Dynaverse.net
Off Topic => Ten Forward => Topic started by: Jack Morris on October 28, 2005, 12:59:27 pm
-
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051028/wl_nm/japan_constitution_dc
It's about frigging time! We need them, they have really been our only true ally over there for the past 60 years.
-
China is about to start gettin' real antsy, boys.
Can you imagine what they are gonna start saying when Japan actually starts on a for-real carrier? Or maybe a class of SSN's or SSGN's?
-
Good, they'll have to start diverting some of their booming GDP over to defense costs! ;)
-
If you ask me, China doesn't need to be overcautious and hostile, China needs a makeover!
I'm not sure whether it's good news or not, Japan trying to have a full military force again... Perhaps so, at least for Japan and their allies (being us as well), but I just hope North Korea and/or China doesn't do anything stupid and risk war.
-
http://news.yahoo.com/photo/051028/481/xin10110281235;_ylt=AjQdxybFg6M9OUEi3pV1xcD9xg8F
http://news.yahoo.com/s/krwashbureau/20051028/ts_krwashbureau/_nkorea_fakedollars;_ylt=AiCRW78nMxMof_3Gloy_xiQBxg8F;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA--
N.K. printing and laundering them through Chinese banks, how nice. I'd be smiling too! ;D
-
CJ and Jack:
This is a strategic boon FOR THE MOMENT, and no less than what Nipon disserves after 60+years of crawling, but there is something that I want to remind you of.
JAPAN IS NEVER ON ANY SIDE BUT HER OWN.
Even during WWII, had the Axis lost, Japan would have moved on Russia and started a war with Hitler(which the would have lost, of course... but never mind that).
WE were Japan's largeszt trading partner in 1941. WE are one of Jaan's largest trading partners right now. And we are still gaijin, we are still the killers of 400,000 women and children and old men, and we are still the largest threat to the Japanese economy.
I'm glad that Japan is ready to step back out onto the world satge... but I have no illusiuons about what that means.
There is about to be a new superpower in the world, boys... the new Japanese Empire- made up of the Islands that they have won through countless business wars and protected by a navy the likes of which the Eastern world hasn't seen since 1941.
-
And we are still gaijin, we are still the killers of 400,000 women and children and old men, and we are still the largest threat to the Japanese economy.
Maybe it's just me and my big damned mouth speaking (and if I misinterpret and/or insult I apologize in advance), but by that logic, we--the evolved descendants of those people--are also rascists and religious and militant extremists, people who murder each other, even children for the most bizarre and most disgusting of reasons. We're also big whiners, hypocrites, and idiots that deserve to die.
If you ask me, I don't believe the said logic, to hate a whole people through the actions of a military in a previous generation is a valid one, or logical at all. If hating at all, one should hate those that did drop those two bombs, and the government that ordered them. And as far as I can tell, barely anyone who did their work in the 1940s are alive today. Trek even made that mistake, the kind of prejudice. I await the day when all that crap of hatred is done and over with, that forgiving and looking forward would be the next objective, even for Japan and us.
Edit: And while I'm happy Japan's going to become independant again, I'd rather not see a whole new area of racism and violence in this world; there's too damn much of that going on already, such as in Indonesia recently (for example) when some "muslims" attacked and killed school girls because of their Christian faith.
-
The enemy of my enemy is my friend. I choose Japan over China any day of the week. If Japan is such a threat, why are they SHARING their hybrid tech and other techs with us? Japan is too heavily invested in the U.S. to ever to be a threat, IMO.
-
The enemy of my enemy is my friend. I choose Japan over China any day of the week. If Japan is such a threat, why are they SHARING their hybrid tech and other techs with us? Japan is too heavily invested in the U.S. to ever to be a threat, IMO.
I'll agree with that, I feel that's more accurate than thinking Japan's going to be an enemy again (as I interpreted J. Carney's post as being, again no offense if I misinterpret or insulted, Carney.). Or maybe that's my wishful thinking, which I'll gladly take anytime.
-
And we are still gaijin, we are still the killers of 400,000 women and children and old men, and we are still the largest threat to the Japanese economy.
Maybe it's just me and my big damned mouth speaking (and if I misinterpret and/or insult I apologize in advance), but by that logic, we--the evolved descendants of those people--are also rascists and religious and militant extremists, people who murder each other, even children for the most bizarre and most disgusting of reasons. We're also big whiners, hypocrites, and idiots that deserve to die.
I'm not saying that ALL the people in Japan hold that opinion... just that some do. Most of those that I've met on campus have a somewhat superior attitude and are quick to point out that we are the only country to ever use atomic bombs on civilians.
Remember, EVERYONE in Japan didn't want to go to war with us in 1941... just a few in the right places. Most of those people in those same 'right places' still hold something of a grudge about the kinds of things that I mentioned. They also view themselves as the modern day samuri, fighting the enemies of their people into submission, albeit on a very different battlefield.
I look for a situation similar to that in Tom Clancy's Debt of Honor to develop in the next 10 years where Japan tries it's luck agianst someone- probably Russia first. They've always wanted the Kuril Islands back.
We'll be a much later target... but there will come a day when the Rising Sun will cast shadows all the way to the West Coast again.
-
You know what...if I were the US...I'd make a move to prevent them from creating an force BUT a defensive force. Why else create a force that isn't defensive except to create an offensive force. At least looking at Japanese history.
Now with Japanese history in mind with what they've done to other nations and each other when they create offensive forces...just exactly why do you think they are creating an offensive force...and seeing how things can shift and change in Asia...do you really want Japan to do away with only building forces for defense?
Personally, I don't think it is such a wise move...
Remember...it wasn't long ago China was an ally of the US...
-
We'll be a much later target... but there will come a day when the Rising Sun will cast shadows all the way to the West Coast again.
I doubt it. If you ask me, I'd say the opinion of a few hatemongering teenagers and old men from Japan wouldn't have much of an effect on a road towards a stronger peace unless said people turn Japan's democracy into communism, and I doubt that'll happen. Call me an optimist on that, I'll just treat it as a compliment and just comment on why some in the world can't appreciate a smile and some peace (though I wouldn't want to be insulting at all as that would come out hypocritical, as if I wasn't capable of that before though). And besides, there're quite a few hatemongering people in any and every country, it's unfortunately unavoidable, even here in the U.S. and--dare I say it--here in the Dnet forums (but I won't point fingers, instead I'll just say for now that I have respect for those visiting the Dnet forums).
I still don't completely know whether it is a good idea or not myself. And if you ask me, if any military in the world is necessary, why not have 'em all defensive? *shrug* Again, call me an extreme optimist, but I await the day we have a real-life equivalent United Earth-esque government and a space program (UESPA)... If you ask me, better than saying we're going to make people mad and then we're all going to fight and die. Keep saying it and it might just come true, therefore I say the opposite; a display of optimism. Might not be how life runs, but how do we know that? So much to learn, we all have... Especially me...
-
Personally, I do not care for the idea of Japan as being capable of front line combat. The very thing I do care about, their deep sense of honor, when mixed in with their attititudes towards gaijin I suspect lay at the roots of the atrocities they committed that occured during ww2. They still have both traits, thus given the potential to use military as a power lever, my worries are that they will do so again.
In contrast though, this does serve as a complication to China. As it stands, there are only three military powers in the region they could not just walk right over. The US, India, and South Korea. the Koreans are bottled up and counter balanced by the North Koreans. India would have a hard time projecting power into the pacific. Thus if China can humble the US military on the world stage, this would leave them free to dominate the pacific, and thus control the resources there. Having a Japan that is not dependant on the US to protect itself could throw a monkey wrench into that.
-
We'll be a much later target... but there will come a day when the Rising Sun will cast shadows all the way to the West Coast again.
I doubt it. If you ask me, I'd say the opinion of a few hatemongering teenagers and old men from Japan wouldn't have much of an effect on a road towards a stronger peace unless said people turn Japan's democracy into communism, and I doubt that'll happen. Call me an optimist on that, I'll just treat it as a compliment and just comment on why some in the world can't appreciate a smile and some peace (though I wouldn't want to be insulting at all as that would come out hypocritical, as if I wasn't capable of that before though). And besides, there're quite a few hatemongering people in any and every country, it's unfortunately unavoidable, even here in the U.S. and--dare I say it--here in the Dnet forums (but I won't point fingers, instead I'll just say for now that I have respect for those visiting the Dnet forums).
I still don't completely know whether it is a good idea or not myself. And if you ask me, if any military in the world is necessary, why not have 'em all defensive? *shrug* Again, call me an extreme optimist, but I await the day we have a real-life equivalent United Earth-esque government and a space program (UESPA)... If you ask me, better than saying we're going to make people mad and then we're all going to fight and die. Keep saying it and it might just come true, therefore I say the opposite; a display of optimism. Might not be how life runs, but how do we know that? So much to learn, we all have... Especially me...
OK, CJ... I can see that our primary argument is political rather than anything to do with Japan actually having a real military- which neither of us is really opposed to. Therefore, I'll cease to address our difference of opinion here, lest this thread get transported to H&S.
I WILL say that Japan, throughout her history- has always been willing to change her stance with other nations on a dime and totally without warning. She also has a penchant for becoming a powerhouse in a VERY short time... remember, from the Tsushima Straits to Pearl Harbor was only 30-some years.
35 years from the naval afterthought of the world to the 3rd most powerful navy on Earth; 35 years from a few sailing junks and a couple of captured and resold Confederate ironclads to the Yamato and the Hyriu.
Combine that penchant for becoming great with the relentless drive and competitive spirit that manifests itself in the Japanese culture, and there is no telling what will happen.
-
Maybe we should just silently let China, South Korea, etc., be a counterweight in Pacific Asia to Japan and just tweak things to keep the simmering pot from boiling over.
The U.S., too, is a Pacific power and if we add our two cents openly, it will definitely rankle some other nationalistic egos. We should diplomatically assume a friendly as possible posture with all these Pacific Asian countries, as they are sure to become, if not already are, rich and powerful.
As long as they stay trading partners, each interdependently invested and interwoven into the others, then it should go a long way towards keeping them from trading shots.
Besides, they all may be of inestimable value in stemming the Muslim threat, especially China, who is slient on it, but does suffer more often than we do, about as much as Russia, I'd venture, from Muslim unrest.
-
Even during WWII, had the Axis lost, Japan would have moved on Russia and started a war with Hitler(which the would have lost, of course... but never mind that).
Not so sure about that last statement. Sea power, and all that. Germany didn't have much, at least not that they could project in a meaningful way into the Pacific.
-
Korea and parts of China were easy pickings for the Japs. Russia however, was not, at least landwise. Japan's navy was toast by the end of the war, so even if Japan had turned on to Russia I doubt they could have supported any worthwhile troop strength without constant naval support. If they could not get Russia, then that means no turning on Germany either.
I might add, and most of us have SH3 with all the historical notesx from the game. The Germans COULD and DID reach Japan in U-boats (As allies), but Japan never could reach Germany.
-
I might add, and most of us have SH3 with all the historical notesx from the game. The Germans COULD and DID reach Japan in U-boats (As allies), but Japan never could reach Germany.
The Germans did send long range U-Boats into the Indian and Pacific oceans, but a few submarines isn't really the kind of power projection you need to fight a navy like Japan had (and assuming an Axis victory in the Pacific, would have still possesed). The Japanese, on the other hand, had plenty of warships to spare, and, assuming that an Axis victory would've involved the possesion of Madagascar (and probably UK possesions in Southern Africa...the UK secured Madagascar from the French under the assumption that the Japanese would try and establish a naval base on the island) too, the Japanese could easily have pushed into the South Atlantic with appreciable firepower.
Actually, the more I think about it, it'd have been very hard for either of the Axis powers to really hurt one another appreciably, unless the front line was, in fact, in Russia. Japan would've gobbled up as much territory as possible if the Soviets had collapsed, and ended up facing the Germans in Eastern Russia. Either way, I don't see Japan or Germany being capable of invading each other's home territory. Germany didn't have the Navy neccesary to invade Japan even if they'd conquered Russia all the way to Vladivostok, and Japan didn't have an armor branch capable of fighting in the types of terrain they'd face German Panzers...their infantry was fine, though...probably the best trained in the world in 1941.
-
Okay, a few things about the Japanese army on mainland Asia:
#1 - Their weapons SUCKED. I mean bigtime blowed. By the end of the war you'd be better off carrying a spear.
#2 - They did fight a brief war with the Soviets and an obscure Russian general named Zhukov kicked their asses so badly that they wouldn't honor their later Axis committments and attack the Soviets from the East. This allowed the Soviets to strip Siberia of trained units. Those units were thrown into a couple of insignificant battles at Stalingrad and Kursk.
#3 - The bulk of the Japanese army, I mean something on the order of 60% of its manpower never left Manchuko. It was there throughout the entire war and could have easily been used to better effect elsewhere. The Soviets spooked the Japanese because they thought they'd repeat the famous defeat of the Russian Czar's fleet on land, and the Soviets were far more lethal.
-
All true, though would that state of affairs have persisted given an Axis victory, or, more to the point, wouldn't Japanese victory, realistically, involved requipping the army with more modern weapons?
Of course deciding such details of a what-if scenario is one of the fun things about it.:)
-
I think the point being that the Axis alliance would have been better served if the Germans had sent submarines full of MG-42's and assault rifles to Japan, rather than plans for rockets and jets.
-
Assault Rifles? By the time the MP-44's were entering service, the war was essentially over.
-
We know that now, because of the bomb. Had we been forced to invade Japan, those would have made a huge difference and not distributing them was a failure on the part of the Axis leadership (one of many).
And from the German perspective, look at the kill ratio of Germans to Russians in 1941 & 1942, when the German army was basically armed with bolt-action Mausers, imagine the damage they would have caused armed with even a decent semi-automatic rifle.
The MG-42 was a fearsome weapon (even today's M-60 is based on its design), but the firepower of a full squad of infantry armed with M1 Garands was too much for either the German or Japanese infantry to cope with. Even when we were outnumbered, we put down more lead (by a significant factor), and that makes all the difference to an infantryman.
-
We know that now, because of the bomb. Had we been forced to invade Japan, those would have made a huge difference and not distributing them was a failure on the part of the Axis leadership (one of many).
By 1944, Germany and Japan were pretty much finished. Up against the almost limitless manpower of the Soviet Union and the production capacity of the United States, sooner or later defeat was, essentially, inevitable. More importantly, the German submarine campaign had pretty much failed by that point, while the US was poised to finally bore in on their own submarine interdiction efforts in the Pacific.
We didn't have to drop the bomb or invade Japan. Starving them out through a total submarine blockade, which by 1945 we'd accomplished, would've eventually defeated them.
Of course, this is all hindsight.
And from the German perspective, look at the kill ratio of Germans to Russians in 1941 & 1942, when the German army was basically armed with bolt-action Mausers, imagine the damage they would have caused armed with even a decent semi-automatic rifle.
Most battlefield casualties in WWII were, if I recall correctly, caused by artillery, not small arms fire. Firepower per infantry squad is certainly an advantage tactically, but I think you're overstating things a little, especially against the Russians.
-
That would make an interesting historical fiction novel.
-
That would make an interesting historical fiction novel.
Yeah, especially if the author didn't flinch from the realities of islands full of millions of starving people, the disease and other such that would certainly result, etc.
In a lot of ways, the bomb was the cleaner option.
-
The bomb was the only way to utterly defeat Japan without having to kill 90% of the men, women, and children on the islands.
-
and for that matter, the world learned, on a comparatively small scale model of bomb what it needed to avoid using again.
-
Yep... God help us if anyone ever figures out how to build something with a nuclear yield and no residual fallout or pollution.
-
Yep... God help us if anyone ever figures out how to build something with a nuclear yield and no residual fallout or pollution.
Would anti-matter leave anything like that?
-
Yep... God help us if anyone ever figures out how to build something with a nuclear yield and no residual fallout or pollution.
Would anti-matter leave anything like that?
I'm not really up on my antimatter, but it seems to me like antimatter wouldn't leave much but memories...
-
no fallout and no residual radiation....
uh oh
-
no fallout and no residual radiation....
uh oh
and no witnesses.....