Japan and US Alliance

[teardrop]

With the increasing terrorists threats, there have been talks that Japan might become one of the targets of the terrorists since they are allied with the US but i've also come across and article before that Osama Bin Laden actually sympathizes with Japan as atomic bombs were dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the Americans and that would exclude Japan from the list of targets for the terrorists. What do you folks think?

[Mandylion]

Terrorists will strike where it best serves their ends. If that is deemed to be Japan, then Japan it will be.

[jigen]

some "terrorists" are just a people without an army- others are just criminals...

[noyhauser]

Doubtful, I can't see any Islamic cell attacking Japan. Its not like the Japanese have attacked Iraq or has a stake in the middle east. Furthermore, I think it will be extremely difficult for Islamic terrorist to "blend in" and set up networks in Japan. I think people would be very suspicious when a Saudi national goes and buys ten bags of fertilizer from a japanese farm coop.

Japan has to worry about its own terrorist groups, like Aum Shinriko and the Japanese Red Army, they are far more likely to attack in the near future.

[teardrop]

i feel that Japan is finding itself in a 'sandwiched' position - maintaining it's alliance with US for whom their national security depends on and also avoiding direct opposition against the middle-eastern countries from where they depend hugely for raw materials. I think the recent blast and outbreaks of violence in Iraq actually helped Japan 'buy some time' as in sending their people in only when it is 'safe'.

[ElChe]

I think that Al Qaeda won't attack Japan because they know that Japan is just a ***** of the US just like most country.Why are the Japanese supporting 'the act of stopping terrorism' when the real terrorists are right there in front of them for the past 60 years.

AMERICA THE #1 TERRORIST!

[Iron Chef]

If you're gonna label Japan as America's "*****", then follow suit by saying America = Public Enemy #1... you better be able to back it up with some convincing arguments... Otherwise, hollow statements like yours are nothing more than useless propaganda imho (i.e. country bashing). Prove me wrong.
:)

[ElChe]

Ha...Yes,another government probaganda slave ready to hear the truth.Very well I'll back those words up.Just wait a day and I'll have 30 of my friends to help me support those comments that Japan is America's ***** and America is Public Enemy #1.

Well actually I can prove that America is the #1 terrorist in the Globe I have many reasons to prove it:
1.Has broken the Geneva Convention hundreds of times
2.Set's up puppet governments in Latin America to increase cheap labor
3.Secretly funds terrorist groups to attack countries which are a torn to it's backside for example Cuba.
4.The army doesn't care about the actions of it's soldiers,which means the soldiers are pretty can do whatever they want in a foreign country without the risk of going to jail
5.Continually lies about things until they become the truth like Iraq having WMD's.
6.They commit illegal operations all over the world

etc.

[noyhauser]

El Che

I don't even know where to begin. Don't go assuming that we aren't enlightend and are just government slaves. I didn't spend half my parents wealth to become educated as a government slave, if some thing even exists. Just because you have 30 friends that all think like you does not mean that you are right. Its really easy to be of one mindset, all you have to do is keep reading literature to support your claims and then claim that everybody else is wrong because they don't understand the truth. Reality is that I've heard many of the arguments that you put forth before, and some hold some water, but most pretty well are extremely biased versions of the truth. If you want to continue pushing leftwing conspiracy theories, by all means do so. I don't usually respond to them because I hoppe people have enough sense on here to fully realize that many of them are incindiary and just meant to be anti american. I hope you will take my counterarguments critcally and openmindedly when I do post, because usually I put a lot of work into my posts because I try to give a fair view on subjects.

[ElChe]

Noyhauser I don't push leftwing conspiracy theories I speak the truth.You call me a liar and a radical just because I say no,,just because I don't flock with the heard.And you are being turned into a slave of the government and you don't even know it.That's the dark purpose of school,it's to supress new ideas and free thinking, to make you one of it's sheeps,but I broke free.You should too.You should start questioning what you read and hear from the media and stop sucking it all in like a vacuum cleaner.I don't think all of you here are non-enlightend,people are smart enough to think for their selves.If you don't want to listen fine,it's okay with me.I just tell the truth.

[noyhauser]

...

need I say more??

[ElChe]

No let's not turn this into a flame war let's just leave this thread alone.

[Iron Chef]

"Ha...Yes, nother government probaganda slave ready to hear the truth.Very well I'll back those words up.Just wait a day and I'll have 30 of my friends to help me support those comments that Japan is America's ***** and America is Public Enemy #1.

Well actually I can prove that America is the #1 terrorist in the Globe I have many reasons to prove it:
1.Has broken the Geneva Convention hundreds of times
2.Set's up puppet governments in Latin America to increase cheap labor
3.Secretly funds terrorist groups to attack countries which are a torn to it's backside for example Cuba.
4.The army doesn't care about the actions of it's soldiers,which means the soldiers are pretty can do whatever they want in a foreign country without the risk of going to jail
5.Continually lies about things until they become the truth like Iraq having WMD's.
6.They commit illegal operations all over the world

etc."

*sigh* First of all, you lost all credibility with me once you prefaced your response with labelling me as "another government probaganda slave". You raise some valid points but it's pretty obvious you harbor some serious anti-American sentiment (which you most certainly are entitled to). You come onto these boards trashtalking BOTH the U.S. and Japan and when I ask you to politely prove me wrong you result in typical slanderous remarks... That alone shows that you can not be reasoned with and that you have entrenched yourself so concretely in what you believe that to engage in thoughtful discussion would be moot (and a waste of time).

Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. If you have something to contribute, by all means feel free to do so (this is a public forum after all)... BUT if you persist in labelling people as "government slaves" or "sheep" whenever they disagree with you because your arguments (or lack of...) can't be constructive then I will take it upon myself to delete/lock any and all future such posts from you. Not trying to be a "forum nazi" here but there is purpose for these forums and it is not to trade ideologies back and forth with you claiming "truth" using derogatory labels slandering those who think differently than you. If you have any future questions or concerns, by all means feel free to send me a PM. Thanks for understanding.
:)

[ElChe]

Okay listen up I'm not anit-American.I love America but I hate it's military based industry,explotation of the poor, and neo-colonialism.I love Japan and I'm tired of seeing the US bully Japan around.And sorry if I responded harshly and I don't try to slander those who think differently from me as I've said in my other post,let people believe whatever they want to believe,everybody as the right to think freely.

[teardrop]

Woah... i sure didn't expect the thread i've started would end up with such heated arguments.Well... i guess i should say something ya...
Hmm... i don't think i can symphathize with you ElChe because i'm not an American and i prefer not to 'bash' any country as well. However, i do understand where you are coming from but i think that was hmm... somewhat tactless? offending? when u first began? Nah... anyway... you've cleared the air so ya....




usually I put a lot of work into my posts because I try to give a fair view on subjects.
noyhauser... can i give you a hug? I can see your efforts when you post and i certainly enjoy reading them... so... 4 stars (out of 5) for u!!

:clap:

[noyhauser]

how do I get a 5th??

[teardrop]

Post more often!;)

[noyhauser]

... I would but sometimes it just really bothers me to post versus other peoples comments. Like sometimes I read some posts that really make me think... "I can't believe someone believes that". And even if I argue the point they just rely on half truths or skewed perspective to argue my point, which just makes me feel that my time is better spent elsewhere. Too quickly people degrade to posts "America is EVIL", and its absolutely tiresome. And when I post something here of real academic value, only ONE person actually bothers to reply.It just makes me ask, Why do I even try?

[bossel]

Originally posted by noyhauser
And when I post something here of real academic value, only ONE person actually bothers to reply.It just makes me ask, Why do I even try?
I know what you feel! :bawling:

But anyway, there are people who read your post & if you can set only a few of them to think for themselves, it's probably worth the effort. Well, sometimes at least. Or, maybe not? Hmmm?!

[senseiman]

Don't worry about posting things of academic value here, Noyhauser. Your essays are great, but they don't really lend themselves to easy debate on a board where most people only spend a few minutes at a time to discuss things, that is why not many people reply.

And El che, exactly how does the US bully Japan around? From my perspective, its the Japanese government that bullies Japan around, not the Americans. The US has bases here because the Japanese government wants them, and even pays for them to be here. "Here" being Okinawa, not mainland Japan of course. Japan is paying for the US war in Iraq (1.5 Billion dollars) because Koizumi is a right-wing suck up who wants Junior to take a harsh line against North Korea. The US doesn't have to bully Japan at all to get what it wants, Tokyo is always more than keen to hitch its wagon to whatever ridiculous scheme the Americans concoct.

[ElChe]

Originally posted by senseiman
Don't worry about posting things of academic value here, Noyhauser. Your essays are great, but they don't really lend themselves to easy debate on a board where most people only spend a few minutes at a time to discuss things, that is why not many people reply.

And El che, exactly how does the US bully Japan around? From my perspective, its the Japanese government that bullies Japan around, not the Americans. The US has bases here because the Japanese government wants them, and even pays for them to be here. "Here" being Okinawa, not mainland Japan of course. Japan is paying for the US war in Iraq (1.5 Billion dollars) because Koizumi is a right-wing suck up who wants Junior to take a harsh line against North Korea. The US doesn't have to bully Japan at all to get what it wants, Tokyo is always more than keen to hitch its wagon to whatever ridiculous scheme the Americans concoct.

Okay so Japan really doesn't get bullied around by the US it only sucks up to it.

[Uncle Frank]

I bet his 5th grade history teacher has concidered suicide !

Frank

[teardrop]

I totally agree with you Frank...

ElChe, why not put it this way...
Japan has at times showed their reactivism towards US because of gaiatsu (external pressure), but that does not mean Japan sucks up to the US.

[ElChe]

Trust me Japan sucks up to the US,Japan is always agreeing with the US on everything and most of the time is always supporting the US all the way.

[senseiman]

I don't think the Japan-US relationship can be described solely in terms of Japan sucking up to the US, though I can see how you could draw such a conclusion. The Japanese government doesn't volunteer to do stuff for the US, its a give-take sort of thing. It doesn't do stuff just because the US asks it too, it expects things in return. You could almost as easily say that the US sucks up to Japan if you think about it. Japan's agreement to pay for the US reconstruction in Iraq is one obvious example of Japanese caving to US pressure, but US policy towards North Korea is also heavily influenced by Japanese pressure.
I don't think it is quite so simple as it appears.

[Mas Oyama, Rikidozan]

All of you guys don’t have a good understanding of Japan’s current situation. On Dec 18, 2001, a Japanese naval vessel attacked and sank a North Korean infiltration ship disguised a Chinese fishing boat. This is a trend of things to come. Ishihara Shintaro w/ Koizumi Junichiro are what I believe trying to circumvent the constitution by sending troops in to Iraq. They only held the GSDF back because of popular pressure. The Japanese have slowly eroding article 9 of their constitution but they must do so with subtlety. Japan gave $1 billion the cost from Americans will be $87 billion in taxpayer money. As you can see this is rather small compared to what the Americans are paying. Even South Korea already sent in troops but as politics go, at the same time Rumsfeld is doing a “realignment” of US troops in South Korea, another way of saying the US troops will pull out of Korea. Why? Simply math…. ROKA=437,000 troops, USFK=37,000. I believe the deal is this. US troops out of Korea and Korea will help with Iraq. That is what the US needs is not money but troops. The money that Koizumi gave is only a nominal contribution as to not commit with troops. You need your house painted and you seriously need help you got the paint but what you need is help painting. Here comes your next door neighbor (whom you borrow tools from and never return) and offers to give you a 5 gallon bucket of paint (of the wrong color) as his contribution to help, you just don’t reject it now do you. Trust me on this Japanese nationalism is on the rise, as long as Japan’s economy is down new leadership is now taking the reins to replace the old regime. Don’t believe me read it on www.foreignaffairs.org the article is not available on the internet but it is there on the NOV, DEC 2003 paperback issue.

[Iron Chef]

"All of you guys don’t have a good understanding of Japan’s current situation"

You'll gain more credibility in these forums if you don't preface your arguments with such statements summarily dissing everyone else's point-of-view...
:)

[noyhauser]

Okay... I've about had enough of this. Part of this thread deals with something that was said in this thread (http://www.jref.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=44 ) which put me off enough that I was contemplating stopping posting on this board because for all the work I did, if I am just going to get trashed for it I might as well not post at all.

I usually post on here without any pretensions of my education or the work I do. But I never slandered other people's views as uneducated or infantile. I never questioned your education MAS but you dismissed mine, which pissed me off enough for me not to even reply to your post. I have an honors degree from Queens University. I do defence research for the Canadian government, I will either go to the London School of Economics, University of Kent, or the University Of Aberswthyth in Wales for my masters next year (and maybe a PhD). I am going to try for Kings College, Oxford, but I honestly don’t know whether I will get in. If you know about foreign Relations those are the best schools outside of United States (and are compared to US schools but I rather like their course curriculum over the heavy doses of Neo realism that are espoused in most US IR programs). Next year I will most likely publish an article about the Common European Security and Defence Program, and I am just finishing my thesis on the Future of the Visegrad group for European Security (which I should be working on but you pissed me off enough to do this). Although my current bend has been on European Security I have done much work in Asian Security. I am a member of the International Institute of Strategic Studies (www.IISS.org), maybe the world’s most respected think tank that has done significant work in the region (called the Shangrila Dialogue). I don't take kindly to my views being called superficial because I didn't work to get a Honors degree or acceptance into some of the best masters schools world to be referred to as a idiot. And don't boost your ego because I didn't reply. You acted so rudely that I didn't bother putting in the time to give a major reply to your arguments. Now that you are rude to other people I feel compelled to reply to your so called informed views. They too are contestable.

I’ve read your comments and I have become skeptical about your position. You also have completely missed the whole point of the Foreign Affairs Article. That article titled "Japan's New Nationalism", by Eugene Mathews should indicate you what the whole article was about, which you dismissed in the other thread. This is your direct quote (http://www.jref.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=44)

" Pertaining to US troops in Japan, our presence is not needed there for stability. First off animosities between the nations of east asia are slowly dissipating with each new generation…. ….So much for this perceived Japanese superiority. Just because you read an internet article doesn’t mean that is true for all cases. Remember that is a generation gap and current sour relations now can become amicable economic partnerships later, depending on the generation”

So wait, here you say that Japanese nationalism is on the rise and on the other thread you say it isn’t? Which is it? I should say that I read the article before I posed my previous views about your previous thread, and the rise of Japanese nationalism is a well known occurrance(I subscribe to FA). I also have read about the issue on a whole variety of works, and studied in Japan for 5 months, two years ago in political studies. Therefore my views aren’t based on one internet article like you so rudely put.

Secondly Mathews argues that the US should remain in the region as a major power. I'm more interested in this because you argue against this by your belief in the removal of American forces in Korea. You completely trashed my argument that the US should militarily remain in the area because it accrues political capital in the region, which is what matthews argues. The US hegemonic control over the region stabilizes the region and decreases the need for states to build up their armed forces. Removing those units would be akin to removing the control rods from a Nuclear reactor, it increases the amount of reactions between protagonist (tensions) in the region. Keeping the Japanese bottled up, mostly as a self defence force with some expeditionary capability confined to out of area peace stability missions is probably the best way to ensure stability in the East Asia region. The whole article is about preventing Japan from acquiring that offensive capability, especially in the form of Nuclear weapons. According to the article the US’s INABILITY to deal with North Korea has pushed Japan towards nationalization. IE the US’s forces aren’t perceived to be an effective deterrent in the region therefore the Japanese would rather do it themselves. If American forces are removed from the region all deterrence provided by the US is removed and then you will be adding more kindling to the fire, possibly touching off an arms race. Even popular theories about Democracies don’t fight democracies are voided in this region because two of the main players aren’t even democracies, and one is Stalinist. US forces need to stay in Japan to prevent its militarization, as well as working diplomatically to diffuse some of the crisis present.

Your assessment about china is also well off the mark compared to current thoughts. For the time being China has acquiesced to US hegemony in the region. Considering trade as an impediment to China asserting a more forceful role in the region is somewhat foolish. On a meta-theoretical level, Neo-realist thinkers like John J Mearshimer or Kenneth Waltz completely disregard trade as a impediment to war, I'm sure you have read Mearshimer's "the tragedy of great power politics" or Waltz's seminal work "Theory of international Relations". An applied reading of Chinese politics would give you even less heartening assessment. Denny Roy argued recently, it is not a matter of whether China will attempt to usurp US influence, but when. The current period of ambivalence is merely the CCP biding their time until they can assure themselves of security. But the Chinese Foreign policy has not been completely spineless. The Chinese have been quite assertive in using their military to achieve their goals, even for minor issues. The Spratly Island issue has seen the Chinese use naval forces as an instrument to carry out their foreign policy goals. Even more visible example has been the Chinese foreign policy towards Taiwan. The recent statement by the Chinese government that it will go to War if Taiwan attempts independence is a good indicator about the importance of Chinese regional pride in comparison to trade. Is this just toothless saber rattling? I doubt it, as the Chinese have deliberately militarized the straights and created an offensive doctrine with the capabilities to match in order to invade that country. I would argue (as many other theorists have) the Chinese hesitation to invade has more to do with the fact they would probably lose a conflict because of the Marines based in Okinawa. Troops mean commitment. Worded guarantees and treaties don’t. The Czechs figured that out the hard way in 1938 when it was dismembered by the Munich agreement by its so called allies the French and the British. If the US was not present as a security guarantee for Taiwan, the Chinese would be far more tempted to carry out an invasion. Trade is an important issue, but the Chinese Communist party believes they would be able to negate or minimize the damage from a US led embargo. The new Chinese diplomacy has worked hard to create new strong links with outside regimes other than the US to ensure that if it did carry out an invasion it would not be completely cut off from the outside world. An interesting article on this topic was in the spring 2002 issue of Survival about the Chinese new oil diplomacy. China in 2001 went from self sufficiency in Oil production to the need to import oil from the Middle East. They immediately moved to secure bilateral relations with Middle Eastern states in order to prevent itself from being a blackmailed through “Oil Diplomacy”. Taiwan’s trade with the mainland is insignificant, and to the Chinese, national pride has always been a driving force in Chinese politics. Looking back in their history, the CCP are acutely aware that Political change has come when governments (the Manchu and the Guomingdang) were not receptive to public demands. The average Chinese citizen has been bombarded with Four decades of communist party propaganda about Taiwan’s rightful place inside of China, and action to right that is going to stop because of a few billion dollars of trade.

I’m going to leave it at that because I have better things to do with my day than sit and argue with you, like writing a thesis. I just wished you showed more respect to people on here because there are several who do have intelligent views that differ over your own and you should at least have the minimum academic courtesy to reply in kind.

[TyPe-ZeRo]

Hahahahahah ElChe reminds me of the character "Dale" from the american t.v. show on FOX, King of the Hill. hhahahahahahah!

Oh yeah, keep posting noyhauser... reading some of these peoples replys enlightens us all!(i'm on ur side noy) lol

[senseiman]

"I usually post on here without any pretensions of my education.."

Noyhauser, I think we both know that that is stretching the truth a bit, LOL.

Seriously though, this mas oyama guy is obviously just an arrogant know it all whose arguments are lost to everyone on this board who are put off by his condescending tone. Keep posting here and we'll keep reading what you write because you make good points (that is, when I agree with you! LOL) and I think everyone will just ignore this guy.

[Mas Oyama, Rikidozan]

Because you are canadian. I can understand your position. You are not American and therefore cannot possibly know the current state of affairs here in my country.

As far as I am concerned you seem to have misunderstood the article. So lets go a quote by quote basis.

You seem to equate Japanese nationalism with fascism. Nationalism in Japan does not mean that they are going to be like how they were prior to World War II with expansionistic tendencies, now does it? Canada for all it is, by public opinion in America is just the 51st state. But that doesn’t keep you from be nationalistic for your own country now does it? We Americans can’t accuse you for being anti-american because you refuse to be our 51st state now does it? Hell you must know that we invaded your country in failed campaigns in the War of 1812.

Nowhere does Matthew say that we need to keep troops in Japan. He states this page 89 “And Japan has the right to establish its own standing army, which need not threaten its neighbors. Having said that, Washington must persuade Tokyo not to persuade nuclear weapons….” Two points it is possible to create this army yet not pose a threat to its neighbors by simply this not threaten them. How by letting Japan neighbors keep their nuclear arsenal to counteract any Japanese military. But also the very troop presence in Japan antagonizes China who seems to read our presence in Afghanistan as further proof to them that we are using the war on terrorism to contain China. But if China feels that it will lose to the Marines in Okinawa then you must clearly not understand from a military viewpoint. The Marines in Okinawa is only 1 division. The Chinese can muster 8. The Marines in Okinawa are rather light compared to the US ARMY. Even here in America the US Marines are too light for prolonged conflict and has been argued and still argued on the very existence of the Marines. Not only that with the stockpiles of Sunburn missiles that the Chinese have the US Marines will suffer tremendous casualties before even setting foot in either China or Taiwan. I can tell you right now our Marines are already neutralized when it comes to Taiwan and China. You need to realize that pertaining to military abilities you have a lot to learn and you really need to study military capabilities before discussing the capabilities of our military or of other nations. But here is a primer www.globalsecurity.org. The only reason that there is peace in the world if because of nuclear weapons not troop presence. Just like the 2nd Infantry Division in Korea, the Marines in Okinawa is just a speed bump. And trust me the Chinese don’t see them as a deterrence at all, but our nukes sure do. I know this because I am an officer in the US ARMY and have spoken to officers from the USMC, JGSDF, ROKA, and a few naval officers from Taiwan. (Also Israel and Great Britain).

Now your argument of Chinese taking nationalism before trade, well reread Matthews page 87 “In fact China has taken steps to bury historical divisions between the two countries….. For example , on September 3, Chinese Defense Minister Cao Gangchuan met with his counterpart Ishiba….. both countries announced that a Chinese warship will dock in Japan for the first time since 1949….” According to you the Chinese are acting on national pride as the driving factor. Trying to establish relations with a country that has invaded them committing atrocities such as Rape of Nanjing and that sort. Oh no, the Japanese are only acting on national pride rather than for any other reason.

As for trade with the Chinese mainland being small…. has created 3 million jobs in China and since the mid 1980s poured $70 billion in China already SINCE THE 1980’s.
But of course this is only chunk change and trade has nothing to do with their relationship, only national pride.

I am soldier and my perspective is completely different than politicians or future politicians like yourself. Nuclear deterrent is enough to keep any anatagonistic Chinese hegemony in check as did the Soviet Union and as you may know the Soviet Union never accepted our hegemony nor did we accept theirs due to Mutually Assured Destruction as the primary reason we never went to war (although we came close in Cuba). And as for troops we are already beginning plans to redeploy US troops out of Korea by “realigning them south of the DMZ” now remember Rummy already stated that earlier when Bush first came to office that he wanted to start a pull out of US troops from Korea, hell he even stated this in the Army Times Newspaper.

As for educated persons like yourself. People exactly like yourself created the debacle in Vietnam for America (McNamara) because you arrogantly see things from a politician perspective, try to see it from soldier's. I say let the Japanese build a ground army and redeploy our troops to where we need them the most, such as Iraq. (But I guess we should simply nuke the whole country and turn it into a parking lot and start from scratch.)

[Mas Oyama, Rikidozan]

As for sensei man.... You mistake my viewpoint as being an arrogant know it all. I don't claim to know it all but what I know from my own experience. Have you ever had to question your leaders (the politician variety) when you are getting shot at and watching some of your soldiers get killed. If so let me know...... we will have something in common.

[senseiman]

Actually, we aren't talking about questioning politicians while getting shot at here. You were talking about something you read in the nov. 2003 issue of foreign affairs.

I was in the army too once (in Canada), though I can't boast about being under fire or even having left North America during my brief service. In fact, my only claim to fame is that I undoubtedly had the most mundane, unheroic army career in all of military history. I take some pride in that.

Unfortunately my academic background is nowhere near as distinguished as the one Noyhauser is pursuing either and I've never read this Mathew's guy, so I guess I'm just speaking as a lowly layman here.

If I'm not mistaken, Japan already has a rather sizeable army called the SDF. I believe the cost of maintaining this ranks Japan somewhere in the top 10, maybe top 5 countries in the world on defense spending.

Japan doesn't really need US troops in Okinawa to defend itself. Like you say, they would be just a speedbump in the highly unlikely event that China ever did attack. I think the purpose they serve is as a guarantee that if China did attack, the US would get involved. If China did attack and killed 20,000 marines, the public outrage in the states would ensure that the US came to Japan's defense. If they weren't there and China attacked, maybe the US would respond or maybe they would just let China have Japan.

Personally, I think US troops should get out of Okinawa though. The likelihood of China attacking Japan is almost nil. Like you say, trade between Japan and China (and US-China) is way too valuable, and getting more so year by year. Plus, the US bases are exacting a heavy toll on the Okinawans, who had to give up about 20% of their land and put up with all the noise from low flying jets, helicopters etc.


*edits* Just an FYI: I took the liberty of deleting that second identical post of yours btw.
-Iron Chef

[Shidenkai]

Japan and America... will win against terrorism??? Eh eh eh:)

[–¼–³‚µ]

Even more visible example has been the Chinese foreign policy towards Taiwan. The recent statement by the Chinese government that it will go to War if Taiwan attempts independence is a good indicator about the importance of Chinese regional pride in comparison to trade. Is this just toothless saber rattling? I doubt it, as the Chinese have deliberately militarized the straights and created an offensive doctrine with the capabilities to match in order to invade that country.Chinese General Says China Ready to Use Nuclear Arms Against US in Taiwan Conflict (http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-07-15-voa14.cfm)

[lonesoullost3]

Chinese General Says China Ready to Use Nuclear Arms Against US in Taiwan Conflict (http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-07-15-voa14.cfm)

There are two steps in being a truly strong nuclear power:

1. Obtaining/developing nuclear weapons.
2. Having the delivery system to use them.

Has it been shown that China has a delivery system to hit the United States? To my knowledge - no (please correct me if I'm wrong).

[lexico]

Regarding the same article, I was under the impression that if there were a target of China's nucleared-headed missile in response to a US attack on China's territory which General Cheng interprets as including its warships and aircraft, it would have to be Taiwan.
That way, other nations, such as Japan or the US, have no legitimacy in attacking the mainiland ever. That's how I compute, although nothing of this detail was mentioned in General Zhu Chenghu's statement,"If the Americans are determined to interfere" on the Taiwan issue, then China "will be determined to respond."
"If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition on to the target zone on China's territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons." "China would act on the principle that its warships and aircraft are part of its territory."
I doubt this part of VOA report:Such a conflict would be extremely costly to both countries, the general says, but under what he calls "war logic," China would have to rely on its nuclear arsenal, because it sees itself as unable to win a conventional war against the United States.
I suspect that the wording might have been carefully arranged to imply the US when the General might have meant Taiwan. Tricky ?

I interpret this part of the report:China has said many times that that it will not be the first to use nuclear weapons in any military conflict.as "No nuclear retaliation unless attacked with a nuclear weapon first."

re: China's delivery capability

Wasn't China's manned mission into earth's orbit to demonstrate such a capability ?

[noyhauser]

There are two steps in being a truly strong nuclear power:

1. Obtaining/developing nuclear weapons.
2. Having the delivery system to use them.

Has it been shown that China has a delivery system to hit the United States? To my knowledge - no (please correct me if I'm wrong).


They have had the capability to since the 1970s. Primarily this could be found in the DF-5 ICBM, ground based nuclear missile. The Problem with the DF-5 was that it was liquid fueled, and therefore was unable to launch for 24 hours while it was readied. Reliable reports in the 1990s also had said that the Chinese had further separated the nuclear warheads from the missiles, which would be an added delay before launch. Therefore many analysts concluded that the Chinese had nothing more than a technical capability. The chinese also possessed a second technical ability to reach the American mainland through the use of the DF-21 submarine launched nuclear missiles that rested in one of two Xia Class SSBN. These however had a very short range, barely over 1500 miles. Therefore these submarines would have to stalk almost all the way across the pacific to hit anything of note... given their age, poor quality, and effectiveness of the US's own submarine force, this was exceedingly unlikely.

The Chinese allowed themselves to lag behind in their nuclear force because they didn't see much need to upgrade their forces. Detente with the United States certainly made the need for nuclear forces vs the United States somewhat unnecessary, as did the drawdowns of the 1990s. However with the age of China's nuclear force becoming apparent, and possibly with some eye to defend themselves more compltely against the US's overwhelming nuclear advantage, the Chinese have begun development and fielding of a new nuclear missile, the DF-31. I for one believe (and have said so several times in various arenas) that the US's interest in a bunker busting nuclear weapon has nothing to do with Al Qaeda terrorism but with the Chinese use of underground bunkers to store nuclear weapons. Really though I think the Chinese leadership were more forced by a need to renew their nuclear forces which were getting up into 30 years old or more in age, but other considerations made this decision convenient.

The DF31 has nothing to do with the chinese space program as it is a solid fueled missile, that can be launched in a matter of minutes. It can easily reach the American continent, and is a serious threat.

Also China has said in numerous statements that they would use military force if Taiwan decided to seceed. Given the structure of their forces, and the probable US response, this almost certainly would have included the use of nuclear weapons if the battle escalated.

[lonesoullost3]

Thanks for the detailed information noyhauser ^_^. I thought about the space program when I wrote my post, but I didn't know if those rockets were able to be retrofitted for nuclear warheads. But nevertheless, you do point out the liquid fuel rocket. However, considering the amount of time it would take for a rocket to reach the US from China, wouldn't it be highly likely that with the anti-missle cruisers we gave to Japan (and that we have ourselves - I believe they're Triton class??) we could shoot down any missle before it reaches our Western coast?

[Clawn]

First and foremost, thank you all for posting such lovely, lengthy, and enlightening replies. This thread has been better than PayPerView!

As you can surely comprehend, I, being a fool, am not nearly interested enough in foriegn affairs or my beliefs on the matter to post a detailed reply. Therefore I shall simply comment on the first asked question.

I believe that no matter how hard Japan and America(and the world for that matter) try, there will always be radicals, extremists, and terrorists. That is simply a fact. Until we have world peace, there will be people who don't agree with certain peope, groups, governments, etc. And there will always be a chance that, while these people remain, there will be acts of violence committed against certain bodies of people. We cannot achieve world peace, however, until these acts of hatred come to a halt. And these attacks will not stop until everyone is satisfied with the world the way it is. That will never happen, because that would mean silencing every idea, complaint, and cry for help. Because for every idea there are opposers, for every comlaint there are ones to blame, for every cry for help there are those would ignore it. And let's say that, despite all of the hurdels, it came to pass and world peace was achieved and one government, one nation ruled the planet. What kind of peace would that be. A peace without progress, individuality, or compassion. And therefore, we must accept that there will be terrorists.

[–¼–³‚µ]

The recent statement by the Chinese government that it will go to War if Taiwan attempts independence is a good indicator about the importance of Chinese regional pride in comparison to trade.Chinese General Says China Ready to Use Nuclear Arms against US in Taiwan Conflict (http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-07-15-voa14.cfm)This is a very interesting link about the topic.

Recent Trends in China's Military Modernization (http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2005hearings/written_testimonies/05_09_15wrts/mcvadon_eric_wrts.htm)However, China's savvy decision to use ballistic missiles as its weapon of choice to try to overcome the disadvantage of being an inferior force does not stop here. First, there is the threat to U.S. bases in the region—and we cannot ignore that heightened antagonism between China and Japan could make it somewhat less difficult for Beijing to make a decision to attack U.S. bases in Japan, particularly if Japan already appears inexorably ready to provide expansive support or even combat forces.