| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rabidcake
Joined: 10 Aug 2009
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 5:27 pm Post subject: The Dai Ichi Daihoumaru Ship Incident |
 |
|
The Dokdo islands are always a big topic with many of the Korean individuals I meet. I too believe that those islands belong to Korea, and at this point I think Japan should finally negotiate upon those two small islands to get some closure on this issue and build a better relationship with South Korea.
That being said, I had no idea the Dokdo islands have a dark side to them. Between 1952 to 1965, approximately 3929 Japanese fisherman were captured and 44 of them murdered.
I was very surprised to see this and also very surprised that very few Koreans knew about this recent history and tragedy. The Dokdo islands is a very sensitive issue so i only asked a few confidants. They themselves said that they had no idea this had happened before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dai_Ichi_Daihoumaru_Ship_case |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
plchron
Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
After WW2, the US distributed all of Japanese occupied territory back to the original inhabitants. They also specifically stated what geography Japan got to hold onto. In the treaty it said any land not specified was still property of the US. Dokdo was never specified, probably because the US people didn't know and/ or care about some uninhabitable rocks.
So guess who really owns Dokdo, the Americans.
LOL  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rabidcake
Joined: 10 Aug 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| plchron wrote: |
After WW2, the US distributed all of Japanese occupied territory back to the original inhabitants. They also specifically stated what geography Japan got to hold onto. In the treaty it said any land not specified was still property of the US. Dokdo was never specified, probably because the US people didn't know and/ or care about some uninhabitable rocks.
So guess who really owns Dokdo, the Americans.
LOL |
America is unique in somehow being involved in so many countries. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crisdean
Joined: 04 Feb 2010
Location: Seoul Special City
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| plchron wrote: |
After WW2, the US distributed all of Japanese occupied territory back to the original inhabitants. They also specifically stated what geography Japan got to hold onto. In the treaty it said any land not specified was still property of the US. Dokdo was never specified, probably because the US people didn't know and/ or care about some uninhabitable rocks.
So guess who really owns Dokdo, the Americans.
LOL |
That's an interesting take on the situation, I'd love to see what happens if the US suddenly declared ownership of the Liancourt Rocks, but that won't ever happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hiamnotcool
Joined: 06 Feb 2012
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sounds very sad. However, I would be interested to see what qualifies as a fisherman.
Maritime boundaries are a very sensitive thing in this part of the world. China and some Southeast Asian countries still have disputes over fisherman going into their territory and every so often a few of these fisherman are arrested causing a minor dispute between the countries.
It seems like a free for all zone because it is the ocean, but it is basically the same as a Japanese farmer crossing illegally into Korea to harvest some crops.
It could be a matter of controlling their supply of fish, or some of the "fisherman" may have some sensitive equipment on their ships that irks the detaining country. I'm not saying the fisherman were spies, but if I was a Korean that grew during the Japanese occupation, I wouldn't be taking any chances.
| Quote: |
| America is unique in somehow being involved in so many countries. |
America is unique in having been bombed by the Japanese, which brought about much of their involvement in other countries.
(que the conspiracy theorists) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xhaktmtjdnf
Joined: 20 Mar 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Wikipedia entry doesn't seem to site any sources other than what the author of the entry says is a translation of a Japanese report. Are there any other sources? Even then the entry seems to indicate that the incident happened around Jeju and that Dokdo was just part of what Korea was claiming as part of its marine boundaries. Whether or not Dokdo has a dark history, territorial boundaries are a big issue in many parts of the world. I don't think the Japanese will ever renounce their claim on the rocks as that might weaken their case in regards to other territories held by the Russians and Chinese that I suspect they care for much more than Takeshima. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 8:03 pm Post subject: Re: The Dai Ichi Daihoumaru Ship Incident |
|
|
| rabidcake wrote: |
| The Dokdo islands are always a big topic with many of the Korean individuals I meet. I too believe that those islands belong to Korea, and at this point I think Japan should finally negotiate upon those two small islands to get some closure on this issue and build a better relationship with South Korea. |
Okay, why do you think those islands belong to Korea? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 4:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Okay, why do you think those islands belong to Korea? |
I've said it before and I'll say it again- Those rocks should be belong to me and my startup offshore gaming and money-laun...er...financing consortium that will gladly cater to Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Americans, and anyone else who has been misunderstood by the authorities. Black Market, White Market- I am not prejudiced. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
detonate
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 5:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| plchron wrote: |
In the treaty it said any land not specified was still property of the US. Dokdo was never specified, probably because the US people didn't know and/ or care about some uninhabitable rocks.
So guess who really owns Dokdo, the Americans.
LOL |
wow lol... another issue i won't bring up over drinks in Seoul |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Julius
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
The Japanese crews were again interrogated by the Jeju police. The Jeju police charged the Japanese crews with violation of Syngman Rhee Line. They refuted the South Korean claim by telling them that installation of the line encompassing the island of Takeshima and a large area of water with fisheries jurisdiction was a unilateral act in contravention of international law.
The police prepared an investigator�s record of oral statement in Hangul, in which the police falsified the statement as saying that the Japanese crews violated Syngman Rhee Line. The police told them to sign the falsified statement written in Hangul and informed the Government of Japan to the effect that they admitted violation of Syngman Rhee Line.
However, it was so obvious that two Japanese vessels were captured in international waters since the South Korean police fabricated a story of violation by the Japanese fishing vessels. A U.S. Navy representative met with South Korean pres. Syngman over the incident. Syngman expressed his regrets over abduction of the Japanese fishermen in international waters. Two fishing vessels and crews were returned home guarded by U.S Navy Frigate ship on February 17.
When leaving South Korea, the South Korean police stated �We are very sorry for death of your crew. Since our country is at war, we couldn�t afford to give you foods even if we wanted to. Please do not say anything bad about the police.�
Major Issues of the Incident described above:
Installation of Syngman Rhee Line encompassing the island of Takeshima and a large area of water with fisheries jurisdiction is a unilateral act in contravention of international law. Firing at the civilian ships without warnings in international waters is a crime. Premeditated criminal act committed by the government of South Korea to pursue its military purpose of illegally occupying the large area of water and Takeshima as evidenced in the fact that each Korean vessel was staffed with 1 military police, 1 specially trained soldier, 1 information officer, 4 police officers in addition to 12 crews. Serious human rights violation by abusing the Japanese crews during interrogations. ex. Refusal to offer medical care, Refusal to supply foods, Refusal to carry out funeral service and cremation, Confinement of the Japanese crews at overcrowded cell whose floor area is less than 8.25 square meters, etc.
The above is just a beginning of brutal killings and abduction of the Japanese fishermen by the government of South Korea.
During the period of January 18, 1952 (date of unilateral installation of Syngman Rhee Line) to June 22, 1965 (signing date of Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea), 328 Japanese fishing vessels were captured and 3,929 fishermen were abducted by South Korea. And, 44 Japanese fishermen were brutally murdered by South Korea. |
Fascinating. Thanks for that OP. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skippy
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
Location: Daejeon
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
This Wikipedia entry read weird. So I dug a little.
First too much hyperbole. That gets my spidy senses tingling. Wikipedia entries try to be Neutral and should be be like Joe Friday with "Just the Facts Ma'am" stuff. Next, no direct links or further information about said incidents - even a Korean or Japanese site would do. Actually a previous link to a Japanese sites was edited out.
Looking at the edits. The person that did the was all one IP number rather the username. Only other edit by number/user was one edit to do with some Japanese researcher.
Looks like a propaganda edit by some Japanese person. It really changed from a simple blurb to an editorial and conjecture filled article. Original blurb went from one person killed in some incident to some 44 people killed. No context about the 44 people.
It would be akin to blaming one expat teacher for molesting a student then blaming any subsequent molestations of children by any expat and Korea as all foreigners fault.
This is a bad entry.
My opinion about Dokdo is it belongs to who ever can hold it. Screw the courts, historical records like maps. It belongs to country who is willing to fight for it. The Koreans have shown the will and little bit of craziness to fight for a couple of rocks in the middle of nowhere - it is theres. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rabidcake
Joined: 10 Aug 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Skippy wrote: |
This Wikipedia entry read weird. So I dug a little.
First too much hyperbole. That gets my spidy senses tingling. Wikipedia entries try to be Neutral and should be be like Joe Friday with "Just the Facts Ma'am" stuff. Next, no direct links or further information about said incidents - even a Korean or Japanese site would do. Actually a previous link to a Japanese sites was edited out.
Looking at the edits. The person that did the was all one IP number rather the username. Only other edit by number/user was one edit to do with some Japanese researcher.
Looks like a propaganda edit by some Japanese person. It really changed from a simple blurb to an editorial and conjecture filled article. Original blurb went from one person killed in some incident to some 44 people killed. No context about the 44 people.
It would be akin to blaming one expat teacher for molesting a student then blaming any subsequent molestations of children by any expat and Korea as all foreigners fault.
This is a bad entry.
My opinion about Dokdo is it belongs to who ever can hold it. Screw the courts, historical records like maps. It belongs to country who is willing to fight for it. The Koreans have shown the will and little bit of craziness to fight for a couple of rocks in the middle of nowhere - it is theres. |
Very well written post, thank you for your input. One of these days I will try finding more information regarding this historical account, but yeah the sources are not that great I agree.
I agree with your opinion about Dokdo too. There's Korean people living there and willing to fight for it, thus it really belongs to Korea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Julius
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Skippy wrote: |
This Wikipedia entry read weird.
This is a bad entry. |
So you mean to say that
| Quote: |
| 328 Japanese fishing vessels were captured and 3,929 fishermen were abducted by South Korea. And, 44 Japanese fishermen were brutally murdered by South Korea |
is just fabricated lies? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skippy
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
Location: Daejeon
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Julius wrote: |
| Skippy wrote: |
This Wikipedia entry read weird.
This is a bad entry. |
So you mean to say that
| Quote: |
| 328 Japanese fishing vessels were captured and 3,929 fishermen were abducted by South Korea. And, 44 Japanese fishermen were brutally murdered by South Korea |
is just fabricated lies? |
I do not know if it is lies. The post has transformed an incident in which one person died to 44 people brutally murdered. Those two words brutally murdered . Brutally - a very loaded word to describe an incident - not a good word to use in what should be a neutral article. Murder another loaded word to me murder means killing with some malice. The two words together gives the image of the Korean police or military literally gunned down 44 people.
It comments that between 1952 and 1965 that over 3000 Japanese fishermen where detained or captured and 44 died during that time. The details are not there about the deaths. All supposition. No details or further info given about those deaths. How are they murders?
Reading the article raised some questions and confusion. Looking into it more just raised more confusion. Do you believe everything you read? Do you not question things? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
emacs
Joined: 08 Apr 2010
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
