3. Now, the most important lesson to draw here is just how problematic changing article 9 of Japan’s constitution will be. Indeed a little bit of fear is not a bad thing. However, the fear should not based on some kind of irrational notion that Japanese are culturally militant. Instead it should be based on the fact that any country can have trouble controlling its military. A clear majority of Americans oppose the war in Iraq. A clear message was sent to congress last election to bring the soldiers home, yet there they are still in Iraq. Not only this, but everyday the rhetoric regarding Iran gets hotter and hotter. Will the president even bother to inform congress if it becomes necessary to bomb Iran? To what extent do people in America have control over the actions of their own military? Japanese people who fear overseas involvement and lack of control of their military should take note of this as they debate exactly how article 9 should be modified.liberal Japan
A good point.
There are some pseudo-liberals who believe the U.S. is more democratic and the victor country and talk as if , therefore, she were exempt from criticisms. I admit the U.S. is more democratic, but because she is more democratically advanced, an advice based on the criticisms on the U.S. is more persuading and convincing.
According to Donald E. Shidt,
At mid twentieth century, after one hundred fifty years of abiding by the Constitutional requirement that Congress, not the president, decided when the nation goes to war. President Truman established a new practice of "presidential war making" Indeed there have been no congressional declarations of war since then----not in the Vietnam War, not in the Gulf War, not in the Iraq War.
(page 247 The folly of War/Donald E. Shidt/Algora Publishing )
I am not sure if people agree with him that "a clear majority of Americans oppose the war in Iraq.", but his point of democratic control of the military absolutely deserves attention when considering revising the article 9.