Someone pls explain why

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggles

:mellow: Which period?

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanes...281592-1598%29

They were expansionist before isolation.

That was the war I spoke of.

As far as I am aware that was the limit of Japanese external aggression prior to the late 19th century. They were attacked a couple of times by the Mongols but saw off the invasions. Other than that very little. Compared to the expansionism of the European countries and later the US, the Japanese do not figure on the international scene at all.

In 1692 they might have spoke of conquering Korea, China and India but the fact is they lost in Korea in 1698 and returned home for 250 years. As expansionist countries go they were not big players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggles

That was the war I spoke of.

As far as I am aware that was the limit of Japanese external aggression prior to the late 19th century. They were attacked a couple of times by the Mongols but saw off the invasions. Other than that very little. Compared to the expansionism of the European countries and later the US, the Japanese do not figure on the international scene at all.

In 1692 they might have spoke of conquering Korea, China and India but the fact is they lost in Korea in 1698 and returned home for 250 years. As expansionist countries go they were not big players.

---

They had expansionist ambitions before their self-imposed isolation. That war was actually three wars with Korea and one with China, all committed to make themselves top of the tree in Asiatic thinking... basically to become the Asian empire leaders. Their expansionist ambitions existed before the isolation and they probably hated being thought of as the Junior nation for the entire time of their isolation, which is the reasonable explanation for their wars with China and the Russians immediately their self-imposed isolation ended. They picked up where they left off.

What's very interesting about this whole discussion is that Snee and many have failed to mention that it was western influence that caused them to become isolationist. No we've been blamed for forcing ourselves upon them and for causing all of the conflict that they have been involved in since isolation ended, yet the entire reason for their isolation was because of us... or more accurately because they feared we were planning to take over their country, and so they isolated themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manicgeek

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggles

That was the war I spoke of.

As far as I am aware that was the limit of Japanese external aggression prior to the late 19th century. They were attacked a couple of times by the Mongols but saw off the invasions. Other than that very little. Compared to the expansionism of the European countries and later the US, the Japanese do not figure on the international scene at all.

In 1692 they might have spoke of conquering Korea, China and India but the fact is they lost in Korea in 1698 and returned home for 250 years. As expansionist countries go they were not big players.

---

They had expansionist ambitions before their self-imposed isolation. That war was actually three wars with Korea and one with China, all committed to make themselves top of the tree in Asiatic thinking... basically to become the Asian empire leaders. Their expansionist ambitions existed before the isolation and they probably hated being thought of as the Junior nation for the entire time of their isolation, which is the reasonable explanation for their wars with China and the Russians immediately their self-imposed isolation ended. They picked up where they left off.

What's very interesting about this whole discussion is that Snee and many have failed to mention that it was western influence that caused them to become isolationist. No we've been blamed for forcing ourselves upon them and for causing all of the conflict that they have been involved in since isolation ended, yet the entire reason for their isolation was because of us... or more accurately because they feared we were planning to take over their country, and so they isolated themselves.

---

There is a fair degree of supposition there. Yes they had ambitions in 1692 but there is little in the 1000 years before then that would suggest they were an Empire in waiting and post 1698 they went into 200+ years of seclusion. Britain, France Spain, Holland etc were constantly at war with somebody or other and looking to take control of somebody else's bit of turf. Yes they were nervous about our intentions but then surely that was with good reason? European nations were quite big on Empire and had a fair track record of taking countries over. If Japan had looked an easy proposition one or other of the European powers probably would have annexed it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggles

There is a fair degree of supposition there. Yes they had ambitions in 1692 but there is little in the 1000 years before then that would suggest they were an Empire in waiting and post 1698 they went into 200+ years of seclusion. Britain, France Spain, Holland etc were constantly at war with somebody or other and looking to take control of somebody else's bit of turf. Yes they were nervous about our intentions but then surely that was with good reason? European nations were quite big on Empire and had a fair track record of taking countries over. If Japan had looked an easy proposition one or other of the European powers probably would have annexed it.

---

Really where ?

You're comparing chalk and cheese with your comparison of Japan with European nations. Their mindset is totally different to any European nations peoples. Your idea of Empire is based upon the European model of conquering a nation and ruling over it, that's not how Asian Empires worked, the Chinese didn't rule over Korea, yet Korea was part of the Empire of Heaven. The facts are that in the Asian mindset of that era China was the Big Brother, Korea was the Middle Brother and Japan was the Little Brother, and the Japanese didn't like that, they wanted to supplant China and become the Big Brother, they wanted to be the head of the Empire. That's what the wars were about. So where's the supposition ?

Their expansionist ambitions existed before the isolation and they probably hated being thought of as the Junior nation for the entire time of their isolation

I took that to be supposition unless you are aware of texts and writings to the contrary.

Regardless of difference in concepts of Empire that does not alter the fact that the Japanese were wary of European intentions with good reason. Most of the Far East ended up under one European Empire or another and generally the local population was not happy about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggles

I don't believe Snee's position is that they were backward or ill informed either but that their reaction to US intervention was one of a people who had become accustomed to an insular view of foreign intervention. They subsequently embraced an aspect of politics that was popular at the time - Empire.

One might view the US role as liberating or one might consider it an ongoing process of securing influence in the region (or indeed a bit of both).

---

It's quite sweet that you want to defend him, but that's a fucked up perception! His position was that the Japanese have been badgered throughout the last few hundred years by foreign intervention against their wishes to the point where they felt they had no choice but to attack Pearl Harbour :dry:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggles

:unsure: There was a donkey too OMG!

---

Those sick bastards! :fist:

http://content.answers.com/main/cont...fe_hokusai.jpg

Here's some tentacle rape.

Traditional style, so you can feel classy while fapping.

txhx..dam i can typ wel wih my left hand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpatulaGeekGirl

http://content.answers.com/main/cont...fe_hokusai.jpg

Here's some tentacle rape.

Traditional style, so you can feel classy while fapping.

---

Is that it's copulatory arm in her gob? Surely for an authentic Japanese feel you need several octopi unfurling their adapted sexual tentacles and rolling packets of sperm onto her forehead?

Oh, and you gotta watch out for it's beak...they can crush shellfish with them mandibles :pinch:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squeamous

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggles

I don't believe Snee's position is that they were backward or ill informed either but that their reaction to US intervention was one of a people who had become accustomed to an insular view of foreign intervention. They subsequently embraced an aspect of politics that was popular at the time - Empire.

One might view the US role as liberating or one might consider it an ongoing process of securing influence in the region (or indeed a bit of both).

---

It's quite sweet that you want to defend him, but that's a fucked up perception! His position was that the Japanese have been badgered throughout the last few hundred years by foreign intervention against their wishes to the point where they felt they had no choice but to attack Pearl Harbour :dry:.

---

I think that might slightly overstate Snny's position but if doesn't he is on his own with that one. It is undeniable that Japan viewed US influence in the region somewhat unfavourably and the blockade by the US navy did cause the Edo regime to fall and a more anti-foreign (although not anti-science or technology) Government to form. This did in turn lead to conflicts with China, Russia and Korea and an increasingly powerful and successful Japanese military.

One might argue that this would have occurred anyway but contra-factual history is always shakey. If there had been no blockade in 1854 might Pearl Harbour not have happened? If Pearl Harbour had not happened would the US have sat out on WW2 and D Day not occurred? The Russians might have prevailed and the most of continental Europe would have come under Soviet direction. Stuff of science fiction "don't touch anything if you travel back in time" sort of thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squeamous

Oh, and you gotta watch out for it's beak...they can crush shellfish with them mandibles :pinch:.

---

The sweet mandibles of love :huh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggles

I think that might slightly overstate Snny's position but if doesn't he is on his own with that one. It is undeniable that Japan viewed US influence in the region somewhat unfavourably and the blockade by the US navy did cause the Edo regime to fall and a more anti-foreign (although not anti-science or technology) Government to form. This did in turn lead to conflicts with China, Russia and Korea and an increasingly powerful and successful Japanese military.

One might argue that this would have occurred anyway but contra-factual history is always shakey. If there had been no blockade in 1854 might Pearl Harbour not have happened? If Pearl Harbour had not happened would the US have sat out on WW2 and D Day not occurred? The Russians might have prevailed and the most of continental Europe would have come under Soviet direction. Stuff of science fiction "don't touch anything if you travel back in time" sort of thing.

---

Phloppy's book over on t'other side is about this sort of thing. It's quite interesting.

To be honest as far as Japan is concerned, you pays your money you take your chances. You start a war with another country, no matter how much you think they deserve it, you have to stand by the consequences. I have no sympathy for them really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squeamous

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggles

I think that might slightly overstate Snny's position but if doesn't he is on his own with that one. It is undeniable that Japan viewed US influence in the region somewhat unfavourably and the blockade by the US navy did cause the Edo regime to fall and a more anti-foreign (although not anti-science or technology) Government to form. This did in turn lead to conflicts with China, Russia and Korea and an increasingly powerful and successful Japanese military.

One might argue that this would have occurred anyway but contra-factual history is always shakey. If there had been no blockade in 1854 might Pearl Harbour not have happened? If Pearl Harbour had not happened would the US have sat out on WW2 and D Day not occurred? The Russians might have prevailed and the most of continental Europe would have come under Soviet direction. Stuff of science fiction "don't touch anything if you travel back in time" sort of thing.

---

Phloppy's book over on t'other side is about this sort of thing. It's quite interesting.

To be honest as far as Japan is concerned, you pays your money you take your chances. You start a war with another country, no matter how much you think they deserve it, you have to stand by the consequences. I have no sympathy for them really.

---

Absolutely! Pearl Harbour was a daft idea just as making PS3s and blue ray HDs is a brilliant idea.

However, as my darling offspring has demonstrated - they did give us the mandibles of love.

I have no idea what the original point of this argument was though as Submission originally went off on one about modern Japan and we ended up talking about the fall of the Edo regime :blink:

It was an interesting thread though. I learnt stuff.....stuff I begrudge learning natch, because those bastards irritate me so :fist:.

I trace it back to the time I watched some stupid fucking Japanese cartoon in an independent cinema and had to walk out after 2 hours because there was just no plot and no end in sight. And my friend is coming back to the UK next month and bringing his Japanese girlfriend with him. They'll probably stay at mine and she doesn't speak a word of English. So I'm a little pissed off at the Japanese right now.

Can I photieshop you on to an octupus please Squeamous. :unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squeamous

It was an interesting thread though. I learnt stuff.....stuff I begrudge learning natch, because those bastards irritate me so :fist:.

I trace it back to the time I watched some stupid fucking Japanese cartoon in an independent cinema and had to walk out after 2 hours because there was just no plot and no end in sight. And my friend is coming back to the UK next month and bringing his Japanese girlfriend with him. They'll probably stay at mine and she doesn't speak a word of English. So I'm a little pissed off at the Japanese right now.

---

The food is nice though - I really like those Wagamama noodle restaurants.

The cartoons are an acquired taste imho although Holywood nick their horror movie ideas left, right and centre.

Yeah, it's not so bad. And I do actually have some T-shirts with Japanese on them. And I quite like a lot of their culture. OMG, I'm a self loathing Nipon-lover.

Is that a Yes. :unsure:

FFS, this muppetry is still going :blink:

This is a whole lot like the arguing with billy back in the old days. Even with the ":lol:"s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manicgeek

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snee

First of all, a feudal society implies a certain structure, not a level of knowledge "poor ill educated and informed" has exactly fuckall to do with societal structure, literacy and so forth.

Second of all, knowledge in medicine, architecture indoor-plumbing, basic science, microscopes and so forth does not equal bluprints for instruments of war. It can be argued that rangaku helped build a foundation for the rampant modernization after 1854 (1853 really, bakamatsu as that article calls it started then, after Perry's first visit), this is true, but the first actual steamship Japan had, for instance, was given to them in 1855 by the dutch, other ships were built for them by the british, and at the same time they'd started sending people off to check out the rest of the world.

Try as you might, there's no disputing that they did turn from insular to expansionist after 1854, having had a fleet of modern warships paraded in front of them, and that that's when they started building a modern army.

---

No you portrayed them as having been backwards and ill informed, unable to cope with the technology and the knowledge, and that was wrong because they weren't. Their expansionist dreams and acts where theirs and theirs alone.

---

Not really. I said it's fucking stupid to arm up a feudal society (you know, one of them societies with one bloke in charge, a bloke with not much accountability, if any) with modern weaponry. This particular society had even chosen to walk away from arming themselves up with such weaponry, large-scale.

Backwards and ill-informed was all in your head, tbh :dabs:

Whether they did have any expansionist dreams or not, and whether they eventually would have gone expansionist is sort of pointless with regards to what actually happened (not to mention that they'd stayed stable, on pretty much the same track for two centuries at that point, it's not really a stretch to assume that they'd gone on the same way, possibly with another family in charge, even if the shogunate as it was collapsed), much like them trading with the chinese, or what they taught in their schools.

Seeing as they didn't have the technology before 1854, despite them having some of the best metal smiths in the world, and having had gunpowder for centuries, and even the theoretical knowledge to build larger ships for decades, if not more, it's not really a stretch to assume that the reason they did chose to arm up when they did, with what they did, was because they'd just had the same stuff paraded in front of them.

I do like your alternative take on time, though. If I read you right, you started off on a hostile note because of something I said in a post later on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squemous

I think what Snee was saying was that the Japanese have every right to have a complex against the West since the West apparently dragged them kicking and screaming into the 20th century and bombed the fuck out of them in WW2.

---

Not really though, but why break the trend of putting words in my mouth and that.

What I was on about was that Japan's actual change came from external pressure, and that the lesson history seemed to have taught them was that they had to stay aggressive, lest they be taken off guard by the west. I should note that, just as I started off saying, there were probably a whole lot of people in japan at the time who felt they had had quite enough of western influences as well, and the right to push back, which has nothing to do with whether they actually did have the right.

Quote:

---

I think that's probably just as you say, the result of having a Western guilt complex. As I've said a few pages back, the Japanese are doing exceptionally well out of being a world power and I've never got the impression there's any bitterness towards the West in that regard. They will keep bleating on about the atom bombs but if they weren't such a proud people only one of those bombs need have gone off, and it was their choice to enter WW2 anyway.

---

Seeing as how my nation never had anything to do with Japan, stayed neutral in both world wars and generally didn't give much of a fuck about trading with Japan during their isolation I'm not really feeling the weight of your western guilt.

Quote:

---

Throughout history nations and empires have been exposed to external influence. It's how the world moves on. To suggest that anyone has a right to be upset about that is a nonsense

---

I'm sure the south american indians wiped out by the spanish/portugese/whatever, the african nations that changed for the worse thanks to colonialism, and every other people or nation that got fucked over thanks to colonialism/imperialism, western or otherwise would be well happy to agree with you on that one.

That's probably my western guilt talking though. I suppose one mustn't sympathize with anyone who gets a raw deal, that's just silly.

=-=-

At this point, I'm having a hard time figuring out whose predjudices and assumptions are sillier in this thread, though.

Manicgeek is the thicker one, I reckon, but you (Squeamous) going off about western guilt without even knowing where I'm from (I'm assuming)is a humdinger. I dunno who of you read the most weirdness into what I've been saying, though.


EDit: Oh, and I would maintain that seen from that perspective (Perry's involvement and so forth), their expansionism, and eventually their involvement in world war II wasn't entirely of Japan's own doing.

EDit: And thus, as I started off saying, they could, from a historical perspective, point to that and say that that's what changed them and in extension eventually got them nuked. Causality being what it is, and all of that.

EDit yet again: :sigh: It should also be noted that what I outlined was one possible way to look at it, "It could be argued", "after a fashion" and all of that. I don't really feel that strongly about it one way or another, the only reason I responded to manicgeek at all was 'cos he/she/it would have it that what I was saying was impossible. So do feel free to stuff your western guilt somewhere where the sun doesn't shine, kthnx.

I wasn't gonna say that last, but then I realised that being diplomatic is sort of pointless when I don't really respect you :mellow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggles

PS wasn't aware the Swedes had that much to be guilty about in respect of Empire.

---

Apart from some light, brief slave trading, which wasn't really a matter of state, and steamrolling the indigenous population in the north (neither is remarkable or comes close to atrocities commited elsewhere), it was pretty righteous, and Sweden had bits of both Norway, Denmark, baltic states and all of Finland, too.

And they pwned the Russians at war :01:

As an empire, it was pretty fucking win to the orsum max :01:

I sort of wish we'd kept Norway, the oil had come in handy :dabs:
We should have traded it for the south, like, 'cept where BOT lives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snee

FFS, this muppetry is still going :blink:

---

Yes it is, and it'll probably keep on going whether you contribute to it or not.

Can't be arsed to read the rest of your diatribe. Bored now.

Yeah, it's not as if you really bothered reading any of the rest, so why break the pattern :mellow:

Just keep guessing what I'm really saying, it seems to be your thing anyways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squeamous

blahblahblah

---

Please answer my question, I have asked nicely.
May I or may I not photoshop your head on to an octopus. :01:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squeamous

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snee

FFS, this muppetry is still going :blink:

---

Yes it is, and it'll probably keep on going whether you contribute to it or not.

Can't be arsed to read the rest of your diatribe. Bored now.

---

Wow, there was me thinking you were a decent spud.

It now transpires that you are a cunt.

Ho hum.

Sorry I missed the request. Yes, of course feel free. Make sure it's a girl octopus though or I'll hunt you down like a dog.

(to Benchez, not cuntybollocks above)

You hunt dogs. :O

Yeah, I dress up as a fox just to confuse them :unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snee

Yeah, it's not as if you really bothered reading any of the rest, so why break the pattern :mellow:

Just keep guessing what I'm really saying, it seems to be your thing anyways.

---

Stop it, you're just doing what he wants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chalice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squeamous

Yes it is, and it'll probably keep on going whether you contribute to it or not.

Can't be arsed to read the rest of your diatribe. Bored now.

---

Wow, there was me thinking you were a decent spud.

It now transpires that you are a cunt.

Ho hum.

---

Someone should have told you.

Yeah, why didn't you warn we, JP, you cunt.

I blame you for all this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr JP Fugley

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snee

Yeah, it's not as if you really bothered reading any of the rest, so why break the pattern :mellow:

Just keep guessing what I'm really saying, it seems to be your thing anyways.

---

Stop it, you're just doing what he wants.

---

I reckon she was mostly standing up for her mate or something, though, I never had a prob with her before. (I'm assuming she's a she, general consensus seems to indicate that.)

Just flung off a couple of insults to see what'd happen, if anything, there, as per the usual interwebs etiquette. Well, that and I was a bit annoyed with the whole business of being told what I was saying, when I wasn't.

Fuck me, are you bunch of old women on your periods tonight or something?

It's the internets, perhaps you've heard of it :smilie4:

Fuck, that reminded me of:

"The internets, where the men are men, the women are men, and the little girls are FBI-agents"

Fucking eve-people tells me that about twice a day :dabs:

A woman goes to the Antiques Roadshow.

She throws down a bloody tampon on the desk of the expert.

'Can you tell me which period that came from?'

I've heard of the internet you illiterate sheep.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chalice

A woman goes to the Antiques Roadshow.

She throws down a bloody tampon on the desk of the expert.

'Can you tell me which period that came from?'

---

Oh, that's bad! You just broke my funny bone.