EigoPass Member Site

A. After September 11th, the U.S. retaliated against the Taliban and ultimately al-Queda, the terrorist network headed by Osama Bin Laden for the attacks on the World Trade Center. Then president, George Bush authorized the capture and "interrogation" of operatives believed linked to terrorist networks.

Over a period of years, the CIA gained invaluable information through live al Queda prisoners that Bin Laden had a few close aides whom still remained loyal to him and served as his trusted messenger. The CIA monitored and tracked the movements of these "aides" where they later determined to a probability of about 50% – 80% where Bin Laden most likely was hiding out.

【日本語訳】: ９月１１日以降、米国はタリバン、そして後にはオサマ・ビン・ラディン氏の率いるテロリストネットワークであるアルカイダに、ワールド・トレード・センターに対する攻撃の報復を遂行した。当時のジョージ・ブッシュ大統領はテロリスト・ネットワークに関連すると思われるスパイの捕獲及び取調べを認可した。

数年にわたり、CIAは生存するアルカイダの捕虜から、ビン・ラディン氏には信頼できるメッセンジャーとして活動する数名の付添いがいるという貴重な情報を得ることができた。CIAはこれらの「付き添い」をモニターおよび追跡し、ビン・ラディン氏が隠れているであろう場所を５０－８０％の確立で断定した。

A. The U.S. entered into an alliance with Pakistan because the belief was that Osama Bin Laden was seeking refuge in the mountains near the Afganistan/Pakistan borders. However, in this mission, President Obama had to decide whether or not to inform the Pakistani government prior to the mission. (U.S. intelligence officers felt that either the Pakistani government or "moles" inside the government were tipping off Bin Laden which may have compromised the mission.)

By giving the "green light" for the mission, President Obama was taking a huge gamble! Let’s consider what would have happened if Osama Bin Laden were not there? How many civilian casualties would there be? This type of "invasion" within the borders of a sovereign country would most likely be construed as an "act of war" that the U.S would have had to explain.

It worked out well for the U.S. in that Bin Laden was present in the compound and that forces the Pakistan government to be on the defensive in explaining why and how Bin Laden eluded them from right under their noses for so long.

【日本語訳】: オサマ・ビン・ラディン氏はアフガン・パキスタンの国境の山脈に非難していると信じられていたことから、アメリカはパキスタンと同盟を結んだ。だが、この任務においてオバマ大統領はその前にパキスタン政府に報告をするかどうかを決めなければならなかった。（アメリカの情報将校は、パキスタン政府または政府内の「スパイ」がビン・ラディンに情報を与えているのではないかと思っていた。）

この任務を「遂行するように命ずる」ことはオバマ大統領にとって大きな賭けであった。オサマ・ビン・ラディン氏がそこにいなかった場合を考えてみよう。どれくらいの市民が犠牲者となったであろう。このような主権国の国境内における「侵略」はアメリカにとって説明し辛い「戦争行為」として捉えられたであろう。

ビン・ラディン氏が境内にいたことはアメリカにとって良いことであり、このことによりパキスタン政府はなぜ、どのようにビン・ラディン氏は近くから逃れることができたか説明しなければならない状況におかれた。

Hi Everyone and welcome to a new month and hope everyone had a great Golden Week.

In my blog this month, I am going to break from my usual writing topic and dig deeper into societal issues. I would like to take this opportunity to share my views on social topics that I have learned about with students and how the views of a foreigner may be different from (or the same as) Japanese opinion.

A current topic brought up during my lessons recently was sort of related to "Children’s Day" which is celebrated in Japan every year on May 5th, if memory serves me correctly 🙂 My students mentioned this day was set aside to celebrate "children" and to reflect on their importance for our nation.

This led me to ponder if children were so important then why are we having less and less children? Of course, I do understand the more industrialized and modern a country becomes, people in that country will naturally have less children. I guess it is just how the world works as lifestyles will inevitably change.

However, the dwindling population in Japan and especially how the "traditional" family values have changed over the years gives me cause for concern. My preconceived idea before coming to Japan was that it was customary for children to live with their parents even after marriage. Whether it be to save money to later be able to afford their own home or to stay close to their family to take care of their parents in their golden years, there seemed to have been a sense of family "unity".

Is this disappearing or do younger generations feel less "dependant" on their family? The better question to ask might be if younger generations prioritize their own life enjoyment or pursuit of happiness over their feeling of "obligation" to take care of their parents. As people no longer feel they can expect children to take care of them in old age, has this changed their desire to not "need" children?

What is the cause for people having less and less children? This is what I would like to address.

TOPIC 1: Why is the birthrate so low in Japan?

When I asked my students about this topic, most of them discuss various causes such as how expensive it is to pay for the upbringing of children. These expenses can range from what they have to pay to send their children to "cram schools" (jukus) or other things associated with childcare. Some also mention how difficult it is to get their children into daycare centers which makes it hard for them to go to work if they choose to continue their career. A few of them go a step further and point out differing lifestyles of the new generation vs the old generation.

Their reasoning is that the "younger" generation is prioritizing more on the enjoyment of life rather than building a family at an early age.

Though I do understand the above points are all valid ones, I feel the issue is deeper. I would like to fully address my views in my next blog… to be continued…

If you would like to express your views on why the birthrate is so low in Japan, please comment below with your opinion. I would love to hear your thoughts!