View Full Version : Japan halts Iraq troop dispatch
Stalky-Italy
11-13-2003, 07:46 AM
TOKYO, Japan (AP) -- The attack on Italian forces in Iraq will force Japan to postpone its dispatch of troops to that country until sometime next year, a top government spokesman said Thursday.
Japan was hoping to send its first batch of troops to Iraq to help rebuild the country by the end of 2003. But Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda said the security situation is not yet stable enough.
He said caution must be taken before the decision to send the troops is made.
"We could sent the troops if circumstances permit," he told a news conference. "But there is no such situation."
The suicide bombing in southern Iraq killed at least two dozen people, including 18 Italians. It was the deadliest toll suffered by non-American coalition forces since the occupation began in April.
Japan had been planning to send troops to southern Iraq because it was deemed safer there than in other parts of the country.
thanks...
Can't blame them. Who would voluntarily stick their hands into this ****ty situation.
You'd have to be quite a moron to send your troops in the middle of guerilla war. Let the ones who caused this mess also finish the dirty job :bash:
Let the ones who caused this mess also finish the dirty job
http://www.ethnos.gr/pages/images_b/sadam.jpg
http://www.terrorismvictims.org/terrorists/bin-laden.jpg
well in the meantime they are no where to be found...
ShotOver
11-13-2003, 08:10 AM
So you want us to drag every Iraqi into the street and put a bullet in their head?
Thats the only way of gettin this to stop, well.. that and dragging Saddams corpse through the streets.
WARPIG
11-13-2003, 08:26 AM
Let those with the heart, and courage to act, deal with Iraq. In the mean time the apathetic will hide behind "I didn't make this mess." and wait for others to contribute to the world. The risk of action is failure, the risk of inaction is apathy. I choose the former. I would rather have tried and failed than to have been worthless from the start.
People with courage and character always seem sinister to the rest.
Hermann Hesse (1877 - 1962)
Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence.
Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)
Apogee
11-13-2003, 08:31 AM
Those are awsome quotes Warpig.
martinexsquaddie
11-13-2003, 08:34 AM
Trouble is it was'nt the best thought out operation. a lot of other countires said so at the begining but were not listened to and now expected to come in and help and you wonder why there relectutant?
WARPIG
11-13-2003, 09:07 AM
Japan is reluctant.. I understand that. Many countries are reluctant. Some countries are indifferent.. that is a different story. Indifference is simply shameful. Reaction to US actions in Afghanistan was quite different. This was an outpouring of support because of 9-11. It was a black and white,delimma that was neat and clean to support.
Iraq is a dirty one. It is a hard, uphill, dirty battle that no one wants. Reluctance is expected. Indifference is worse than cowardice.
Let those with the heart, and courage to act, deal with Iraq. In the mean time the apathetic will hide behind "I didn't make this mess." and wait for others to contribute to the world. The risk of action is failure, the risk of inaction is apathy. I choose the former. I would rather have tried and failed than to have been worthless from the start.
whatever motives are cool with me, couldn't care less if one country wants to do these things. But not caring about the U.N. or the opinions of other countries and then trying to beg for help, that sounds like bad politics. That's what I was referring to. How does one even have the nerve to start blaming other countries for not wanting to waste money and lives on an attemp to change a nation to see things the american way?
Not that the american way would be the wrong way but you can't just use force to change cultures that have been here for long time.
Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events.
Sir Winston Churchill
Guttorm
11-13-2003, 09:27 AM
Well... Just as an addon to the use of A. Einstein quotes to support the war effort...
A. Einstein was a pasifist... He DESPISED war, and all things concerned with it...
Just a thought... :)
Oh, and before the flaming begins, let me be quick to specify that Norway allready has sent troops to Iraq... :D
WARPIG
11-13-2003, 09:43 AM
Not wanting to contribute is one thing.. coming out to criticise is plain stupid. If the US has the balls to swallow their pride and ask for help... then the EU can show some class and not criticise in something they are apathetic about.
I know ..it is a pipe dream.. but when UN, and NATO lean so much on US support, both financially and for muscle, it is a hard pill to swallow when they turn their backs on you.
I agree though.. the war in Iraq is dirty because there is still the risk that democracy is just a concept that Arabs won't embrace.
~one of my favorites...
The shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep's throat, for which the sheep thanks the shepherd as his liberator, while the wolf denounces him for the same act as the destroyer of liberty.
~Abraham Lincoln (1809 - 1865)
Not wanting to contribute is one thing.. coming out to criticise is plain stupid. If the US has the balls to swallow their pride and ask for help... then the EU can show some class and not criticise in something they are apathetic about.
I know ..it is a pipe dream.. but when UN, and NATO lean so much on US support, both financially and for muscle, it is a hard pill to swallow when they turn their backs on you.
I agree though.. the war in Iraq is dirty because there is still the risk that democracy is just a concept that Arabs won't embrace.
~one of my favorites...
The shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep's throat, for which the sheep thanks the shepherd as his liberator, while the wolf denounces him for the same act as the destroyer of liberty.
~Abraham Lincoln (1809 - 1865)
EU and UN did criticize before the conflict and they seem keep that hard line.
NATO is a US puppet but UN is not, that's why so few UN nations have contributed to this war. Iraq is a mess a I have no visions of what will happen there in next few years. One guess is that one or two years of this guerilla war and then it's peaceful enough to get UN to send troops there. The worst thing could be iraq sliding into the state of anarchy that chechnya is.
budanski
11-13-2003, 10:16 AM
Gone are the days of the Samurai. When others seem to have more courage than Japan...the world is upside down.
rokus2595
11-13-2003, 10:22 AM
Gone are the days of the Samurai. When others seem to have more courage than Japan...the world is upside down.
Yeah right, just like 'either you are with us or against us', or its latest incarnation 'you are with us and hence u r courageous/freedom fighter/noble spirit/whatever other crap you want to put here, or you are not with us and are a coward......'
:roll:
budanski
11-13-2003, 10:25 AM
Well... Just as an addon to the use of A. Einstein quotes to support the war effort...
A. Einstein was a pasifist... He DESPISED war, and all things concerned with it...
Just a thought... :)
Are you certain of that?
"If all the young people in America were to act as you intend to act, the country would be defenseless and easily delivered into slavery."
-Albert Einstein (letter to a pacifist)
budanski
11-13-2003, 10:30 AM
Yeah right, just like 'either you are with us or against us', or its latest incarnation 'you are with us and hence u r courageous/freedom fighter/noble spirit/whatever other crap you want to put here, or you are not with us and are a coward......'
:roll:
Roll your eyes all you want. You obviously don't get it.
Japan offered the help, (http://www.albawaba.com/news/index.php3?sid=263212&lang=e&dir=news) Now they've stalled...they won't send security troops because the security situation is not stable enough? Why do they think they are going there in the first place, to attend a party?
WARPIG
11-13-2003, 10:40 AM
ROK doesn't seem to be commited to the amount of support that the US asked for either. I can understant that since the North Korea issue is still ongoing. Probably why Japan is not wanting to spread too thin either. I do see the reasons for some countries to be reluctant. I have long been tired of EU rhetoric and their apathetic arrogance. US Cowboy foreign policy is, admittedly, hard to stomach. Not more so than the newly found moral high ground that the EU thinks they stand.
I also see two outcomes to Iraq's future.
The first is that the US will leave Iraq with an incomplete or interim democratic government which will slowly die. The only hope of stability will be an elected leader will turn democrat to autocrat or a military coupe will overthrow the democracy and replace it with a junta.
The second is that the US will continue it's efforts and democracy will slowly become a stable government in Iraq. Weathering guerilla warfare, terrorist attacks, and criticism the whole time. US will predictably snubb EU requests for trade business over those who backed US involvement.
why help in a war you was against at the first time ?
(ok, I don't know if japan was against the war or not, so don't flame that..)
budanski
11-13-2003, 11:01 AM
why help in a war you was against at the first time ?
(ok, I don't know if japan was against the war or not, so don't flame that..)
Japan supports US war (http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,6157831%255E25778,00.html)
rokus2595
11-13-2003, 11:08 AM
Roll your eyes all you want. You obviously don't get it.
I beg to disagree... :D. What sane country would want to send troops to Irak when they would not be wanted there by the iraqis?? To somehow magically improve the situation? There is a clear signal coming from Iraq now, that that is 'foreigners out'. They are starting to fight the occupation, so why send more occupiers? It does not matter what the americans think, as long as the iraqis see the Americans as accupiers, then they will be treated (are are being treated) accordingly.
Jack Mehoff
11-13-2003, 11:15 AM
Can't blame them. Who would voluntarily stick their hands into this ****ty situation.
You'd have to be quite a moron to send your troops in the middle of guerilla war. Let the ones who caused this mess also finish the dirty job :bash:
rofl or we can pull 20,000 some odd U.S. Marines out of Japan and put them in Iraq and **** Japan. Japan probably send 500 of their troops to Iraq anyway. You do the math, eh?
NcDeuce
11-13-2003, 11:19 AM
Let those with the heart, and courage to act, deal with Iraq. In the mean time the apathetic will hide behind "I didn't make this mess." and wait for others to contribute to the world. The risk of action is failure, the risk of inaction is apathy. I choose the former. I would rather have tried and failed than to have been worthless from the start.
People with courage and character always seem sinister to the rest.
Hermann Hesse (1877 - 1962)
Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence.
Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)
Yup...
Some will run when the shi* hits the fan. Some will stay. You find out who your true friends and allies are during this time.
vmpsmII
11-13-2003, 11:24 AM
Well I don't know about japan but the bombing of the Italian Carabinieri H.Q. yesterday didn't delay the departure of the Portuguese unit in the same day.
This Portuguese national guard unit was supposed to stay with the italians in the same bilding that was destroed, now I think they are going to be redirected to Basra to stay with the British.
budanski
11-13-2003, 11:28 AM
I beg to disagree... :D. What sane country would want to send troops to Irak when they would not be wanted there by the iraqis?? To somehow magically improve the situation? There is a clear signal coming from Iraq now, that that is 'foreigners out'. They are starting to fight the occupation, so why send more occupiers? It does not matter what the americans think, as long as the iraqis see the Americans as accupiers, then they will be treated (are are being treated) accordingly.
Someone give this guy a cigar!!
Boy, where were you when the German "Werwolf" were attacking allied troops during the rebuilding of Germany. We could've listen to smart folks as yourself and just turned tail and run. :roll:
He219
11-13-2003, 12:12 PM
Roll your eyes all you want. You obviously don't get it.
I beg to disagree... :D. What sane country would want to send troops to Irak when they would not be wanted there by the iraqis?? To somehow magically improve the situation?
The ordinary Iraqi seeks reconstruction and security. The Saddam holdouts and terrorist elements don't want change and use chaos to further their goals of gaining control.
There is a clear signal coming from Iraq now, that that is 'foreigners out'.
Really, all those Iraqi civilians getting killed in terrorist bombings, and you say it is the will of the Iraqi peoples??
:roll:
They are starting to fight the occupation, so why send more occupiers?
Define THEY, smartypants.
It does not matter what the americans think, as long as the iraqis see the Americans as accupiers, then they will be treated (are are being treated) accordingly.
Obviously you think it doesn't matter what the Iraqis want either, as long as you choose to spew your inflammatory rhetoric.
:roll:
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20031113/capt.mad10111131217.portugal_iraq_mad101.jpg
Portuguese National Guard police officers board a plane at the Figo Maduro military base in Lisbon, Portugal Wednesday, Nov. 12, 2003 bound for Iraq (news - web sites). A group of 128 Portuguese police officers were sent to Iraq Wednesday to join the Italian police force but were rerouted to Basra instead of Nasiriyah, where a bombing attack took place at the Italian paramilitary base killing more than a dozen people. (AP Photo/Paulo Amorim)
Guttorm
11-13-2003, 12:16 PM
Well... Just as an addon to the use of A. Einstein quotes to support the war effort...
A. Einstein was a pasifist... He DESPISED war, and all things concerned with it...
Just a thought... :)
Are you certain of that?
"If all the young people in America were to act as you intend to act, the country would be defenseless and easily delivered into slavery."
-Albert Einstein (letter to a pacifist)
Pretty certain... I have a poster of him, with a quote underneath... He talks of how despicable he finds war, and what barbarians (?) people who fight wars are... Can't remember it exactly...
budanski
11-13-2003, 12:25 PM
The Quotable Einstein (http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/article/0,12543,425658,00.html)
(4th from the bottom quote)
aeternum
11-13-2003, 12:40 PM
Boy, where were you when the German "Werwolf" were attacking allied troops during the rebuilding of Germany.
If you would read up before you post, you would know Werewolf did not kill 1 single allied soldier after the end of the war. This resistance was a joke of a few old Nazi functionaries.
A snippet from the book "Werwolf!: The History of the National Socialist Guerrilla Movement, 1944-1946"
Bidiscombe's book on German resistance and the Allied occupation has received some notice by people searching for historical parallels to the current US military occupation of Iraq. Hitler and Saddam Husein as personifications of evil make such comparisons seductive. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and National Security Advisor Rice evoked this theme in their 25 August 2003 speeches before the 104th National Convention of the VFW. While one hopes that our national leaders bring an historical perspective to their actions, it appears that they have chosen to read Biddiscombe's book, not to learn from history, but to manipulate it for their own ends. Biddiscombe's book should, however, cause one to reflect on the current US situation in Iraq.
1) General Eisenhower and his staff devoted considerable effort during the war to developing a post-war occupation strategy, not all of it consistent with international law. (pp. 252-254)
2) The occupation of Germany was a direct result of German military aggression and followed a formal surrender by German authorities. Germans knew that Germany had started the war.
3) The successful occupation of Germany occurred after it was entirely surrounded by hostile forces. There were no open borders with countries opposing the Allied occupation, unlike Iraq, which borders Iran and Syria.
4) The Nazi Party´s extermination of the Jews left only Protestants and Catholics, two Christian sects that hadn?t been at war in Germany for over 200 years. The ethnic (Kurds and Iraqis) and religious (Sunni and Shiite) tensions in Iraq continued to erupt throughout the twentieth century.
5) The partisan resistance to Allied occupation quickly faded at the end of the war. Continued Iraqi resistance quite likely points, in part, to simmering ethnic and religious tensions.
budanski
11-13-2003, 01:06 PM
Its easy to play monday morning quarterbacking now. But at the time, it was well known In 1945 Germany resisted the allied advance to the bitter end, relying on the fanaticism of the SS and calling up elderly men and 14-year-old Hitler Youth, despite the deep war-weariness of the German people. There were even plans for a campaign of guerrilla resistance -- ala werewolves after a formal German surrender. The wartime allies took this threat very seriously. Weather they did any signifcant damage who knows, but if you look back there were plenty of reported deaths of allied GI's who got their heads decapitated riding in open air jeeps. thanks to retreating Germans who strung those wires up.
aeternum
11-13-2003, 01:32 PM
Talking about retreating germans and "attacking allied troops during the rebuilding of Germany" is a qualitative difference.
Neither was there a significant resistance after the end of the war, nor did die any allied soldier. The author of the book i posted above gave 4 valid reason why you cant compare the after-war scenarios of Germany and Iraq.
pinkeye
11-13-2003, 01:49 PM
The Quotable Einstein (http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/article/0,12543,425658,00.html)
(4th from the bottom quote)
einstein was a pacifist, although he accepted the fact that war was at times inevitable and necessary. from the american museum of natural history:
While watching a German military parade in the 1880s with his parents, young Albert became terrified by the almost mechanical movements of the soldiers who seemed to have no minds of their own. His parents had to promise their frightened son he would never have to become a soldier. Einstein despised militarism and the use of force his entire life—although he later recognized that in some situations, there is no alternative but to "fight for peace."
Einstein denounced World War I and after the war became an outspoken pacifist. But the rise of Nazism and the horrifying events of World War II forced him to reconsider his anti-war position. Concerned the Nazis were building an atomic bomb, he urged the United States to build one first. Six years later, when the bomb was dropped on civilians, Einstein openly regretted his action and became a champion of nuclear disarmament for the rest of his life.
In the last decade of his life, Einstein dedicated himself to the cause of nuclear disarmament. "The war is won," he said in December 1945, "but the peace is not." The development of the atomic bomb and the subsequent arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union ushered in a new conflict: the Cold War. Einstein feared this battle would end with the destruction of civilization.
But Einstein never gave up his fight for peace. In the years between 1945 and 1955, Einstein was at his most active politically, frequently speaking and writing about his desire for peace through international cooperation and elimination of all nuclear weapons. Einstein was not alone in promoting these ideas—quite a number of leading scientists of the time shared his views—but international fame made Einstein one of the most effective representatives of the cause. Yet even Einstein could not reverse the political tide: the Cold War lasted for more than four decades.
He219
11-13-2003, 01:57 PM
But one can certainly qualify the IMPRESSION of organized resistance. The indoctrinated German youth, who knew nothing other than the Fuehrer, were the key element in the creation of the Werewolf ledgend.
Explained by a personal account, at the end of the War large numbers of former Hitler Youth were rounded up in the British sector of Germany for perceived involvement with this group. Indeed, many ordinary people were unwittingly cutting communication wires strung through trees to patch their own power supply amongst the rubble of WWII. These act's of 'sabotage' along with others were PERCEIVED as resistance. The only notable Werewolf act was the March 25, 1945, assasination of the Aachen Mayor, on Himmler's orders.
In Iraq, the Saddam loyalist insurgency along with terrorist infiltrators commiting suicide for Jihad Inc. are giving some the IMPRESSION of organized resistance, on behalf the ordinary Iraqi citizens that are getting killed as innocent bystanders of therse terrorist acts.
Go figure.
rokus2595
11-13-2003, 02:09 PM
Roll your eyes all you want. You obviously don't get it.
I beg to disagree... :D. What sane country would want to send troops to Iraq when they would not be wanted there by the iraqis?? To somehow magically improve the situation?
The ordinary Iraqi seeks reconstruction and security. The Saddam holdouts and terrorist elements don't want change and use chaos to further their goals of gaining control.
Yes, the ordinary Iraqi seeks reconstruction and security; they need our help in reconstructing the country, but not in providing security!. Whenever there is a suicide bombing, it also kills iraqi civilians, but the iraqis understand that that is the price to pay to get the americans out...they simply don't want to be occupied (hell, nobody does)
Really, all those Iraqi civilians getting killed in terrorist bombings, and you say it is the will of the Iraqi peoples??
:roll:
see above
They are starting to fight the occupation, so why send more occupiers?
Define THEY, smartypants.
The insurgents in Iraq, or why not say the guerrillas....are all iraqis guerillas? of course not; are there fighters from other countries (referred to as terrorists in USA) helping the 'insurgents' from iraq? It wouldn't surprise if there are...
It does not matter what the americans think, as long as the iraqis see the Americans as accupiers, then they will be treated (are are being treated) accordingly.
Obviously it doesn't matter what the Iraqis want, as long as you choose to spew your inflammatory rhetoric.
:roll:
You have hit the nail right in the head....'IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT THE IRAQIS WANT' summarizes exactly the Americans' attitude towards the iraqis.
He219
11-13-2003, 02:46 PM
Roll your eyes all you want. You obviously don't get it.
I beg to disagree... :D. What sane country would want to send troops to Iraq when they would not be wanted there by the iraqis?? To somehow magically improve the situation?
The ordinary Iraqi seeks reconstruction and security. The Saddam holdouts and terrorist elements don't want change and use chaos to further their goals of gaining control.
Yes, the ordinary Iraqi seeks reconstruction and security; they need our help in reconstructing the country, but not in providing security!. Whenever there is a suicide bombing, it also kills iraqi civilians, but the iraqis understand that that is the price to pay to get the americans out...they simply don't want to be occupied (hell, nobody does)
Now you agree that they need our help with reconstruction, but not security! :cantbeli:
A price to pay for foreign intervention? Who is going to protect the security of foreign aid workers, the new government and the ordinary Iraqi's from Saddam's men and OBL's Jihad Inc.?
Really, all those Iraqi civilians getting killed in terrorist bombings, and you say it is the will of the Iraqi peoples??
:roll:
see above
They are starting to fight the occupation, so why send more occupiers?
Define THEY, smartypants.
The insurgents in Iraq, or why not say the guerrillas....are all iraqis guerillas? of course not; are there fighters from other countries (referred to as terrorists in USA) helping the 'insurgents' from iraq? It wouldn't surprise if there are...
Those insurgents who killed the Red Cross Workers, the Italian Security Forces and the UN Comissioner in Iraq along with many others, you would call them 'Freedom Fighters'?
It does not matter what the americans think, as long as the iraqis see the Americans as accupiers, then they will be treated (are are being treated) accordingly.
Obviously it doesn't matter what the Iraqis want either, as long as you choose to spew your inflammatory rhetoric.
:roll:
You have hit the nail right in the head....'IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT THE IRAQIS WANT' summarizes exactly the Americans' attitude towards the iraqis.
Oh yeah? The Iraqis want self-rule without theocratic rule, Saddam or tyrannical domination by an ethnic element.
You are poorly informed on American attitudes.
:roll:
rokus2595
11-13-2003, 03:02 PM
Now you agree that they need our help with reconstruction, but not security! :cantbeli:
A price to pay for foreign intervention? Who is going to protect the security of foreign aid workers, the new government and the ordinary Iraqi's from Saddam's men and OBL's Jihad Inc.?
The iraqis are figthing the occupation.....If the americans leave there would be no occupation and no more fighting against aid workers
Those insurgents who killed the Red Cross Workers, the Italian Security Forces and the UN Comissioner in Iraq along with many others, you would call them 'Freedom Fighters'? No, but the Iraqis probably would...
Oh yeah? The Iraqis want self-rule without theocratic rule, Saddam or tyrannical domination by an ethnic element.
Right, so the first thing is for troops to leave, and let the iraqis decided that...on the NYT today: Bush wants to "encourage more Iraqis to assume more responsibility in governing"....rofl ....that's amazingly awesome DOUBLESPEAK!!.....can you ever conceive the canadians needing encouragement to govern themselves? the americans? japanese?? NO. Same with the iraqis. But the iraqis do need more encouragement to see how the Americans would like them to govern themselves....hence the american troops
Flagg
11-13-2003, 03:14 PM
Something to keep in mind about Japanese deployment of armed troops abroad:
It's a relatively new endeavour for them.....as they were previously only allowed to act in Self-Defense of Japan...hence the name:
Japanese Self-Defense Forces
In GWI the Japanese supported with $$$ and, I think, only a small contingent of specifically non-combat logistics type support becasue they were unable(politically/legally) to assist with combat units.
I can't read Japanese, but it's my understanding that the deployment is a huge political issue for the current government, already under considerable fire for the continuing economic slump.
Japan is a strong ally of the US.....but from the Japanese perspective I think this deployment is a much bigger decision/commitment than just deploying troops....it entails a 180 degree change in military foreign policy.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.