Article Overview:   Japan has agreed to go to war again, for the first time since WWII.  This time, it is against the Beast of Terror.  Find out about this historic decision and its fallout.


Sunday--July 27, 2003—Ground Zero Plus 683
Pacifist Japan Launches War Against Beast of Terror In Iraq
Cliff McKenzie
   Editor, New York City Combat Correspondent News

  GROUND ZER0, New York, N.Y.--July 27, 2003-- Post-war Japan's Constitution forbids a military force that can be used to wage war.   Its military is restrained by the Constitution from engaging in any force to settle international disputes.
      It has not engaged its military in any combat since the war's end.  Not, that is, until now.
      This week Japan's legislature passed a bill authorizing up to 1,000 Japanese soldiers to engage the Beast of Terror in Iraq.

 Japan's Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi last September vowed to President Bush "We Japanese will stand by the United States to fight terrorism."

     It was a hard-fought battle for Japan's Prime Minister,  Junichiro Koizumi, but his prevailing party won in a 136 to 102 vote authorizing the troop deployment sometime in November.
      Currently, the U.S. is the primary Sentinel of Vigilance in Iraq.   Ninety-two percent of all troops in Iraq are Americans.   There is a total of 161,000 military in the country formerly ruled by Saddam Hussein and his now dead sons, 148,000 are U.S. troops and 13,000 allied.
       The Japanese public, however, is not in favor of the deployment of troops who can play a combat role in a country constantly plagued by guerrilla warfare.
       In a pole conducted by the nation's liberal newspaper, Asahi Shimbun, 55% of those polled opposed sending troops and 33% supported the bill authorizing troops to be sent.
       Japan's military will serve non-combat roles according to its Constitutional provision of non-aggression such as helping with the aid and reconstruction of the Iraqi people.
       However, opponents of sending Japanese troops filibustered unsuccessfully that Iraq has no "non-combat" zones because it is in a guerrilla war state.  At any place at any time combat can occur, so there are no clear lines where Japanese troops can stand on the "non-combat" side.
       For nearly sixty years, two generations, the taste of blood has been cleansed from the Japanese diet.   Once one of the most bloodthirsty of nations, WWII put the country into military neutral by emasculating its legal right to engage in combat.
       Some say a single drop of blood on the lips of a warrior can turn into a ocean of it in an eye blink.

...the bushido-warrior of a nation

A single drop of blood might ignite ...

      Now, that drop of blood is poised above the open mouths of Japan's military.  And many within the peaceful, prosperous nation with an economy second only to the United States, are fearful that dangling drop of blood will ignite the bushido -- the code of  behavior the warriors adhere to --of a nation that tried to bury its aggressive past and resurrect its pacifistic present.
        I wonder if that is possible.
        Japan is looking down the barrel of the Beast of Terror with each breath Kim Jong Il takes in North Korea.    The tyrant of North Korea has already vowed to attack Japan should the U.S. try to invade his country.  He targets not only Japan, but also implies he will lay waste to Southeast Asia.
        Should Japan fight the Beast of Terror?
        Pacifism can sometimes turn to Complacency.   Japan is now in a vice.  As North Korea rattles its sabers, more and more Japanese are worrying that without a military block, the nation is vulnerable.  This is especially true since the United States has half of its forces committed to the Middle East.
        Then, there is the moral question.   Should Japan arm itself?  Should it become a Sentinel of Vigilance with a sword?
        The question shakes the roots of pacifism, for its ripple effect Jell-Os its way across all national borders and jiggles up into the living rooms of every citizen, especially those in the United States.
        Should a parent of children in the United States arm himself or herself against the Beast of Terror?   Or, should that parent or grandparent rely on the government, or some third-party enforcement unit to protect them from Terrorism's Fear, Intimidation and Complacency?
         Every home in America and the world, I believe, that does not have a Pledge of Vigilance posted on its refrigerator, and subscribes to the Principles of Vigilance, is as vulnerable to Terrorism as Japan is with its ban on military combat engagement.

The Beast of Terror seeks out soft targets

 The Beast of Terror seeks the line of least resistance.   Terrorists call them "soft targets."  A "soft target" is one that is not protected.   It's like wolves looking for prey and spotting a deer with a limp.    Terrorists go after the weak, the vulnerable.
         No one is more vulnerable to Terrorism than the Complacent.  The Complacent are those who "expect" others to protect them and their loved ones, and abandon the idea that self-protection is the first priority.
         A parent who is not aware of his or her child's Fears, or can't list down those things that Intimidate their child, or, are not aware of their child's Complacencies, leave the child bobbing without a life preserver on a rough and turgid sea of Terror.

Don't plant seeds of terror in your child's garden - share your Fears with him or her

         But, if a parent is Vigilant, and takes the time to share with his or her child his or her own Fears, Intimidations and Complacencies, and is willing to build a bridge of trust over which the child feels safe in exposing his or her Triads of Terrorism--Fears, Intimidations of Complacencies--then there is more than hope the Beast of Terror will tuck his tail and run for targets "softer" than the Vigilant parent offers.
          Vigilance is about sharing with a child how Courage overcomes Fear, how Conviction cripples Intimidation, and most importantly, how Right Actions for the Children's Children's Children reduces to rubble the fortress of Complacency in which the Beast of Terror takes refuge.
          A Parent of Vigilance is aware of training his or her child to walk upon the Bridge of Vigilance, hand-in-hand with the Parent or Loved One of Vigilance.   Parents of Vigilance are not shy about talking about the Beast of Terror, or in reminding the child that they too become subject to the Beast's breath on their neck, and how they work to overcome the Beast's yoke.
           Japan is but a symbol of what all Parents of Vigilance need to be thinking about.  For two generations, Japan has relied on a third party, primarily the United States, to serve as its Parent of Vigilance.

Japan is realizing it needs to take charge of its destiny and to counter the nuclear weapons of India, Pakistan, China and North Korea

        Now, the nation is realizing it needs to take charge of its destiny.  While sending 1,000 troops to Iraq may seem a grain of sand on a huge beach, it is giant step toward self-defense.   It breaks over a half-century of Complacency within a nation whose wounds of war bleed upon the pages of history, illustrating the horror of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
          But, it can no longer sit on the sidelines.
          Already, Japan has rumblings of the need for nuclear weapons to counter those held by India and Pakistan, and now, North Korea.  And then, of course, there is China.

Japan has no choice but to fight Terror

          But the most powerful weapon of all, is not nuclear or biological.   It is personal.  It is generational.   It is the Pledge of Vigilance, the key to becoming a Sentinel of Vigilance.
          Japan's vulnerability lies within its households, which are half those of the United States.   The 100 million households in the U.S. and the 50 million in Japan can combine as one powerful source when they become Homes of Vigilance, ruled by Sentinels of Vigilance.
          While many may argue whether Japan should or should not engage in combat against Terrorism, I vote that it has no choice.    Ultimately, every citizen in the world will face the choice of being armed or unarmed to ward off the Beast of Terror's attacks on their children.
         I have faith they will choose the Shield of Vigilance over the Cowardice of Complacency.

July 26--Bashing A Child's Head With A Bat--Unintended Terrorism

©2001 - 2004,, All rights reserved -  a ((HYYPE)) design