Murgi wrote:

> > People who place such a concern about saving or not spending tax money as
> if a single chartered plane or a
> > week of late night meetings mattered, should encourage the premature
> deaths of those 65 or over or demand
> > people take care of their own elderly relatives at home out of pocket
> including medical expenses, or demand
> > that every prefecture in Japan including Osaka, not depend on Tokyo for
> financial support. Cutting social
> > security and prefectural assistance to zero would be almost exactly what
> is required for Japanese revenues
> > to equal expenditures without having to depend on public debt for 38% of
> the total.
>
> Of course, "hostage taking" can be quite different, and I am sure that the
> government would spent huge amounts to resolve the problem...

There is no reason that if *these* people had not been taken hostage, any other
Japanese nationals in the region for "legitimate" purposes would not be taken
hostage instead, creating the same kind of situation, including relatives or
protesters demanding the government immediately accede to hostage takers'
demands. It's not like it's never happened to Japanese before.

> if
> fundamentalist muslims highjack a jumbo jet with 500 Japanese on board and
> threaten to blow themselves and the hostages up if their demands aren't met.
> In this case you could also see the SDF out of Iraq within a few days!

No, we've had 500 Japanese taken hostage before, probably under the assumption
that the Japanese government would quickly cave. The government sat on the
sidelines for months, till Peruvian President and recently recognized non
language speaking Japanese citizen Fujimori demonstrated the will to decisively
resolve the situation in a manner that no other publicized proposal would have
accomplished.

I believe the Japanese government is quite weak willed. They would likely give
in, but hardly within a three day or one week deadline, since they need to have
long meetings and negotiations even to decide to do absolutely nothing. Look at
how the Japanese government has ignored the North Korean abduction issue, or
the issue of thousands of people from Japan not able to leave North Korea since
the postwar period, for about 25 and 50 years, respectively.

> If the government refuses, the conservative parties are dead meat afterward.

I am glad that I don't know any of the people involved, but Koizumi
demonstrated the proper attitude, as did Fujimori. Japanese should not allow
themselves to be seen as easy marks for the world's criminals and extremists if
they do not want such scenes to repeat themselves. The LDP or their coalition
has lost power temporarily just once in the postwar period, and are quite
comfortable in the public sentiment that despite their faults, the ruling
parties are the only "leaders" they have ever known.

> The 3 hostages are small in numbers, and they have virtually "begged" to get
> into such a situation.
> The incurred loss of tax payers money is probably insignificant compared to
> squandered money on unused and stopped highway constructions, but it is a
> principle not to waste a single yen on irresponsible people.

Exactly the point of my last point.

Now tell us where to draw the line on "irresponsible" people. Are cancer
patients who smoked or had unhealthy diets or lifestyle (myriad causes of
cancer) for decades against common sense or explicit advice of medical
professionals irresponsible? Are people who get heart or circulatory problems
due to their own stress, smoking or diet irresponsible? Are people who develop
serious and costly conditions, simply because they did not take care of
themselves properly or get extensive twice yearly checkups at their own expense
(even terminal cancer can develop otherwise unseen in a literal handful of
months, as I have seen) irresponsible? Are elderly who are not poor or were not
undereducated or unemployed, but simply did not save or invest properly over
the decades for their retirement (who knows they will not also live to 120
years old, beyond many descendants who could have helped care for them),
irresponsible? Should today's young people who spend literally all their money
or even go into crippling, unrecoverable debt on such as volatile fashion
trends or frivolous travel or study abroad be criticized and penalized when
they get older and are not able to properly care for themselves or their
families, or be denied such as welfare, unemployment, student grants, or social
security?

Should police abroad waste their time, and foreigners waste "their" tax money,
on the multitudes of Japanese travelers who are victimized by local criminals
who rightly believe that they are in physical possession of large amounts of
cash or valuables and in a poor position to return for trial in the case
suspects are found? Should Japanese police waste their time and taxpayers waste
"their" money on women who get assaulted or raped getting drunk or going on
dates with literal strangers, or men they do not know well, or for getting into
men's cars downtown? How about for "amejo" and other groupies of gaijin who are
unavoidably mistreated? Should police and people waste their time and money
helping people who hand over millions of yen without question to strangers on
the telephone who claim to be relatives of people in trouble?

Should taxpayer money be used to house, clothe, even educate and protect
admitted criminals in increasing numbers?

Where do we draw the line on irresponsible people or organizations who do not
deserve aid?

> Having slapped the entire costs of the rescue mission upon them would
> prevent them from going back to Iraq again.

Slapping a couple million on them and being soundly denounced throughout the
archipelago, as well as being publicly criticized by the same relatives who
also pleaded for their rescue, would prove enough for most. Despite saying they
want to go back, the doctor says they are all currently suffering from mental
distress.

> I hope that the Japanese government decrees that any further hostages will
> have to be on their own without government interference.

That's akin to what I suggested. But if the government for its OWN political
reasons decides to make some efforts or spend a lot of money on their OWN,
against public will, that is not the fault of the hostages.

It's not the fault of a former career housewife who did not pay any income tax
or into the national pension system, that she might live off public funds for
40 or 50 years till well past 100, either, part of the over 20 TRILLION yen
paid out yearly to senior citizens who are likely perfectly able to pay their
own way or rely on relatives for care till their deaths, as they are
controlling over 750 TRILLION yen of their own assets, over HALF of the 1.4
QUADRILLION yen of all individual assets in the entire country.

> Warnings like the 13 that were issued before should be sufficient. Stupidity
> or willingly risking dangerous stunts can lead to premature death. Everybody
> can determine his/her fate whenever they think it's OK.

Does stupidity include any known hazardous activity publicly, explicitly, and
repeatedly discouraged, such as smoking, or eating meat, salty, oily, processed
or likely tainted food such as tuna; having sex with other than a lawful spouse
or regular partner without a condom or under the influence of alcohol, or
living in an urbanized area with known health and crime risks, breathing the
air? Does stupidity include the 70% of people I have read of in one Tokyo based
survey who do NOT lock their doors and windows when they go out, despite
keeping large amounts of cash and other valuables in readily accessible areas
such as bedroom wardrobes or Buddhist altars, who may later be victimized by
burglars, rapists or murderers in the tens or hundreds of thousands each year,
requiring legal or medical aid?

Why draw the line at some Japanese with allegedly anti government views?

--
If Gibson decides to make his next film about Rasputin or that Utah hiker who
had to cut off his arm after it got trapped under a boulder, it might be time
for him to seek professional help.

- Jon Niccum, Entertainment Editor

http://www.mercycorps.org/
http://www.mercycorps.org/items/1398/
http://www.mercycorps.org/mercykits.php

Mercy Corps' goal in Iraq is to work with conflict-affected communities to meet
their urgent needs while also providing a firm foundation for the future
development of economic opportunities and civil society.

Efficiency
Over 92% of our resources go directly to humanitarian programs.

Excellence
Worth Magazine named Mercy Corps one of America's best charities.

High-Value
Every dollar you give helps us secure $12.71 in donated food and other
supplies.