Toyota Kawasaki Suzuki! (Translated: Let's go beat Japan!)

Day 748, 14:31 • Published in USA USA • by Cody Franklin

Good afternoon, eRepublikans. I've been doing some thinking, and I'd like to share my contemplations with you.

As you may have noticed, the United States' recent military campaign (formally known as Operation Wakka Wakka) has a large number of critics, many of whom are skeptical of the U.S.'s intentions in going to war with Japan; admittedly, I was, to an extent, one of those people. I questions our nation's motives, and I heaped harsh criticisms on our government for sidestepping its commitment to take down the United Kingdom; however, spoon-feeding you my personal thoughts is hardly any way to promote unbiased journalism, so I went to do some more research into the nature of this military campaign in order to hear the other side of the story.

While perhaps not the most impartial source, I found it necessary to hear things straight from the horse's mouth, as the saying goes: I took a look at one of the people responsible for our current situation - I read a recent article posted by e😜resident Gaius Julius.

One point that I brought up in a previous article was that, from an outside perspective, this attack on Japan seemed a bit unprovoked, as if it were a war of conquest on our part, as opposed to one of liberation. On this point, Julius remarks that Japan is hardly a "righteous" nation, as it is content to sit idly by while PHOENIX's agenda, filled with conquest and atrocities, is being pushed forward. As an often-used quote reads, "Inaction in the face of injustice equals guilt". I would be the first to admit that I was perhaps mistaken in assuming that our proactive attack on Japan was motivated by economic gain and a lust for territory. One can certainly not claim that Jewitt changed the agenda on a whim, after all; Julius puts it best, arguing that "Jewitt was just the poor sap who had to be President when the button needed to be pushed."

Still, there is one point that hasn't been answered. What kind of long-term backlash can be expected from such a conflict? I can understand our proactive, liberty-oriented mindset, but I still believe it to be possible that our current actions will warrant some kind of admonishment from the international community, if not some kind of retaliatory response. Just as Admiral Yamamoto recognized the awakening of a sleeping giant, is it not possible that we are facing the same crisis? While American military superiority isn't often disputed, multilateral retaliation is hardly something to be scoffed at. Our goal may be small in scope, but throwing a small rock in pond can create large waves. It's still too soon to tell, I'll admit, but caution seems to be a necessity even within the bounds of military action, especially the unilateral variety being practiced by the United States in its conflict with Japan and its allies.

Beyond educated guesswork, it's impossible to predict the repercussions of military actions. With things in this world working the way they do, we must remember to invoke reason before passion, and perspicuity before wrath. For now, the only advice that I can give you is this, America: fight smarter, not harder - because, remember: in spite of our American bias and overflowing patriotism, truth takes no sides.