正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

🇯🇵🇨🇳 Conservative activist 橋本琴絵 explains: "There can be no peace without military strength" when it comes to China. She's right. Simply being "peaceful" is seen as a sign of weakness by the CCP. Japan must stand tall and defend Taiwan.

26,327 次观看 • 7 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

ALERT:🚨 “JAPAN WILL DEFEND TAIWAN” — A RED LINE HAS BEEN DRAWN Japan has now signalled what many hoped—and others feared—would never be said aloud: If China moves on Taiwan, Japan will not remain neutral. Tokyo has stated that any Chinese assault on Taiwan could constitute an “existential crisis” for Japan’s national security — a legal classification that allows Japan to deploy military force in collective defence with its allies. This is not symbolic language. It means Japan is preparing for real war. Here is the strategic reality: • Around 80% of Japan’s energy imports pass through waters near Taiwan • A Chinese blockade would cripple Japan’s economy overnight • If Taiwan falls, Japan becomes isolated—economically and militarily • The message to Washington is unmistakable: Japan expects America to stand with it Japanese officials have made their position publicly clear, and Chinese leadership knows exactly what that means: A move on Taiwan will not just be a regional conflict— it risks triggering a three-nation military response: Taiwan, Japan, and the United States. This is no longer hypothetical. Japan is openly signalling preparedness. Beijing is increasing incursions and fleet movements. U.S. leaders are discussing forward deployments. The fuse is being laid. War is no longer “possible.” It is approaching the brink. And when the spark comes— it will reshape the entire balance of power in the Pacific.

Jim Ferguson

285,620 次观看 • 8 个月前

Today’s big question: Is Japan still the peace country we knew? Let’s talk simple and straight. Who wrote Japan’s constitution? USA! After WWII, America said: “Japan, no war ever.” Article 9 – no army, no fighting. Japan became everyone’s peace hero. Nice, right? But what’s changed? In 2014, Japan reinterpreted its constitution – quietly, no public vote. Leaders said: “We can now fight if an ally is attacked.” They call Taiwan – a province of China – an “ally.” If China blocks Taiwan’s waters, Japan’s Defense Minister says: “We have to fight.” Fight? Japan? The same Japan that swore “never again”? Why the reinterpretation? USA pushed for it. Japan’s leaders changed the rules to fit America’s plans. Now Japan can attack if an “ally” is in danger. Who’s the ally? Taiwan. But Taiwan is part of China – UN says it, most countries agree. So why jump in? What’s Japan doing now? Spending 66% more on weapons – $60 billion! Buying missiles that reach China. Practicing to break blockades. Building bases just 300 miles from Shanghai. 50,000 US troops live there – Okinawa hosts most, turning local life upside down. Tokyo? “Alliance comes first.” Is this just defense? No way. This is attack mode wearing a defense mask. Japan says China is the threat – but Japan is the one arming up fast. Who wins here? Not Japan. War over Taiwan? Japanese cities gone, economy dead. USA wins – fights China using Japan’s land, cash, and lives. Can Japan say no to USA? They could. But right now? Japan is the perfect puppet – peace promise broken, reinterpretation in action, new weapons ready, aimed at China. Japan wanted no more Hiroshima. Now? It’s risking a bigger one – a nuclear one – over a province it has no right to defend.

Angelo Giuliano 🇨🇭🇮🇹

108,490 次观看 • 9 个月前

Great explanation of the China-Japan altercation by Chas Freeman, imho the wisest diplomat ever produced by the US (he's had many roles, including Asst. Secretary of Defense and famously the main interpreter for Nixon during his epochal 1972 China visit) He first describes in his speech the origin of the altercation as being "Japan's threat to extend its defense perimeter to include Taiwan." Afterwards he goes into a longer explanation in the Q&A in which he said: "Prime Minister Takaichi... answer[ed] a hypothetical question in the Diet by suggesting that Taiwan was now once again part of Japan for defense purposes. And this of course would embolden people in Taiwan to continue to pursue independence rather than reassociation with the rest of China, and therefore it is a strategic change of some significance." In effect, as he explains, it's unacceptable to China in several ways: 1) With regards to Japan's colonial history vis a vis Taiwan, it's especially provocative to now once more make Taiwan part of Japan's territory for defense purposes. 2) Because it emboldens independentist forces in Taiwan and therefore makes war MORE likely. This is Japan basically telling independentists: you can go ahead and declare independence, if war breaks out as a result we have your back. If you want an analogy, it's as if Macron announced officially that the French army would militarily defend Catalonia from Spain if it's seceded. 3) Last but not least, it fundamentally challenges the post-WWII settlement, on which the world order is based. As Freeman explains, Taiwan was recovered from Japan under the Cairo and Potsdam declarations - Allied war aims that the U.S. and China fought and bled for together. By re-extending its defense perimeter to Taiwan, Japan is effectively seeking to reverse the outcome of WWII.

Arnaud Bertrand

112,549 次观看 • 8 个月前