<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is It Takeshima or Dokdo?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.j2fi.net/2008/07/16/is-it-takeshima-or-dokdo/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.j2fi.net/2008/07/16/is-it-takeshima-or-dokdo/</link>
	<description>Yet Another Gaijin In Japan</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:25:23 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: toadface</title>
		<link>http://www.j2fi.net/2008/07/16/is-it-takeshima-or-dokdo/#comment-1612</link>
		<dc:creator>toadface</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:38:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.j2fi.net/2008/07/16/is-it-takeshima-or-dokdo/#comment-1612</guid>
		<description>Jason, you have some serious problems with this article.

First the Japanese did not "take control" of Takeshima (then Matsushima) in the early 17th Century. That is a myth perpetrated by Japan's MOFA and pro-Takeshima lobbyists,

In 1618 one Japanese man was caught in a storm and happened upon the Ulleungdo and Dokdo region. From there he requested permission to voyage there from the Shogunate and was granted the right. (foreign travel was banned then) The Oya and Murakawa families of Yonago voyaged to Korea's Ulleungdo (illegally) to harvest trees and fish in exchange for paying annual tributes. The Japanese never once voyaged to Dokdo Takeshima as a sole destination. They went there en route to steal from Korea's rich Ulleungdo Island. Takeshima is a small, barrren rock with no shelter and little or no fresh water.

In 1696, the Koreans confronted the Japanese about the illegal voyages and the Japanese agreed to stay out of Ulleungdo. It was also recorded when the Shogunate inquire, that neither Ulleungdo nor Dokdo (Takeshima) were part of Japan.

From then on the Japanese did not consider Dokdo Takeshima as their territory. In facts almost all of Japanese national maps either excluded the islets or showed them as Korean territory.

Japan annexed the islands in 1905 during the Russ-Japanese War while Japan fought for the exclusive right to colonize the Korean peninsula. The Japanese Imperial Navy systematically surveyed and mapped Dokdo for military watchtowers about 1 month before they seized the islet. This was recorded by the Japanese Warship Tsushima's November logbooks.
http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-x-files2.html

The San Francisco Peace Treaty makes no mention of Liancourt Rocks. There were confidential memorandums circulated between the U.S. and Japan that suggest that the American military supported Japan. This was because the Allies were concerned the Korean peninsula would fall into communist hands (Korean War era) 

Also it was recorded the Americans wanted to locate military bases on former Japanese outlying islands after WWII. America was in the process of negotiating joint trusteeships of these islands so the U.S. military could established bases on them. Very early on the Americans wanted to put up weather and radar stations on Dokdo Takeshima. With security considerations with the Japanese the Americans could do this.
http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-sf-truth.html

Dokdo's nearest proximal island is Korea's Ulleungdo. Ancient Koreans have lived within visual proximity of Dokdo Takeshima since about the 6th Century called the Unified Shilla era. The Koreans were in this region a whole millenium before the Japanese arrived on the scene.

Korea currently maintains a 12 nautical mile limit around Dokdo Takeshima. When we measure the current distances from the nearest Korean and Japanese islands and landfalls we can see the current boundary is more than fair. Check yourself and see how unreasonable Japan's MOFA is.
http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/index.html

You should check the facts, Jason.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jason, you have some serious problems with this article.</p>
<p>First the Japanese did not &#8220;take control&#8221; of Takeshima (then Matsushima) in the early 17th Century. That is a myth perpetrated by Japan&#8217;s MOFA and pro-Takeshima lobbyists,</p>
<p>In 1618 one Japanese man was caught in a storm and happened upon the Ulleungdo and Dokdo region. From there he requested permission to voyage there from the Shogunate and was granted the right. (foreign travel was banned then) The Oya and Murakawa families of Yonago voyaged to Korea&#8217;s Ulleungdo (illegally) to harvest trees and fish in exchange for paying annual tributes. The Japanese never once voyaged to Dokdo Takeshima as a sole destination. They went there en route to steal from Korea&#8217;s rich Ulleungdo Island. Takeshima is a small, barrren rock with no shelter and little or no fresh water.</p>
<p>In 1696, the Koreans confronted the Japanese about the illegal voyages and the Japanese agreed to stay out of Ulleungdo. It was also recorded when the Shogunate inquire, that neither Ulleungdo nor Dokdo (Takeshima) were part of Japan.</p>
<p>From then on the Japanese did not consider Dokdo Takeshima as their territory. In facts almost all of Japanese national maps either excluded the islets or showed them as Korean territory.</p>
<p>Japan annexed the islands in 1905 during the Russ-Japanese War while Japan fought for the exclusive right to colonize the Korean peninsula. The Japanese Imperial Navy systematically surveyed and mapped Dokdo for military watchtowers about 1 month before they seized the islet. This was recorded by the Japanese Warship Tsushima&#8217;s November logbooks.<br />
<a href="http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-x-files2.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-x-files2.html</a></p>
<p>The San Francisco Peace Treaty makes no mention of Liancourt Rocks. There were confidential memorandums circulated between the U.S. and Japan that suggest that the American military supported Japan. This was because the Allies were concerned the Korean peninsula would fall into communist hands (Korean War era) </p>
<p>Also it was recorded the Americans wanted to locate military bases on former Japanese outlying islands after WWII. America was in the process of negotiating joint trusteeships of these islands so the U.S. military could established bases on them. Very early on the Americans wanted to put up weather and radar stations on Dokdo Takeshima. With security considerations with the Japanese the Americans could do this.<br />
<a href="http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-sf-truth.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-sf-truth.html</a></p>
<p>Dokdo&#8217;s nearest proximal island is Korea&#8217;s Ulleungdo. Ancient Koreans have lived within visual proximity of Dokdo Takeshima since about the 6th Century called the Unified Shilla era. The Koreans were in this region a whole millenium before the Japanese arrived on the scene.</p>
<p>Korea currently maintains a 12 nautical mile limit around Dokdo Takeshima. When we measure the current distances from the nearest Korean and Japanese islands and landfalls we can see the current boundary is more than fair. Check yourself and see how unreasonable Japan&#8217;s MOFA is.<br />
<a href="http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/index.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/index.html</a></p>
<p>You should check the facts, Jason.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://www.j2fi.net/2008/07/16/is-it-takeshima-or-dokdo/#comment-1484</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:28:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.j2fi.net/2008/07/16/is-it-takeshima-or-dokdo/#comment-1484</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the compliment, Mr. West.

This is a pretty sensitive topic for many people, both in Japan and Korea. The main idea with this post was to share a little history behind the conflict with people who might not otherwise know of the issue ... all while not offending any Japanese or Korean person that might happen upon this article :P

Sounds like I might have actually achieved the goal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the compliment, Mr. West.</p>
<p>This is a pretty sensitive topic for many people, both in Japan and Korea. The main idea with this post was to share a little history behind the conflict with people who might not otherwise know of the issue &#8230; all while not offending any Japanese or Korean person that might happen upon this article <img src='http://www.j2fi.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif' alt=':P' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
Sounds like I might have actually achieved the goal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://www.j2fi.net/2008/07/16/is-it-takeshima-or-dokdo/#comment-1483</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:27:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.j2fi.net/2008/07/16/is-it-takeshima-or-dokdo/#comment-1483</guid>
		<description>Takedokdo sounds like something out of Doraemon ... like Take-koputa and Dora-yaki :P

That said, sharing the land could prove to be more beneficial than not.  What better way to prove to the world that two of Asias economic superpowers can cooperate on something as important as fishing resources?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Takedokdo sounds like something out of Doraemon &#8230; like Take-koputa and Dora-yaki <img src='http://www.j2fi.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif' alt=':P' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
That said, sharing the land could prove to be more beneficial than not.  What better way to prove to the world that two of Asias economic superpowers can cooperate on something as important as fishing resources?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: billywest</title>
		<link>http://www.j2fi.net/2008/07/16/is-it-takeshima-or-dokdo/#comment-1482</link>
		<dc:creator>billywest</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:22:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.j2fi.net/2008/07/16/is-it-takeshima-or-dokdo/#comment-1482</guid>
		<description>Good introduction to the issue. Short, but very informative. It's good that people like yourself take the time to make relatively unknown, controversial topics like this available and easy to digest.

Nice piece!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good introduction to the issue. Short, but very informative. It&#8217;s good that people like yourself take the time to make relatively unknown, controversial topics like this available and easy to digest.</p>
<p>Nice piece!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tornadoes28</title>
		<link>http://www.j2fi.net/2008/07/16/is-it-takeshima-or-dokdo/#comment-1481</link>
		<dc:creator>tornadoes28</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:20:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.j2fi.net/2008/07/16/is-it-takeshima-or-dokdo/#comment-1481</guid>
		<description>It's Takedokdo.

It should be shared.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s Takedokdo.</p>
<p>It should be shared.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
