl Harbour has not seen so many ships in port since WW2. A-10's are landing in Subic Bay. F-22's are landing in Japan. A Chinese fleet has sailed within US territorial waters in Alaska. China has declared Australia "an ideal target." Yet here we are, still allowing what is clearly an enemy country to buy up our real estate. A Chinese company has now bought Lindeman Island in the Great Barrier Reef. I wonder how long it will be before it is named by China as a part of China, and they start building a fighter and bomber airfield?

Sell off Tasmania to the Chinese, as they suggested as a joke on Gruen Transfer. Nobody seems to care anyway.
Strange that I can't buy anything in Samoa- or Thailand- or Indonesia, unless under very strict conditions if at all.

I burst out laughing when I heard those Chinese references to our barbarian past, that we were just a bunch of convicts on the edge of the civilized world. I'm quite proud of my convict past, with (so far) nine convict ancestors from all corners of the British Isles, almost invariably from rural areas, from hamlets and small villages which barely exist any more.

Obviously, they were casualties of the Industrial Revolution, moving each generation to larger centres and eventually to the cities where they had to thieve to survive. So I have much sympathy for Chinese peasants today having to leave their villages and find some sort of living in the cities, before they are sent off to the laogais and their factories.

Clearly, the current Chinese regime has no more sympathy for its poorest than the British government did back then, and is just as intent on looking after and enriching its own as the Brits were. But I'm proud of my convict ancestors, they helped to build this country and make its civilized ways - and sense of humour - and clean, sporting prowess - the envy of the world.

Joe

LEGO, you make some truthful comments. Have to agree with you.

No matter what country or nation we are talking about, as long as Australia has that silly union jack in the corner of its flag, foreigners will perceive Australia as distinct part of the UK.
Changing the flag design has been debated and talked about in this country for many years already, but it still remands and embarrassment.
It portrays an image of an infantile country afraid to let go of mother's apron...
Countries like Canada and India still part of the British commonwealth, but have their own distinct flags. This may be a minor point but it is the internationally perceived image that a flag projects across the globe that is the issue here. Can we please do something constructive about this "dumb ass" flag!!

Another point that is disturbing and untrue about Australia's origins is the fact that it is not solely birthed from British convicts, there are free settlers or immigrants here that came out during the 19th century. My family records on both sides of the family have traceable records from 19th century free immigrants and no convict heritage that can be located today.
I'm sure a considerable amount of other 19th century originated Australian families can prove that also. But no, this is not mentioned is it? better to belittle Australia as 18 century originated UK prison dumb. This way any country, any where can put down Australia. Pity its only half the truth!
Time to see the light > http://waves.anmm.gov.au/Immigration-Stories/Immigration-history

Nationalism expressed as a type of blind faith is utterly dangerous, shame it's prevalent in China today.

A typical reaction from China, a jingoistic, racist country that thinks it is superior to everyone else on Earth. Never mind that they regularly execute their own people and charge the family for the bullet.

Young Horton has more courage that all our politicians put together; those invertebrates who kow tow to the most vicious communist country in the world, and sell off huge lumps of their own country to China because its 'one party' dictatorship asks them to. Our dealings with China should be a source of shame to all Australians.

A down to earth article...I find myself in agreence with ttbn on this subject!

THe very worst insult you can hurl at a chinese national is the truth that rents asunder the face saving false facade that they present, be it their human rights record or the annexation of falsely claimed territory, taken because no one dares defy them!

I had my very first real fist fight aged just six and against a very much larger 15 year old bully, who picked me out of the blue, arguably because he couldn't find anyone smaller or weaker and reminiscent of the thundering abuse hurling chinese editor, for whom the truth is a complete stranger if it's about chinese officialdom and their totally lacking humanity or any vestige of an inherent morality?

THe lesson I took away that day despite my blackened eyes and bloody nose, was that bullies must always be stood up too, and you don't quit until it is them hollering uncle!

Better to live on your feet fighting for your dignity or basic human rights, than die on your knees having compromised every ideal you used to live by or hold true!?

That said, none of this need have troubled territory taking China or the vociferous verbosus verbal vomit editor, if drug cheats when exposed, were simply and permanently banned for life, as a matter of course!
Alan B.

This spat with China highlights the stupidity of Australia.

We have well overpopulated the country through immigration, and we now rely on selling something most of the world does not want to support the excess population.

We make a trade surplus with mainly three countries, China, Japan and South Korea, and when trading with the rest of the world, we make a trade deficit.

But due to the overpopulation, we must keep selling coal and iron ore to China, while China has little regard for Australia.

As we continue to overpopulate the country through immigration, our dependency on China will only increase, and Australia can do less and less regards China's negative attitude towards Australia.

It's just been announced.
2pm Thursday 11th.
Scott Morrison has stopped sale of the Ausgrid Network to a Chinese buyer. NSW Premier Baird will be unhappy.

Maybe Morrison was expecting that One Nation and Xenophon would have a lot to say about this??

Well we have to retain control of our vital assets...

this is the reference re Ausgrid and Scott Morrison:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-scott-morrison-blocks-sale-of-ausgrid-to-foreign-bidders-20160811-gqq5te.html?

In relation to the most important issue which is the alleged Chinese Denial of Service (DoS) attacks on Swimming Australia and the Census:

Yes Swimming Australia is a likely DoS from China target.

I'm not convinced China would gain from DoSing the Census.

The Census DoSing could as easily have been Haktivists/Anonymous from the US and Australia. Turnbull's lot reported the DoS was from US but then Turnbull's lot automatically concluded China was at fault.

A Haktivists/Anonymous DoS of the Census would have been equally or more likely. This is so much more embarrassing for Turnbull because it would tie in with popular Australian opposition to the Census. With Australians using US servers-helpers to do something about the Census.

My knowledge of Cyber and DoS matters goes back to 2007 -
see my COVER STORY article: "The fifth battle domain - cyberspace" at http://www.newsweekly.com.au/article.php?id=2999

The above benefitted from an extended study of Chinese and Russian malware and DoS attacks. Ably assisted by discussions with a US contact from US Army Cyber/SigInt from 2008.

Confirming the accuracy of my comment above re the Denial of Service (DoS) attack against the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Census on Tuesday:

our Government is steadily confirming the attack started in Australia-then via US servers-hit the ABS. Hence no China involvement with the Census, just an Australian public mass action against the Census.

SkyNews reported today (August 12, 2016) http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2016/08/12/no-resignations-yet-over-census-debacle.html

“Mr Turnbull told reporters [today] the attacks appeared to have originated in the United States, but the actors were not necessarily American.

'It is not very difficult to route traffic through another country using private networks and virtual techniques,' he said.

...Earlier on Friday Senior Minister Christopher Pyne appeared to confirm the disruption of the census came from within Australia.”

The Chinese seem to be ready with their attacks on Australians. We are racist, China-phobic, barbarians, lap dogs of the British and Americans, and so on.
For years I had to study Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin. This type of invective was always ready for any fight they got into .Lap dogs of the colonialists, running dogs of imperialism, etc etc.
It's weird that Bob Carr, in the University of Technology's Centre for China-Australia Relations, is attacking Scott Morrison's decision. He was a Labor Premier. Shows how much he cares for the working class in Australia!

Alleged 'Chinese' and 'everybody' DoS attacks on the Australian Census.

It wouldn't be as simple as the ABS and its expensive contractor IBM stuffing up on how many might complete it online. LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTBsm0LzSP0

Several poms think that dreadful Australians came from convicts , that British are separate from EU and they have the only "royal" navy and rules the waves . They found a large coral island girt by sea and said no-one is home and took the lot , the oil, iron, kangaroos, coal, natives and opera house. Chinese drug opiates tried to claim China until the pure white navy bombed their Made in Hong Kong sea-ports and funny looking junks ( how's that for a racist put-down?).
How dare the slopes think of being superior or organising a famine like Ireland had for British profits! They are treacherous , look at Singapore joining the barbarians at Darwin to attack their own mother.

Well give the census to the Chinese, they would have a small army of people and have it done pronto.
I wonder how they organise their own census of 1.36 billion?

LEGO

I am a Japanese. You said, "dangerous as Imperial Japan." Japan began to be involved in a big continental war with China on July 7, 1937. It struck Pearl Harbour on December 8, 1941 (Japan Standard Time).
Tell me why Japan waited so long as four years to make war on the United States, will you? Was it to expel America and Great Britain from East Asia to have hegemony? Tell me why Japanese Prime Minister Konoe proposed to the United States in August, 1941, that he would go over to America to have direct talks with President Roosevelt. Tell me why Tojo became Prime Minister so late as October, 1941?

Hi Michi,

So Japan invaded China in July, 1937, without genuine provocation.

Then it fought a war of aggression with Russia in 1938.

Then it occupied French Indo-China in 1940 with the connivance of the Vichy government in France.

Then it bombed Pearl Harbor in December, 1941, without provocation.

Then it invaded Hong Kong, the Philippines, the Dutch East Indies, Malaya, Burma, Papua-New Guinea and Pacific islands, and bombed towns across northern Australia, all without any provocation.

Busy times !

So, they staggered their aggression over a number of years. Is that what you are saying ?

Joe

Japan doesn't teach about its war-crimes. The West doesn't teach about its trade-crimes.

. “On July 2, 1940, Roosevelt signed the Export Control Act, authorizing the President to license or prohibit the export of essential defense materials.” Under this authority, “[o]n July 31, exports of aviation motor fuels and lubricants and No. 1 heavy melting iron and steel scrap were restricted.” Next, in a move aimed at Japan, Roosevelt slapped an embargo, effective October 16, “on all exports of scrap iron and steel to destinations other than Britain and the nations of the Western Hemisphere.” Finally, on July 26, 1941, Roosevelt “froze Japanese assets in the United States, thus bringing commercial relations between the nations to an effective end. One week later Roosevelt embargoed the export of such grades of oil as still were in commercial flow to Japan.” The British and the Dutch followed suit, embargoing exports to Japan from their colonies in southeast Asia.

I don't know what this resume of Japanese imperialism (or Japanese people seeking room to expand) has to do with the China- Australia relationship, which is where we started.

The Conversation has a nice take on the Spratly Islands also known as South China Sea. Nowhere near China, I might add.

I'm amazed that China has the money and power to keep pushing its world expansion plans along.

Check it out.

https://theconversation.com/fishing-not-oil-is-at-the-heart-of-the-south-china-sea-dispute-63580

Loudmouth and nickname,

The Sino-Japanese war was started by an accident on July 7, 1937. Several shots were fired by the Kuomintang army, presumably by infiltrated communists. Both Japan and China wanted to contain it; neither wanted to escalate it and in fact the two countries came to truce agreement a few times. But it became a big war without either side declaring war, and as the war got bigger and bigger, the US-Japanese relations soured and got strained, so the two countries started negotiations in Washington in spring, 1941.
The Roosevelt administration wanted to engage in war with Nazi Germany to help Great Britain and, therefore, wanted to avoid armed hostilites in the Pacific with Japan. Japan thought in the beginnig that it could easily knock down China but, as China received military assistance from the US and Great Britain, it found itself inadvertantly dragged into a prolonged, exhausting war, which was another big reason why it proposed negotiations with the United States. What it wanted was a withdrawal from China with its good appearace preserved like Nixon's "peace with honour."
Prime Minister Konoe was so shocked by the total embargoes of the US in July, 1941, and he also had thought that the armed forces, particularly the army, stood very much in the way of success in the US-Japanese talks, that he wanted to talk with President Roosevelt and make compromises which would have been impossible to attain domestically (within Japanese politics) and he intended to send the concessions directly by telegram to Hirohito and get over domestic resistance by dint of Hirohito's moral prestige. (Even the Japanese army was not monolithic and even Tojo did not want to go to war with the United States. He and the army liked to get out of the hopeless war with China. They insisted on a few years to take to withdraw from China but US secretary of State Hull insisted on a few months.) To be continued.

Both the army and the navy had agreed to Konoe's idea and selected generals, adimirals and military experts to accompany Konoe. Secretary Hull refused the proposal, saying that more details ought to be worked out beforehand.
Tojo succeeded Konoe as prime minister and he asked Shigenori Togo as foreign minister to continue the negotiations. Togo accepted the post after discussing with Tojo and making sure that war was not a foregone conclusion. Togo said to US ambassador Joseph Grew after recieving a reply from Hull on November 26 that he was shocked and completely disappointed (Joseph Grew/ Ten Years In Japan). The final decision was made in Tokyo on December 1, a week before the Pearl Harbour attack. The Roosevelt administration knew on November 26 when Hull handed the note called Hull Note to two Japanese ambassadors that Japan would respond militarily. (When the Suzuki cabinet was formed in April with Togo as foreing minister, 1945, J. Grew and others knew that the cabinet would lead Japan to surrender. Tojo said, "This is the end. This is our Badoglio cabinet. Actually, groups of Japanese had already started to consider how to end the war. Communication within Japan was intercepted or decoded by the United States, which knew Japan wanted to surrender.)
Many experts say the US-Japanese talks did harm to Japan but good to the United States, which wanted to make war on Germany, because Washington could do things which otherwise would have been impossible to do as the Roosevelt administration's hands had been tied down by strong anti-war feelings, because the negotiation was like playing chess in which each Japanese move could be countered by American one. America entered the European war by the back door, Japan.

The military clash that broke out at Changkufeng in 1938 was the reconnaissance manuevering to test the other's strength. This skirmish was followed by another at Nomonhan in 1939. The Rise Of Modern Japan). To be continued.

The Japanese "Kwantung army suffered on each occasion a serous reverse (ibid)."

Japan was dependent on the United States for virtually all its oil and iron supplies. It asked the Netherlands for oil sales but was denied. So its army advanced into northern Vietnam just in case for oil and other natural resources. What proved disastrous was its occupation of southern Vietnam. The United States retaliated with the total embargoes. Prime Minister Konoe was so shocked by this response, which he had hardly expected though many Japanese expersts had warned him of its serious implications. So he decided to meet with President Roosevelt.

1930s' Japan is usually termed militarist Japan. Even Japan at that time was very different from Germany: It did not have a concentration camp like Germany or Commnunist China; it did not have the police like Gestapo or Commnunist China's Armed Police and Public Security Police. Its parliament functioned and every bill had to be passed by it to be effective as a law except some special military expenditures.
"Consequently,...the Diet passed a Wartime Emergency Measure Bill...which authorized the government to take all necessary measures to ensure military production, supply of foodstuffs, transport, payment of taxes, and care for the victims of air raids. The original draft required the govenment to 'report' on the use of these powers to a special Diet committee. But the House of Peers amended the bill, requiring the government to 'consult' the Diet committee, rather than merely 'report' to it. Thus, even under the most extreme circumstances, the Diet was eager to retain the last vestiges of its power (Ben-Ami Shillony, Politics and Culture in Wartime Japan)." To be continued.

What is usually termed militarist Japan of the 1930s was in reality a country far different from Nazi Germany or Communist China. It did not have a concentration camp, the police like Gestapo or China's Armed Police and Public Peace Police or a strongly organized propaganda system like Germany's and China's.

More than seventy years have passed since the end of the war, and we can look at the past in a more disapassionate way. "the wartime regime of Japan, repressive as it was, was very different from the totalitarian states of that time in other places. When one realizes how tenuous and frail democracy is elsewhere in the world, and how strong is the tendendy towards arbitrary rule, one may conclude by wondering not why democracy failed in Japan, but rather how, despite the undemocratic tradition and the pressure of war, a totalitarian dictatorship did not evolve (Ben-Ami Shillony)."
It is widely held that the seed of democracy in postwar Japan was brought and sown and grown by the United States. This is totally wrong. Japan had been developing democracy in prewar days. All men twenty five years old or older than it were given suffrage in 1925. Women's suffrage was already discussed in 1920s and 30s. "Despite common American and Japanese (and probaly Australian) assumptions that Japan had made an entirely new political start after the war, this flow was basically the continuation of prewar trends, especially those of the twenties (Edwin O. Reischauer, Japan: The Story of a Nation)." To be continued.

We are talking about China, not Japan. As Leggo has said, Chinese are intensely racist and nationalist, as well as homophobic. An altogether unpleasant race of people who we do NOT need or want in Australia.

Hi Cody

Let me remind you that US Ambassador to Australia, John Berry, is married to a Chinese-American bloke named Curtis Yee. Curtis is clearly not homophobic - so there.

They are husband and husband who were introduced to then PM Tony a couple of years ago. Tony, ever the man's man, found Curtis quite charming.

Ambassador John Berry also introduced husband Curtis in this home movie - enjoy: http://youtu.be/eZ3U5NzHGdw?t=23s

This is a public service message on behalf of the Embassy of the United States of America, Canberra.

Pete
(US Honorary Counsel, Dapto)

Michi
The Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere was equal to the US Monroe Doctrine.
However, the US walked more quietly and had a bigger stick. It didn't take a slice of South America while promising to give it freedom. Japan will be right if it 1) gets a bigger navy or 2) submits to Chinese law and order. Some British opinion supports 2 as Britain's stick is quite limp.

FREE TIBET, err, anyone?

As to Japan's "revisionism", see for example the following article (and others) by Walter Hamilton:

http://johnmenadue.com/blog/?p=7343

Anyway, back to topic: someone wrote that what China was after wasn't the oil, but fishing rights. None so blind .....

What China is after, first up, is control of the entire South China Sea, AND its fishing, AND its oil. But sovereignty over the entire Sea primarily.

Then, it can move on Singapore and Malaysia. Then, as Japan did before it, the rest of south-east Asia. I'm glad I'm getting old, but I feel sorry for my kids and grandkids.

Joe

Christopher Columbus hit the beach running with body armour and crucifix for Chinese gold take-aways. By 1511 Indonesia was coming under the Portuguese jack-boots. Columbus' cousin Perestrello in 1513 went to Portuguese royal territory in China which almost became a Papal dominion / gold-mine. China's greatest weakness is its lack of royalty for a proper empire over its western coast in Portugal-Spain.

I care who controls key assets in my country.
I wish more people did.
Do we care if a foreign power can switch off electricity- or do what it wants, charge what it wants?

This was on SBS News:

Chinese investment in Australia surpassed $A14.29 billion in 2015, according to a report by accounting firm KPMG and the University of Sydney.

Former senior defence department official Peter Jennings said the trade relationship put Australia in a difficult strategic position.

"We've never had a greater dependency with any country," said Jennings, a director at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.

"The risk that creates for us is if Beijing wants to adopt politically coercive policies, it's in a fairly strong position to do so with us because of that level of trade dependence."

sbs.com.au

Loudy says, "Then, it can move on Singapore and Malaysia. Then, as Japan did before it, the rest of south-east Asia. I'm glad I'm getting old, but I feel sorry for my kids and grandkids."

That's why we have to bite the bullet sooner rather than later. I'd like to think there are allied military moves afoot towards this.

"Former senior defence department official Peter Jennings said the trade relationship put Australia in a difficult strategic position."

Is trade the same as investment ? And so should we try to increase coal and iron-ore shipments to Samoa , Mozambique and Iceland?

Further to the parallel with Japan:

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/would-china-launch-pearl-harbor-style-strike-america-14491

Pilgrim & nickname,
I understand historical revisionism has more than two meanings. In one, suppose the court judged you guilty for the shoplifting that you did not do, and you bring the case to an upper court. This is not bad. In another, you did it but, insisting that you did not, appeal to the upper judgement. This is bad.
I do not say that Japan did not have an imperialistic and aggressive policy since 1868, but so far as the war that started in 1937 and led to the Pacific war was concerned, Japan wanted to get out of the bottomless quagmire.
D. MacArthur was fired by President Truman in April, 1951, and in May he said at the joint session of the Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees of US Congress that Japan's decision was largely dictated by security. William Webb presided as Chief Judge at the Tokyo Tribunal. I understand he said very much the same thing back in Australia after the Tribunal.

Japan's Great Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere was different from German Lebensraum or American Monroe Doctrine. Prime Minister Turnbull's and Xi Jinping's doctrine of "May peace prevail in the South China Sea" would be radically different.

China wants peace to prevail in the South China Sea.
Oh great, I feel much better. Now I can go to bed and sleep peacefully.

China doesn't want her own way sometimes- she wants it all the time.
The South China Sea carries one third of the world's trade, according to some sources.
Will we let China walk in and take control of our country?
It will be "Poor fellow, My Country" then, boys and girls.

Sydney: Aussie one day- Chinese the Next

Xi Jinping's peace doctrine in the South China Sea would be very different from PM Turnbull's, just in case of misinterpretation. Even Hitler spoke of peace in Europe when Germany achieved ascendancy.

Hi Michi,

Yes, until Nazi Germany invaded Poland. And again, when it invaded the Soviet Union. And overthrew the Italian occupation of Albania. And Greece. And later, Horthy's Hungary. And Rumania and Bulgaria, all former allies. There's no love lost between fascists.

So, you've learnt nothing from the lessons of Japanese imperialism and aggression ? Even after seventy years ? God help us.

But thanks for being honest: it gives Australians a fair idea of how people in our region may think.

Joe

Michi
Can we rank the contestants in the following order.
gold : Turnbull.
silver: China ( although it is bulldozing an east Tibetan Buddhist monastery as we speak)
bronze: US Monroe
4th : Japan
5th: Hitler.
China was on opium by British Global Invasions and Field Races.

Vietnam has 2 medals in shooting ( bullets not heroin)

Hi Joe

Unfortunately Michi's fascism is not just due to him living through Japan's fascist stage. Japan's new, female, Defense Minister, Tomomi Inada also appears rightwing to fascist.

Japan's Defense Minister denies Japan's Nanking Massacre and wider invasion of China. She believes Japanese teachers should not teach the truth about Japanese aggression in schools.

Japan's Defense Minister also insists The International Military Tribunal for the Far East after World War II, was against the principles of the modern law and was only a MacArthur policy construct.

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomomi_Inada#Political_beliefs_and_positions

It looks like Australia rightly escaped becoming Abbott's submarine ally of Japan, because Australia would have had to move in step with Japan's new rightwing direction.

Pete

the right-wing RPCR became the largest party in New Caledonia and regained first place in the South Province. Fascist French submarines will patrol the centre-right east Australian Sea with an alliance against Japan against China against US-Vietnam comrades.

SBS News says sale of Ausgrid to the Chinese will NOT go ahead.

Watch and se what else Baird and co try to sell off.
Not their own homes, evidently.

If PM Turnbull said, "Peace in the South China Sea is important for Australia," as perhaps it is, his peace would be quite different from what Xi Jinping has in mind as peace in the South China Sea. Turnbull's peace in the SCS and Xi Jinping's peace in the SCS would be two different things. As the two peaces would be different, so Japan's Great East Asia's Co-Prosperity Sphere (GEACS)and Germany's Living Space (Lebensraum) were two different things. When I said even Hitler spoke of peace in Europe, I had Xi in mind, not Turnbull.

Y. Matsuoka became foreign minister and spoke of GEACS to the Japanese press in July 1940. He did not mean that Japan should kick the European contries out of East Asia and that it should take all of mainland China. The war with China, starting in 1937, had become a big war, and the people had begun to wonder why, so he had to say a thing like that to convince them that Japan was on a great historical mission for great peace not only in China but for Great East Asia. (When the Japanese spoke of Asia or Great Asia, they usually had China in mind; they were oblivious to other parts of East Asia.) PM Konoe found him standing as a big obstacle in the way of the US-Japanese negotioations, so he kicked him out of his second cabinet in July 1941 and formed his third cabinet. Tojo was angry wiht Matsuoka for his too hawkish stance in the US-Japanese talks.
Matsuoka was ailing in December, 1941, and cried bitterly at the news of the Pearl Harbour, saying that he was very sorry to Hirohito for what he had done (in his diplomacy). The Japanese were terribly shocked at the news but felt relieved, thinking "This will solve our problem with China that we have been fighting an exhausting, long, and big war about. To be continued.

I (Yoshimich Moriyama) sent three comments on EastAsiaForum/Sam Bateman/Brinkmanship in the South China Sea helps nobody/June 7, and wrote a bit about the Nanjing Atrocities.
http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2016/06/07/brinkmanship-in-the-south-china-sea-helps-nobody/.

The Japanese did not forbid entry into or exit from the city of Chinese or Western people. Western people and journalists were allowed to make or keep contact with their homelands; they were free to send reports.

Michi
Our Dear Leader Kim Jong-Un gives us freedom of opinion and religion. His light of liberty protects all Japanese and Australians while he creates a world worth living in under the warm embrace of North Korea.
In Malaya , Wataru also believed that they must also be ready to give their lives if necessary to establish Hakkō ichiu(the whole world under one roof) and the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.
However, in November 1943, when the Japanese held the Greater East Asia Conference, both Malaya and Indonesia were excluded as the Japanese Military wanted to annex both countries. German farmers began packing their bags and moving to their land in Ukraine and Russia.

Meanwhile, the China lobby continues to be angry that we don't lie down and let them buy up ports, land, and resources. Why not give them the ports of Melbourne and Fremantle? They need it to feed their people.

Write your own article, M and see how people like it.
I would have thought after what happened at Nanking the Japanese would not have much to be proud of in the war years.

http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/genocide/nanking.htm

Nicknamenick,
Japan did not start war in the Pacific from an altruistic and noble motive of liberating East Asian countries. The purpose of the Great East Asian Conference held in 1943 was mainly to enlist the attending countries on the side of Japan. Malay and Indonesia were not invited as you said, because Japan wanted to put then under its military control for the convenience of carrying out the war.

The colonial powers tried but could not come back as masters and those countries won independence one after another after the war; it was a side-effect unintended at all by Japanese. Sukarno often said to Japanese visitors, like Nasser of Egypt, after peace was restored that they owed liberation and independence for Japan's war. Even Mao Zedong said to Japanese that he owed his victory over Chiang Kaishek to the Sino-Japanese war and that the Japanese must visit Yasukuni Shrine.

Waverley,
I read The History Place: The Rape of Nanking, 1937-1938, 300,000 Deaths.
There were in total millions of Japanese soldiers fighting or stationed in China, and quite naturally I do not know and no one can know, logically, what each of them was doing at each minute, at each hour, and each day and each year, so I cannot contradict or deny mutilation of people or "Pregnant women were not spared. In several instances, they were raped, then had their bellies slit opnen, and the fetuses torn out." But mutilation of people or bodies, raping and bellies slit open, etc, were recurring themes in China. The Great Cultural Revolution may have been the latest case, though nothing of the sort is taught in Chinese school and, as I heard, today little is known among young Chinese.

I (Michi) sent a comment, American Humanism, on Chinese Comfort Women, amazon usa, and said, "And it is only Chinese that can write a gigantic fantasy like this...The Chinese case was more fantastic. Chinese soldiers assaulted Chinese women in addition to having comfort women. A Chinese saying goes, 'Good iron is not used for nails. Good men do not become soldiers.' There has been no distinction in Chinese history between soldiers and thugs. In many parts of China, villagers welcomed the advancing Japanese army because it brought social order with it."

Michi
It's unclear exactly what you are trying to argue. Stalin was OK because he gave us Medicare. Hitler organised the EU which is really what Britain wants and probably will get one day.

Mr. West,
I (Yoshimichi Moriyama) posted five comment on YaleGlobal Online/Alistair Burnett/War Drums in Asia: Back to the European Futurre?, one comment on Project-Syndicate. org/Emily S. Chen/The Surrender of Japanese Peace Constitution, and four comments on EastAsiaForum/Hugh White/Need to face the facts in Asia.
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/war-drums-asia-back-european-future.
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/japan-peace-constitution-amendment-by-emily-s-chen-2016...
http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2016/04/18/need-to-face-the-facts-in-asia/.

I (Michi) also sent a comment, It Is Not China's Fault, Nov. 16, 2015, on Michael Pillsbury/The Hundred-Year Marathon, amazon usa.

I will appreciate if you spare some time and read them.

Waverley,
I forgot to say this in my reply to you. A small photo of a little Chinese child crying. My mother saw it on a TV screen more than forty years ago and cryed out, "Maa...(in Japanese)," and she was speechless and dumb.
What had become of the child was on my mind. About twenty or thirty years later, I knew that it was a faked photo of the staged situation by Chinese Nationalists for propaganda. I felt relieved then because the child had someone to look after it(him or her).

Michi
yes and the comments by -Jean-Pierre Lehmann , War Drums in Asia: Back to the European Future?

So then
"The purpose of the Great East Asian Conference held in 1943 was mainly to enlist the attending countries on the side of Japan. Malay and Indonesia were not invited as you said, because Japan wanted to put then under its military control for the convenience of carrying out the war."
I like the idea , it's useful and good strategy . It will be convenient when Okinawa , Hokkaido and other Chinese labour supplies come under Beijing's control.

Hi Michi,

I think I'm getting the gist now:

* war is peace;

* the Nanking butchery was humanitarian;

* invasion is liberation;

* pillaging is co-prosperity;

* Chinese and Korean women like being raped;

* the Second world War probably didn't happen, it's all a Hollywood hoax.

How am I doing so far ?

Cheers,

Joe

Hollywood hoax ? They were in jail. Carl Foreman was the initial screenwriter for "Bridge on River Kwai", but Lean replaced him with Michael Wilson. Both writers had to work in secret, as they were on the Hollywood blacklist and had fled to England in order to continue working.

The tadpole wiggles its tail:
But in 2015, documents obtained under Freedom of Information revealed Australia opposed the ban on nuclear weapons, since it believed it relied on US nuclear weapons as a deterrent.

“As long as the threat of nuclear attack or coercion exists, and countries like the DPRK [North Korea] seek these weapons and threaten others, Australia and many other countries will continue to rely on US extended nuclear deterrence,” said one of the briefing notes for government ministers.
Toady, Oz alone rejected the treaty being signed and brought on a vote. Kim Jong-Un was not available for comment but Julie Bishop was.

Blimey Charlie these arguments go on endlessly..are we arguing about China or Japan?
: )

Japan is inside the heritage fishing waters of China and is closing down.

Nick,

"Inside the heritage fishing waters of China" ?! Do you realise that every party of the coastline of south-east Asia (and northern Australia) has been traditionally fished by fishermen from every other part ? There were probably Japanese and Thai and Indigenous Taiwanese and Cham fishermen throughout everybody's waters hundreds of years ago, as there were Javanese and Timorese fishermen along our north coast. Probably Indian and Burmese fishermen in all those waters too.

Don't buy the imperialist rationale of China, of all countries: apart from the 1420s under the Muslim admiral Cheng He, about the only time that China was interested in the oceans, China has been a sea-fearing, land-oriented empire. The emperors burnt his maps when he returned from Africa. Most of China's trade was probably handled by Arab, Indian, Thai and other traders from what is now Indonesia: there were mosques and at least one Hindu temple in Canton back then.

China is trying something that hardly any other imperialist power has had the cheek to try before: to claim an entire Sea as its own domestic territory, on the pissy grounds that some of its boats may have once fished in those waters. Like everybody else in the region did.

Joe

Mr. West,
PS
I am sorry to cut into the China debate again. Mich wrote three replies to Alan Dale Daniel's comment, Good But Partisan, May 12 2012, on Freedom Betrayed, amazon usa. I hope they will interest you.

Loudmouth
China's waters reach the high-rise mark on Vancouver waterfront of Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC). The only hope for avoiding demolition of Japan is the Irish map of Saint Brendan of Clonfert ( 484 – 577AD) in Viking Latin which proves he sailed around Canada in the peat-fire Global Warming , wearing green and blessed the whales and coral reef. Michi's kamikaze tuna spearmen will join IRA river dancers in liberating Chinese fishing boat slaves.

Hi Nick,

Yes, you could be onto something. After all, Iceland can just as easily lay such claims to Greenland Canada and the north-east of the US too. Roman coins have been found in Malaya, so clearly it should belong to Rome, and therefore Italy, including the seas in between. How else can anybody explain how they got there ? The Vikings founded Moscow and Dublin and Edinburgh, so clearly Norway should be able to seize them back, including all waterways in between.

And don't let's get started on Mesopotamia and the Middle East :) Nobody mention Out-Of-Africa either. Which the Chinese don't believe, by the way: they ignore DNA and claim that their ancestors sprang up out of China.

Cheers,

Joe

ABC has investigated Chinese who are contributing to Australian political parties and influencing politicians.
Bob Carr has an interesting part to play in many of the places investigated.
Worth an article..... or four...

LEGO,
I know I am bothering you, but this is what I wanted to mean:
Japanese militarists would have pounced on the United State in July 1937 from the beginning if they had wanted to build peace by Japan in East Asia, no matter how stupid they were, without making a very long detour of first doing it on China and exhausting themselves in a waste of resources and energy for four protracted years.

To use the chicken or egg first metaphor, Hitler rose to power in 1933 and nazified German society first before embarking on his project, and then started war as it was his wish; it was the egg first. Japan fell into an accidental warfare with China and the need of carring it on militarized Japanese society.

Thank you.

Hitler was betrayed by Germans . Japan was betrayed by Chinese who sabotaged Japan's cultural hanamachi odori geishas. Japan spent aircraft carrier money in rebuilding its geisha charities and had 3 large carriers and 2 small ones in 1937 , not enough to bring a full cast of singers to Madame Pearl Harbour.

The Australian carried a fascinating article today on page 10, concerning the name of the South China Sea. The sea, or different parts of it, have had many different names over the past couple of thousand years, but 'the South China Sea' has only been around - even in China - for only a couple of hundred.

After all, the Chinese were not known as traders until recently. Every other state and empire across that region seems to have been heavily involved in all manner of trade, from the east coast of India throughout south-east Asia to Korea and Japan. But China has been the recipient of that trade, not the initiator, or even the participant, in it. Both China and Japan, as we know, shut their doors to foreigners for hundreds of years.

Still, if we are to divvy out territory on the basis of its common name, then perhaps Ireland should be recognised as the rightful owner of all of the Irish Sea, India of the Indian Ocean, Mexico of the Gulf of Mexico, Timor of the Timor Sea, and so on. Perhaps Hudson's Coffee could register as a country and sue Canada over infringement of its sovereignty.

Crazy world.

Joe

If a country built a pontoon bridge out to an island they could claim the air base and planes. But then China would counter-claim by seizing the whole country at the other end and launching self-defence assault back on the island which then becomes irrelevant and China would sign the UN decision .

Bob Carr- writing from a China "research centre" - is defending the right of the Chinese to buy anything they want in Australia, including Ausgrid. You'll have to find his letter to the Herald here among all the others:

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-letters/michael-kirby-is-right-on-samesex-marriage-plebiscite-20160823-gqywu9.html

Who funds this Institute? What place does it have at a university supposedly devoted to finding truth? What freedom do people have at universities in China? As much as they had during the war years in Japan, China and Germany, I'd bet

Hi Waverley,

If I were China (now, there's megalomania for you), I would be very wary of allowing any utilities or infrastructure, especially ports, to come under foreign control. Apart from the obvious imperialist connotations of such purchases or leases, the fragmentation of control of such major projects could cripple the country.

I would also be opposed to anyone concreting over an off-shore shoal, say 200 km from the Chinese mainland, putting an airfield on it and then stationing planes and ships there.

And what's sauce for the goose ......

Cheers,

Joe

"The upshot is that there now appears to be a greater openness in China – explicitly encouraged in China’s current 5-year plan – to allow greater participation of foreign investment in future infrastructure projects.

In Beijing alone the municipal authorities last year invited foreign participation on over 126 projects valued at $US 55 billion and are making soothing noises about ensuring foreign investors get a reasonable return.

Conceivably, in future some existing projects in China could even be privatized or handed over to foreign consortia to manage."

Chongyi Feng asks if we should celebrate Mao's anniversary in September at Sydney Town Hall:

https://theconversation.com/culture-free-speech-and-celebrating-mao-downunder-64360

Mao- a great hero or a brutal tyrant? Sounds like an argument that might attract a few, given the vociferous arguments going on about Asians buying up Australia's resources.
The Japanese failed to take control in World War II- maybe the Chinese will succeed?