NationStates Jolt Archive

In your own opinion do you think its a good idea to allow Japan
the military capablity they once had before renouncing the ability to wage war.

In my opinion I believe Japan should had the ability to reopen there aresenal of weaponary, again for the capability to wage war against any nation that sought to invade them.

But my opinion though.

They already COULD, though they have no need for it now. Japan has the second most powerful navy in the world. They also field 150,000 ground troops. You can argue that it is defensive, but it meets Article 9.

Only if they brought samurais back.

They already COULD, though they have no need for it now. Japan has the second most powerful navy in the world. They also field 150,000 ground troops. You can argue that it is defensive, but it meets Article 9.


Where on Earth do you get that idea from?
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...links-navy.htm
Rank 1: Major Global Force Projection Navy (Complete) – This is a navy capable of carrying out all the military roles of naval forces on a global scale. It possesses the full range of carrier and amphibious capabilities, sea control forces, and nuclear attack and ballistic missile submarines, and all in sufficient numbers to undertake major operations independently. E.g., United States.

Rank 2: Major Global Force Projection Navy (Partial) – These are navies that possess most if not all of the force projection capabilities of a "complete" global navy, but only in sufficient numbers to undertake one major "out of area" operation. E.g., Britain, France.

Rank 3: Medium Global Force Projection Navy – These are navies that may not possess the full range of capabilities, but have a credible capacity in certain of them and consistently demonstrate a determination to exercise them at some distance from home waters, in cooperation with other Force Projection Navies. E.g., Canada, Netherlands, Australia.

Rank 4: Medium Regional Force Projection Navy – These are navies possessing the ability to project force into the adjoining ocean basin. While they may have the capacity to exercise these further afield, for whatever reason, they do not do so on a regular basis.

At best, the Japanese have a 4th Rank Navy.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...japan/ship.htm

...they'd probably lose against China, let alone the UK or France or Russia.

In your own opinion do you think its a good idea to allow Japan the military capablity they once had before renouncing the ability to wage war.

In my opinion I believe Japan should had the ability to reopen there aresenal of weaponary, again for the capability to wage war against any nation that sought to invade them.

But my opinion though.

Yes, I agree. They are a strong Democracy and a major contributor to the world economy.

Originally posted byNeo Imperial Japan
In my opinion I believe Japan should had the ability to reopen there aresenal of weaponary, again for the capability to wage war against any nation that sought to invade them.

Yeh, they are fully allowed to keep a defensive force and some would say they already have a bit more than that, so the whole prevent countries form invading them; they're on it. As to whether they should be allowed to have full offensive capability, that's uncertain. They seem to be cooperating on a world scale now, so maybe we should give them the benefit of the doubt. However a lot of the nations around them don't fully trust them yet and are still quite upset with them so it might hurt regional relations considerably.

On a side note, i'm watching a documentary of the treatment of prisoners under Imperial Japan.

I think they should after all, don't you think they learned their lesson?

I believe that Japan should be able to defend themselves. My boyfriend is from Japan, and he told me that Japan is only allowed to defend themselves if they were to get attacked.

Japan has every right to a more capable military. Especially with the growing threat of North Korea(and sometimes China), Japan should have a military capable of large scale offensive missions

I think they should after all, don't you think they learned their lesson?

Which was what? "Don't sneak attack the Americans?"
Recall, Japan defeated the Russians easily in 1905.

Lesson? Pfha. Most people ignore history. That's the only way I can explain reality TV.

possibly but i was think more along the lines of"don't piss people off who have a lot more natural resources and indusrial capiblity than you."

Yes, Japan should contribute to peace-keeping in the region and be able to send troops to the DMZ of Korea etc. This would lighten the load on American soldiers and tax-payers. We already pay so much, without really benefiting, I think Japan could pull it's weight a little bit more were it not for that pesky constitution... that we wrote...

I think Japan should get to have an offensive force. What happened in WWII was because of several violent and brutal individuals. Every nation has had a few of them, but they still have armies.

The problem is, they've become so peaceful, that they don't WANT one anymore. I can't say I blame them. They get to but that money elsewhere.

They might not want one all the much, but they should be given the option.

Japan has every right to a more capable military.
I don't think so, their constitution barred them from raising a larger military. I heard they're planning to change that.
Especially with the growing threat of North Korea(and sometimes China), Japan should have a military capable of large scale offensive missionsNorth Korea maybe a threat but why China? Despite their huge military and a very frosty diplomatic relations with Japan, since when China said they're going to kick their ass?

possibly but i was think more along the lines of"don't piss people off who have a lot more natural resources and indusrial capiblity than you."I thought the lesson was. Sometimes you get really shitty luck where all but one of you your aircraft carriers were sunk in one battle... which was incidently the battle in which you thought you would be able to completely cripple your oppenents navy. See the Battle of Midway.

Well, Japan already has non-offensive forces in Iraq and Afghanistan yeh? Actually i'm not sure if they're in both, but still it would seem they've decided they can be a part of peace keeping missions. What they don't have is offensive capability and this isn't so bad, because unless we plan on invading North Korea, Japan can still help with defensive measures in the DMZ.

I don't think so, their constitution barred them from raising a larger military. I heard they're planning to change that.
North Korea maybe a threat but why China? Despite their huge military and a very frosty diplomatic relations with Japan, since when China said they're going to kick their ass?

The frosty relations not only with Japan, but also Taiwan is all the reason for a stronger military. If China invades Taiwan, Japan should be there to defend it. China's relatively hostile attitude to Japanese people in general, the growing military, and huge regional influence is another reason. If China can become stronger, why not Japan? Especially since Japan is the much more "western friendly" nation, and actually cares for human rights and democracy.

The frosty relations not only with Japan but also Taiwan is all the reason for a stronger military.You know why China is being hostile to Taiwan? It's because of Chen Shui-Bien. Geez, fuck Ah-Bien! I'm not a right-wing guy here but I'm so wish Ma Ying-Jeou (yes that KMT guy) becomes president. I'm for unification, but Taiwan should be in status-quo for now until China becomes a democratic state.
If China invades Taiwan, Japan should be there to defend it.I do not like to see China fire 700 missles at the little province. But if Japan is here to fuck around, you know how I feel. But really, I think the US should be here to intervene if the attack happens.
China's relatively hostile attitude to Japanese people in general, the growing military, and huge regional influence is another reason.You should know the Japanese government's attitude towards not just China but other asian countries:
-Textbooks
-Yakusuni shrine
-The land and island dispute involving S.Korea, China, Taiwan, and Russia.
-and yes, many more.

We don't have to 'allow' them. They own theur country, we don't. Japan is all the way on the other side of the world for most of us, we shouldn't decide what they can and can't do.

We don't have to 'allow' them. They own theur country, we don't. Japan is all the way on the other side of the world for most of us, we shouldn't decide what they can and can't do.

I was just about to say that. Its a bit arrogant of us to think we can allow them to do anything. Apart from the whaling, Japan is a kickass country. They can do whatever they want. We should worry about crazy countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran.

We don't have to 'allow' them. They own theur country, we don't. Japan is all the way on the other side of the world for most of us, we shouldn't decide what they can and can't do.I had no problem with Japan plan to expand their military, it's their call not ours.

Also, I think the US should STFU about China's military. Like really, since when China said they're going to kick their ass?

That's true, but that didn't stop Bush with the Iraq thing..i know i know that's different, however the U.S. seems to stick it's nose in other people's business.
I am not trying to start anything by saying that.
I do think that Japan should have the freedom to have there own army and do what they like/need to do.

I thought the lesson was. Sometimes you get really shitty luck where all but one of you your aircraft carriers were sunk in one battle... which was incidently the battle in which you thought you would be able to completely cripple your oppenents navy. See the Battle of Midway.
Perhaps it was, "Don't engage a country with superior resources and industrial capabilities when you're already tied up fighting the Chinese on their own territory."

...they'd probably lose against China, let alone the UK or France or Russia.

China:
8 Destroyers
56 Frigates(Almost 40 of Obsolete Small Patrol type, along with 8 or so in the ASW role)
69 Submarines(Almost 40 of which are Romeo and Ming class, which hazegray says are "Completely and Utterly Obsolete", and rarely go out to sea due to lack of trained crews)

Japan:
15 Destroyers
30 Large Frigates(None older than 1980)
14 Small ASW Frigates
20 Submarines(again, none older than 1980)[4 Of the Oyashi class subs are nearing completion)

I say along with excellent training of the japanese navy in conjuction with the US Navy (Compared to the rather mediocre training of China's sailors), in an all out war in the Sea of Japan and Pacific, Japan would utterly and severly devestate the Chinese Navy. At most Japan would lose a few ships, as the only real threat would be 2 the Sovremennyy class ships, the rest would be dealt with rather easily.

Well, Japan already has non-offensive forces in Iraq and Afghanistan yeh? Actually i'm not sure if they're in both, but still it would seem they've decided they can be a part of peace keeping missions. What they don't have is offensive capability and this isn't so bad, because unless we plan on invading North Korea, Japan can still help with defensive measures in the DMZ.
No, it has a very, very small GSDF force in Iraq (currently armed with soccer balls). The force there cannot take part in any fighting and there's some gray areas on if they could actually defend themselves should they come under attack, which is why they are being guarded by the Aussies right now and will be pulling out shortly (President Bush isn't happy about this).

For Afghanistan, they have been providing logictical support from ships in the Indian Ocean. Japan's position, as bound by article 9, is very, very clear. It cannot do anything unless actually attacked. It cannot partisapate in actual combat operations even in peace keeping missions, and it cannot aid in the defence of others. Edit: And this means they cannot do any premptive work either.

BTW, the proposed changes to Article 9 would just note that the JSDF is Japan's military, answerable to the Prime Minister, and that Japan would be allowed to partisapate in peace keeping operations and mutual defence, but it still renouces war forever.

And there's a lot of backlash against even these small changes in Japan.

Ah ok, like i said i wasn't entirley informed, thanks very much for clearing that up. well then ok, i think it should at least be able to help in defence, not peace keeping missions mind you, because thats really just war...but working with a nation to build its defence i can see. Thanks again

You should know the Japanese government's attitude towards not just China but other asian countries:
-Textbooks
It's ONE textbook used by less than 1% of junior high schools nation wide. Get over it!

-Yakusuni shrine
Last poll noted 75% of the Japanese public disproves of Koizumi's visits and the Diet may actually get off its collective ass and build another memorial.

-The land and island dispute involving S.Korea, China, Taiwan, and Russia.
*sighs* I keep hoping the US will come in and just take them over. Some of those rocks (because that's all that they are) have belonged to Japan. Some were taken by Japan, some no one claimed till recently. Personally though, I find it a little funny that Japan keeps offering to go to the UN with this and let them settle it out, you know, what nations are supposed to do, but South Korea, China, and Taiwan refuse to.

-and yes, many more.
While I find the Japanese government arogent, unrepentive at times, clueless at others, and just plain strange elsewise, PM Koizumi does have a point though; of all the countries whom Japan invaded and did horrible, horrible things to, the ONLY ONES who haven't let it go are South Korea and China (And North Korea, but North Korea gets offended when the US doesn't send a birthday present to the Great Leader), and they have really gotten annoyed about it recently. It makes you wonder how much of this is really being upset at Japan for Japanese actions and how much of it is being prodded by the CCP who is trying to take peoples minds off of their troubles in China and the president of South Korea who has troubles of his own?

In your own opinion do you think its a good idea to allow Japan
the military capablity they once had before renouncing the ability to wage war.

In my opinion I believe Japan should had the ability to reopen there aresenal of weaponary, again for the capability to wage war against any nation that sought to invade them.

But my opinion though.

We're gonna need them against China. But we'd better keep a tight leash on them.

Absolutely. Aside from the economic benefits to the US, a remilitarized Japan with full offensive capabilities would be a valuable counterweight against China as well as a first line of defense in the event of a war. They could act more swiftly than the US and launch strikes against mainland China, or hold their ground until we arrive.

I'd also allow Germany to further develop its military as a counterweight to Russia and Iran and to bolster the EU's military capabilities even further for the same purpose.

These nations are no longer threats; by disallowing them to prepare for war we are shortchanging allies in the face of real threats.

China:
8 Destroyers
56 Frigates(Almost 40 of Obsolete Small Patrol type, along with 8 or so in the ASW role)
69 Submarines(Almost 40 of which are Romeo and Ming class, which hazegray says are "Completely and Utterly Obsolete", and rarely go out to sea due to lack of trained crews)

Japan:
15 Destroyers
30 Large Frigates(None older than 1980)
14 Small ASW Frigates
20 Submarines(again, none older than 1980)[4 Of the Oyashi class subs are nearing completion)

I say along with excellent training of the japanese navy in conjuction with the US Navy (Compared to the rather mediocre training of China's sailors), in an all out war in the Sea of Japan and Pacific, Japan would utterly and severly devestate the Chinese Navy. At most Japan would lose a few ships, as the only real threat would be 2 the Sovremennyy class ships, the rest would be dealt with rather easily.

But there are an awful lot of chinese people. They would do some damage.

Do they want one?

If so, does that mean Bush may declare war on Japan?

Iran can't have nukes, Palestine can't elect Hamas, Iraq can't open parlaiment with prayer .... Japan can't have an Army?

Shit.

I believe that Japan should be able to defend themselves. My boyfriend is from Japan, and he told me that Japan is only allowed to defend themselves if they were to get attacked.

How can a country defend themselves without getting attacked? :confused:

I don't see why not. Japan is an okay country, it's not very likely they're going to invade us again.

China:
8 Destroyers
56 Frigates(Almost 40 of Obsolete Small Patrol type, along with 8 or so in the ASW role)
69 Submarines(Almost 40 of which are Romeo and Ming class, which hazegray says are "Completely and Utterly Obsolete", and rarely go out to sea due to lack of trained crews)

Japan:
15 Destroyers
30 Large Frigates(None older than 1980)
14 Small ASW Frigates
20 Submarines(again, none older than 1980)[4 Of the Oyashi class subs are nearing completion)

I say along with excellent training of the japanese navy in conjuction with the US Navy (Compared to the rather mediocre training of China's sailors), in an all out war in the Sea of Japan and Pacific, Japan would utterly and severly devestate the Chinese Navy. At most Japan would lose a few ships, as the only real threat would be 2 the Sovremennyy class ships, the rest would be dealt with rather easily.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying that China and Japan are using 1980 era Naval capabilities???

And are you saying that China would get there ass whooped, just because Japan is America favorite Lappy?......


Kid... your are far... far ... far away in anycase close to anything logical if what I assume was right.

The Chinese No longer dwells on the past weapon as there naval forces... if you done your study the Chinese military has gone under quite an upgrade.... from Old to new.... Speaking of Japan having tech, and skills.... They aren't just the only one.... The Chinese are buying weapons from Russia, and there naval army are as capable as the Japanese....

Don't believe the Chinese don't have a modern Navy.... check out the link below

http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/surface/default.asp

We're gonna need them against China. But we'd better keep a tight leash on them.:rolleyes:

Ah-Bien supporters these days...

But there are an awful lot of chinese people. They would do some damage.
They could, if China could get them somewhere. Currently it doesn't have the capasity to do so unless they can drive or march to their battlefield.

I dont think they should be encouraged (read allowed if you will) to develope an Offensive army (That is an army which is designed with offense in mind), because its a waste of their time and money, their army as it is is pretty much a waste. The fact that they are a pacifist nation now is admirable and the old guard nuts at the top (in some positions) should be stalled and fillibustered until they shrivel and die frankly.

Of course theres always the distinct possibility of Chinese invasion, some of the people rising to the top in China are looking increasingly loony.

Do they want one?
Want is a tricky word. Some right wingnuts want the Imperial Army and Navy back. Some conservatives just want Japan to have an actual military in order to defend Japan and engage in peacekeeping missions.

The majority of the Japanese are ok with the idea of the JSDF becoming Japan's military, but they do NOT want Article 9 to be scrapped. Japan should still renouce war.

Japan can't have an Army?
Well, more like:
CHAPTER II: RENUNCIATION OF WAR
Article 9:
Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes. 2) In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.

Why not? If Japan got a real military industry boom we might see mecha and all sorts of high-tech shooters.

:D

I thought the lesson was. Sometimes you get really shitty luck where all but one of you your aircraft carriers were sunk in one battle... which was incidently the battle in which you thought you would be able to completely cripple your oppenents navy. See the Battle of Midway.

The Japanese really did have the most horrific luck in the Pacific. Either that, or you could say America had astounding luck.
Either way, that whole battlezone could have turned out COMPLETELY differently very easily.

Militarised Japan = Giant Robots, therefore YES YES YES.

Well, that's up to the Japanese to decide, I think. Germany got the okay to do it back in the days against the Soviets, and they didn't go and try to conquer the world again.

So the risk from allowing them would be somewhere between ultraminimal and non-existent.

The question is whether Japan wants to get into that sort of stuff again. Because their neighbours won't like it, their taxpayers will have to fork the money for it over and a lot of extra international responsibility comes with it as well.

And what are they going to use it for? Is it worth it?

Well, that's up to the Japanese to decide, I think. Germany got the okay to do it back in the days against the Soviets, and they didn't go and try to conquer the world again.

So the risk from allowing them would be somewhere between ultraminimal and non-existent.

The question is whether Japan wants to get into that sort of stuff again. Because their neighbours won't like it, their taxpayers will have to fork the money for it over and a lot of extra international responsibility comes with it as well.

And what are they going to use it for? Is it worth it?


Sure there Asian neighbor fear them... why?... Cause Most of Japan neighbor are a bunch of cowardly pansy that go and genocide there own minority....

Imagine Japan having offensive military capablities.... China would whine, S.E Asia would whine, hell most of all asia would whine.... But I wouldn't mind
seeing Japan rekicking the snot out of Se.Asia.

Sure there Asian neighbor fear them... why?... Cause Most of Japan neighbor are a bunch of cowardly pansy that go and genocide there own minority....Asian countries don't fear Japan, they're still majorly pissed ever since. Especially China and S.Korea.

But it's up to Japan to decide if they REALLY need a military.

It's only a matter of time until the US realizes that it is more expensive than it's worth for them to keep a floating arsenal in the pacific. Either China, or a a democratic-capitalist league led by Japan is going to end up 'patrolling' the pacific. Odds are, both of them.

It's entirely in Japan's rights to defend their interests through military means. It's hardly 1942 anymore.

Militarised Japan = Giant Robots, therefore YES YES YES.

Priceless quote.

Imagine Japan having offensive military capablities.... China would whine, S.E Asia would whine, hell most of all asia would whine.... But I wouldn't mind
seeing Japan rekicking the snot out of Se.Asia.
Question:

Are you seriously a very nationalistic Japanese imperialist or you're just a trollish little joke puppet controlled by a 12 year old?

In your own opinion do you think its a good idea to allow Japan
the military capablity they once had before renouncing the ability to wage war.

In my opinion I believe Japan should had the ability to reopen there aresenal of weaponary, again for the capability to wage war against any nation that sought to invade them.

But my opinion though.
They have already started a military build up of sorts. Plus, it's no longer anyone else's business whether they do so or not.

Question:

Are you seriously a very nationalistic Japanese imperialist or you're just a trollish little joke puppet controlled by a 12 year old?


I'm the second one with a little dose of Sarcasm... controlled by a 5 year old.

Militarised Japan = Giant Robots, therefore YES YES YES.
I did not think mechas could give people orgasms...

I did not think mechas could give people orgasms...
Psh, of course they can, it just doesnt come up in there series' much.

China:
8 Destroyers
56 Frigates(Almost 40 of Obsolete Small Patrol type, along with 8 or so in the ASW role)
69 Submarines(Almost 40 of which are Romeo and Ming class, which hazegray says are "Completely and Utterly Obsolete", and rarely go out to sea due to lack of trained crews)

Japan:
15 Destroyers
30 Large Frigates(None older than 1980)
14 Small ASW Frigates
20 Submarines(again, none older than 1980)[4 Of the Oyashi class subs are nearing completion)

I say along with excellent training of the japanese navy in conjuction with the US Navy (Compared to the rather mediocre training of China's sailors), in an all out war in the Sea of Japan and Pacific, Japan would utterly and severly devestate the Chinese Navy. At most Japan would lose a few ships, as the only real threat would be 2 the Sovremennyy class ships, the rest would be dealt with rather easily.

The History Channel did a great show on the Japanese Navy; without a doubt they are the 2nd best Naval force in the Pacific. Their training is amazing, their equipment is top notch, & their leadership is smart.

Militarised Japan = Giant Robots, therefore YES YES YES.Giant robots made by Nintendo lol.

I was thinking of Militarised Sony Japan.

Or maybe an Imperial Anime Japan attacking people with tentacles.

I do not like to see China fire 700 missles at the little province. But if Japan is here to fuck around, you know how I feel. But really, I think the US should be here to intervene if the attack happens.

I can only hope that the Canadian Government will support & be capable of supporting Taiwan when the time comes.

Giant robots made by Nintendo lol.

I was thinking of Militarised Sony Japan.
A world controlled by Sony and its Nintendo robots, where everybody's forced to play Gamecube games, and X-boxes and PlayStations are outlawed! :eek:

Giant robots made by Nintendo lol.

I was thinking of Militarised Sony Japan.
O.o a Japan in which things rarely work, break frequently and often have accessories that you cant seem to find anywhere?

Sorry, i used to fairly support sony a little, but since they abolished Aibo/Qrio they have nothing left ot support.

Sure there Asian neighbor fear them... why?... Cause Most of Japan neighbor are a bunch of cowardly pansy that go and genocide there own minority....

Imagine Japan having offensive military capablities.... China would whine, S.E Asia would whine, hell most of all asia would whine.... But I wouldn't mind
seeing Japan rekicking the snot out of Se.Asia.

If they didn't fear.. then ask yourself why... they whine everytime Japan.. talks about military...

I don't understand why the issue should even be up for debate. I mean, nobody argues whether or not Germany should be allowed to have a military force. Why Japan?

If they didn't fear.. then ask yourself why... they whine everytime Japan.. talks about military...Well exactly when did China and S.Korea whine about Japan's military? Got proof?

But really, are you seriously a very nationalistic Japanese imperialist? Yes or no?

A world controlled by Sony and its Nintendo robots, where everybody's forced to play Gamecube games, and X-boxes and PlayStations are outlawed! :eek:

If Sony's controlling the world, why would PlayStations be outlawed? :p

I don't understand why the issue should even be up for debate. I mean, nobody argues whether or not Germany should be allowed to have a military force. Why Japan?Dunno, but their constitution barred Japan from raising a bigger military.

If Sony's controlling the world, why would PlayStations be outlawed? :p
Sony would feel guilty trying to push its crap onto so many milions of people.

O.o a Japan in which things rarely work, break frequently and often have accessories that you cant seem to find anywhere?

Sorry, i used to fairly support sony a little, but since they abolished Aibo/Qrio they have nothing left ot support.
Sony's okay. They've got good discmans that don't break, unless the whimsy Panasonic ones that broke after the first time I dropped it. Damned Panasonic and their crappy discman :gundge:

Dunno, but their constitution barred Japan from raising a bigger military.

Shouldn't their constitution be amendable? After all, it was put on them by a conquering power. The same conditions weren't put on Germany, and they were far worse...

Sony's okay. They've got good discmans that don't break, unless the whimsy Panasonic ones that broke after the first time I dropped it. Damned Panasonic and their crappy discman :gundge:
I do actually use several Sony products (Walkman, Playstation (For ICO and Shadow of the colosuss) and a Digital Camera (I liked the walkman i used to have the one ive got at the moment is a peice of rubbish) But they also release a large range of products that are just not up to stratch, and they wonder why their profits are slipping. its called R&D they ought to try it sometime.

Shouldn't their constitution be amendable? After all, it was put on them by a conquering power. The same conditions weren't put on Germany, and they were far worse...

Yea, but you must remember one thing. The Soviet Union was right next door.

Yea, but you must remember one thing. The Soviet Union was right next door.

The Soviet Union was right next door to both Germany and Japan, and both countries had American forces occupying...

Well exactly when did China and S.Korea whine about Japan's military? Got proof?
"If Japan fully abandoned Article 9, no doubt that kind of new Japan would find it difficult to have more constructive relations with China, the Koreas and even the United States," said Pang Zhongying, head of the Nankai University Global Studies Institute.

Gao Hong, vice director of political science at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Institute of Japanese Studies, said pro-war constitutional changes were a top fear of Chinese officials nervous about whether the LDP would sweep the Nov. 9 general election last year.

Ministry spokeswoman Zhang Qiyue also spoke out against the SDF deployment in Iraq, where Japan plans to do humanitarian work as part of its first post-World War II involvement in an overseas conflict zone.

Lee Jae Young, a member of the South Korean NGO Korea Anabaptist Center, said that the people of North and South Korea are concerned about any attempt to amend Article 9 due to Japan's past colonization of the Korean Peninsula.

Changes would be seen as a real threat by Japan's neighbors, according to Lee.



"This will inevitably lead people a step further toward doubt and anxiety," she told reporters. "As Japan's neighbor, we hope Japan can diligently draw from the lessons of history, act carefully in the military safety field and continue to persist in taking the road toward peace and development."

Striking peace clauses from the Constitution would worsen relations with China and could threaten Japan's economic power in Asia, said Zhang Lili, a teacher of 20 years at the College of Foreign Affairs in Beijing.

Even though Japanese legislators talk of using military forces for "global responsibility," Japan's definition of this term may violate that of other nations, Zhang said.

"This Constitution is very special. It's given the economy a chance to advance to No. 2 in the world," Zhang said. "Why do they want to get involved (militarily)? I'm Chinese, and I don't understand. These 60 years they haven't wanted to change."

I owned a Sony MP3 player (E-105). Good sound quality, doesn't break, small, and very good battery life. One thing I hate about is the software required to load musics into the device.

Btw, this is the last sony I've ever bought. Sony is too much of a money grabber.

*snip*Glad to live in Canada, 1000km away from political WTFing in Asia. ;)

Btw, I don't know why Japan want to scrap Article 9. But if they want to get rid of it, they should take extra responbility.

Well exactly when did China and S.Korea whine about Japan's military? Got proof?

But really, are you seriously a very nationalistic Japanese imperialist? Yes or no?

Well just look it at this way... when Japan military builds up.. Chinese Nationalist rise to it's defense.. saying Japan spreading it's wing of miltary might again...

Obviously this is more then enough proof to say China dosen't want Japan to rise again.... why?

Fear of what has happen in WW2.


Im just a Asian Military Kid.... nothing more nothing less.


Read books like the Chinese New Empire... by: Ross Terrill... that should give you some insights....

But really, why would they want to scrap Article 9? Probably fearing China is going to kick their ass after all those BS such as the Yakusuni visit. But why would China do that?

Like I said, asian countries are still majorly pissed off at Japan.

Well just look it at this way... when Japan military builds up.. Chinese Nationalist rise to it's defense.. saying Japan spreading it's wing of miltary might again...

Obviously this is more then enough proof to say China dosen't want Japan to rise again.... why?

Fear of what has happen in WW2.


Im just a Asian Military Kid.... nothing more nothing less.


Read books like the Chinese New Empire... by: Ross Terrill... that should give you some insights....
But you do realize that Japan would be royally screwed if it attacked China. China is its largest trading partner, so it's economy would take a HUGE blow. Also, they weren't able to implement the Japanese style of education during WWII, and they will never be able to. As long as the Chinese people are educated under their own system, they will kick the Japs out again.

Btw, I don't know why Japan want to scrap Article 9. But if they want to get rid of it, they should take extra responbility.
But they're not actually scrapping Article 9.

I say why not. Japan seems to be an okay country historically.

Sure, they tortured one of my great aunts to death: but that was a long time ago; and they seem to have changed in the interim. So I say go for it.

After all, Germany is allowed tanks.

Sure there Asian neighbor fear them... why?... Cause Most of Japan neighbor are a bunch of cowardly pansy that go and genocide there own minority....

Imagine Japan having offensive military capablities.... China would whine, S.E Asia would whine, hell most of all asia would whine.... But I wouldn't mind
seeing Japan rekicking the snot out of Se.Asia.
So that is your reason for asking the question?

In that case, no, this particular Japanese person (or person pretending to be a Japanese person) hasn't learned his/her lesson, and will thus not be allowed an army.

After all, Germany is allowed tanks.
And the Spanish are thanking their god for it every day. :D

The Soviet Union was right next door to both Germany and Japan, and both countries had American forces occupying...

Yea, but Germany didn't bomb Peal Harbour.

As long as the Chinese people are educated under their own system, they will kick the Japs out again.

They got lucky that Japan was dumb enough to start stuff with America, if they hadn't, there would no longer be a China, just Imperial Japan.

In your own opinion do you think its a good idea to allow Japan
the military capablity they once had before renouncing the ability to wage war.

In my opinion I believe Japan should had the ability to reopen there aresenal of weaponary, again for the capability to wage war against any nation that sought to invade them.

But my opinion though.

You have two quite different questions here: 1) Should Japan return to it's WWII military strength? and 2) Should Japan maintain and legalise the JSDF (which is supposed to wage the exact defensive military actions you suggest).

First off, a bit of history and a little bit about the Japan Sef Defence Forces (JSDF, or in Japanese 自衛隊, "Jieitai"):

Japan was only disarmed from 1945 to 1950. In 1950, the National Police Reserve, a 75,000 strong paramilitary force armed with light infantry weapons, was formed - at the beheist of the US. In 1952, this was expanded and the name was changed to the National Safety Force was formed, and included a small costal defense force. And in 1954, it was again expanded and became the Japan Self Defense Force.

Currently, the JSDF is quite capable, if inexperienced. The SDF is equiped with modern MBTs, aircraft, and ships. The Naval SDF is capable of "blue water" operations, and has done so as far away as the Indian Ocean. http://japanfocus.org/article.asp?id=549

It's quite interesting to note that JSDF members are legally considered civilian civil servants. They are not covered my a Japanese military legal code, but by

With nearly 240,000 military personnel and an annual budget of close to $50 billion, Japan's military outstrips Britain's in total spending and manpower, while its navy in particular scores high among experts for its sophistication.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/jda.htm


As to the questions, your second question (should Japan be rearmed) is complicated, but overall, I'd say yes, it'd be prudent, but it needs to follow the constitution. If the LDP (soon to be the LFP, if rumors have it right) can put through a constitutional amendment modifying or clarifying Article 9 in a legitimate fashion, more power to them. But I tend to be rather a bit of a legalist, especially on constitutional issues, and IMHO the existance of the JSDF violates Article 9. Polls seem to suggest that this is what the people want. http://www.forbes.com/finance/feeds/afx/2006/03/05/afx2570983.html

The trickier question is your first question (should Japan be rearmed at WWII strengths) I'd say yes, if the Japanese people really want to
do so, they should. However, I don't think it would be wise or prudent to do. so.

NERVUN, I'm pretty sure the JGSDF forces in Samawa are armed with more than soccer balls, as the following picture shows. I could be wrong. (I wish some of my former students were at hand to ask - I've had five or six members of the SDF pass through my classroom.)

http://www.geo.tv/news_images/world/25-Feb-06-b74e2ab6-8926-4cca-8b7d-2f9412d74c55japan-iraq_lpic.jpg


And Chinese Republics, I agreee that Japan should take extra responbility.

NERVUN, I'm pretty sure the JGSDF forces in Samawa are armed with more than soccer balls, as the following picture shows. I could be wrong. (I wish some of my former students were at hand to ask - I've had five or six members of the SDF pass through my classroom.)
Oh I know. I just remember when they were deploying, the newspapers ran a story that the GSDF was going to go over to Iraq with soccerballs as their mission was more humanitarian aid than actual combat.

The idea being that someone told the general that Iraqis love soccer and he figured that since so do the Japanese, it would be a great international gesture. So, yes, they do have their weapons (but there is an issue if they are allowed to use them), but for the first wave of GSDF, each person was issued a soccerball. :D

I think it is a good thing but only to the point where they can't inflict harm on NZ through warfare like actions if we decided to sort out the South Pacific Whaling issue.
Of course they could hurt us economically.

Oh I know. I just remember when they were deploying, the newspapers ran a story that the GSDF was going to go over to Iraq with soccerballs as their mission was more humanitarian aid than actual combat.
Here in Oz the official line is that Australian troops are deployed there to protect the Japanese. I'm pretty sure the Japanese commander said something to the effect of "We don't need protection.", but this story makes it sound like the Aussies are doing something worthwhile there and so everybody repeats it.

http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20050223-122343-4559r.htm

Japan can and should do as it pleases. From what I know, most Japanese wouldn't really want their country to have a strong military anyway. Just one thing, though:

Yes, Japan should contribute to peace-keeping in the region and be able to send troops to the DMZ of Korea etc.

There's no way South Korea would ever agree to having Japanese soldiers on its territory. Too many bad memories. Not to mention sour relations even today.

Here in Oz the official line is that Australian troops are deployed there to protect the Japanese. I'm pretty sure the Japanese commander said something to the effect of "We don't need protection.", but this story makes it sound like the Aussies are doing something worthwhile there and so everybody repeats it.

http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20050223-122343-4559r.htm


The protection deal is mostly due to domestic politics.
From your article:
...because Koizumi promised that Japanese troops in Iraq would not have to fire any shots unless they were directly targeted, the prime minister has resorted to seeking help from other nations to protect Japanese camps that are based in a relatively stable part of Iraq.

Until this month, that role had been assigned to the Netherlands, but as the Dutch government decided to withdraw from Iraq altogether, Koizumi has had to lobby hard to find a replacement to protect the Japanese troops which have been providing humanitarian aid to the local area, including sanitation and medical assistance.

There's no way South Korea would ever agree to having Japanese soldiers on its territory. Too many bad memories. Not to mention sour relations even today.

Yep, that'd be a bad thing.

The protection deal is mostly due to domestic politics.
Yep. It's silly really.

If you're going to give your guys guns, and you send them into a battlezone, then you have made that decision. Silly rules of engagement don't change that fact.

If Germany can send planes to fire missiles at radar and anti-air installations, or send special forces to assassinate drug lords, then Japanese pioneers can shot at people who want to kill them.

Yep. It's silly really.

If you're going to give your guys guns, and you send them into a battlezone, then you have made that decision. Silly rules of engagement don't change that fact.

If Germany can send planes to fire missiles at radar and anti-air installations, or send special forces to assassinate drug lords, then Japanese pioneers can shot at people who want to kill them.
As much as China and South Korea are up in arms about a return to Japanese nationalism, the Japanese pretty much do so themselves.

It's silly, and it take troops from other areas, but the idea of Japanese actually shooting unless it can be proven they were under fire is a very good way to anger a lot of the country. Many people remember what happened and they do not want a return to those days.

Many people remember what happened and they do not want a return to those days.
Obviously, but although the Japanese have handled (maybe "not handled") their history differently to the Germans, I'd still think that roughly the same rules apply.

The Germans as a whole still don't really trust the Bundeswehr, and the German media was the first to pounce on the possibility of the KSK being engaged in unsavoury missions in Afghanistan - but if there is something worthwhile to be done, there is support for it. Peacekeeping and even peacemaking seems to be supported, if it is done with a lot of parliamentary debate beforehand.

Ultimately the same should go for the Japanese, IMHO.

Obviously, but although the Japanese have handled (maybe "not handled") their history differently to the Germans, I'd still think that roughly the same rules apply.

The Germans as a whole still don't really trust the Bundeswehr, and the German media was the first to pounce on the possibility of the KSK being engaged in unsavoury missions in Afghanistan - but if there is something worthwhile to be done, there is support for it. Peacekeeping and even peacemaking seems to be supported, if it is done with a lot of parliamentary debate beforehand.

Ultimately the same should go for the Japanese, IMHO.
Actually you've managed to hit the nail square on the head about the SDF is viewed in Japan and the current deployment.

God help Koizumi and the LDP if someone gets killed though.

Actually you've managed to hit the nail square on the head about the SDF is viewed in Japan and the current deployment.

God help Koizumi and the LDP if someone gets killed though.

Your average Japanese may be even more sensitive to the question of the SDF than the Germans.

In my opinion I believe Japan should had the ability to reopen there aresenal of weaponary, again for the capability to wage war against any nation that sought to invade them.

They already have the right to defend themselves, and they have America to depend on as well.

Yea, but Germany didn't bomb Peal Harbour.

What kind of reasoning is that? Japan didn't round up people and gas them in large factories either. It's not 1942 anymore. Treating the Japanese different than the Germans is racist, pure and simple.

What kind of reasoning is that? Japan didn't round up people and gas them in large factories either. It's not 1942 anymore. Treating the Japanese different than the Germans is racist, pure and simple.

While Novoga's reasoning is weak, you seem to be rather uninformed about the Japanese Holocaust and it's aftermath. No, Japan didn't round people up and gas them. They commintted their war crimes in less civilized fashion. They put civilians and POWs to the sword (sometimes in contests to see who could lop off 100 heads the fastest), used them for live bayonet practice, engaged in vivisection of civilians and POWs, engaged in biological warfare, and committed numerous other atrocities.

Here are some good links:
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v25/n22/john04_.html
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP3.HTM
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/japan/bw/

Unlike Germany, it isn't clear that Japan has owned up to it's war crimes. Germany has made a clear and explicit atonment. Japan's atonment has been wishy-washy at best. There has been no equivilant of Willy Brandt's "Warschauer Kniefall". Official apologies were delayed and obscured by language - "remorse" (but also by the state controled media of most of Japan's neighbors). Two people convicted as Class-A war criminals later served as ministers in post-war Japanese governments.

But in my mind, the biggest indicator of problems is that Japanese Prime Ministers continue to visit Yasukuni Shrine (http://www.yasukuni.or.jp/english/), a shrine dedicated to Japan's 2.5 million war dead, including 1,068 convicted war criminals (including 13 Class-A war criminals). Could you imagine a German prime minister visiting the graves any German war criminal to "pay respects"?

And some good links on that:
http://www.cfr.org/publication/6565/japans_memory_lapses.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/east/08/13/japan.shrine/