Talk:Korea under Japanese rule

American complicity in the Japanese annexation of Korea

I find it unfortunate that this article makes no mention of: the secret Taft-Katsura agreement that created an Anglo-Japanese-American alliance; Teddy Roosevelt’s desire for Japan to play the American role in an Asian Monroe Doctrine; that when Korean Emperor Gojong sent a secret message via Homer Hulbert pleading for America to live up to the “good-offices” clause of the U.S.-Korea treaty of 1882 and stay the tightening grip of Japan in 1905, Teddy chose not to come to their assistance, demanding repeatedly that the Korean emperor go through official channels when official channels were controlled by the Japanese…. In short, there are many bits that point to Japan learning from American western expansionism and Teddy Roosevelt instigating and coaching the Japanese in this process as a check on Russian expansion from the north. We must remember Japan was closed to all “white devil” outsiders except Dutch merchants until July 8, 1853 when the U.S. Navy under Perry steamed into Tokyo Bay unannounced with 50 ships. Perry threatened violence and forced the defenseless Japanese to accept an “open door policy” with the Americans. This is the history that we Americans have so conveniently forgotten when we consider the events leading up to Pearl Harbor. This is the history that is not represented in this article because it is written in English; IOW, of course contributions from Japanese contributors are of value (see section above)!Take a look at the date of my signature. I guess it is all too appropriate I would be thinking about these things on the eve of the 10th anniversary of 9/11. History does repeat itself. Zuvaruvi (talk) 16:11, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Come back with peer-reviewed Reliable Sources. Otherwise a reminder that Wiki is not a Forum and Wiki is not a Soapbox !! HammerFilmFan (talk) 14:51, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

So much allies the United States of America and the Empire of Japan were, the latter got nuked by the former, causing the latter to cease existing. I'm going to go with what HammerFilmFan said. In the meantime, tl;dr. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 10:54, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Seikanron

Seikanron (征韓論) is not a debate to invade Korea. Sei (征) means "punitive expedition" (征伐[1]) and kan (韓) means Korea. See these Google book hits.[2] ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 09:40, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Source quality

Source quality is shockingly poor. Statements are sourced to unpeer reviewed sections of private webpages. Genocide is called based on an unpublished and non-reviewed workshop. Fifelfoo (talk) 07:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Chinese Commanderies

Chinese commanderies DID exist in Pyongyang and throughout the entirety of northwestern Korea. No serious historian doubts this. It was never "Japanese propaganda". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.63.125 (talk) 11:00, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Agreed; see Lelang Commandery. Since the source is in Korean, somebody who can read that language should translate what it says: otherwise, it should be removed because it is contradicted by more reliable English-language sources. This article also claims "Korean history had never rule over Manchuria" as Japanese propaganda, which is extremely ironic, because Japan's promotion of the name "Manchuria" for northeast China, and its claiming "Manchuria" as some sort of Korean-Japanese-Altaic urheimat did more to legitimize Japanese rule over Korea than anything else. Overall, this article is poorly sourced, and the many references to "Doosan Encyclopedia" and "Korea Times" should be scrapped in favor of Western academic sources. Shrigley (talk) 23:57, 12 February 2012 (UTC)