Hearted Youtube comments on Good Times Bad Times (@GoodTimesBadTimes) channel.
-
2300
-
1900
-
1800
-
1700
-
1700
-
1600
-
1500
-
1500
-
1300
-
1200
-
1100
-
1100
-
1100
-
1000
-
1000
-
1000
-
1000
-
989
-
978
-
948
-
903
-
896
-
846
-
819
-
816
-
757
-
753
-
752
-
740
-
733
-
731
-
719
-
691
-
665
-
641
-
629
-
629
-
623
-
621
-
621
-
607
-
586
-
556
-
546
-
542
-
527
-
519
-
515
-
509
-
508
-
505
-
505
-
504
-
502
-
487
-
480
-
466
-
462
-
452
-
449
-
447
-
439
-
439
-
438
-
436
-
426
-
417
-
410
-
410
-
408
-
407
-
395
-
390
-
385
-
379
-
376
-
365
-
363
-
349
-
341
-
340
-
336
-
334
-
332
-
332
-
326
-
324
-
322
-
318
-
317
-
317
-
314
-
311
-
310
-
310
-
308
-
308
-
308
-
304
-
291
-
288
-
287
-
285
-
284
-
283
-
283
-
266
-
265
-
263
-
257
-
250
-
250
-
246
-
246
-
242
-
241
-
240
-
240
-
235
-
234
-
234
-
232
-
229
-
229
-
228
-
225
-
225
-
219
-
219
-
217
-
214
-
214
-
211
-
205
-
202
-
201
-
199
-
196
-
195
-
193
-
192
-
191
-
190
-
187
-
187
-
186
-
184
-
184
-
183
-
183
-
183
-
181
-
179
-
178
-
175
-
174
-
173
-
172
-
172
-
172
-
169
-
168
-
167
-
167
-
167
-
163
-
163
-
160
-
160
-
159
-
159
-
159
-
158
-
This video is quite good for a video over the "division" of Belgium (that is indeed very rare to find an accurate video on the topic). There are however a few inaccuracies that I listed hereafter (sorry for the lenght but being precise is important on such a sensitive topic).
- (0:02) You started by saying "in the minds of many Belgian citizens, there is one true Belgian, namely the king, all other citizens being Flemish, Walloon or German". I am Belgian, I speak the 3 national languages and never heard anyone in this country saying such a thing in any of its languages. This is typically a sentence that comes from foreigners, who very often do not understand our country (well nobody really does, I know). To simplify, in Belgium one can say that there is in fact two identities, the Flemish one and the Belgian one. Those identities can coexist within a person or not (Flemings usually identify firstly as Flemish, then as Belgian) but the Walloon identity is in any case very weak in comparison with the Flemish one for two main reasons:
(1) Firstly the Flemish identity is born with the Flemish movement in the 20th century, asking cultural respect and linguistic equality from the Belgian state. This is an identity that has constructed itself against the Belgian one. The Walloon identity, on the other hand, has not developped in opposition to the Belgian identity but to the Flemish one. Consequently, the Walloon identity has always been part of the Belgian one, a subdivision of it.
(2) Secondly more than 25% of the French speaking Belgians live outside Wallonia (in Brussels and Flanders) and do not identify as Walloons. Those 25% have brought lots of symbols of the (French-speaking) Belgian culture (e.g. Jacques Brel, Tintin, the Smurfs, Eddy Merckx, Stromae, etc.), although not being Walloon. That is why in Belgium we usually speak of "Flemings" to designate Dutch speakers and "Francophones" to designate French-speakers.
Finally, I can assure you that German-speakers do not identify as German. They identify firstly as Belgians and we often say in their regard that they are "the most Belgians of all", a term they also like to use themselves.
- (3:36) You said that one of the cause of the Belgian secession from the United Kingdom of the Netherlands was that "the industrial revolution mainly took place in the north". That is inaccurate. The industrial revolution mainly took place in the extreme south, in Wallonia which has been, from 1790 to 1910, the second industrial power in the world. At that time, Flanders was mostly agricultural and the Netherlands were mostly centered on trade and mercantillism.
- (4:02) You said that the language reform in the United Kingdom of the Netherlands intended to impose the Dutch language in the Flemish provinces, which caused the opposition of the French-speaking population. It should be explained that 1) those French speakers were from the Flemish/Brabantian bourgeoisie and nobility, which, at the time, spoke French (hence, not the current French-speaking population in Wallonia) and that 2) this reform was opposed by Flemish speakers as well, since they considered Dutch as a foreign language at the time.
- (5:14) You said that the division of Belgium began to progress in the 20th century. The reality is that the linguistic/cultural division STARTED at this moment. Before WW1 the Flemish and Walloon identities were pretty much non existent and the dominant feeling was the Belgian one.
- (5:54) You compare Wallonia, mostly rural with Flanders, mostly industrial, and it makes one think that it has always been so. You should explain that this is quite recent in the Belgian history (since 1960). Before the 1960s, the situation was inverted. Wallonia has been the economic powerhouse of Belgium for 130 years when Flanders was mostly rural.
- (6:09) You show the GDP of each province and say it is enough to see that there is just one Walloon province in the top 5 to understand the economic divide. This is however quite logical since those 5 first provinces are the most populated (they represent together nearly 7 million people). Numbers like the GDP per capita that you show after are a better indicator to grasp the economic devide, although not being perfect (and they allow to see that the economic devide is mostly between provinces rather than regions).
- (7:27) The polls you cite indicating that 40% of Flemings would be in favour of independance were taken during the political crisis of 2007-2011. Such percentage has never been seen again and those polls are in any case to be taken with caution because:
(1) During every Belgian political crisis, the proportion of Flemings in favour of independance rises, to go back quickly after to a low proportion of 10-16%, but there has never ever been any majority for independance ever. That is why Flanders is not independant. The problem of Brussels that you cite at 9:30 is, in that regard, just a way to hide the fact that there has never been any majority for an independant Flanders.
(2) A lot of polls contradict themselves and there are great variation in proportion depending on the poll (the numbers of 2020 even show that there would be more Flemings wanting to abandon federalism to go back to a unitary state than Flemings wanting separation).
(3) Even inside separatist parties, the proportion of Flemings actually wanting independance is not really high (the last numbers show 25% for the voters of the main separatist party, the NVA).
Thank you for your reading and I wish you a lot of success with your channel and next videos!
155
-
154
-
154
-
154
-
146
-
145
-
145
-
141
-
138
-
I am an Senior R&D Project manager for a German multinational. I can tell first hand that bureaucratic red tape is forcing us to relocate most of our business. Most of the regulations on chemical business are so strict that it is no longer possible to do innovation, let alone set up production, in several key areas. If saving the environment is the goal it is self defeating: you make regulations so strict that companies are relocated just across the boarder, with externalities coming right back. Or even worse, relocate in countries with no regulations at all, making it worse for the environment as a whole. When, in think-tanks you try to explain this, you are met by a bunch of jurists that lack the basic technical understanding in the fields they are regulating upon.
This is just the start. Complying with bureaucratic requirements starts to cost more than the rest of the development process combined, without any real tangible benefit for the consumer, safety and the environment. Having this coming from parties that then caused Germany to increase reliance on coal because of an irrational fear of nuclear is, to put it mildly, infuriating.
There is nothing more efficient at killing the German industry than German regulations.
138
-
137
-
What an excellent job, and a lot covered! I think it's pretty clear from living and doing business in Hungary that what Orbán Viktor learned is how to stay in power. He's no ideologue. He'll adopt just about any position that keeps him and Fidesz in power. The informal alliances with other authoritarian regimes is also a matter of self-preservation; authoritarians who support each other improve their own chances of survival.
Your definition of liberal democracy is obviously spot-on, but that's not what many Hungarians from the countryside would pick up on. What they would associate it with is smarty-pants from the big cities telling them to embrace gay marriage and foreigners with dark skin.
These really aren't things Orbán ever really worried about (like Putin), it's just stuff they found worked for getting easy votes (as has Trump).
A few items of clarification for viewers (if anyone is reading): Modern magyarok (Hungarians) have no greater genetic connectivity to central Asia than Slavs or Germans. After the Ottomans were pushed out, much of modern Hungary was resettled by Swabian Germans and others from the surrounding areas. 200 years ago, Hungarian as a language of Hungary had just rebounded. Genetic studies put Austrians as being the closest relatives to Hungarians.
In the Austro-Hungarian maps used in the video, there was a little overlap between Hungary proper and Transleithania. Hungary proper didn't reach to the Adriatic. That was Slovenia-Croatia, that had a degree of autonomy, just like Hungary did from Austria. There would have been almost no ethnic Hungarians in that part of Hungarian administered Transleithania. Hungary didn't have a separate navy from Austria, as all foreign affairs were managed by the Austrians.
Trianon came quite a bit after the end of WW1 as folks in the west think of it (11th hour of the 11th day...), whereas in Eastern Europe fighting continued. There were the wars of the Bolsheviks, Poles and Ukrainians... and Hungary had the stupid idea of trying to take back parts of modern day Slovakia, Ukraine, and Romania by force, the culmination of which had Romanian soldiers occupying Budapest. Hungary could have been wiped off the map (I exaggerate a bit, but for a point) had it not been for the French and Americans, particularly. You can look at Trianon as shrinking Hungary, but you can also look at it as preserving Hungary and the ever-important Hungarian langauge, amit szeretek.
In the end, Hungarian nationalism isn't any more over the top than elsewhere (certainly not more so than Serbia). It's buoyed by the have nots embracing a version of history that makes them feel like they come from important and influential people. The reality is it's a tiny country with a funky language, an economy a bit smaller than metro Portland OR, and a people who I've generally come to adore.
135
-
133
-
132
-
131
-
131
-
130
-
129
-
129
-
128
-
128
-
127
-
127
-
124
-
124
-
123
-
123
-
123
-
121
-
120
-
120
-
120
-
119
-
118
-
118
-
117
-
114
-
114
-
111
-
111
-
108
-
105
-
105
-
103
-
103
-
102
-
101
-
100
-
100
-
99
-
99
-
98
-
98
-
97
-
97
-
96
-
96
-
95
-
94
-
93
-
93
-
92
-
92
-
92
-
91
-
91
-
90
-
89
-
87
-
87
-
87
-
86
-
85
-
84
-
83
-
83
-
83
-
82
-
82
-
82
-
82
-
82
-
82
-
81
-
80
-
80
-
79
-
78
-
Some sidenotes and added context:
10:10 This system was nicknamed as «Dictablanda» (a play on words that translates as «Soft dictatorship») or «Perfect dictatorship». It was posible because the government had a monopoly in everything. For example, you had PIPSA, or «Productora e Importadora de Papel, SA» («Paper producers and importers, PLC»), a state monopoly that would come at you with unppaid charges you or delay orders if you had a newspaper or magazine that had recently publish any criticism.
10:16 - 10:30 This part probably refers to concessions made after the 1986-89 period. In 1986 the center-right opposition PAN lost the gubernatorial election in Chihuahua state; but the fraud was so egregious (even to members of the ruling PRI party. Some PRI members even argued for a "patriotic fraud") that it is said to have led to the PAN winning the 1989 Baja California gubernatorial election. (It was the first time anyone other than the PRI had governed a state since the revolution; and it was a concession.)
12:41 - 12:48 This part most likely refers to the presidencies of Luis Echeverría (or LEA, 1970 - 1976), and José López Portillo (or JOLOPO, 1976 - 1982). (TBF, from 1940 to 1964 the single party rule (PRI) wasn't that bad, but from 1964 to 1985 was a disaster.) LEA really believed that the economy could (and should) be controlled from the presidential residence (there is an anecdote about how he ended up dismissing his economic secretary, Hugo Margain, because he had a bit of common sense) and JOLOPO really believed that he was within his rights to dictate the line to the media through advertising contracts as well as significantly increasing bureaucracy.
12:49 - 13:10 We saw these political and economic reforms from the presidency of Salinas (1988 - 1994, when NAFTA was signed) to the presidency of Fox (2000 - 2006), who was the first opposition president (from the PAN party). One thing you can recognize about the one-party regime (PRI) is that they had a smooth transition of power.
78
-
77
-
77
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
75
-
74
-
73
-
73
-
73
-
72
-
71
-
71
-
70
-
69
-
68
-
68
-
68
-
67
-
67
-
66
-
66
-
65
-
65
-
64
-
64
-
63
-
63
-
63
-
62
-
62
-
61
-
61
-
61
-
60
-
60
-
60
-
60
-
59
-
59
-
59
-
59
-
59
-
59
-
58
-
58
-
58
-
57
-
57
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
55
-
54
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
I always find "neutrality" as troubling concept, I do respect it, but it still troubles me. Same comes from Vatican and same comes for example form Switzerland. If one looks to debates Swiss had when their government decided to side with EU sanctions (de-facto aligning with the west and working against ruzzia) many Swiss were angry saying it is wrong policy, despite acknowledging war crimes and horrors in Ukraine as facts. So how can one look at the human tragedy and be neutral to it... isn't then neutrality = ignorance = negligence?
I think all would agree that if you hear your neighbour beating his wife then the right thing would be to react to it, I am sure that even most neutral Swiss would agree with that, or that Pope would agree with it... but that is fundamentally taking sides! You could as well just stay neutral and say "well that is conflict between them, I don't know the details why should I intervene, maybe she is at fault for something, or at very least maybe she should make decision herself and divorce him". Now I am sure that are people like this, but in general I don't think people around the world would find it acceptable position. Not in Switzerland, not in Vatican or Ireland.
So why all can agree on small domestic problem affecting one person, yet when we scale the issue of wife being the country and husband being another country... this analogy is lost to "neutralists". Why isn't it right to say ruzzia has invaded, killed 100s of thousands of people, ra*ped thousands of women... why it is okay to be neutral in front of this massive tragedy, human suffering and injustice, but comparably tiny problem of one wife being beaten requires action?
Is it just me or "neutrality" is just a way to avoid responsibility and act correctly when it is politically, financial or militarily difficult? Isn't it just an excuse for a weakness? Look at what happened to Sweden and Finland... suddenly when they are on the line neutrality gone out trough the window! It seems to me that choice to be neutral in front of aggressor is in itself an act of "taking sides" - so the actual result is that failing to stop evil is just as bad as siding with it. Is it not?
52
-
52
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
47
-
46
-
46
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
I think the most interesting thing about this conflict is that it was allowed to happen.
- Ten years ago, America would have tried to stop it because they were the global cop and friendly uncle and stopping wars like this is what they did, almost out of habit.
- Ten years ago Russia would have stopped it because Armenia were their sidekicks, but Armenia screwed the pooch.
As you said, it's a sign of the times.
Also, the actual conduct of the war is significant in various ways -- Turkey is throwing weight around, drones are not just for top-tier militaries now, Israel is selling drones to Muslims, there are Syrian mercenaries available...
And the Azeris ran their war really well, using their tech advantages with drones, and using the threat of Turkish F16s (but not actual sorties) to shut down the Armenian advantage in jet fighters. Skillfully done.
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
Well as I am German, I have to agree and disagree. Yes, without America we wouldn't be at the point we are now, with personal freedom and all around living in a wealthy country, despite that more and more of our population is getting poorer by the year. But if Europe would unite for once and for real, we could stand alone for sure. But as long as Europe is still just a conglomerate of selfish countries, there will never be any consent and progression. So as long as the European Union is not working, yes we as German people do need America and I think that most of native germans would consider ourselves western. But if America keeps up its political strategy, we could stand for ourself I believe, we would have to change some processes quite radical though, like immigration. I think the speech behind the speech which AKK gave is the revelation that she lost hope in the cause of the European Union, nothing more.
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
Great work as always. If you can, you should do a video about the New Scramble for Africa. France, the traditional policeman of Africa, especially Francophone Africa, is now challenged to maintain influence. The competition is as follows: economically by China, the US Turkey and Gulf States, militarily by the US and Russia, soft power and diplomatically by Russia and Turkey.
Paris is trying to shed its military role and to change its engagement and image. Recently, France has been engaging with anglophone nations like Ethiopia, Rwanda (former part of it's sphere), Ghana and South Africa. It is also investing in African tech markets and French educational institutions (soft power). However, I do not get why France doesn't progressively shed the CFA Francs and Eco which would allow it to turn over a new leaf.
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
I love your vids, beautifully organized, illustrated, & presented at a level that not even American news networks can match. Told like a story, with such elegance, wisdom, & perfect rhythm. Your voice however is the coup de grace. It is naturally infused with a unstoppable intelligence, wit , and clever wisdom, an awesome accent that Carries within it the weight and importance of the moment.. An excellent vehicle that perfectly facilitates & explains the most important & serious issues of our time. Your personality offers a subtle, yet colorful & unique take on the the news and world events. You should apply or try to partner with CNN. Million dollar contracts await. They would love to have you, and be a better network for it. All I know is…after watching your videos, I feel like I’ve had a full and complete meal, without realizing that before…I was starving. Your videos actually raise the intellect of the viewers. I finish each video,…smarter than when I began.
Thank You❤
I worked in audio video post production and live tv broadcast for 20 years. If I may offer one critique: I feel like you need a better microphone. Or perhaps you just need better sound isolation where you record. (It sounds like you’re recording in a closet, or at a desk in a small room). I can hear early-reflections that are a little distracting. It is the only thing that stands out to me as anomalous, and perhaps amateur.. Might I suggest a Shure SM7B, or perhaps a Sennheiser 416? A more expensive option I would try is the Neumann U87. You have such an excellent voice, it’s a shame to not capture it more perfectly. The right mic with an acoustically treated room is key, and will allow your work to translate well across multiple platforms. Some eq and compression, better preamp & converters might do the trick, but nothing beats a good mic in a well-treated room. Just my 2 cents. God blessed you with a great instrument. You are using it well. Keep up the good work.
Kind Regards
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
I think I have been greatly underestimating China, but I still think that a lot of people still overestimate it.
It is a Great Power, the largest economy in terms of GDP PPP, it already has the largest fleet in the world, but not the strongest fleet.
The Non-Performing loans are now at about 20% when Japan faced the lost-decade crisis in 1990 its NPL ratio was 17%. And the economic growth of both was largely based on the low-interest rate loans.
Therefore I think it is safe to assume that China will face an economic crisis (after the 2020 Coronavirus crisis.)
Nevertheless, whether will CCP solve the problems and continue to grow or will enter the chaos of the pre-Mao era is not yet clear, but... I will say that if China is able to solve current crises - the Yangtze river problems, coronavirus etc., then it is likely that it will be able to solve the next major economic crisis (I mean China's lost decade.) and continue to grow, although with lower rates.
Again, it should be remembered that until 2020 Japan had a navy larger than China and the largest in entire Asia.
Japan is the 3d largest economy in terms of Nominal GDP and the 4th in terms of GDP PPP and unlike China has a naval tradition and a much greater experience (WW2 and 1).
Japan also is militarizing since 2012, in 2017 Japanese authorities re-interpreted the article in the constitution which prohibited them from engaging in the wars abroad.
In 2018 they made large investments into the anti-ballistic missile systems and in 2019 Tokyo approved military expenditure plan until 2024 of as far as I remember, 243 billion $.
Therefore I think that Japan is an extremely important power which is greatly underestimated right now, but will play a major role in 5-10 years from now and will challenge China.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1