Why would Japan intervene and risk confrontation with a nuclear armed China? Why would the US intervene and risk a confrontation with a nuclear armed China?

Some people on these forums really are living in cloud cuckoo land. If you want to point the blame at any state, you have to single out China as the common theme here in support of vile dictatorships throughout the region (including North Korea). It is of course a vile dictatorship itself after all so no surprise there.

Robinson, Cambridge, England

Condolances to the Japanese journalist Kenji Nagai.

Disgusting - cold blooded murder if ever I seen it. The soldier in question had no need to shoot. Unreasonable force if ever there was some used.

Condolances to Kenji Nagai's family, friends and the rest of Japan. Not nice at all, and they could hardly say it was done in error. The soldier who fired was 5 feet away.

To the people quizing - British soliders in Afghanistan. They have legal responsibilities under the "laws of armed conflict". Such as the use of "reasonable force". If people served they would understand the measures British soldiers - professionals - go to NOT to have to kill but to detain and subject to the course of law enemy combatants.

Mark, Chester, Cheshire, UK

When I was a boy, I would hear about some attroicty on the news and then hear that the British government had expressed profound regret or other such empty words and would think "nevermind that, why don't they do something?" At last, the British and American governments did start to "do something" in Kosovo, Afganistan and finally Iraq. Alas, now neither America nor Britain will "do something" such as intervene in places such as Burma, Darfur or Zimbabwa for a long time and that is because of the opposition to the war in Iraq. Shame.

Matthew, Ringwood, UK

To those who feel that their countries should get involved and invade in order to protect the citizens where were you at Tianaman Square.

Democracy is not all it is made out to be, in the USA you are free but there is a political class controlled by big business that make the decisions regardless of what the man in the street wants.

Leave these countries to sort things out themselves and they will be better of for it.

joseph Kellie, Edinburgh, Scotland

Burma is not America's problem. We just happen to get involved in situations like this because we don't like seeing people slaughtered around the globe. We have a strong sense of right and wrong. Unfortunately, this is a very impractical way of living because there are too many places where the bad leaders slaughter their people. Look at Darfur (400,000) or Zim.

That being said, it would be nice for some other country to grow a set and help these people out. I've got a picture of one of these monks on my office wall. Very peaceful people. Wonderful country. Their leaders have screwed it up badly.

Why don't some of you folks stop hijacking this thread by somehow blaming the US for this. This is not Iraq.

Tom Jack, Dallas, TX

Following WWII, and per Article 9 of its Constitution, Japan does not have a "projective military capacity".

M Chat, London,

Conrad, you ask a valid question - why should the US be the only ones to police the world. Why are Russia and China blocking the UN security council?

It's time China and India as mass importers of Burmese gas put the squeeze on the Burmese government to indicate that if you murder peaceful citizens you will have to face consequences. But I guess that won't happen.

Simon, Newbury, UK

The monks and people of Burma staged a peaceful protest to ask for the basic human right - freedom. The Burmese government have given them violence in return. China says it has no impact on international affairs - haven't we heard that somewhere before - like in Tibet? When are these dictatorial and communist governments in the Asian countries going to realise that to rule by oppression and violence is not the answer. You can subdue by violent means and political brainwashing for a while, but before long the truth will arise. The world is becoming smaller, the people of Burma, along with the people of Tibet, Nepal, Bhutan, Korea are able to see for themselves that there is another way and that just like everyone else in the world they want their basic human liberties and the right to choose a way of life for themselves.
This is not just a domestic episode for Burma. It is a reflection of how the Asian population as a whole are struggling for their freedom from oppression.

Wendy, Hull, UK

The difference Kevin is this, America wouldn't have to lie to the rest of the world about phonie wepons of mass destruction to gain support for this war. Although i do agree with you about Japan asserting it's military influence to reslolve this conflict. Either way it's going to be the innocent civilians here that suffer.

Jordan, Port, Eire

Does nobody have any knowledge of history?!?
Japan doesn't have an offensive army because of its terrible behaviours in World War 2.
And even if it did, do you think it's really likely it would start military action in Burma where it committed such atrocities in the war?
So talk of Japan growing 'balls' is very misplaced.

Will Duffay, London,

Free the people in Burma.

No Country needs a Military Rule, especially one in power for so long. The Country should be governed by its people, for the people.

The Military should be there to protect and help its citizens.
Obviously in this case the military leaders are there for money power and greed at the expence of the Burmese people and the Country.
Listen to the MONKS, and protect them.
Power to the people.
SP

Stella, Melbourne,

Cheers Ian for proving my point.
Why are you in Iraq then, to stablise the area, to help the oppressed? If so then why aren't you in Burma, Sudan or even China? Might it, oh might it be about oil?

Conrad Holmboe, oxford, uk

If ever 'pre-emptive' military strategies are appropriate, it's now, in Burma.
Why does the world so easily accept the idea of 'pre-emptive' military intervention in Iraq and Iran but not even consider it when it comes to a humanitarian crises? Is saving people's lives and freedom less attractive to our generals than extending political and economic power? Military intervention would have saved people in Rwanda, in Sudan, instead a new war in Iraq was started.. its pathetic.

Samuel Waumsley, Cape Town, South Africa

The complete ignorance of people about the situation in Burma is terrifying.
First Burma is abundant in natural resources - oil and gas - and that fact that they currently supply a lot of China's fuel needs is the reason why the Chinese have so far failed to intervene.

Second there's a good reason why an intervention in Burma would not be like Iraq. And believe me I tussled with this argument long and hard having railed against the Iraqi invasion and then instinctively feeling it necessary here. Burma has a democratically elected government - led by Aung Sun Suu Kyi and the military leaders didn't like that and stayed in power through force. The Burmese people have had enough and are standing up to their government and demanding democracy - all of them - and therefore to avoid a civil war we owe it to them to step and stop the violence. Thats it send a UN security force to stop innocent civilians being killed. I would have advocated that in Iraq. Please don't liken this to Iraq.

Will Hoyles, Hove,

It is only about oil, what else would they want?

Patsy, Liverpool, UK

no other country can fight suppression except their own people. been there, done that in this country. it takes courage from someone from within the military to realize what is good. other than that, we can only watch...

Art, Quezon City, Philippines

So, ASEAN is NATO (no action talk only)

Budhiana, Bandung, Indonesia

If you look back in the Philippines during People Power Revolution not a single shot was fired against the protesters. Why? Because of the inner goodwill and goodness of the man named Ferdinand Marcos.

Juan del Cruz, Sydney, Australia

We funded the taliban knowing the drug trade there. The united states has been funding extremist back before the 40's.

Kyle, the government isnt stupid and neither is our CIA. Their main job is forieng espionoge.

andy, fishers,

To Jo, London,

America may have funded the Taliban in the 80's, but that was only because they were fighting a greater enemy, the Soviets. The Taliban also hadn't been linked to any terrorist activites when we decided to fund them.

Kyle, Orlando, USA, FL

The focus is on Burma, but if you look at the history of peaceful demonstrations in the United States and England, you will see that it has a history of abusing those holding peaceful demonstrations. Yes, what is occuring in Burma is a tragedy, but they learn it from the countries that claim to be leaders in democracy. See article below where the UK authorities are trying to ban a peace rally in London on 8, Oct. What do you think the outcome would be if the peace demonstrators in London marched on Parliament in defience of the authorities? Maybe not bullets, but tear gas, batons and arrests would be used.

"The Stop the War Coalition is planning to stage a march from Trafalgar Square in central London to nearby Parliament on October 8, the day MPs return from their summer break.

But following a series of meetings with police, the group said it had now been told that all demonstrations within a mile of Parliament have been banned."

Yes, power corrupts, but not just in Burma!

Tim Griffith, Fredonia, Pennsylvania, USA

But, KMc Joseph of Annapolis, the U.S. OWES more money than ANYONE else in this world.

Jeffrey Moore, Toulouse, France

If ever 'pre-emptive' military strategies are appropriate, it's now, in Burma. Why is it that 'pre-emptive' interventions are proposed in Iraq and Iran without much public consternation but when it comes to human crises like Rwanda, Sudan and Burma no intervention whatsoever is proposed?

Samuel Waumsley, Cape Town,

To KMcJoseph, Annapolis, USA

Who's harbouring terrorists? Americans funded the Taliban in the 80's!!

Jo, London,

It's funny how people always call the U.S. "World Police". We don't just engage in wars, we GIVE more money to the world than ANYONE. Believe me, you do not want the U.S. to practice isolationism. If we cut off the flow of money to the world, certain countries would literally die. We didn't ask for the role of parent to the world, it was thrust upon us. If the rest of the world would get off their butts and fix their countries and not allow total corruption and oppression along with harboring terrorists maybe we could all live in the peaceful dream world that those who have never travelled outside their hometown seem to want to imagine.

KMcJoseph, Annapolis, USA, MD

Just the evil sound of the Burmese Junta's original acronym should tip off the most casual observer--SLORC. The fellow in Ecuador who asked what the difference between Ghurkas in Afghanistan fighting Taliban, and the Dictatorial Regime in Burma killing unarmed monks on the street needs to grow a brain, use it to develop thought and reason, and then re-read this article and others. Completely idiotic posts like his make me question the state of intellectual progress in South America.

Boycott Burmese gems, jewelry, tourism, and any other product they have for export. Encourage your governments to use sanctions on them, and tell Germany to quit arming the junta--Germany should be ashamed!!

James, Tucson, AZ

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely!! With no arms there's no way to defend the large majority of these peaceful people who are held in poverty in a rich country.
Awfull, I feel for these people!

Al Land, Comox BC, Canada

Hell yes ,Iraq was about oil, if it wasn't then the war really would be pointless. Yea, we flew a quarter of a million troops halfway around the world to get rid of one guy. Go back to elementary school. Second, the US isn't going to do anything about Burma. We have no interest there. But if getting results means letting Japan form an army and march through there I'll be for it. Of course, nobody will do anything in the end because there's nothing in Burma but people.

Steve, Greenville, USA, Tx

Happy to show up to the whole world about the real face of Bumese Military Government. If you will not involve this time and if we cannot overthrow this government this time do not consider to stay inside Buma, the killer will find you and kill you at any moment. Fight for our freedom till to the end of the life.
"Are they the winner all the time ! "

Albert Lee, Macao, China

The UN should be abolished for failing to carry out its duties and responsibilities repeatedly!

Wing, Poole, UK

Regardless of what country or countries need to get involved, if anyplace is desperate need of "Regime Change" It's Burma.

Robert Scobie, Lexington, KY / USA

I sadly agree with jake flood , England..
But our fellow countrymen, demanding that we do nothing to help the tortured and harrassed people of the world, are our greatest impediment.
At some point, you must ask yourself what is the difference between our respective countries turning a blind eye to the suffering in Rawanda and Burundi and Sudan... and the German people who acted like they didn't know what was happening in the camps that were located in their towns. They knew.
So do we!
My father wept when the US refused to help Hungary when they rebelled against the Soviets, as I have when the US abandoned the Kurds.
We turn a blind eye to the suffering of others and the day will come when others will turn a blind eye towards our suffering.
Thank God for our attempt to rescue the weak and suffering people of Iraq and Afganistan.
The "Left" in America and England has it wrong. They weep for the dictators and thugs who who crush and rape the innocents of their own countries.

watchingintexas, West Columbia, TX

1.We should boycot peking olympics (china vetoed in UN purely for commercial interests with china and burmese army generals)
2.The only language of communication understandable for the generals is by using force and by arms only.
2.Without the above 2 burma will be ruled by the military forever.

mza

mza, rangoon,

jake flood,

You are so right. I fear that it will not be long before we see this here in the states as well. The only thing that is preventing it is the fact that over 80 million Americans are armed. We may well see another revolution here in my lifetime (and I am 51yrs old), if the feds don't quit trying to impose their will on the citizenry.

Jack Aubrey, Richmond, Virginia, USA

First, as "victors" in WWII, we helped establish the State of Israel along with other countries. The countries in the area ceeded the land (at least the borders at the time) and we are sworn to defend it.

Second, the comment "it's about oil" implies that there is something inherently "evil" in what we are doing. Clearly, oil is an important part of the global economy. Not just here, but MANY places. Ensuring a stable flow of oil is in our economic AND national interests. If there were evil in our intent, we would simply take one of those countries over, as we are certainly capable of doing, and confiscate the oil. We certainly wouldn't be paying for it.

And before someone responds "then cut off your dependency on oil"... we are working on it... but our entire economy and society was built upon it... and China is right behind us in consumption.

James, Annandale, USA, VA

Considering how long the debate has raged about western involvement in Iraq being oil-based, it is staggering to note the continuing growth in personal transport,especially fuel inneficient cars, within a public supposedly opposed to the Iraq scenario.
Just how we get from the oppression in Burma, and the junta's disregard of a democratically elected governernment, to Iraq is as logical as the western preponderence to protesting against it's democratically elected leaders' oil lust - whilst still driving their own cars!
Unless,of course, the connection is in the massively increased
fuel price. A common factor in Burma and - well not quite yet - the west! Face it! Not many western motorists would vote for a government that would not or could not continue the supply of oil related products at the cheapest possible prices
This article is about Burma. The aspiration to a better world for everyone is not exactly helped by the parrot-like repetitions of 'apparent misjudgements'

Keith Robotham, Dalsland, Sweden

China buys oil and natural gas from Burma.

My thoughts and prayers go out to the people of Burma. I'm sorry you would have to rely on the United Nations for support.
I'm sorry you live under a brutally repressive regime.

Justin, California, United States of America

Why do you reject myanmar repression while in the same page you praise your nepalese "warriors" in afghanistan....that i do not understand.....Should I accept that their warrios are "bad warriors" and their violence is "bad violence" and your warriors are "good old english warriors" and your violence is a "good civilized western violence".....?...Does it means that you really think that you have the right to decide on the justiness of violence....?...Which nation lives and which dies..?

antonio moreno, guayaquil, ecuador

Japan isn't allowed to intervene because of a little treaty they signed in 1945. Don't they teach history in school anymore?

Joe, LaCrosse, WI -USA

I'm worried what will happen once the military thinks its sufficently sealed off the country, mediawise. Now that the message has been sent to journalists, and the internet is locked down, the Generals might feel free to act behind "closed doors".

Worst case scenario. Maybe they're just closing down the net to disrupt prodemo action, and the journalist was just an accident. but judging on past evidence. .

Tom, Phoeniz, Arizona, USA

This is happening all over the globe, whether it is the subtle errosion of civil liberties under the guise of protecting "democracy" here in the U.K. or the destruction of all opposition in places like Zimbabwe and now Burma. Unless the puppet masters have a vested interest no one will help and nothing will change. We in the west will be distracted by the next game show to offer weak minds relief and the status quo will be maintained.

jake flood, England,

Ian, I’m sure you're correct regarding the oil issue relating to the Middle East conflict but I tend to believe Alan Greenspan's take on events there. For all you technical war superiority the coalition forces have still to find one WMD & also I believe that if such weaponry ever existed the Israelis would have dealt with it long before Bush & Blair acted.

mark angus, Aberdeen, Scotland

Well said, all this talk about oil linked to war is all wrong. I say The UN should forcebly act on burma's crisis

Jaques Fremet, Voiron, France

It does not matter what the reason was re. Iraq, we are now looking at Burma and people being slaughtered. They need help anyones help. All countries should unite to stop that sort of oppression.

My heart goes out to every decent citizen marching in the protests and the Monks are indeed saints and so brave.

This is the time they all need support. Surprised the military do not support them and do away with any Leader who allows such cruelty to take place.

Izzy, wirral, england

I'll play the devil's advocate; If we were to "intervene",
wouldn't we just be doing the same as we are in Iraq?
Points to Conrad; oughtn't Japan grow some "balls" and actually defend the integrity of their own "sphere of influence".

Kevin Kersten, Auburn Hills, MI / USA

pray tell then ian, what has been the motivating factor for american involvement in the middle east for the last half a century?

a keen interest in camels?

please wake up and smell the roses

barry gateaux, odessa, ukraine

As a Japanese national, I'm very disappointed by the lukewarm reaction of new cabinet members to this event. If Japanese government really wants to contribute to international community, this is a good opportunity to demonstrate their commitment. To deploy refuelling ships to Indian Ocean is not the only way.

Hiss, Taipei, Taiwan

I am ashamed of South Africa's role in the UN Security Council on the Burmese matter. You would think that the ANC Government would encourage democratic protests - after all that was how they came to power themselves. I'm also surprised that Nelson Mandela hasn't spoken out about the plight of that lady in Burma (sorry, can't remember her name!), but he's probably too busy opening shopping malls. Luckily we still have Desmond Tutu, the conscience of our nation.

PamE, Johannesburg, South Africa

Conrad, any country willing to intervene will have to face the wrath of the world. Japan will not intervene. Face it, no one REALLY cares. Sad, isn't it?

Debra, Boston, US

Horrible, pity the monks. These are non-violent people.

EP, Makati City, philippines

Why should America be the only ones allowed to police the world. If Burma was sitting on the same amount of oil as Iraq is, US marines would have been there two weeks ago!
A Japanese journalist was jilled by the Burmese army. I say Japan should go into Burma and end this using military force.

Conrad Holmboe, oxford, uk

"...Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..."

drew, sd, ca

Burma is of course, Conrad, as rich in oil as the Sudan,but in both those countries the puppet master with the interest in oil supplies is the totalitarian regime of China - which has troops in mufti stationed in the latter and dominates the economy (such as it is) of the former. It is not therefore practicable for the USA to intervene in Burma, but can we assume from his comment that Conrad would approve if they did? Yes, apparently. And he would, by implication, also be prepared to risk war between China and Japan on the same basis. A little more study and a little less obsession with the USA might actually educate the Conrads of the world to focus on the real sources of tyrannical attacks on liberty, and the actual correlation of forces between the free and the unfree countries of the world, rather than trying to twist every such attack into criticism of liberty's most active defender.

Malfleur, Bristol,

May he rest in peace
and is there no way we in the world can do something.
There must be some way to help the burmese people

Finbarr Crowley, nagoya, japan

Ian, Texas - then enlighten us.

Nick Hodgkins, Moscow, Russia

Conrad, it's simply ignorant to assume our involvement in the middle east is strictly based on oil. Infact, it's outright stupid. Please grow up.

Ian, Texas, United States