You will find many reasons for and against this. It is about 70 years ago and perhaps living then may give a different view point from one who was born 15-15 years ago. I for one, think it was correct.
That was in 1309, right when I was born.
in your body
Banzai! (I think)
He touched himself, very sexually, not right at all doe!
During WWII, the Chinses government (KMT) and that USA were fighting Japanese together. Right after the war, the KMT was defeated by the Communist party in 1949 after a brutal civil war and retreated to the island of Taiwan. Taiwan remains as the United States strong allies and shares the same believes, capitalism, democracy and freedom.
You will find many reasons for and against this. It is about 70 years ago and perhaps living then may give a different view point from one who was born 15-15 years ago. I for one, think it was correct.
You will find many reasons for and against this. It is about 70 years ago and perhaps living then may give a different view point from one who was born 15-15 years ago. I for one, think it was correct.
MIGHT makes right/the victor WRITES the rules/he who has the gold makes the rules... Justice? Refer to the above.
No they shouldn't! Do we want people who have comitted crimes to elect our leaders?????????? Just adding to this.. Most of our leaders are criminals themselves.. They just have the contacts to keep from getting in trouble and prosecuted for their crimes.. I say yes they should depending on the crime.. They should have a number code next to your felon to indicate what it was.. People make mistakes and should still have the ability and knowledge to elect leaders. Many simple crimes are labeled as a felony and everyday people are trying to make more and more felonies.
Because they are accused of crimes it does not mean they committed those crimes.
the allies
Answer this question… Leaders do not have the right to oppress their people.
At the beginning of the war, the Japanese were seen as liberators (remember, most of Asia was under European colonial rule). Many Indians saw the Japanese as allies in their struggle against British rulers. Leaders such as Gandhi, however, advocated peace, by taking neither side in the war. Finally some Indians. Finally, many Indians believed that it was right to fight alongside the British. Nonetheless, the Japanese attempt to invade India failed. They had more important concerns in the Pacific, China, and South East Asia. More importantly, it was clear that Britain would eventually have to relinquish its possessions; the war was making it weaker by day. To answer your question: the Japanese treated their Indians allies as "friends" fighting against imperialism. But remember that they had the same policy in other parts of Asia (Vietnam, Cambodia etc.), and then became the imperialists themselves. As a result, it is hard to tell what their true intentions were. Sameer
Allies
Chinmoku no ko is how you right it in English I'm not shore how you right it in Japanese.
Put it like this. A couple hundred thousand had died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If the United States and her allies in the Pacific had invaded the Japanese home islands, it would've cost both sides around 1 Million Deaths each. Your call. :)
Japanese is typically read from left to right, top to bottom, like English. However, traditional Japanese texts or manga may be read from right to left.