Korea doesn't have to be afraid of Japan.

 In discussing a nation-to-state war, it is important to compare the power difference between the two countries, but first of all, it seems in order to discuss the "reasons for the war" underlying it. In other words, there should be a discussion about "why are you going to war?" first. The United States did not go to war with small African countries, but during World War II, it fought direct wars with Germany and Japan, and fought proxy wars with the former Soviet Union in Afghanistan and Vietnam. This is because war does not occur when there is a difference in power, but occurs when the answer to the question "Why are you fighting a war?" is given. Historically, most wars have occurred because they are "economic" of the "strong." In other words, the answer to "Why are you going to war?" is "Because the strong are hungry." In the 1980s, the Japanese economy was in a happy dilemma over whether to overtake the U.S. or not. Among the world's top 10 companies, Japanese companies accounted for seven to eight, and Japanese companies ranked first to fourth in terms of sales. (Now, only Toyota Motor Corporation ranks 10th.) In the early 1990s, Japan was shocked by the collapse of the bubble and has since passed the "lost decade" and is now passing the "lost fifteen." The economic bubble is closely related to overheating. In the 1980s, Japan invested in real estate and stocks with huge dollars earned from all over the world. As with most goods, in particular real estate, "value recognized by others" becomes the price. Even apartments made of the same cement and rebar differ greatly in prices between apartments built in Tokyo and those built in rural areas. One day, all of a sudden, the value of real estate in Tokyo disappeared. There was neither an earthquake nor a war, but real estate prices in Tokyo plunged by up to 1/20. Most companies or individuals engaged in economic activities by taking out loans as collateral for the real estate. The fall in collateral value quickly left the bank with huge bad assets. He lent 1 billion won as collateral for 2 billion won in real estate, but the real estate he held as collateral fell to 100 million won overnight. As the valuation of real estate, which accounts for a significant portion of the asset value of companies' books, plunged, the accounting asset value of companies also became a "bubble." Naturally, the aftermath was bound to spread to the stock market. (This is out of the question, but the reason why we are forced to suffer a long-term recession is that the Korean economy is also based on real estate. When they brought in dollars from difficult times and distributed them to the people, the people bought land and bought them at random. When we were in trouble, most of the dollars earned from the sound of Gongdol and Gongsoon are melted into the ground of Seoul. A large circle was drawn on the land of the city of Seoul, and the rule was set, "From now on, the land of this original plan is gold." People have believed in the rule and traded the "gold" at a high price. One day, when the rule is broken, the precious values that we earned from selling blood and that we wanted to keep until we sold our pride are also blown away. The rule is neither a law nor its common "custom." It's not compulsory to protect.) China is growing at such a terrifying pace that it is said that it will soon overtake the United States after the Cold War. We also feel a sense of crisis over China's overtaking, but it is nothing compared to Japan's sense of crisis. Japan's feelings have already gone beyond the stage of "a sense of crisis." (On top of that, the tsunami of Samsung Electronics is hitting Japan.) With the collapse of Japan's bubble economy, the world is now at the center of a recession. This global recession was caused by a global oversupply. In other words, it should be said that the global oversupply phenomenon accumulated, causing the bubble collapse in Japan. In other words, technology that makes fast and a lot develops day by day, but demand cannot keep up with the pace. Until just a few decades ago, goods were sold as long as companies made them, but from some point on, companies risked their lives in competition, and creating a trend to promote and encourage consumption was the only way to survive. Now, it has reached an era where consumers want to buy automatic cleaning robots by pouring huge amounts of money into automatic cleaning robots that used to appear in science fiction. Looking at the PDP market, there is not much demand for 40 inches, but factories are producing 102 inches. Products produced by companies were not sold, piled up in inventory, and disposed of. In terms of added value, the world has burned down enormous added value for decades. They burn expensive oil to make things that are not for sale. On a global scale, for decades... The current global recession is caused by the accumulation of this phenomenon for decades. Therefore, any stimulus policy at the national level is useless. Venture boom and Internet boom in the late 1990s are all optical illusions. In the future, there will be many optical illusions that seem to revive the global economy. (Bio-related to stem cells, robots, etc.) But they are all bubbles. Companies have to keep going back, so they have to make things, and they have to spend a lot more on technology development than they do on things they don't sell today to make things of the future. However, if future predictions are wrong, expensive oil will be burned again to make things that are not sold. In the midst of this, Japan is the world's No. 1 foreign exchange holder, and its reserves are increasing. Rather than having a large net added value held by Japan, there is a problem with the wrong (distorted) tendency of the dollar flow to flow only to Japan. Japan's leading companies seem to have declined more than in the past, but Japan's potential remains in the world. In other words, the competitiveness of small and medium-sized Japanese companies is world-class. During the recession, only competitive products survive, and Japanese products do. This creates an abnormal flow of dollars into Japan. The problem is that the dollar (value-added) will flow into Japan, but it will not flow out. Even if Japan wants to release dollars, it cannot. If there is demand, we will release dollars and import raw materials to make more goods. Unless there is demand, there is no way for the dollar to be released. More precisely, it does not provide an opportunity for the dollar flowing into Japan to flow out normally. The difficulties of these Japanese companies appear as the difficulties of American companies. In other words, the parts that American companies are worried about are the same as Japanese companies, and the intensity of their worries is greater for American companies. Methods to overcome the global recession caused by this oversupply are largely divided into ways to increase demand and reduce supply. The method of increasing demand has already reached its limit worldwide. It hit huge commercials, seduced consumers, and made them drink two or three bottles of Coca-Cola, which had been drinking a bottle, and shortened the cell phone exchange cycle to several months. It has reached the stage of seducing and persuading consumers that it is time to buy an automatic cleaning robot from science fiction. As you can see from the household debt rates of major countries, consumers around the world have already consumed several years' worth of consumption earlier. The only thing left is to reduce supply. There is no choice but to forcibly remove the supply capacity of countries that supply a certain amount to the global economy through the method of war. War reduces the supply capacity of the affected country and creates large-scale demand that the provoking country needs right now, not future demand such as automatic cleaning robots. As explained above, the requirement for a war that will become a "global recession breakthrough" must first be the "war of Japan." - Dollar exhaustion and dollar distortion in the No. 1 foreign exchange holder. Second, Japan's war target must be a country with a certain supply capacity to the world economy. - To effectively eliminate supply capacity to the global economy. Third, Japan's target of war should be a country that cannot hurt Japan. Fourth, Japan's war target must be a country with a certain scale or more and that can withstand it for a certain period of time. - It should not be an aspect of elimination of supply capacity, but a country where the Japanese dollar can be added value and effectively permeated into Japan. Japan cannot release its own dollars and make other countries do good things. The United States is the only country that can take the initiative in implementing and managing these "global recession breakthrough measures," and Korea is the only country subject to war. Only Korea is a country that meets all four of the above conditions. The third important of the four conditions is the ability to hit Japan. This is achievable depending on the efforts of the war-torn countries and occupies the largest proportion of the requirements for war execution. Therefore, for the United States, which needs a "global recession breakthrough" as much as Japan, it should prevent Korea from cultivating its ability to hit Japan. In fact, the U.S. is effectively preventing South Korea from cultivating its ability to hit Japan. This is the war between South Korea and Japan from our point of view. We think that if the Korean Peninsula is invaded, the surrounding powers will rush in like dog days. It's not at all wrong. It is correct if Russia, China, and North Korea invade South Korea, or the United States, Japan, and South Korea invade North Korea. However, Japan's invasion of South Korea or China's invasion of North Korea is simply a "conflict between them." It is not included in the "sensitive Korean Peninsula issue" we know. For Russia and China, it is strategically advantageous for Japan, which is weaker than the world's strongest U.S., to be stationed in South Korea. In other words, the "strategic danger" that the world's strongest U.S. has never been stationed in South Korea for 50 years is unlikely to occur because Japan is stationed in South Korea. The same is true of China's invasion of North Korea. For example, even if a million Chinese troops gather near the armistice line, the United States cannot attack North Korea or China first. Only then can the U.S. enter South Korea's territory by pushing down the ceasefire line, and the fact that a million Chinese troops have gathered on the ceasefire line cannot lead to war first. Also, suppose that Russian troops have been stationed in North Korea for the past 50 years.

Now suppose that the Russian army will step down and the Chinese army will take its place. Is this a serious case for us? For Japan and the United States, is the "replacement act" of changing from Russian troops to Chinese troops in North Korea not something to stand by? In addition, the Korea-Japan war brings war specials to China and Russia. (Japan laid the foundation for today's war as a special feature of the Korean War.) The logic that China and Russia are forces capable of preventing the expansion of the United States has already faded. If the logic is correct, China and Russia should have prevented the expansion of the United States in Iraq, a repository of oil, worth dozens of times as much as South Korea. In addition, what we can put forward is the size of our economy. Simply put, Korea's economic size in the global economy is considerable, so if we fail, the global economy will become difficult. Currently, Korea is a country that contributes 250 billion dollars in exports and 200 billion dollars in imports to the global economy. Exports may be important from our point of view, but in a world of oversupply, some countries' exports are visible to others. In terms of imports, most of the goods Korea imports are raw materials or intermediate goods. In other words, most of the goods imported by Korea are imported to be processed and exported from Korea. If Korea fails, other countries import and produce as much as Korea imported. In a world of oversupply, there are many factory lines resting. If Samsung Electronics fails, Sony and Motorola's resting production line will run. What is left now is purely what Korea consumes, and the final consumer goods to eat and use. To put it a little exaggeratedly, 1.3 billion Chinese people can consume more than a year's worth of food in Korea if they starve for just one meal. The effect of creating demand for the global economy caused by the removal of Korea is more than offsetting such net imports of Korea. Now, from Japan's point of view, war does not happen suddenly one day. It happens gradually. The Japanese people's tendency to move to the right is the most basic requirement for war. Now, Japan just needs to keep pace with the speed of power growth. War is similar in nature to fire. Flints, flints, and firewood are needed to make a fire. Japan's act of touching Dokdo is like turning on a flint. But you can't start a fire just by lighting a flint. Therefore, it is necessary to ignite the fire. The spark can be provided by South Korea or by Japan. If South Korea is "outraged" by Japan's invasion of Dokdo and sinks a Japanese warship, the spark will be provided by South Korea. In fact, Korea and Japan have similar historical experiences related to "Fireworks," such as the "Unyangho Incident." If the U.S. were able to invade Iraq without the September 11 terrorist attacks, Japan would have given 72 hours to demand the return of Dokdo and forcefully occupy Dokdo within the deadline. If South Korea does not take any action in this process, that is, if it does not provide a torch, it must take the trouble that Japan has to provide. Therefore, after Japan's occupation of Dokdo, large-scale terrorist attacks against Japanese, such as the September 11 attacks, will occur in Korea, and Korea will be pointed out as the culprit. The 120 million Japanese, now known for their strong unity, cannot be controlled. The bow has already left the demonstration, and there is only one way to proceed. At this time, the ability to strike Japan other than nuclear weapons is useless. Even if a few missiles are dropped on the mainland of Japan, it will only fuel hostility among Japanese people. Japan overcame the Great Kobe Earthquake and survived the ruins of World War II, becoming the world's second-largest economy. The current economic situation in Japan is the same as having been in several wars. The Japanese can be "fully prepared" for war. I haven't eaten for that long. What the Japanese need right now is neither a golden fishing ground around Dokdo, nor a hydrecht (fish, hydrecht, enough in Japan's sea, which is 100 times larger than ours). What the Japanese need right now is a "decisive" opportunity to stop China from chasing and break the cycle of a recession that has been holding Japan back for 15 years. Now even South Korea is attacking Japan with the "Samsung Electronics tsunami." It's crazy and crazy for Japan.) Japan has used all the "peaceful" methods for 15 years to revive its economy. All that remains is a "non-peaceful" approach. Now, from the perspective of the United States, we are also arguing, but South Korea is a strategic point of the United States. Conversely, the United States only needs the "land" of South Korea. I don't need the smelly yellow people living in it. For the United States, there is no reason to spend the same money as the Cold War era on South Korea, which has no oil. For the United States, South Korea is just a necessary land to protect Japan. Therefore, it is effective for the United States to let Japan dominate South Korea. In fact, the U.S. is reducing the number of U.S. troops stationed in Korea and strengthening U.S. forces in Japan. Japan itself is in a hurry to revise the law to support the reinforcement of U.S. forces in Japan. In other words, instead of leaving South Korea to Japan, the U.S. forces in Japan will be strengthened to prevent Japan from betraying South Korea, and Japan will be allowed to point a knife at its neck. In other words, the U.S. should transfer its control over South Korea to Japan. In other words, South Korea is at the forefront of security in Northeast Asia for the United States, but it is unimaginable that Japan will not hand over South Korea while entrusting Japan with security in Northeast Asia. What the United States wants is to hand over its current status in South Korea to Japan. For example, the status of the USFK, which is guaranteed by wartime operational rights and SOFA, will be inherited to Japan. In other words, Japan has South Korea's wartime operational control, and the Japanese military occupies the U.S. military base in Korea. However, the United States is well aware that such succession is "absolutely impossible" to be "peaceful." In addition, South Korea expresses its willingness to self-defense and take back wartime operational control from the United States within 10 years. This will of Korea means the same to the United States as "loss of control at strategic points." Therefore, using the conflict (Dokdo) between Korea and Japan, the "Korea-Japan War" is induced, and according to the result, the status of the USFK is transferred to the Japanese military through a "legal(?) procedure. In this process, the U.S. can break the will to independence (i.e., attempts to lose U.S. control) rising from its strategic point of "colonial Korea," which is a very important issue for South Korea. Since Korea has not had wartime operational rights since the Korean War, it seems that it does not know the purpose of wartime operational rights, but in fact, wartime operational rights play a more effective role in peacetime than wartime. The Korea-Japan war, premised on this article, is a territorial dispute triggered by the Dokdo issue. Therefore, in addition to the reasons described above, it is difficult for China and Russia to intervene in the Korea-Japan war. It's not like the Japanese government's slogan or ideology, as it was during the Japanese Invasion of Korea in 1592. There is no justification to intervene. However, if China or Russia has signed a mutual defense treaty with South Korea, the story will be different. However, wartime operational rights are essential to signing this mutual defense treaty. In other words, the mutual defense treaty between countries is a treaty concluded based on "war." Therefore, governments without wartime operational rights cannot conclude mutual defense treaties with foreign countries. In a 1:1 war between South Korea and Japan without the U.S., the U.S. wartime command itself is meaningless if a war breaks out. In other words, once the Korea-Japan War breaks out without the United States, there is no South Korean soldier who will not listen to the order of the president, who is the commander-in-chief. However, it is impossible to suddenly sign a mutual defense treaty with China or Russia independently, just as South Korea made a surprise show before the war. Even if China and Russia want to accept such a proposal, they cannot accept it. (The Mutual Defense Treaty concluded with the government without full authority at the beginning of the war is invalid and has no legal effect. Therefore, if the Korean War is imminent, South Korea must regain its wartime operational control before the war breaks out, and the U.S. and Japan must not return it. Some argue that if the United States allows Japan to dominate South Korea, Japan will grow further and threaten the United States. If the U.S. had not let Japan grow, it would not have allowed it to grow as it does today, nor would it have condoned Japan's ongoing rearmament. Did the U.S. allow Japan, the world's second-largest powerhouse, to rearm itself in the name of not knowing that Japan is scarier than North Korea and preparing for a handful of North Korea? Also, while China and Russia are still alive, can Japan grow up and betray the United States after taking South Korea with the approval of the United States? In other words, Japan should fight China, Russia and the United States. In other words, even if the United States gives up South Korea to Japan, Japan cannot "betray." If Japan betrays the United States, it will be after Japan kneels on China and Russia with the U.S. on its back. Rather, the U.S. wants such a victory. China and Russia were handled by Japan, and the United States only had to deal with Japan... Lee Kun-hee controls Samsung Electronics with a small stake and controls the entire Samsung Group. Lee Kun-hee controls only the parent company and the parent company controls the entire Samsung Group.

This governance structure is "essential" for large organizations. The United States is now big enough to feel the need for such indirect control. What the U.S. should do is to control South Korea's ability to strike against Japan until Japan is ready for war. In order to bring Japan into the ring, the U.S. must tie South Korea's hands and feet and break its Achilles' heel. Only then will Japan come up to the ring with confidence. (It's something to do as a promotor.) The United States will take a neutral stance in the event of a war between South Korea and Japan, and the USFK will be converted to a UN peacekeeping force with the approval of the United Nations. During the war, the United States pretended to be a dove peacekeeping force, and after the war, as always, became a kind-hearted Uncle Tom, supporting South Korea and practically dominating South Korea. In Northeast Asia, including South Korea, anti-Japanese sentiment increases and anti-American sentiment decreases. After handing over South Korea to Japan, the influence of the United States in South Korea does not decrease, but rather increases. The time when the United States began planning the "Korea-Japan War" as a single idea is estimated to be the time when the regime was transferred from Chun Doo-hwan to Roh Tae-woo. Until Chun Doo-hwan, the United States had the "right to appoint" to the president of the Republic of Korea. Until then, the president of the Republic of Korea was able to "maintain the presidency" only after being nominated by the United States or approved by the United States. However, with the June Democratic Uprising and Roh Tae-woo's June 9 declaration, the president of the Republic of Korea was decided by direct election of the people. For the United States, not only did it lose the right to select the highest power in Korea, but the introduction of the direct presidential system in South Korea raised the possibility that the United States could lose control in South Korea, a strategic hub in Northeast Asia. The United States would have needed countermeasures against the risk of losing control of South Korea. So how can we eliminate the danger? In similar cases, the method that the United States enjoyed using was to support anti-government forces to overthrow the regime. However, it was difficult for South Korea to have armed anti-government forces in South Korea. However, it was impossible to overthrow the South Korean government using North Korea. In the end, there would have been only a way to overthrow the South Korean government by using Japan as a way of war. In order for this method to work, South Korea should not have nuclear weapons. The United States, which has watched India and Pakistan's cases and Park Tong's attempts to develop nuclear weapons, had to block all possibilities for South Korea to develop nuclear weapons. Eventually, in 1991, Roh Tae-woo made a "declaration of denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula" under pressure from the United States. For the United States, the risk of losing control in strategic positions defending North Korea, China and Russia is greater than that of the North Korean nuclear issue. Japan's invasion of South Korea is a war that brings only losses to the United States and Japan. In other words, the U.S. and Japan will lose money without such a war. Finally, from North Korea's point of view, North Korea's nuclear weapons, to be exact, were needed for the justification for Japan to develop the power to invade South Korea. In fact, North Korea's nuclear weapons contributed decisively to Japan's rearmament and constitutional amendments (future-type but almost certain), and China and Russia provided an unstoppable justification for Japan's armament. North Korea risked its life as a means of self-defense to maintain its "state." Just because South Korea is invaded by Japan, North Korea cannot try to use its nuclear power or participate in the war. The most important reason is that North Korea knows that the South-North alliance cannot beat Japan (Japan with more power than it is now), and that action undermines the cause of its own nuclear possession as a means of self-defense. Above all, North Korea has no ability to carry out war. In other words, one's own nose is three. When most Koreans thought there would be no Japanese invasion, Yi Sun-shin accepted it as a fait accompli, and was so afraid of Japan that he jumped up with a cold sweat while sleeping. Crucially, Yi Sun-shin was afraid of Japan, so he was able to strengthen the navy by enduring so much opposition and pain. Because I was afraid of Japan, I was able to endure any pain that I had to prepare for the Japanese invasion. As can be seen from Yi Sun-shin's case, in order to win, at least not to lose, you must first fear the enemy in the preparatory stage. Do we have a "fear of Japan"? Is "feeling afraid of Japan" "pro-Japanese, anti-ethnic"? True courage is a flower that overcomes the fear of death and blooms.