Russian v.s. Japanese war in the offing

[anggwaponi]

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Portsmouth
Naa peace treaty ang japan og russia brad, ang north og south korea ra wala peace treaty kay armistice ra ila gisabutan

ahahah Lol


katawa man lang ko anang peace treaty imong gi-state kay though tinuod na pero history speaks for itself


Germany has signed a non-aggression pact with Soviet (Germany–Soviet Union relations before 1941), as well, Germany signed also a non-aggression pact with Poland (German–Polish Non-Aggression Pact)


pero look what have happened, Germany invaded both Soviet and Poland triggering WWII in Europe


ma-relate natu ni in modern times, China is signatory to ITLOS pero look again what have they done to West Philippine Sea









Here's who would win if Russia, China, and America all went to war right now
NOTE: News link courtesy of businessinsider.com

[katulz]

ahahah Lol


katawa man lang ko anang peace treaty imong gi-state kay though tinuod na pero history speaks for itself
Germany has signed a non-aggression pact with Soviet (Germany–Soviet Union relations before 1941), as well, Germany signed also a non-aggression pact with Poland (German–Polish Non-Aggression Pact)
pero look what have happened, Germany invaded both Soviet and Poland triggering WWII in Europe
ma-relate natu ni in modern times, China is signatory to ITLOS pero look again what have they done to West Philippine Sea

Dili man buot pasabot nga if naay Peace Treaty then di na mahitabo nga maggubat ang both signatories wala man ko mihimo ana nga claim. Pero mas maayo gihapon ang peace treaty compared sa Armistice like North and South Korea. Kay if mu-violate ka sa peace treaty then ang imo declaration of war mahug og invalid and illegal. Madaot ka sa international community og possible mawad-an ka og support bsan sa imo allies. Kay unsa ila assurance nga mu-respect sa uban nimo treaties if dali man kaayo ka mu-violate? Dako kaayo og chance nga tabangan ka og gubat. In the end dihado sa gubat ang nasud nga mu-violate og peace treaty mao talagsa ra kaayo kay mkadungog ana.
Compare that to armistice, if muattacke ka kay valid since both country are officially at war.

[anggwaponi]

Dili man buot pasabot nga if naay Peace Treaty then di na mahitabo nga maggubat ang both signatories wala man ko mihimo ana nga claim. Pero mas maayo gihapon ang peace treaty compared sa Armistice like North and South Korea. Kay if mu-violate ka sa peace treaty then ang imo declaration of war mahug og invalid and illegal. Madaot ka sa international community og possible mawad-an ka og support bsan sa imo allies. Kay unsa ila assurance nga mu-respect sa uban nimo treaties if dali man kaayo ka mu-violate? Dako kaayo og chance nga tabangan ka og gubat. In the end dihado sa gubat ang nasud nga mu-violate og peace treaty mao talagsa ra kaayo kay mkadungog ana.
Compare that to armistice, if muattacke ka kay valid since both country are officially at war.

i'm a little bit confuse or shall i say i'm not sure if we're on the same boat here but my wild guess is we're not


you said and i agree nga " ... nindut ug mas maayo gihapon ang treaty kay if mu-violate sa treaty ... so mahug og invalid and illegal ... then madaot sa international community og possible mawad-an support bisan sa mga allies ... "


so unsa man imong ikasulti o stand karon sa gibuhat sa China nga signatory sa ITLOS which is a treaty then they're the first one to ignore it?


Russia, China, SoKor has already signed peace treaties with Japan right after Japan surrenders in WWII which it's the reason Japan has only JSDF that they can't send or deploy there armed forces abroad even in the name of UN


karon na lang na bag-ohay ilang gi-usab ilang strategy to re-deploy it's JSDF when China, as well, Russia became aggressive in occupying the isles









China may be feeling increasingly threatened by North Korea
NOTE: News link courtesy of Yahoo news.

[katulz]

so unsa man imong ikasulti o stand karon sa gibuhat sa China nga signatory sa ITLOS which is a treaty then they're the first one to ignore it?

Yes UNCLOS is a treaty but NOT a peace treaty, and yes i believe that China violated UNCLOS. Take note that violation of that treaty is NOT a declaration of war. Madaot ghapon ila image sa International community, pero dili pareha kaworst sa usa ka state nga mi-violate og peace treaty

Russia, China, SoKor has already signed peace treaties with Japan right after Japan surrenders in WWII which it's the reason Japan has only JSDF that they can't send or deploy there armed forces abroad even in the name of UN

Nope, Japans pacifist stance is a self imposed policy, no state forced them into it.

karon na lang na bag-ohay ilang gi-usab ilang strategy to re-deploy it's JSDF when China, as well, Russia became aggressive in occupying the isles

Actually if i remembered correctly ang reason why gi-usab nila ang ang interpretaion sa ila pacifist policy is unfair siya sa ila mga allies. Why? If naay country mu-attack sa Japan ang ila allies naa responsibility mo support, pero if ila ally ang attackihon then its illegal for japan muhimo og millitary support. Klaro kaau unfair so ila gi-usab.

[anggwaponi]

Yes UNCLOS is a treaty but NOT a peace treaty, and yes i believe that China violated UNCLOS. Take note that violation of that treaty is NOT a declaration of war. Madaot ghapon ila image sa International community, pero dili pareha kaworst sa usa ka state nga mi-violate og peace treaty

yes pud! UNCLOS is not a peace treaty that though a violation of it is not a declaration of war but what China's doing now in West Philippine Sea is militarizing it by putting garrison permanent structures in which it harms our Ph fishermen by pushing us away in our very own EEZ

Nope, Japans pacifist stance is a self imposed policy, no state forced them into it.


Actually if i remembered correctly ang reason why gi-usab nila ang ang interpretaion sa ila pacifist policy is unfair siya sa ila mga allies. Why? If naay country mu-attack sa Japan ang ila allies naa responsibility mo support, pero if ila ally ang attackihon then its illegal for japan muhimo og millitary support. Klaro kaau unfair so ila gi-usab.

and yes that was right that it's a self imposed policy in which they might have waken up nga di gyud diay maayo ilang gibuhat sa ubang nasud


what i can't understand China is that sila unta ang naay dakong kasinatian nga di maayo mangilog laing lugar o teritoryo considering of what have Japanese done in Nanjing during WWII ... but yet here comes China nangilog sa lugar o teritoryo nga di ilaha which is much worse nga they have done it pinaagi paglipat sa Ph by being a an UNCLOS signatory in the in modern times


however, what i couldn't understand about you also is that you don't have a fix stand


it seems naniid ka kinsay kusog kay adto ka mutapon which is a save-your-shame style









Japanese PM hopes for peace progress with Putin
NOTE: News link courtesy of MSN.com

[æRLO]

Actually its not the Russo-Japan war that didnt have a peace treaty. Japan and Russia (then Soviet Union) have not signed peace treaties for cessation of hostilities in the 2nd World War, because of Kuril... Now this begs the question... Is Kuril worth going into a shooting war against a capable military in Japan?

I think Japan will take back its "self-defense only" policy... They already bent their rules a little bit by participating in the US led coalition in Iraq and Afghanistan. And a lot of new Japanese sentiments are starting to go "right-wing". I would like to see what kind of badass carriers and capital ships the Japanese could make. They would be able to make China act proper.

[katulz]

however, what i couldn't understand about you also is that you don't have a fix stand
it seems naniid ka kinsay kusog kay adto ka mutapon which is a save-your-shame style

What do you mean i have no fix stance? There's no need to take sides, Japan and Russia wont go to war against each other over small matters, simply not worth it.

[durfritz]

ahahah Lol


katawa man lang ko anang peace treaty imong gi-state kay though tinuod na pero history speaks for itself


Germany has signed a non-aggression pact with Soviet (Germany–Soviet Union relations before 1941), as well, Germany signed also a non-aggression pact with Poland (German–Polish Non-Aggression Pact)


pero look what have happened, Germany invaded both Soviet and Poland triggering WWII in Europe


ma-relate natu ni in modern times, China is signatory to ITLOS pero look again what have they done to West Philippine Sea









Here's who would win if Russia, China, and America all went to war right now
NOTE: News link courtesy of businessinsider.com

Boss, curious lang ko. China/Russia vs America rman ni ang g compare. How about China/Russia vs NATO. Nindot unta to kung ngon ani ang g compare

[Jepot Tenio]

dli na mag gubat ang japan og russia, US noun vs Russia

[butitoy]

it seems nga just like SoKor - NoKor War, wa pud diay peace treaty ning Russia - Japanese War (Russo-Japanese War) nga karon nagka-init na sab




bantug ra nga mu-back up gyud ning Russia o mosugnod sa bikil between China and Japan kay naa pud diay history sa bikil ang mga Russians ug Japanese [Soviet–Japanese War (1945)]








Russia building new military bases on islands claimed by Japan
NOTE: News link courtesy of Yahoo news.

naa pud na bikil ang china and russia..though unpublicized

the russian chinese border was a highly guarded place with top of the line weaponry and elite personnels