Somebody did. Ooooo, that's bad. That's "paint your nails black and draw pentagrams on your math notebook" bad. Our old friend has visited us before, most recently with his opinion piece on the territorial dispute between Japan and Korea, with the basic thesis of "Dokdo is ours because Japan is bad," in which he said the current crisis ought to have the same urgency for Americans as the rise of Hitler. In another article on the topic (see a trend?):
Fairness should be derived from the political history of the land and the sea, and historic international relations between countries. The Sea of Japan and the East Sea are the two legitimate names of the waters between Japan and Korea. The Sea of Japan, eliminating the East Sea, has been the prevailing name since Japan emerged as a powerful military nation around the turn of the 20th century and colonized Korea in 1910.
This is part of the sad and unfortunate political history of Japan and Korea. Modern mapmakers should recognize the lost name of the Korean people and their sea under Japanese rule and should print the two names of the sea for the purpose of restoring the dignity of the once colonized nation. The two names in this case reflect the existence of the two nations, and remind people that their history is one of unequal relations. One name over the sea between Japan and Korea is not just and fair.
*sigh* Another writer mistakenly believing that just because the name in Korean is "East Sea" that it thus has legitimacy as the English name. Does no one see how ridiculous that line of reasoning is? Nobody's trying to change the name in Korean from 동해 to 일본해, they're just objecting to forcing the name change in English.
Earlier he wrote that the US attempts to sell its beef to South Korea "is a crime against humanity," since it was widely believed at the time that Americans were trying to unload diseased beef on Koreans.