Comments by "Seven Proxies" (@sevenproxies4255) on "Asian Boss" channel.

  1. 18
  2. 18
  3. kama2135: Absolutely. And that's another issue that makes the issue further complicated: the fact that japanese students aren't taught about what happened. I'm not entirely sure of how prevalent it is, but from my impression, the japanese educational system (most likely under order from the government) really gloss over or ignore atrocities that the japanese government of the past has done. So many japanese citizens probably live in ignorance, which might make them feel unduly attacked by some koreans speaking out against it and react in a less desirable way that's not conducive to better relations, despite the fact that the criticism is quite valid. So I do agree with many people that the japanese government of today should acknowledge what happened more and start teaching the truth rather than try to gloss over the truth like they do now. I would argue that the average japanese person would agree that this would also be for the benefit of japan, because most japanese people of today seem quite pro-social and believe in virtues like cooperation and friendly relations and trade with other countries. And it's not like acknowledging the atrocities of the past and apologize for them out of respect of the victims would "cost" them anything. It's just the human, decent thing to do. Japan and South Korea are after all very similar in many ways. Both highly industrialized, free and prosperous societies in east asia. They both have everything to gain from improved relations and mutually beneficial cooperation would surely spring from an act of concession and public apology on the part of the japanese government.
    17
  4. 17
  5. 16
  6. 16
  7. 15
  8. 15
  9. 15
  10. 14
  11. 14
  12. 14
  13. 14
  14. 13
  15. 13
  16. 13
  17. 13
  18. 13
  19. 12
  20. 12
  21.  @deanjay6454  Personally I have a hard time respecting people who argue from a position of complaining. It's unbecoming of an adult. People in general should be more stoic. Citing hardships of what someone had to go through in the past in order to complain about what's going on today is very dishonest. None of us argue that women and men had it better in the past. There were a wide variety of gender based injustices. For women it could be not being able to file for a divorce. But for men it could be conscription and being sent to die in a war, regardless if the man wanted to go or not. But those are problems of the past. They aren't relevant today. And women living today certainly shouldn't be given any extra benefits just because women in the past faced injustices. And the same goes for men. If you're going to tackle problems of today, they should be treated as current day problems and be scrutinized in their own context, and not by dragging up a bunch of injustices that have existed in the past but are long since gone due to new legislation. But this is what cultural marxists do all the time. They whine and complain about the past to justify their theft of today. But take it to it's logical extreme: where does it end? Human history is rife with atrocities, wars of conquest and government oppression. If we're going to run around and "give back" all that was ever taken, all of society and the world will be plunged into chaos and the majority of people who acted in good faith (for example, people who purchased land with their own money that was conquered at some point in the past) will be destitute in the process. Whatever changes we make, can only be on a "from now on"-basis. There is no valid way for anyone to "correct" the past.
    12
  22. 12
  23. 12
  24. 12
  25. 11
  26. 11
  27. 11
  28. 11
  29. 11
  30. 11
  31. 10
  32. 10
  33. 10
  34. 10
  35. 10
  36. 10
  37. 10
  38. 9
  39. 9
  40. 9
  41. 9
  42. 9
  43. 9
  44. 9
  45. 9
  46. Chí Thiện Nguyễn: Do you deny that the Vietnamese enemies of Korea and the U.S did things like hide weapons caches in civilian villages and towns? Do you deny that Vietnamese fighers hid themselves among civilian populations and staged attacks by using civilians? There are tons of reports of vietnamese children being sent as suicide bombers by groups like the Vietcong and the like in order to kill and maim U.S and Korean troops during the conflict. It's actions like that which cause troops to consider all civilians to be potential hostiles and leads to further innocent deaths. Put yourself in their shoes. Just the day before you had soldier buddies getting blown to pieces by a civilian suicide bomber, you're in a foreign country, scared for your life and rumors circulate everywhere that there are enemy troops hiding among the civilians. Do you seriously believe that you'd be able to make sure that you or your superior officer never harms an innocent civilian under those conditions? If anything you should place your blame on the Vietnamese armed forces who were willing to resort to such underhanded tactics. The U.S troops didn't send civilian suicide bombers to deal with their enemies, and they always wore uniforms. Real soldiers wear uniforms to show which side they're on, even so the enemies know it and so their enemies DON'T go chasing after innocent civilians in pursuit of them. When you start using civilians to attack enemy troops then YOU are the one who paints a target on civilians backs, not the enemy.
    8
  47. 8
  48. 8
  49. 8
  50. 8