I've never heard such bulls--- in my life, but then, talk to any survivor of Japanese hellships, or the Comfort Women, or extremely brutally treated POWs, or... You are talking about a country that was a feudal state run by Samurai until 1868. Yes. The "No War" clause was forced upon them by the surrender document written up by General MacArthur.
If you still think that the Japanese were glorious peaceniks, ask anyone who lived through the Rape of Nanking (modern spelling Nanjing) and see just how peaceful the Japanese were.
Yaakov, just because you make things up doesn't mean it's true. I really expected more from you, Yaakov. Regardless, you're missing the point. There were conditions, but that's not one of them. Let's say you are correct (you're not, but whatever), the treaty is practically irrelevant now and the Japanese are allowed to wage war and have an army... yet they still don't. And you still think they're a warmongering country? Get a grip with reality, you brain-washed American psycho. The history books are generous to you in America, huh?
What really prompted the clause in their constitution outlawing War as a means of resolving conflicts and expansion was that America, despite the fact that Japan was trying to surrender, still dropped a-bombs on Japan and killed countless people. It was a terrible tragedy. Japan has seen the horrors of war, and wishes no longer to be a part of it.
Now all we need is someone to a-bomb several American cities, and then hopefully they'll learn something and change their warmongering ways. Great tragedy and loss creates change, and America will continue to wage wars of expansion and greed until they've suffered a terrible tragedy because of their actions (like Japan)... hopefully something like that happens soon. I can think of several good targets.
Have you even read this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Instrument_of_SurrenderPlease. Please. Please. Do not make uninformed posts. It's tedious and boring. I expected much more from you, Jew.
The source of the pacifist clause is disputed. According to the Allied Supreme Commander Douglas MacArthur, the provision was suggested by Prime Minister Kijūrō Shidehara, who "wanted it to prohibit any military establishment for Japan—any military establishment whatsoever." Shidehara's perspective was that retention of arms would be "meaningless" for the Japanese in the postwar era, because any substandard postwar military would no longer gain the respect of the people, and would actually cause people to obsess with the subject of rearming Japan
It has nothing to do with surrender conditions, Yaakov. Do some damn research the next time you post. Every time you respond to me it's pure bollocks. The Japanese came up with this clause, not the Americans. Believe me, America wants war because it's profitable. Japan couldn't care less because they are above it, and they do extremely well because of it. Consider this a lesson to you, Yaakov. And a warning.
Poll