It’s ironic that we’ve turned our backs on the Asian region due to this misled war in Iraq. We’ve pretty much let China say “nah-nah” to Japan while the whole time, China bullies Taiwan internationally.

I definitely and strongly as a black/Native American, oppose this resolution. The U.S. can’t even apologize for slavery. I live in Alabama and for all I know, Alabama recently apologized for slavery THIS YEAR. I don’t know if the other states have done so. Go figure.

We need to stop being hypocrites, uphold Taiwan’s democracy and look China squarely in the eye and stop being too chicken. Japan hasn’t conducted another war in over 50 years, China’s preparing for war over Taiwan. I mean seriously guys…this resolution is the dumbest thing the U.S. Congress could have come up with.

I hope Japan doesn’t take it too personally. Japan’s like our ally, why are we acting like Japan’s our “lap dog”? Japan doesn’t have to be our ally. As a matter of fact, Abe lost a major election and his party usually supports the so-called war in Iraq and Afghanistan but the opposition party has been winning lately and they oppose such projects as they well should be simply because there’s more serious concerns like China’s military buildup and neglection on the U.S. part of Taiwan.

If China occuppies Taiwan, that would be Japan’s worst security nightmare and yet the U.S. State Department don’t give a damn about Taiwan because they love kissing China’s ass.

Well, if you want an apology by “Japanese standards”, why not go to the source. Here’s the one that has been reiterated by successive Japanese governments for the last 14 years:

“The Government of Japan would like to take this opportunity once again to extend its sincere apologies and remorse to all those, irrespective of place of origin, who suffered immeasurable pain and incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women.”

The whole thing is here. http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/women/fund/state9308.html

It goes a little farther than mere empathy for those who suffered and clearly lays the blame at the hands of the Japanese government, unlike Condi and Colin’s statements which are far from apologies. Powell, by the way, is no longer a representative of the U.S. Government. What he says in his current capacity, while interesting from an historical perspective - much like Robert MacNamara’s conversion - doesn’t really mean jack in this context.

I do, however, agree with your basic position, Danova. I’m not sure this issue has much to do with “intervention” on the part of the U.S. at all. However, I think the resolution is quite stupid, given the already existant apology above. But if the HOR wants to waste its time and its constituents’ money with this vote, then so be it. Abe should just point out that his government continues to support the 1993 Kono statement and then shut up and move on.

Do these statements constitute an apology? One, a government official is making the statement, two it expresses “regret” or “sorrow”, three it nebulously describes the cause of the suffering. The US is also funding billions of dollars into Iraq’s infrastructure. See, it’s paying reparations! I guess the future government of Iraq and its people will have no argument since the US is paying up.

By Japanese standards the US has already apologized.

When will america appologize for the invasion of Iraq and lying about possible atomic weapons there? What about all the innocent people they’ve killed while policing the world for many decades?

I hope to have a chance to say more on this topic. In particular to respond to some comments at Observing Japan.

Peter Pan I think Vimy assumed people would know the source of the comments because they were comments from the actual entry itself.

I hope we can keep the conversation here friendly.

My bad for thinking that the source of the quotes was obvious.

You addressed me and then put in quotes, no where did you mention Matt in the comments. Even if you did not intent to make it look as though those quotes were mine, you have to admit that to someone reading the comment, that’s the way it would look. It’s very easy to get people’s comments mixed up on a thread like this because there is no ‘face’ to put the comments too. However I don’t like the way you are trying to twist this around and say that I am at fault for thinking that when you addressed me, you were actually talking to me. I think your middle school writing teacher would have had to get the giant red pen out for that one, because you’re mislabeling your source.

The only good I see in the process was the opportunity to keep human rights issues alive in popular discourse. Of course, this is hardly the only issue worth discussing.

When it’s all said and done, the Japanese government is to blame for this being passed. Their reaction to it, and especially the full-page Washington Post ad, guaranteed that the resolution would pass…

Maybe it’s what they wanted?

Now, regardless, do you disagree that Japan should be allowed to defend/state it’s case in the House just as those bringing up the discussion are allowed to present their case? Is that not the way our democratic system is supposed to work? Regardless of which argument you think to be factually correct, I hope you can not deny the clear fact of the matter that the process in which America is playing the court of the world, and a poorly run on (at least by American standards) at that where only the plaintiff is allowed to present their case and the defendent is attacked for defending themselves without the argument’s even being heard. The House has created an even bigger straw-man in the place of Japan than you have with your ‘quotes’ from me.

Danova, you do also have to admit that trying to compare Japan and China on this issue is silly. Not because of any difference or similarities in what is being charged against them, but because you’re essentially saying that either everything America says is 100% right, or 100%, no in-between. If I say the House’s decision to pass this bill on Japan is wrong, that does in no way mean I’m saying anything at all about China. There are virtually no issues in the world that can be so easily broken into black and white, and the world of politics is by no means an acceptation to that rule. Each and ever decision made by any government, any individual in any government must be examined on a case-by-case basis, and any correlation between to events must be made, and must not be assumed. What does China’s human rights record have anything to do with Japan? Probably less than America has to do with the comfort women issue that is really only between Japan and the former comfort women.

Seriously, “foreign intervention?” When’s the invasion?

“Comfort women bill approved by US congress!” It’s a resolution, not a law.

“Note the resolution explicitly tells the Japanese government how to educate its future generations. ” Hogwash. The resolution makes no such claims.

Arguments are much more forceful and convincing without the hyperbole.

Hey, all those Congressional reports and resolutions condemning human rights abuses are non-binding, so they must useless right? They can’t possibly be pushing China to do something about its abysmal record?

So surprising that Japan’s rightists and their supporters are beginning to resemble their Chinese communist neighbors.

Imagine if Japan passed some bill calling for America to apologize and make amends for the treatment of the native Americans, completely avoiding the fact that America has already done so, and making no mention what so ever as to why what has already been done doesn’t count, and what needs to be done in order for it to count. And then imagine Japan saying, “It’s a non-binding resolution. It’s purely symbolic and has no legal or military threat of force behind it. The Japanese government isn’t telling America what to do and how to do it, or else.” It’s nothing more than being an ass, like perhaps walking up to some girl on the playground and saying, “you’re the ugliest person here, but looks don’t matter.” If looks don’t matter, then why say anything in the first place? If your words carry absolutely no meaning (non-binding), then why say anything?

I did a quick search and found this article from Korea’s Chosun Ilbo, which says:

The expression in the resolution is much stronger than that of the previous one. The resolution reads, “The Japanese government should formally acknowledge, apologize, and accept historical responsibility in a clear and unequivocal manner for its Imperial Armed Force’s coercion of young women into sexual slavery, known to the world as ‘comfort women,’ during its colonial and wartime occupation of Asia and the Pacific Islands from the 1930s through the duration of World War II.” The resolution states that more than 200,000 such women suffered gang rape, forced abortions, and other humiliations during that time. It also urges the Japanese government to emphasize human and women’s rights so as not to engage in human trafficking as their ancestors did.

However I recall the number being greater than 2, but that could just be a mistake on my part.

I believe this time was the first time the former ‘comfort women’ were invited to speak. Which is a rather interesting turn of events really. The proposed victims are allowed to present their case, and based on that alone judgement is passed? What ever happened to the defendant being allowed to defend themselves? In this case, the plaintiffs words are taken at 100% face value and the defendants words aren’t even heard. The more I think about it, the more and more anti-American values this bill becomes.

When did Mr. Honda first introduce his first bill? And how many times did he do this exactly, every year since when? Is the language in each bill exactly the same? Do you think his views changed over time, especially since the first time, which I assume was in the 1990s?

Sorry for all the questions, but maybe by learning the history behind this, it might help our understanding. I guess Honda has been in Congress a long time and just thinks persistence pays off.

Also has he always held a hearing on the issue and invited supposed comfort women? Does Congress pay for this?