1092329
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
@SlurpNoodle
Yeah, I have to concede there are some areas where embassies do not count as foreign territory ( say, like taxation of staff revenue or the obvious waiving of the need for passports to enter in one for most proposes ), but those are more in line of a special rights zone of the country represented than of simply a building that by acident is run by a diplomatic staff of other country. And , anyway, the point still stands: no ambassador can waive the embassy they are in without a plenipotenciary letter of their government or by direct order from the same. Just see how lenghty was the US embassy move in Israel even the current US President so adamant to make it fast and how the respective governments had to sit down and discuss the move ( and not just the ambassador purchasing or renting a building in Jerusalem and selling the instalations in Telaviv to the highest bidder ).
Again, all of this is in the context of atleast pretending to keep with international law, like our author was adamant to tell us repeatedly when of the "defense of Japanese interests" they did in a country no Japanese were in besides the JSDF soldiers
A country can easily invent any excuse they want to seize embassies and consulates of other country ( like the US did to China and Venezuela not long ago ), but there you aren't exactly fooling anyone about following international law, are you?
Yeah, I have to concede there are some areas where embassies do not count as foreign territory ( say, like taxation of staff revenue or the obvious waiving of the need for passports to enter in one for most proposes ), but those are more in line of a special rights zone of the country represented than of simply a building that by acident is run by a diplomatic staff of other country. And , anyway, the point still stands: no ambassador can waive the embassy they are in without a plenipotenciary letter of their government or by direct order from the same. Just see how lenghty was the US embassy move in Israel even the current US President so adamant to make it fast and how the respective governments had to sit down and discuss the move ( and not just the ambassador purchasing or renting a building in Jerusalem and selling the instalations in Telaviv to the highest bidder ).
Again, all of this is in the context of atleast pretending to keep with international law, like our author was adamant to tell us repeatedly when of the "defense of Japanese interests" they did in a country no Japanese were in besides the JSDF soldiers
A country can easily invent any excuse they want to seize embassies and consulates of other country ( like the US did to China and Venezuela not long ago ), but there you aren't exactly fooling anyone about following international law, are you? - Joined
- Jun 8, 2019
- Messages
- 136
@rrolo1
True, but they still operated within the law, and that's the important thing. It's not that hard to make the laws work for you or find ways around them.
Again, I think you are confusing internal laws for "international laws". A law Japan makes for its own limitations and justifications on military adventurism is not "international law". That's their own internal laws.
About closing embassies however, if your funds dry up and you lose contact with the mother nation, you have to make decisions. Rent, utilities and salaries are not going to pay themselves after all. It's not a situation that's happened in the real world AFAIK, but it's a bit of a doomsday contingency that I think most embassies might want to have plans for. It's fine to say "the embassador doesn't have plenipotentiary powers" but that assumes the embassy still has contact with the mother nation.
Again, all of this is in the context of atleast pretending to keep with international law, like our author was adamant to tell us repeatedly when of the "defense of Japanese interests" they did in a country no Japanese were in besides the JSDF soldiers
True, but they still operated within the law, and that's the important thing. It's not that hard to make the laws work for you or find ways around them.
Again, I think you are confusing internal laws for "international laws". A law Japan makes for its own limitations and justifications on military adventurism is not "international law". That's their own internal laws.
About closing embassies however, if your funds dry up and you lose contact with the mother nation, you have to make decisions. Rent, utilities and salaries are not going to pay themselves after all. It's not a situation that's happened in the real world AFAIK, but it's a bit of a doomsday contingency that I think most embassies might want to have plans for. It's fine to say "the embassador doesn't have plenipotentiary powers" but that assumes the embassy still has contact with the mother nation.
@SlurpNoodle
Well, that would be true for most countries, but for Japan is a tad diferent, due to the aftermath of WW II. It is literally written in their constitution they can't have a offensive army and that out of borders actions must be expressely condoned by the UN ( for a example, JSDF was stationed in Afghanistan post 9/11 under the UN flag , the first time since WW II that Japanese military crossed borders in arms ). Sure, like a certain US president apparently said, a Constitution is just a piece of paper, but it would still need to be changed for something like this and , from what I get from far away, even the international deployment of JSDF on Afganistan I mentioned above was not consensual in the japanese society. Hell, even GATE had issues with the public opinion regarding showing the JSDF in offensive actions ( while TBH, the situation in GATE would be perfectly legal since JSDF never crossed a border ... ), so I have my serious doubts the Japanese public opinion would be extremely receptive to make such a drastic change in their base laws even in a scenario like this. ANd , given how risk -averse Japanese politicians tend to be, I do not see anyone with enough guts to try to force that change anyway ...
That is why I said that, in a situation like this , the most likely would be Japan, to keep the pretenses, continue financing the embassies just give a veneer of legitimacy on whatever Japan wants to do ... maybe even convene a mini-UN for that. It would definitely make less waves internally ( they could simply paint whatever intervention they wanted as a UN peacekeeping mission ) and would allow everyone to save face. But that is not Nippon Banzai, isn't it?
Well, that would be true for most countries, but for Japan is a tad diferent, due to the aftermath of WW II. It is literally written in their constitution they can't have a offensive army and that out of borders actions must be expressely condoned by the UN ( for a example, JSDF was stationed in Afghanistan post 9/11 under the UN flag , the first time since WW II that Japanese military crossed borders in arms ). Sure, like a certain US president apparently said, a Constitution is just a piece of paper, but it would still need to be changed for something like this and , from what I get from far away, even the international deployment of JSDF on Afganistan I mentioned above was not consensual in the japanese society. Hell, even GATE had issues with the public opinion regarding showing the JSDF in offensive actions ( while TBH, the situation in GATE would be perfectly legal since JSDF never crossed a border ... ), so I have my serious doubts the Japanese public opinion would be extremely receptive to make such a drastic change in their base laws even in a scenario like this. ANd , given how risk -averse Japanese politicians tend to be, I do not see anyone with enough guts to try to force that change anyway ...
That is why I said that, in a situation like this , the most likely would be Japan, to keep the pretenses, continue financing the embassies just give a veneer of legitimacy on whatever Japan wants to do ... maybe even convene a mini-UN for that. It would definitely make less waves internally ( they could simply paint whatever intervention they wanted as a UN peacekeeping mission ) and would allow everyone to save face. But that is not Nippon Banzai, isn't it?
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2019
- Messages
- 581
Ah yes finally some action!
Hopefully those japanese frigates will shoot down the meanie wyvers that most likely belong to the musket boyz of Parpaldia?
Anyway this chapter was amazing. Can't wait to read more!
Hopefully those japanese frigates will shoot down the meanie wyvers that most likely belong to the musket boyz of Parpaldia?
Anyway this chapter was amazing. Can't wait to read more!
After a while most ambassadors will decide to give up the embassies because they'll run out of money. Many might use whatever that's left of the embassy money and assets to pay off themselves and laid off staff. Then they can go look for new jobs or something.
If the situation looks fairly permanent, the ambassadors can do whatever they think necessary first and "await disciplinary action" that may take a while to arrive.
Even if some embassies don't have to pay rent (like the British one) if they still keep operating they still would have other expenses - staff salaries, utilities which are likely to be a lot higher than their income.
If the situation looks fairly permanent, the ambassadors can do whatever they think necessary first and "await disciplinary action" that may take a while to arrive.
Even if some embassies don't have to pay rent (like the British one) if they still keep operating they still would have other expenses - staff salaries, utilities which are likely to be a lot higher than their income.
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2018
- Messages
- 137
Parpaldia just sign their death warrant
Member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2018
- Messages
- 49
@rrolo1
The thing is that Japan is no longer on Earth and therefore the constitutional limits no longer apply. They were put in place by the United States after WW2 in order to keep Japan from attacking again. However...
The thing is that Japan is no longer on Earth and therefore the constitutional limits no longer apply. They were put in place by the United States after WW2 in order to keep Japan from attacking again. However...
After the war with the Parpaldian Empire, Japan realizes they must begin building up their offensive capabilities. There are plans for carriers, nuclear subs, stealth jets and even nuclear weapons.
@Animeaddiction
Sure, you can argue that ... but you can also argue the exact oposite, that the Constitution is the law of the land and can't be changed willy nilly ( if the fundamental law of the land can be disregarded just because #issues , it is not much of a fundamental law, isn't it? Also, if the Constitution can be disregarded, the rest of the laws, that base themselves on it, are also not that solid ... ) ... in fact in basically all countries , changing the Constitution is a deliberately hard process exactly to ensure most people of the country are ok ( or atleast don't opose ) with that change.
In the end, like it was said before, it is a internal Japanese problem, for sure. But they would need to change their constitution, and for that they would need to agree not only that it needed a change, but there would be needed an agreeement in what would need to be changed and how . It is definitely not a fast process and it definitely does not follow that even being isekai'ed is enough of a reason to ignore a part of the Constitution ... ( just a thought experience : the Human rights were put in the Japanese constitution by the US in the same way the non-offensive clause ( remember, it is the United Nations ( aka Allies ) Declaration of Human Rights, after all ). Being isekai'ed means there are no guaranteed human rights in this Japan anymore, just because it was the USA that have put them there? )
On the spoiler ... well, being this a Nippon Banzai series, that does not surprise me. Given the context , it is not that dificult to believe that eventually the JSDF would need a retooling ...
Sure, you can argue that ... but you can also argue the exact oposite, that the Constitution is the law of the land and can't be changed willy nilly ( if the fundamental law of the land can be disregarded just because #issues , it is not much of a fundamental law, isn't it? Also, if the Constitution can be disregarded, the rest of the laws, that base themselves on it, are also not that solid ... ) ... in fact in basically all countries , changing the Constitution is a deliberately hard process exactly to ensure most people of the country are ok ( or atleast don't opose ) with that change.
In the end, like it was said before, it is a internal Japanese problem, for sure. But they would need to change their constitution, and for that they would need to agree not only that it needed a change, but there would be needed an agreeement in what would need to be changed and how . It is definitely not a fast process and it definitely does not follow that even being isekai'ed is enough of a reason to ignore a part of the Constitution ... ( just a thought experience : the Human rights were put in the Japanese constitution by the US in the same way the non-offensive clause ( remember, it is the United Nations ( aka Allies ) Declaration of Human Rights, after all ). Being isekai'ed means there are no guaranteed human rights in this Japan anymore, just because it was the USA that have put them there? )
On the spoiler ... well, being this a Nippon Banzai series, that does not surprise me. Given the context , it is not that dificult to believe that eventually the JSDF would need a retooling ...
Group Leader
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2020
- Messages
- 224
Hey, just figured I'd bring this up, but that last panel on page 8 (not counting credit page) may have a case of weird phrasing. Instead of "timeline" I would say that the word "lifetime" would make more sense. Not saying to change it, it's just what I would have done as a native English speaker.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2018
- Messages
- 2,252
The most important question should be if Japan is already producing uncensored demi-human JAVs.
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2020
- Messages
- 82
HMMMMMMM, i think i knew the reason that japan is transported, You want to know what it is? This guy
@Skylarz1801 definitely. And with the monsters' knowledge of the "iron dragon" and the ships, it's very probable that another modern day country also got "summoned". My theory is that they are actually not summoned but copied into the new world.
Similar threads
