Talk:Japan–Korea disputes/Archive 1

---

I think you're missing the biggest dispute of all: the 35-year period during which Japan annexed Korea as a colony (1910-1945). The imposition of Shinto as the state religion, the Japanese control of all Korean schools, the attempts to stamp out the use of Korean language, etc. . . . --Uncle Ed 19:56, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I read the article as "current disputes", not "resentment over historical disputes".

---

Kadzuwo: the external link you added (Korea, the Preposterous World) is to a highly POV personal Web site maintained by Wikipedia user Nanshu. Nanshu has already published a lot of the material from that site here and has caused numerous edit disputes because of it. We don't need any more hateful material from him than he has already contributed. I have removed the link to the site. And don't tell me I'm censoring the truth or whatever: there is already too much anti-Korean nonsense on Wikipedia. --Sewing 16:53, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

It is not hate site but factual error corrections. Please don't brand but read it carefully!!Kadzuwo 16:59, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I have known about that site for months and have read it carefully; I discussed the site with him and several other Wikipedians last autumn (2003). Some of what he says is true, and he has repeated those things on this site. Other things he says are nonsense, and do not belong on Wikipedia. --Sewing 17:06, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

OK, I will search better site(s). Thank you so much, everyone!! m(_ _)mKadzuwo 18:49, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Cultural Dispute

Starting NPOV mine field. My god, aren't we (Korean & Japanese) such kids. :D FWBOarticle 00:55, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

there must be load of others. Feel free to add. FWBOarticle

Should add Zainichi issue but it is such a big topic that it might deserve separate page. FWBOarticle 00:59, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I propose that this page is split into two section one about politics the other about cluture.

Ah, the idea that there are no such things as Korean (nation, race or ethnic group or whatever) at that period and Korean penninsula is just region where thich contained different ethinic groups of Altaic origin is a view held by the people who counter claim that Japanese decended from Korean. I obviously understand that Korean would disagree with such assertion and find that to be offensive. However, as long as attribution is properly made such view should not be censored. On one side, Japanese decended from Korean, (more accurate statement probably being the tribe(s) which set up the original dynasty in a region of Japan came from Korean Penninsula). On the other side, there were no such thing as "Korean", (more accurate statement probably being variation of Altaic tribes/nations were subsequently unified to form Korean nation and ethinic group). Obviously, counter-counter argument (variation of language is in fact dialect not language) exist and then there is counter-counter-counter argument (such variation extend to Manchuria, Japan and possibly Mongolia). You might also notice that there were no such thing as Korean also mean there were no such thing as Japanese. FWBOarticle 18:46, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Takwondo originally being Korean Karate is not that cotroversial. In fact it was called as such. Until 70s, Taekwondo dojo/dojang used exactly the same forms as Shotokan Karate. Obviously, whether the current TKD being a variation of Karate or separate MA depends on POV. It's also bit funny given that Karate is actually Okinawan art not Japanese. Also Okinawan karate is the Tangsu martial art of China (admitted by the Okinawans)FWBOarticle 18:46, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

---

Wow, I have never been so amused by a wikipedia article. I had only heard of about half of these disputes. I knew Japanese and Koreans could be petty towards each other, but christ! I wish I'd known about some of these before, I could have pissed off my korean teachers with it! hehe.

DPRK propogandist?

Boy, if I had to guess, I would swear the DPRK are starting to post on the Wikipedia (welcome comrades!). I am tempted to go through and clean up the POV and goofy unproven tripe on this page, but then I think this page may actually serve a purpose: gives the trolls a nice sandbox to post their rants and keep them off the Japan or Korea page.... Davejenk1ns 15:39, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

North Korean abductions of Japanese

Under the dispute "North Korean abductions of Japanese", the last sentence is completely incoherent. I can't tell if the meaning is that during WWII the Japanese also kidnapped North Korean citizens and this doesn't bother them so why should North Korea care about Japanese citizens, OR that during WWII other nations also kidnapped Japanese citizens but this isn't a problem because it was not North Korea that did it. In any case, this needs to be made comprehensible and NPOV, or it needs to be removed. As this is a potentially controversial topic, I'm posting this to the discussion page first. Munkymu 22:33, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I think we should remove it since it doesn't have anything to do with "North abductions of Japanese." --Nc622 11:57, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

History Textbooks

The Japanese Ministry of Education is now Ministry of Education and Science. I think we should rename the title to "Publications on History in Japan" or something to put the issue in broader context. The textbooks must pass a governmental inspections before they're issued to each school, but publications other than textbooks can contain anything regardless of their nature, meaning whether they're right-wing or left-wing. It's also important to clarify what whatwashings of wartime atrocities the Koreans are pointing out, like the use of the term "invasion."

The problems with the Korean publications on history should be put in the article too. There is only one history textbook in Korea, written and edited by the goverment. And due to the anti-Japanese educational policy, the "good" side of the nation/people is hardly written in any publications.

I'd also like to have non-Korean/Japanese discussing this issue. Some could provide a neutral point of view. --Nc622 11:57, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

"A prime example of this would be the introduction of Buddhism/Confucianism. This concept almost completely came to Japan by way of Korea, but Japan almost goes out her way to not focus on this fact."

Japanese textbooks state that Buddhism/Confucianism came via Korea. I don't understand why Buddhism/Confucianism is such an issue. The claim that "Japan neglects Korea to save her face" is the typical Koreans' delusion due to their insecurities. --203.189.128.197 19:21, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Korean adoptation of Japanese culture

Removed the part about Taekwondo and culture taught wrongly in Japan. This is false; they mention the Korean influence in their culture in textbooks. I think we've had enough of the falseness of the claim on Taekwondo not originating from Karate.

Corea/Korea

This claim is groundless. No documented records are found that can prove that the Japanese empire changed the name. The name Korea was used before the Japanese annexed Korea. Until the 20th century French was normally used for international conferences, in these documents Korea's written Corée because in Roman languages in general to start with C is linguistically correct. It's after Versailles Treaty when English became prevalent. So it's just a difference of whether they prefer the French way or the English way. It's your choice... It's kinda scary the whole nation believes this Japanese conspiracy theory though. Same with the name of the sea... Personally I don't care about that "sea" (it's just a sea, for christ's sake), but... I'm sorry but I have to say the reasonings in these claims are extremely poor.--Nc622 11:17, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Chinese and Korean Propaganda

The more and more I find about these "brutalities commited by Japanese army," I notice that they're all made ups by the Chinese and the Koreans... Unbelievable.

Look the Nanking Massacre, comfort women, death railway, the murder of Empress Min, Manila massacre, unit 731, unit 100, etc these are not made up.

The Nanking Massacre and comfort women are exactly the made ups. The comfort women issues are the worst though. There're no documented records or whatsoever to suggest that these "comfort women" were slaves that the military forced to be. These were prostitutes, and there're only testimonies by the women themselves, which somehow constantly change with each trial they faced. --Nc622 09:24, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

If you don't believe these crimes happened, take it up with the WWII war tribunal, in which the court stated it did happen.

I know this arguement is also coming up in Germany as well, they ask for proof of the Holocuast. Where is the documentation, where are the bodies they ask. Then they state the holocuast never happened.

The very fact that you think this is about belief shows you're not doing academic research. You seem not to understand my point either. Give me the names of the German historians denying holocaust since I've never heard about it. You're trying to make a very rough contrast. There are numerous legitimate evidences that suggest holocaust did happen, which is, in comparison, exactly my point on the two issues: there are NO legitimate evidences (testimonies, documentations, etc.) that suggest these happened. Just for your information, the first ones who denied the comfort women were Korean journalists themselves, and the Tokyo trial is largely considerred by historians as illegal and unjust for the Japanese.--Nc622 11:13, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The UN human rights commision believe Japan is guilty on the comfort women issue in addition to various other war crimes and have made multiple statements about this. International civic groups have stated the evidence showed Japan as being guilty. In addition the Netherlands performed a mock trial (as realistic as possbily since they do not have jurisdiction over Japan) on the comfort women and have concluded Japan was guilty. One of the government ministers of Japan Nariaki Nakayama have stated there was alot of evidence for comfort women and apologized. The women from Europe who were in the pacific and got forced to be comfort women by Japan protest every year at the Japanese embassy, on the anniversary day of Japan's defeat in WWII. I stated "this arguement was coming up in Germany" not by the historian but by nationalists, neo-nazi's, the new axis national socialist party of Japan (which is a neo-facist group in Japan). The German government has done a wonderful job of trying to reflect on their past behavior, apologized formally, didn't show an ambiguous stance on war crimes, tried to compensate financially, which is a stark contrast to what happened in the pacific.

I didn't know that the Dutch performed a mock trial. Yes, they don't have jurisdiction over Japan... I'd be surprised if they did. As I said, Nakasone confessed that the apology was political. He admitted that the governmental investigation could not find any evidences on it. You have not presented anything that I didn't know. The UN human rights commision is the very organization that first referred to comfort women as "sex slaves." There have been at least a hundred of English books that depict the story of comfort women according to this view; if you include books in all languages probably the number easily exceeds a thousand. These "nationalist" historians as you call them are very well-aware that the majority of international community including Japan are people like you who just lebel the opposite side of their opinion as revisionalist "neo-fascist group" who's just simply in denial of the history for national pride. Quite a simplistic attitude. Nevertheless, for your information, there're growing numbers of non-Japanese professionals who're starting to look into this issue.

But I really honestly wonder if you even know how this matter came up to the public in the first place. The term "comfort women" itself did not exist untill a former-Japanese soldier Seiji Yoshida published a book with a super-pretentious title My War Crimes in 1983. Before that, there had been no disputes or whatsoever about sex slaves in and outside of Japan. In the book, Yoshida confessed that he kidnapped some Korean women and forced them to be "comfort women"; which was the first time this term was used. This book was translated into Korean in 1989 and as I stated previously a Korean journalist went to the island where Yoshida's army positioned and investigated on the fact of the matter. On August 14th 1989 she published a report on a regional newspaper and denied Yoshida's testimony as a lie. Along with her report there were criticisms from the Japanese historians, and Yoshida admitted that he published the book for his financial need. I forgot his name but a professor of Souel University later performed further investigation on 40 women who claimed to be of former comfort women and he concluded that more than half of them were inventing the facts. But the Japanese major press such as Asahi, Yomiuri and Japan Times, and English press such as New York Times and Washington Post as well did not even refer to the Korean report and Yoshida's testimony that his story was invented. Other civilian testimonies and diaries of the comfort women rather suggest that they were "sold" by their own parents to a group of prostitution. These are not even talked on the newspaper because people like you just lebel these opinions as from "neo-fascist group" like you said. It's such a distortion itself, since Japan was not fascist during the war.

Don't just say "women from Europe" and be specific. There are few Dutch women who have been sueing the Japanese government. It must be such an easy and lighthearted thing for you to make a claim like: The German government has done a wonderful job of trying to reflect on their past behavior, apologized formally, didn't show an ambiguous stance on war crimes, tried to compensate financially, which is a stark contrast to what happened in the pacific. Read at least the content of San Francisco Peace Treaty before you codemn Japan. It's a typical propagandized belief of Chinese and Korean that Japan has not made apology. For Korea, Japan didn't even have to apologize or compensate for anything but she still did. The only country that Japan has not compensated is Taiwan because of political reason that the Japanese government decided to consider it as part of China. --Nc622 08:33, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Factual Accuracy of the Page

What is the "Denno"? There is no such term or word. Why do Koreans like to be the father and the creator of Japan and Japanese history without having any proof? It is hard to understand why they forge all kinds of things.

You can also ask why Japan doesn't like to relate historical items and concepts with the rest of Asia. Eventhough they are an island, they do have neighbors. Information passed from Korea to Japan like swording making techniques, iron processing, pottery techniques, writting, also the fact that people of Baekchae Korea wrote Japans first history compilation. All, these are undeniable, but why do they perfer to use the term NE area, China, mainland, the continent, wouldn't terms like Shilla, Baekchae, Koryo, Goguryeo, peninsula be more accurate. Also, Koreans learned all these concepts from other countries as well, mainly China. But alot of what China learned was also from India, Arab and the middle east. But you don't see the Koreans writting history about iron processing and only mention the mideast and completely leave out China who passed on the info. Should Korea only mention India for Buddhism and not mention China or put it in as a small footnote or one sentence info.

The history of the two countries are intricately tied together.

http://www.uglychinese.org/japanese.htm

http://www.nsjap.com/

Go look at this Japanese website and you will see the information on the Burial tombs, and how eventhough Korea has archeologically the older burial tombs, the two countries are still argue about the origin of it. And Prince Akhito making the acknowledgement of Emperor Kammu's familial relation to King Muryeong is well documented. And alot of the information is from the WWII war tribunal. That is why former Japanese prime ministers apologized for the education policy in Korea. To educate enough for labor, but not for higher learning.

Another complicating issue is in order to truely get a good understanding of the disputes you need to be fluent in English, Korean, Japanese, and Chinese. Very few people can speak all 4 languages fluently. Also note most of the information in English comes from Japan because Japan has had the longest relationship with the west.

You must have a strong belief that "Japan neglects Korea." The Japanese textbooks mention Korea, China and the rest of Asia in detail. I don't really understand why one needs to be able to speak all the four languages in order to know about Japan or Korea; languages can be translated. Anyway, one thing I noticed for certain is that you haven't actually opened any Japanese historical books for once.--Nc622 13:46, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You need to learn all 4 languages because Japan and Korea used to write in Chinese, also Chinese references to these countries can not be ignored especially when these countries did not compile massive ancient historical information like the Chinese did. Example, the letter sent by Tokugawa to Korea is in Chinese characters about the disputed islands. Also, there are proof, evidence, documentation in Korean, Japanese and Chinese, in addition to counter arguements for many disputed items. And you need to know english cause this is an english website.

You can also ask why Japan doesn't like to relate historical items and concepts with the rest of Asia. Eventhough they are an island, they do have neighbors.

On what evidence is your claim based on? Can you specify which part of Japanese history is the case that you're talking about? I would also like to remind you that, unlike Korea which has only one governmental history textbook, there're plenty of textbooks from different publishing companies in Japan. As for Japan, you cannot make a generalized statement like above since there're number of theories for each part of history. Your claim is exactly the Koreans' imagination that roots in their anti-Japanism.--Nc622 13:46, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Even in this article it switches back and forth from people saying the penisula, then someone switches it to continent. Also, from the translated Japanese text books I've read, it uses terms like NE area, continent. When I studied East Asian History in School, this was brought up by the professor also. Now, why is the Japanese government making apologies for unit 731, Nanking, Comfort women if it was all made up. Where is the logic for Japan in burial tombs agruement still going on, where is their proof, why do people keep bring that up on this website and switching it without proof as being Japanese culture. Isn't it logical to assume the country with the older archealogical burial tombs and artifacts to be the founders?

I am surprised to hear that Japanese textbooks are translated into Korean. Can you give me the titles and the names of the publishing companies? BTW, you never know if it's Japanese or Korean changing the article. I haven't noticed that the terms like "peninsula" have been changed on this page but honestly I don't think it's relevant anyway.

The Japanese government has made apologies to Korea and China that they didn't require to in the post-war years, concerning political relationships with these countries. For the Nanking Massacre it was due to the Chinese propagandas too, but comfort women issue was exactly the case. The Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs has said that the apology was political and that they weren't able to find any evidences justify the claim. It has caused much controversy and even made Japan and the rest of the world believe that it happened. For unit 731 though, I've never heard about there has been an official apology; Japan was never been convicted for it either; according to one source that I read on internet before, all evidences on Unit 731 were confiscated by the Americans. But I read in an article that Nobukatsu Shigenobu of Tokyo University and some other historians are stating that it's highly possible it was real.

The political compromises and academic historical studies are two different things although they somewhat relate to each other at times. Historians are beggining to find out what is there, and they claim statements based on evidences. In Japan there's freedom of speech unlike Korea where discussions about positive effects of the Japanese annexation is totally unacceptable. They can discuss anything; if they're wrong somebody will correct them. This is not about politics. Don't confuse both. I don't really know about the tombs. But that's also an academic study. Overall, I find that Koreans are unable to separate politics and history.--Nc622 11:17, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

English....books are translated into english. This is an english website, I was educated in the US. And yes, I believe Chinese and Koreans translate Japanese text books, isn't that why there was such an uproar when the new Japanese History book came out.

How do you know what is acceptable in Korea and what is not, do you speak the language, have you lived there for more than 5 years. With all the freedom in Japan the information about unit 731 came mostly from the US papers, only then did Japan apolozie, but didn't make all the sealed papers in Japan public...hmmm lots of freedom there right...very objective right. Not all the papers were confiscated by the US. The research information was shared with the US, the US wanted the research info for their own knowledge. But papers on weather those weapons were used, where, how may or may not be in the sealed papers in Japan. Just a side note, I think the perpetrators of crimes in history tend to want to move on and say lets separate the past actions in history from our current politics even if nothing was resolved. The victims of the crimes tend to want resolution and are much more vocal about the crime. There is always a trust issue also, if you can't trust the other country due to historical crimes, it may become a current political issue.

Really... they're in English. Can you give me the publishing companies and titles please. I'm just curious.

You made a rush conclusion there. There're lots of books on unit 731 in Japan. It's discussed on newspapers. But I've only read one book on it, which is Katsuichi Honda's Trip to China. I only know little about unit 731 but I know there is a trial for the Chinese vitims still going on in Japan. I've never been to Korea. I read Korean newspapers and translated books. I don't think you do that though. Have you heard about Kim Wan Sop? He's a Korean writer. He published a book called "An Account for the Pro-Japanese People" that evaluates the Japanese annexation of Korea as positive and proper, and he got in a series of deep troubles for that. He was sued by Korean civilians and the police persecuted him for treachery for nation. He fled to Australia and the book was banned. He even asked Japan for political asylum although the government refused it. As I recall, there was also a Korean highschool student who was arrested just because he made a website that praised Japan. Do you know that in Japan there're many Korean writers and historians who publish books in Japanese, which would probably never be allowed by the Korean government to be viewed by the public? There is no freedom of speech in Korea. --Nc622 16:48, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

More rushes in conclusions, Yes we know how the matter of comfort women came up in Japan, this was also something generally known in the west and in asia before 1983 but wasn't emphasized until someone from Japan confessed to it. The Koreans also try to verify Japanese historical info because they question Japans trustworthiness. The reporter didn't completely dismiss the Japanese book, he raised valid questions which could not be answered, especially in regard to timeline. You must of read the edited version of the news research, because the edited Japanese version dismissed many testimonies of people who wanted to stay anonymous and people of questionable back ground, which meant protitute/rape victim testimonies were dismissed. Testimonies from Korean, Filopinos and Chinese were dismissed. There was another article in english (can't remember the writer) questioning the Japanese take on it cause they only left Japanese testimonies as valid. And stated that was like the criminal investigating himself.

Also, if you take any East Asian history class in the US (college level) they will translate sections and chapters of books from other countries.

Why, is the accuracy of Japan's history text books always on the US news.

I have several problems in understanding your reply. I don't know who you mean when you adress yourself as "we". Americans? The term "comfort women" problem wasn't emphasized before My War Crimes was published. Before that, a book Military Comfort Women by Kakou Senda was published in 1973 but his book was filled with flaws (actally this was the first time the term was used). If you're talking about Senda's book, you haven't done enough research because he didn't adequetely analyze his evidences. 10 years later Yoshida "comfessed" the story but admitted that he invented it. The book was a lie; he made up the story because he wanted the royalty. In the latter part, are you talking about the Korean reporter's investigation? What she did was to interview the villagers of the island, and they denied such act was done (btw, she is not "he", she was female). What's the edited Japanese version. Maybe you're confusing the Korean reporter and the Souel University professor who performed further investigation; but his investigation was exposed fully to the academic community in Japan. I can't tell what report you're referring to.

You don't seem to have access to the trial records of the Korean comfort women or any evidences from primary sources. You haven't answered my question whether if you've read San Francisco Peace Treaty but I doubt it strongly; and you don't seem know anything about the Japanese public opinion or even what's on newspapers in Japan, claiming something about Japanese "sealed paper". I really don't think you're actually qualified enough to discuss this issue. Not that I decide whether you can discuss anything.

I also found out that there are no translations of Japanese textbooks for Chinese and Korean. The Japanese public have access to both country's textbooks in contrast. I find you quite hypocritical in leaving out some obvious facts like that the freedom of speech is not promised in Korea in reality, the single Korean history book is governmentally written and that Korea had been on the watchlist of International Press Institue for political thought control. Korea is perhaps the only democratic country that oppress information to this extent. For China, even Chinese historians themselves state that the death toll of Nanjing Massacre is "politically exaggerated". Reporters Without Borders ranked China 162th out of 167 countries in its third annual worldwide index of press freedom. Ask any historians or journalists about the inaccuracy of Chinese textbooks before you talk about Japanese thought control in your belief of the "evil Japanese".

http://www.time.com/time/asia/covers/501041129/chinajapan_japan.html

The Asian Time magazine in this month's issue states: It's not that Japan is free of radical nationalism. For every sincere expression of contrition for Japan's conduct in World War II, there have always been a headband-wearing revisionist or a bigoted old-boy politician ready to declare that the Nanjing Massacre never happened or that Korean comfort women were "volunteers." But in modern Japanese society, such voices are of increasingly marginalized fringe elements.

Don't you find this article stereotyping? But that's how the press is. The major press, in any "liberal" countries in the world, only favors information that's in accordance with their ideaology i.e. liberalism. The reality that only these news are reported to the public is clearly a wrong liberalism in journalism. By the way, those "marginalized fringe elements" include person such as a professor of Tokyo university, the highest educational facility in Japan; it's no wonder how people think Japanese are "whitewashing the history" when such authority tries to establish the "revisionalist" viewpoint history, don't you think? There you go the stereotyping again. --Nc622 10:24, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Quality of the Page is in Big Question

The content of this article is based on Korean fabrication(and imagination) plus propaganda. I strongly suggest that this article should be revised, after a thorough and careful discussion. Observed from an objective perspective the article is too illogical, lacks historical and scientific proof. A crystal of anti-Japanism and racism. It goes without saying that such a hostile and disrepectful attitude will exacerbate the relationship between two countries. As a non-Japanese and non-Korean, I believe that the quality of the article itself is in question. : Tangfe 14:38, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I strongly agree with the user above. Although I have restored the article to become as least NPOV as possible, there are still some POV comments deeply rooted within various sub-articles. If I'm not mistaken, I believe that all of us would like this article to be well balanced between Korean and Japanese arguments, and not in favour of one side or the other. Leonhart

Some people without ID seem to be just changing articles without discussing. I agree with Tangfe. The whole article needs revision, or else needs to be erased leaving some major disputes such as the ones over the island and the textbooks. Some articles are totally nonsense and unworthy like Japanese photographs of Korea. What's this about? A big question mark in my head. --Nc622 17:05, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The info on this page switches back and forthe almost daily. There should be discussions for each change.

>Archaeological studies show that a large influx of people from Korea immigrated to Japan along with technology, culture, and language.

Why do Koreans assert that they are the cultural and the ethical father of Japanese. Is this another Korean superstition? Due to government policy and anti-Japanese education, don't Koreans hate Japanese? Then why? A contradiction...Quite puzzling. Korean psychology must be complex. Koreans cannot live without thinking about Japan and the Japanese? |Tangfe 23:44, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Japanese photographs of Korea

The photographs are disputed between the two countries because it was one of the excuses Japan used to invade other countries in WWII. They believed the other countries were "backwards", then showed the photographs as evidence. Later people started questioning the photographs asking why historical treasures which eventually got stolen/destoryed in war were never photographed. Koreans state it was propaganda photos, Japan states it was not propaganda. That is what the current arguement is about.

Japan states it was not propaganda. Who in Japan are you talking about? And what pictures?Koreans believe they can say anything when it comes to about Japanese people. By the way, They believed the other countries were "backwards": this statement is either your imagination or what you're told from your government, very typical of Koreans.--Nc622 11:28, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hmm... I guess it's Nc622, the guy who posted his opinionated material is the article without knowledge of Wikipedia's NPOV policy. I guess that's okay, since he's a new guy, but some of his statements are questionable. For example, there's that part in which he said that the Nanjing Massacre was Chinese propoganda (or something similar at least). But it was worthy to be used as propoganda, as all wartime incidents are. Not only that, there's no denying that it was done in a purely barbaric and inhumane matter. Whether it was systematically carried out or was a result of national rivalry is a dispute left to historians, but it was, at the very least, comparable to the brutality of Attila the Hun.

In addition, although Nc622 did mention it, along with another guy, the bit about the need to speak four languages in order to fully comprehend the history of East Asia from 1850~1945 is also quite true... sure, there are translated historical records, but full access to all English, Chinese, Korean, and Japanese records is only available to a person who can speak all of the languages listed above.

Finally, the dispute over the Japanese photographs.... obviously they were used as "proof" by Korean governments over the last five decades (perhaps six), but it was true that Japanese photographers targetted the very worst of Korean society. Opium addicts, the poor, the disabled, the starving... they were all used as evidence of Japan's need to colonize and industrialize Korea and the rest of Asia. Just becuase a few memorabilia was used as propoganda doesn't mean that they have been invalidated; they're just leaving a stronger mental impact. It's better than whitewashing history altogether with nationalistic beliefs, like Japan (and to a far lesser degree, Korea and China). And finally, revising history doesn't change anything, especially not the history of the Japnese colonial period in Korea: Japan's imperialistic rule over Korea had everything to do with the cruelty and mercilessness of the worst barbarians and the savageness of hunting dogs and had nothing to do with humanity, the rights of human beings, or respect for other cultures. I hope revisionists do not deny or downplay this fact 'cause sometimes, admitting your own faults and taking responsibilty is a way to help yourself.

Although the comments above are only my opinion, anyone is welcome to criticize and rebuke them, and I will do my best to answer them in a sincere matter. Leonhart

Leonhart, are you talking to me? Or are you just talking to some of your imaginary audience? Please site evidences when you make a long claim like Japan's imperialistic rule over Korea had everything to do with the cruelty and mercilessness of the worst barbarians and the savageness of hunting dogs and had nothing to do with humanity, the rights of human beings, or respect for other cultures. My opinion completely opposes to yours and vice versa, that means there are some misunderstandings between us, right? I'm also curious which pictures and photographers you are referring to. Well I've seen some pictures taken not by the Japanese but by a British. I suppose you haven't read "Korea and Her Neighbours" by Isabella Lucy Bird so I suggest you to take a look at it. I believe it'll provide some new view on Korea.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0710308124/qid=1058362516/sr=8-2/ref=sr_8_2/104-9157928-1535113?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

I know her book is not published in Korea. There're other good historical publications on old Korea in English but are not translated into Korean. Most importantly the Korean history textbooks do not describe these either. Most Koreans have never seen any such "miserable" pictures; the government strictly regulates them. And by the way, about the articles that I posted, I do not think they were opinionated although I think I should've put in this discussion page.--Nc622 07:51, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This article is completely ridiculous. I've removed it.--Nc622 10:27, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The Book you present above from 1890's to early 1900's actually proves the point about Japan's photographs of Korea, there was no reason why pictures of the Palace/artifacts could not be taken. Also, this was written by a Japanese ally (british) who thought every one in Asia was inferior to the caucasians at that time. Yes, the british thought the Japanese were the Yellow Pearl of Asia (as long as they knew there place below the british) and believed China to be the sick man of Asia. And remember even in the 1980's when new archeological evidence was being excavated which contradicted Japan's old theories about their evolution/origin culture, many people even whites scholars resist believing the new evidence, because they had developed a loyalty to Japans version of history. Eventaully, due to the amount of evidence, books like "Paekche of Korea to the Origin of Yamato, Japan" became the gold standard in current theories.

I don't know if a current dispute should be deleted like this. The debate is still strong in Japan and in Korea. Currently two historians Mr. Kang an honorary professor at Hanajo University and Mr. Lee an honorary professor of Wako University (Both schools are in Japan) have been collecting evidence of the Joseon Dynasty photographs and technology Joseon started using from the West and how the Country was trying to modernize before Japan interferred. In addition Mr. Lee spent 10 years of his life collecting tombstones modified by the Japanese with lime powder. Mostly 500 rubbing of King Gwanggaeto's tombs. The tombstones were modified during the Japanese occupation, but Mr lee wanted to know what the original script had said. He spent 10 years flying back and forth between Japan and Korea.

There are pictures of Korean Palace/artifacts. Are you saying not enough? I don't think the photographers had a specific intention to make Korea look more beautiful than its reality. Have you read the book? I don't think you should make a generalization like above about "how caucasians thought about others at that time". You sound as if you've been "at that time".

"The debate is still strong in Japan and in Korea". There is no such debate in Japan. Stop making it up please. Korea was not trying to modernize itself before Japan annexed it. I suggest you to first investigate on your questions more deeply before you post something in Wikipedia since 1.) this is not a place to present debates 2.) you're utterly filled with your nation's propaganda not realizing that they're so.--Nc622 19:06, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200404/200404150011.html

To the poster above: about the pictures, do you mean this article? I have to say, this is the most ridiculous claim I have ever heard. --Nc622 15:22, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"perceived"

Under Japanese invasion, this occurs <trying to expose some "perceived" distortion of history by Korea>. What does it mean that "perceived" is in quotes? Usually something is in quotes to indicate that it is not actually so, but only allegedly so. But, here, that would mean the perceived distortion were not really perceived? That doesn't make much sense to me. Sivamo 08:13, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I think that's POV. --Nc622 13:16, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Discussion Caution

The discussion like above isn't productive. Can we keep the tone down? And sign up to get ID so that we know who is talking. --Nc622 13:16, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I erased the latter part of Apparent mistakes section. Do that kind of slander somewhere else.--Nc622 14:57, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Although I created that section, I erased the whole part, since I believe the section itself became meaningless. Tangfe 16:25, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oh, I see. So you erased that entire fight with Leonhart since it seemed like your arguments were totally baseless and invalid. Obviously, that put you at a disadvantage. ' Ah-hah! Now I get it. You're running way! Best idea you had in your whole life.' Samurai91

To Samurai91: why're you so mad? I think Tangfe did bring up issues unrelated in an offensive manner but the article was quite POV too. --Nc622 16:49, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It is hard to understand why some anti-Japanese activists attack Japan constantly. The things these anti-Japanese activits write are highly offensive. For example, they move around to brand Japan as an extremely evil country, the Japanese as a whole as racist islanders. They really demonize Japan and the Japanese. Totally intolerable. They should definitely stop this. It is only detrimental. The more these Koreans attack Japanese, the more negative their image will become within Japan and other countries. The stuff that I have pointed out in the criticism towards Korea are facts. Although criticism may not be a friendly response, I thought these anti-Japanese activists won't stop without showing any expression of anger. Korean slanders, rumours and propaganda about Japan are acceptable but any critical remarks about Korea are interpreted as "mad"? Double standard. Tangfe

To Tangfe above: It seems we have a misunderstanding, Tangfe. First, you seem to think that I'm an anti-Japanese activist. Forgive me while I titter. Anti-Japanese activist? Really. Like you, Nc622, and Nanshu aren't part of some All-Japan Brotherhood that's bent on keeping Japan's dirty, good-for-nothing image. And Koreans slandering on Wikipedia? I'm sure there are also a few Japanese editors like Nanshu and Nc622 who go around cursing Korea at every available moment. As for you, Tangfe, don't try to play the good guy. It really doesn't fit you. After all you've done as a "foreigner" (neutral, my foot), you seem to have overlooked a few points in the relationship between Korea and Japan. Plus, why did you erase our argument? I beleive it is not illegal on Wikipedia to post your opinion and critiscm on the DISCUSSION page. What, are we re-entering a period of authotarian dictatorships, this time led by Japanese Internet users? Leonhart

Calm down. You're completely paranoid out of ignorance and not actually reading any of my posts. I'm not interested in your country in any ways. That means I don't have any emotional connections to Korea; I don't specially love your country nor hate it. Maybe you should rephrase the words to "criticizing Korea" for its apparent historical/social Japan-related problems. --Nc622 16:22, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

So, Leonhart's going paranoid, you're not interested in Korea. 'Snort.' Yeah, we just all believed you. For your information, Leonhart is not raving simply because he is a lunatic (a fact I very much doubt). It's because guys like Tangfe just walk around blindly, hitting anything that gets in the way, which is in this case, criticism about Japan. And if you don't care about Korea, what are you doing on this discussion page anyway? Doing lunch, are we? Samurai91

I don't know what your problem is. I hope you won't resort to some childish argument like "don't discuss something you don't care about." What am I doing here on this "discussion" page? Well... let's use some time to think before you go all sarcastic and post something here.--Nc622 04:57, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

If you don't have an answer, just shove off. I couldn't care less about what Nc622 has to say about his "emotions toward Korea". I might've mentioned it at one point, but I'm really critical of what my Japanese homeland has to say to other East Asian countries. In fact, all Japan does is to give generous donations overseas, take advantage of the receiving countries' gratitude, dominate their markets, and move on, while in neighboring East Asia, all it does is ignore, ignore, ignore some more, and then revise its own historical wrongs. And by the way, Nc622, I don't have any problems in my life. Maybe it's you who needs to see a psychologist.--Samurai91

You've just proved either that you didn't read my previous post or just don't have a mental capacity to understand it. This is a "discussion" page; what am I doing here? Use your brain. Anyway, two points, although they're unrelated to anything discussed in this page; 1.) there's nothing wrong with doing a business overseas if done legally, and 2.) market domination is impossible both practically and legally (give me a break). You didn't even mention which specific company or market you're refering to; you just made a broad statement like "all Japan does is bla bla.." Sorry, that's the lamest thing I've ever heard. Enough of your moronic, vacant statements.--Nc622 14:45, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Ha ha. Real funny, Nc622. As usual, you've put your keen and penetrating (snort) mind to the task coming to the wrong conclusion. For your information, I have been reading your posts, you dimwit, and just because I don't explicitly say so in my own comments doesn't mean I'm ignoring you or anything. And by the way, saying stuff like "This is a "discussion" page; what am I doing here?" really doesn't help you, 'cause you've already violated the principle of discussion with Tangfe by agreeing to the deletion of arguments that don't fit your personal view of history. To me, you just seem like an ignorant fool who considers the rules of nettiquette beneath him. Oh, and before Nc622 (that ugly git) says anything about me ignoring his "precious" posts (again), I'll address one of his useless suspicions: why didn't I mention any specific Japanese companies? It's because the news here in Shanghai NEVER mentioned any exact companies. All they showed me were the logos of companies such as Toyota and Honda in some African country. Happy, you slimeball?

P.S.-Insulting me by saying that I don't have the mental capacity to understand plain English seems to be a comment that disses yourself, since your sentences seem more grammatically incorrect than mine.--Samurai91

I've replied to you in your talk page.--Nc622 11:29, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

God damn you guys are funny. I'm amazed that people can have arguments like this. --Ce garcon 12:17, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

To Nc622: Do you know that a recent broadcast by a Japanese TV channel fetured a so-called "historian" saying that the word "colonization" is incorrect when applied to the annexation of Korea by Japan in 1910? Did you also see how he went on to say that "all of Korea agreed" to the subjugation of itself to Japan? I mean, what kind of shit is this? We all know that Japan forced nearly all of its treaties on Korea, including the Protectorate Treaty of 1905 and the Korea-Japan Annexation Treaty of 1910. We also know that only a small minority of Korean officials actually signed the 1910 treaty out of free will. In this sense, the annexation of Korea fits perfectly into the term of "colonization". I hope this clears up your victimized sense of Japanese history, Nc622. Samurai91

Clean Up

I'm starting to clean up this article. I'm planning to erase basically the entire section on the cultural disputes since most of them are worthless, except for Zainichi and Corea/Korea(I think this is quite idiotic too, but considering how big the issue became in Korea during the World Cup, I decided to leave it).--Nc622 17:19, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)