Article 9 of the Constitution as a Deterrent to a War of Aggression
昨日、ほんの少しだけ日本の戦後史を勉強しました。
・昭和22（1947）年5月3日：日本国憲法の施行
・昭和28（1953）年1月12日：韓国が日本領である竹島の強奪作戦を開始。
韓国は一方的な理由で日本漁船を銃撃し猟師44人が死傷、そのうち5人は死亡。
最終的に計328隻を拿捕、3,929人を抑留。
海上保安庁巡視船への韓国側からの銃撃事件等は15件で、16隻が攻撃を受けた。
・この一連の作戦により、韓国は日本領の竹島を実効支配。
不法占拠状態のまま現在に至る。
結論：「日本には『日本国憲法第９条』があるお陰で、
諸外国は日本に侵略戦争を仕掛けてこない」という主張は、
61年以上も前に、完全に論理破綻していた。
以上。
「憲法９条を守れ！」と長年言ってる方々へ。私は不思議で仕方がありません。
・それは誰の為の主張なんですか？ 日本人？ 自衛官？ アメリカ？ それ以外？
・中東、チベット、ウイグル等の現実的な国際情勢を踏まえた上での主張ですか？
・その主張は本当に、日本国と日本人の為になりますか？
私が前提とした歴史的事実や、考え方が間違っていると思う方は、早めに教えて下さい。
Yesterday, I took the occasion to study up a bit on Japanese history.
May 3, 1947: The Japanese Constitution came into force.
January 12, 1953: South Korea began an operation to seize by force Takeshima Island, which was part of the territory of Japan.
South Korea unilaterally fired upon Japanese fishing vessels, injuring 44 fishermen, of which 5 died.
Ultimately, a total of 328 vessels were seized, and 3,929 persons were detained.
Patrol boats from the Japanese Maritime Safety Agency were fired upon by the South Koreans, and 16 vessels were attacked.
As a result of this series of operations, South Korea took physical possession of the Japanese territory of Takeshima.
And the illegal occupation continues to this day.
Conclusion: The logic behind the argument that "because of Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, foreign countries will not undertake an armed invasion of Japan" totally broke down some 61 years ago.
I thus find it hard to understand those who have over the years have insisted "Uphold Article 9 of the Constitution!"
For whose benefit is such advocacy? The Japanese people? The Self-Defense Forces? America? Other?
Is this realistic advocacy in light of the international situations in the Middle East, Tibet, Uighur parts of China, etc.?
And is this advocacy truly in the interest of Japan and the Japanese people?
If you think that the historical facts which I have relied upon for this reasoning are wrong, please let me know as soon as possible.