The Instigator
YDebate
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Tophatdoc
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Japan is becoming a threat to the peace in East Asia

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Tophatdoc
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/28/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 920 times Debate No: 43043
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (3)

 

YDebate

Pro

Japan's president has been taking actions that are endangering the peace in the East Asian Region. Many countries are alerted and are now chipping away their relationship with Japan. The main countries are China and Korea.
Tophatdoc

Con

I would like to thank Pro for hosting this debate. As Con I will be arguing that Japan is not becoming a threat to East Asia.

"Japan's president has been taking actions that are endangering the peace in the East Asian Region."

First, Japan does not have a president. Japan has a Prime Minister whose name is Shinzo Abe. I assume Pro is referring to how Abe recently visited the Yasakuni shrine(1).

(1)http://www.irishtimes.com...

His actions only upset South Korea and China. That does not make Japan a threat to peace. The Prime Minister merely visited a shrine that honored alleged war criminals. Abe has not severed ties with his neighboring countries or armed Japan for war.
Debate Round No. 1
YDebate

Pro

Thank you Pro for accepting my challenge request.
(This is my first debate)

Well, in World War II, Japan invaded China. It was commanded by the emperor and all the soldiers were either forced or were in need of money.
The Yakuzuni shrine houses their war dead. Prime Minister (Thank You) Abe visited the shrine, angering China and Korea because they thought he was honoring the dead soldiers that invaded their homeland. Also, on CCTV News, there has been videos of speeches from officials on the topic: (Translated) Prime Minister Abe hasn't made an apology to China for the Mass Killing in Nanking yet, and that he should respect history, and not replicate the mistakes of men in history.

Also can you please research more on the Mass Killing of Nanking.

His actions only upset South Korea and China. That does not make Japan a threat to peace. The Prime Minister merely visited a shrine that honored alleged war criminals. Abe has not severed ties with his neighboring countries or armed Japan for war.

Japan is making another army similar to the US's Navy SEALS just recently.
If you listen to the news, the US is disappointed in Prime Minister Abe's visit to the shrine too plus some other countries I forgot :(
I recommend you listen to Chinese and Korean viewpoints too on the topic.

By the way, Japan is also falsly claiming islands that belong to the Chinese and Koreans like China's Diaoyu Island!!!

Would you want a World War happen all over again?
Tophatdoc

Con

"Also can you please research more on the Mass Killing of Nanking."

I am very familiar with the Rape of Nanking and the atrocities that took place. I am also familiar with Japan's other malicious actions in Manchuria, Korea, and in Southeast Asia. But Prime Minister Abe is not responsible for the actions taken before he was born. Maybe a symbolic apology may be necessary from the government of Japan. But to assert Prime Minister Abe is personally responsible for Nanking and should apologize is a severe error. Perhaps he should clarify why he went to the shrine and explain he didn't have malicious intent.

"Japan is making another army similar to the US's Navy SEALS just recently."

Japan is developing their military out of reaction to Chinese aggression. The Chinese have steadily become more aggressive in terms of flexing their influence. For example, a few months ago when a newspaper editor in Taiwan was asked to tone down the rhetoric in his paper because it offended the mainland Chinese government.

"If you listen to the news, the US is disappointed in Prime Minister Abe's visit to the shrine too plus some other countries I forgot.I recommend you listen to Chinese and Korean viewpoints too on the topic."

I read one Chinese newspaper a day aside from the other four papers I read I'm very familiar with the response by State Councilor Yang Jiechi denouncing Prime minister Abe(1). I don't read the Japanese news so I wouldn't know their view at all on the subject.
(1)http://english.peopledaily.com.cn...

"By the way, Japan is also falsly claiming islands that belong to the Chinese and Koreans like China's Diaoyu Island!!!

Would you want a World War happen all over again?"
Japan is not becoming a threat to peace. China is the threat to peace because they have started these border disputes with several of their neighbors aside from Japan. China is still disputing territory with Russia and India which had to deaths(2). Japan has had only border disputes with China. Japan has yet to engage in violence as China has utilized in their border disputes. China has a history of aggression in the last fifty years, not Japan.
(2)http://en.wikipedia.org...
(3)http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
YDebate

Pro

Perhaps he should clarify why he went to the shrine and explain he didn't have malicious intent.
Then now he knows they don't like his visit to the shrine, but why hasn't he explained yet???

China is the threat to peace because they have started these border disputes with several of their neighbors aside from Japan.
Perhaps you should adknowledge that now the border disputes are over and resolved, but when the Chinese tried to settle the border disputes with Japan, the Japanese were really stubborn and gave many false excuses. But I dont think Japan should attack China because China has a much more stronger military force. What Prime Minister Abe is trying to convey to the public we dont know, so China is afraid and now is very suspicious of Japan.

I don't read the Japanese news so I wouldn't know their view at all on the subject.
Well a recent poll for popularity of Shinzo Abe showed that the citizens saw nothing but a stuggling economy after Shinzo Abe was elected. He also used to be with the LDP party, led to a crushing defeat at the hands of the DPJ party. The LDP party was evicted later, but Mr. Abe still persisted and became Prime Minister.

Tophatdoc

Con

"Then now he knows they don't like his visit to the shrine, but why hasn't he explained yet???"
I am not responsible for Prime Minister Abe so I won't make any claim here. It would be better to read statements made by the Japanese government.

"Perhaps you should adknowledge that now the border disputes are over and resolved"

Those borders are still disputed by their respective countries internationally to this very day. Therefore the border disputes are not resolved. However, the conflicts and clashes on these borders have died down,for now.

"But I dont think Japan should attack China because China has a much more stronger military force."
Japan would not attack China. Japan's military forces are not large enough to launch an attack on mainland China. This is why Japan is not the threat to peace in East Asia. China may attack Japan though.

In conclusion, I will say my opponent has failed to address the issue of how Japan has become a threat to the peace in East Asia. Instead, he discussed historical events and Shinzo Abe's trip to the Yasakuni shrine. The only issue coming close to Japan threatening the peace in East Asia was Japan's military buildup. That however does not make Japan a threat to peace in East Asia. Even Pro admitted the Japanese military was inferior to China's. So Japan is not the threat in the current scenario taking place in East Asia.

I would like thank Pro for hosting this debate. After reading this debate you agree that Japan is not a threat to East Asia, Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Poiesis 3 years ago
Poiesis
Chris just called it.

That was part of the deal with the US at the end of WWII.
Posted by ChrisF 3 years ago
ChrisF
Japan actually can't attack China, even if they wanted to. It would violate the Japanese Constitution, specifically Article 9.

"ARTICLE 9. Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes. (2) To accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized."
Posted by henrib736 3 years ago
henrib736
Pro has failed to explain how Japan is becoming a threat to East Asia. Instead, Pro has tried to deface Japan by listing atrocities committed by Japan almost a full century ago, but those atrocities do not explain how the Japan of today are the aggressors they once used to be. Throughout the debate, Pro has falsely claimed that Japan, not China, is the one invading the islets in the East China Sea, the Senkaku Islands/Diaoyu Islands. Other claims made by Pro can be seen to be false by simply reading Google News, such as his claims that Abe has worsened the Japanese economy. In fact, Abe is recognized as the Prime Minister who has successfully boosted the Japanese economy in 2013.

Pro's argument is cluttered with false claims resulting in an argument that is neither coherent or credible. Con wins!
Posted by Tophatdoc 3 years ago
Tophatdoc
Send your request again please, just to make I made the correct changes.
Posted by Tophatdoc 3 years ago
Tophatdoc
Thanks for pointing that out. No wonder I was not receiving friend requests. I changed my settings now.
Posted by kbub 3 years ago
kbub
You'll need to change your settings, or send a request to me. Your profile isn't accepting requests.
Posted by kbub 3 years ago
kbub
Message me answer
Posted by Tophatdoc 3 years ago
Tophatdoc
Sure, more friends is always good
Posted by kbub 3 years ago
kbub
Taphadoc, would you like to accept my friend request?
Posted by YDebate 3 years ago
YDebate
I should have added that many Japanese people are boycotting Prime Minister Abe.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
YDebateTophatdocTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro simply doesn't reach a decent burden of proof here. Simply stating that Japan is upsetting some of its neighbors isn't enough - there's something called a brink where you have to provide some measure of proof that they're coming to the edge of a cliff, and are about to fall off of it. It's Pro's burden to prove that this cliff both exists and that it will be reached. I don't think he's done either, and by the end of the debate, I'm wondering what Pro sees as the likely military outcome if Japan is never going to attack anyone. Perhaps he's proven to a small extent that it would raise tensions, but that's not how you win this round.
Vote Placed by gordonjames 3 years ago
gordonjames
YDebateTophatdocTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Sources - Irish Times and Wikipedia are not great sources for Asian politics and history. Grammar goes to CON, Arguments - Pro did not convince me of anything, and CON did not make any big blunders. I still don't feel very well informed on the issue(s) from the debate.
Vote Placed by kbub 3 years ago
kbub
YDebateTophatdocTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Great debate on both sides. Con won. Pro, try to keep more consistent arguments. against someone else you might have won. Fantastic job con.