Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Right-Wing Extremism Grows in Japan
Asia Finest Discussion Forum > Asian Culture > Japanese Chat > Japanese Serious Talk
Pages: 1, 2
BigBenChow
QUOTE

Right-Wing Extremism Grows in Japan

Right-wing extremism is increasingly becoming a driving force in Japanese politics and society.

While the news regularly carries stories about how right-wing extremism is growing in Germany, with right-wing parties entering into government and promoting nationalist policies, this same trend is gathering steam in Japan, that other great aggressor in World War ii.

It is shadowy right-wing groups, the Independent reports, that “are at the forefront of a concerted push to get Japan to move away from its post-war pacifism” (Dec. 8, 2006).

This right-wing movement, reports the Washington Post, “is ardently nationalist, reveres the emperor, supports the rebuilding of Japan’s military might and generally bemoans what they call the apologetic strain of Japan’s foreign policy since World War ii. The right-wingers trumpet their patriotism in the sound trucks and at Tokyo’s controversial Yasukuni shrine honoring the country’s militarism.”

They also use violence and other sinister methods to promote their nationalist cause. In February last year, for example, right-wing extremists burned down the house of a prominent liberal politician. “Japan’s police are calling it right-wing terrorism and say such groups are on the rise,” writes the Independent. Members of one such group, Taiko-Sha, “are accused of carrying out fire-bombings, beatings, stabbings, shootings, and even their own ritual suicides, to make a political point” (op. cit.).

Such groups have received little exposure over the years. Now, however, the aggressive nationalism they espouse is becoming mainstream. “[A] resurgent nationalism among some mainstream politicians and North Korea’s recent nuclear testing have meant right-wing groups are now being listened to at the highest levels, and many of the policies they have been seeking are now on the government’s agenda” (ibid.; emphasis ours). Traditionally sensitive topics that have recently become open to political and public discourse—such as stripping the constitution of its pacifist components, developing nuclear weapons, and promoting patriotism in schools—are the very issues right-wing extremists have been pushing for decades.

Manifestations of the popular rise in Japanese nationalism advocated by right-wingers include foreigners being targeted by police, the alleged censorship and intimidation of journalists and scholars who criticize nationalist trends in Japan, the Defense Agency being upgraded to a Defense Ministry, a new school curriculum aimed at instilling in students “an attitude that respects tradition and culture, and love of the nation and homeland,” and teachers being threatened with suspension and loss of pay if they don’t sing the national anthem and salute the flag.

“All of this,” comments the Independent, “is exactly what Japan’s influential and well-organized right-wing movement has been demanding for years.”

Yumi Kikuchi, a writer who attended a meeting in central Tokyo recently to protest against moves to the right, put it bluntly: “If you look at all the laws they passed in the past three years it is preparation for war like we did 60 years ago.”

Naturally, some surrounding Asian nations are eyeing the emerging nationalism in Japan nervously. However, it is not only Japan’s neighbors that should be concerned; Japan’s history shows it can be a threat much further afield. In this context, it is worth noting that the right-wingers also advocate cutting ties with the United States—a trend also likely to be reflected in Japanese society and politics in the future as right-wing sentiment becomes more and more mainstream.

http://thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=2838
enomosiki
I'd say lets all gather around the right-wing extremists into a deserted island and nuke the hell out of them just for the kicks.
RentonWong
It took Germany two World Wars to get it right
Puppetz
If i was Japanese i would look at the military strength China has been building for 30 years and think yeah its about time to stand up and think about making the country strong again. They have every reason to be concerned, its their lives and children at stake. Theres a strong move to keep Japan weak why do you think that is? We needed a stronger Japan 10 years ago theres no time to waste.
warrhero
protecting children and homeland, thats good
extreme nationalism(violent) , thats very bad
Ogumo
QUOTE(Puppetz @ Jan 26 2007, 03:23 PM) [snapback]2681838[/snapback]

If i was Japanese i would look at the military strength China has been building for 30 years and think yeah its about time to stand up and think about making the country strong again. They have every reason to be concerned, its their lives and children at stake. Theres a strong move to keep Japan weak why do you think that is? We needed a stronger Japan 10 years ago theres no time to waste.


That is exactly what this is about. The chinese and koreans simply want an even weaker japan to push around.
Ecthelion
QUOTE(Ogumo @ Mar 29 2007, 08:35 PM) [snapback]2824556[/snapback]

That is exactly what this is about. The chinese and koreans simply want an even weaker japan to push around.


I agree that having a strong military is an inherent aspect of a strong nation. But honestly Ogumo, do you really believe that your country can stand against China indefinitely? It's best to kiss and make up. The ball's in your court, and your boy Abe isn't picking it up, time's running out.
Ogumo
QUOTE(Ecthelion @ Mar 30 2007, 01:34 AM) [snapback]2825201[/snapback]

I agree that having a strong military is an inherent aspect of a strong nation. But honestly Ogumo, do you really believe that your country can stand against China indefinitely? It's best to kiss and make up. The ball's in your court, and your boy Abe isn't picking it up, time's running out.


Militarily? If japan were to develop a stronger navy and airforce it is possible. On the ground is a different story. In anycase if japan must bind itself up to play ball with the chinese. Then there is no point in playing at all.
moobie
yes spend more money on garbage u.s tech for overinflated prices, great idea.
Bulldogg
its the year 2007, WW I and WW II, were decades ago let alone all of you here i assume weren't even born around that time let alone myself. Makes me sick when all of Asia have finally caught up or are catching up real fast to the technology and economic successful level.

It was Japan who ruined all of S.E.A countries or shall i say helped ruin it even more, with the help of Western colonial powers along with the U.S.A useing it has a battle playground.

Today all of Asia and S.E.A are united and all of their economy and country along with military keep getting bigger and better and stronger.

To the new Japanese imperialist generation who would like to repeat WW I and WW II.

I say all of Asia and S.E.A countries unite and sink that island they call Japan. Who need Japan anyway.
enomosiki
QUOTE(moobie @ Mar 30 2007, 09:33 AM) [snapback]2825786[/snapback]
yes spend more money on garbage u.s tech for overinflated prices, great idea.


It's much better than spending money on worthless garbage Chinese technology for undeserving prices.
EvilAsianDude
I hope the right wing end up destroying Japan like they did during the early half of the 20th century. Maybe then will the Japanese realize that Japan is not the center of the world.
Ecthelion
QUOTE(Ogumo @ Mar 30 2007, 05:17 AM) [snapback]2825607[/snapback]

Militarily? If japan were to develop a stronger navy and airforce it is possible. On the ground is a different story. In anycase if japan must bind itself up to play ball with the chinese. Then there is no point in playing at all.


I think the problem is the Japanese's view of the greater picture. From what I understand of the Japanese right wing, they basically want Japan to carve its own path, independent of the great powers.

This is an admirable goal, and it should (idealistically) be the goal of every self respecting nation.

But the reality of the situation does not allow this. Almost every major political analyst has come to the conclusion that this century will be one of China versus the US. Sort of like how the last century was about Germany and Japan versus the established powers of Britain, the US, and the USSR.

Japan is too powerful to stay out of this drama in the Pacific. But it is not powerful enough to be an independent player in it. It, along with South Korea, has to choose a side.

So the Japanese have to ask themselves who they trust more in, the old power or the new.
moobie
QUOTE
It's much better than spending money on worthless garbage Chinese technology for undeserving prices.


how about not spend extra at all because if you get into a war with china they will just nuke you into the ground
Titanium
QUOTE(Puppetz @ Jan 26 2007, 02:23 PM) [snapback]2681838[/snapback]

If i was Japanese i would look at the military strength China has been building for 30 years and think yeah its about time to stand up and think about making the country strong again. They have every reason to be concerned, its their lives and children at stake. Theres a strong move to keep Japan weak why do you think that is? We needed a stronger Japan 10 years ago theres no time to waste.

Well it doesn't help that right wing Japanese politicians continue to gloss over their wartime past. Most people tend to overlook the fact that this issue is also a security one for Japan's neighbors. The fact that Japanese politicians continue to show no remorse over her wartime past is proof that Japan's neighbors (China, Korea) need to be alarmed. If a former criminal shows no remorse over what he/she did in the past, how can anyone trust that same criminal not to commit the same crime again?
SiFuZhenXing
QUOTE(Ecthelion @ Mar 30 2007, 12:34 AM) [snapback]2825201[/snapback]

I agree that having a strong military is an inherent aspect of a strong nation. But honestly Ogumo, do you really believe that your country can stand against China indefinitely? It's best to kiss and make up. The ball's in your court, and your boy Abe isn't picking it up, time's running out.

laugh.gif
enomosiki
QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 7 2007, 04:20 PM) [snapback]2848274[/snapback]
how about not spend extra at all because if you get into a war with china they will just nuke you into the ground


How about not bragging off about how China has nukes when Japan can build enough nukes by themselves to level major Chinese cities and stone China's economy by AT LEAST a decade? Surely you should all know that, with all these "right-wing extremism" growing in Japan, the Japanese will be ridding themselves of the pacifist ROE and arming themselves with offensive capabilities, of which will most likely include nuclear arsenals.

It's really easy; If one side uses nuclear weapons, then the other side has no choice but to use it also. I doubt that even you Chinese are dumb enough to start lobbing nukes for fun and provoking World War III but, heck, I just might be wrong on this one. icon_wink.gif
moobie
once they find out japan is building nukes and instilling nazi extremism they'll just have north korea blow tokyo away and watch
Red Fox Ace
QUOTE(Puppetz @ Jan 26 2007, 02:23 PM) [snapback]2681838[/snapback]

If i was Japanese i would look at the military strength China has been building for 30 years and think yeah its about time to stand up and think about making the country strong again. They have every reason to be concerned, its their lives and children at stake. Theres a strong move to keep Japan weak why do you think that is? We needed a stronger Japan 10 years ago theres no time to waste.


I agree. Japan needs to build more submarines and pluss up the numbers of fighter jets in the air force. Currently there are 223 F-15s and 70+ F-2s. If it gets boosted to a 400- or 500-airframe fighter force, that would be more like it. Airborne tankers would extend range and long-range missiles might give Japan some sort of strike capability against North Korea or China.
moobie
they should just develop nukes and save some money
enomosiki
QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 8 2007, 09:46 PM) [snapback]2852826[/snapback]
once they find out japan is building nukes and instilling nazi extremism they'll just have north korea blow tokyo away and watch


Are you letting your mouth do the thinking for your brain? Just how is North Korea going to deliver nuclear warheads to Japan?

With their obsolete Scud-B? I don't think so. The only warheads that the North Koreans can produce are clunky, massive, heavy, low-yield and unreliable, which are too heavy for the Scuds to be able to lob them off, modified or not.

With their Cold War-era bombers? Not a chance in hell. They will have to get through the layers of air defenses consisting of AWACS, Aegis destroyers, whatever intercepters their ASDF can sortie out and, finally, the PAC-3.

Seriously, try using your brains once in a while instead of blurting out, "zOMFG WE GOT THE NUKES SOMEONE SET UP US THE BOMB!!" If you are dumb enough to be willing to watch China lobbing off their nuclear missiles, then you are probably not smart enough to realize that your @$$ will also be fried in retaliation strike.
moobie
Japan would be annihilated before they can even arm the ICBMs, it'd take development a few months in advance for them to get second strike capability.

and North Korea could launch a nuke if say, NK nationals "abducted" some scientists.

I'm not willing to watch anyone get nuked. Unless they're crazy Japanese Right-Wing Nazis who want to go around attacking people.
Vitality
Geography is clearly against Japan in a full on nuclear confrontation because China can absorb punishment. On the other hand, Japan's obliteration is guaranteed.

Red Fox Ace
QUOTE(Vitality @ Apr 8 2007, 11:01 PM) [snapback]2853190[/snapback]

Geography is clearly against Japan in a full on nuclear confrontation because China can absorb punishment. On the other hand, Japan's obliteration is guaranteed.



Good point. China's population is spread out over a wide mainland whereas Japan's is clustered in a few large metropolis city centers. A few nukes in the right places will have catastrophic results for Japan.

QUOTE(enomosiki @ Apr 8 2007, 10:41 PM) [snapback]2853163[/snapback]

Are you letting your mouth do the thinking for your brain? Just how is North Korea going to deliver nuclear warheads to Japan?

With their obsolete Scud-B? I don't think so. The only warheads that the North Koreans can produce are clunky, massive, heavy, low-yield and unreliable, which are too heavy for the Scuds to be able to lob them off, modified or not.


I'm thinking Taepaedong missiles, which seems to be North Korea's obvious weapon of choice. icon_neutral.gif
Vitality
Having said that, a nuclear strike in China will surely cause it's fragile nation to collapse politically, economically, and socially.

China's goals (Or ambitions) I should say are not military but rather economic dominance. One needs to look no further at the recent case of Myanmar and Sudan.
enomosiki
QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 8 2007, 11:54 PM) [snapback]2853185[/snapback]
Japan would be annihilated before they can even arm the ICBMs, it'd take development a few months in advance for them to get second strike capability.

and North Korea could launch a nuke if say, NK nationals "abducted" some scientists.

I'm not willing to watch anyone get nuked. Unless they're crazy Japanese Right-Wing Nazis who want to go around attacking people.


Yeah, right. What you are basically saying is that China is going to use nuclear weapons should Japan ever goes nuclear for whatever reasons that might or might not concern China.

Good luck on starting World War III there, retard.

And with what will the North Koreans launch nuclear warheads with, imaginary rockets? You can't abduct "some scientists" and force them to build warheads and delivery systems with a snap of a finger. It takes months (years in North Korea's case since they have absolutely no tech-base whatsoever on creating heavy rockets capable of lifting any nuclear warheads that they can build due to the fact that, if not that they have any warheads to begin with, then due to the massive size and weight) to be able to design, construct, implement, organize and prepare a missile. Compared to that, Japan already has capability to build and prepare a delivery system within a few months if they wanted to.

QUOTE(Vitality @ Apr 9 2007, 12:01 AM) [snapback]2853190[/snapback]
Geography is clearly against Japan in a full on nuclear confrontation because China can absorb punishment. On the other hand, Japan's obliteration is guaranteed.


Japan doesn't need to be able to turn China into a smoldering parking lot. They just need to be able to throw the Chinese economy back to the 1950's status in order for them to deter the Chinese from pressing the button. A few warheads targeted at major Chinese economic cities will do just that, plus some more at major population areas.

QUOTE(Red Fox Ace @ Apr 9 2007, 12:15 AM) [snapback]2853202[/snapback]
I'm thinking Taepaedong missiles, which seems to be North Korea's obvious weapon of choice. icon_neutral.gif


Taepodong-1 is not powerful enough to lift whatever warheads that the North Koreans can come up with. It's also vulnerable to mid-air interception due to the fact that it's nothing more than a glorified Scud-B.

Taepodong-2, on the other hand, might (I say "might", because their only test with this thing failed miserably) be able to lift newer and smaller tactical nuclear warheads ranging at about 300kt maximum, but even then it's nowhere enough for it to be able to lift whatever North Koreans can manage to produce due to the fact that they have no ability to create a small warhead with more than a kiloton range.
baal
QUOTE(Vitality @ Apr 8 2007, 08:01 PM) [snapback]2853190[/snapback]

Geography is clearly against Japan in a full on nuclear confrontation because China can absorb punishment. On the other hand, Japan's obliteration is guaranteed.


You speak cavalierly of death. I'm sure you realize Japan's mutual defense treaty with America will be invoked by the Japanese, and honored by the Americans. How much punishment can China absorb? After absorbing a couple of thousand thermonuclear warheads will China continue to exist in its current political and territorial configuration? America couldn't absorb that kind of punishment and survive in its present political and territorial form. If you decide to respond, in addition to whatever else you say please directly answer the two questions I have posed. Thank you.


moobie
On the contrary, China is the one and only nation in the world that has both the population and the resolve to survive abject poverty, given their trained resistance to it. However there'd be utter chaos in any of the G8 nations if they were destroyed financially; which is why forex reserves give China (and Japan/Korea) so much power.

No one would honor that treaty with Japan if they were nuked. Self-interests are top priority, and they don't want mutual assured destruction.

Lets review, anyway, to regain perspective:

Some guy suggests increasing Japan's already enormous percent GDP military budget, because of the the "threat of China! OMG, they're going to kill us all"

I suggest not wasting the money and simply developing nukes with the money instead, because that's truly the only thing that will save Japan from China if there's an all out war (which there won't be)

Then we have the point where we're at now.
baal
QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 8 2007, 10:18 PM) [snapback]2853420[/snapback]

On the contrary, China is the one and only nation in the world that has both the population and the resolve to survive abject poverty, given their trained resistance to it. However there'd be utter chaos in any of the G8 nations if they were destroyed financially; which is why forex reserves give China (and Japan/Korea) so much power.

No one would honor that treaty with Japan if they were nuked. Self-interests are top priority, and they don't want mutual assured destruction.


The only people who believe the contentions in the foregoing post serve on the PLA's General Staff, and periodically threaten to nuke Los Angeles. Most Americans consider such people to be monsters. I believe you are mistaken, but not a monster. There are a couple of reasons I disagree with your analysis. Since 1949 China's internal coherence has been enforced by a ruthless police state. This is analogous to the way the Kempetei (sp?) enforced political coherence in wartime Japan. In a thermonuclear exchange with America the instruments of the CCP's police state would cease to exist.

If the CCP attacked Japan with nuclear weapons Americans would assume they would be next, and would abandon the notion of deterrence. If the CCP cadres went insane and attacked Japan, they invite a first strike as the only means of partial American self-preservation.

Why do so many Chinese assume that Americans will react differently than the Chinese would if the roles were reversed? Vitality has still not answered my questions. How much punishment can China absorb? Am I correct in assuming Vitality is not an American? I sure hope I'm correct. Has Vitality seen death up close? I suspect not.
moobie
Well if they're attacking Japan in the first place, we're already in bat $hit bizarro world so what's new here

The situation which I'm positing though, that I garner from this nationalism crap and offensive capability, is one where Japan goes completely buttfu-k crazy and starts firebombing Beijing or something. In that case China would probably launch a nuclear motherlode, and they should.

However you'd be right if some crazy retard in the CPC nuked Japan; it could probably instigate some kind of nuclear holocaust between the U.S and China.

Personally I think China and Japan are both wasting their money increasing military spending, but oh well.
baal
QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 8 2007, 11:51 PM) [snapback]2853553[/snapback]

Personally I think China and Japan are both wasting their money increasing military spending, but oh well.


So is America. Hang in there homeboy. beerchug.gif
moobie
yeah u.s military budget is insane. could build another country with all that money.
Red Fox Ace
QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 9 2007, 01:18 AM) [snapback]2853420[/snapback]

Some guy suggests increasing Japan's already enormous percent GDP military budget, because of the the "threat of China! OMG, they're going to kill us all"


Lol. A 1% GDP spending military budget is considered "enormous?"
moobie
well , i guess if you think paying a few billion dollars for nothing is a good idea then sure
Red Fox Ace
QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 9 2007, 12:20 PM) [snapback]2854494[/snapback]

well , i guess if you think paying a few billion dollars for nothing is a good idea then sure



Actually, Japan's military has many issues that could be addressed with an increase in defense spending. I'd recommend something like 1.5% of GDP perhaps, around $60 billion a year, to address the following needs:


Offensive strike missiles. Long-range missiles similar to China's Dong Feng series could allow Tokyo to strike at North Korean targets, and other targets as well. $4 billion over five years.



New fighters, as mentioned. Japan's fleet is aging and getting outdated. The F-4s should have been replaced by now and the main fleet of 223 F-15Js is also over 20 years old. The Eurofighter Typhoon is currently the leading candidate to replace the F-4s, but what's going to replace the F-15s? We're talking around 250-300 fighters, which is a huge amount of money. $20 billion over eight years.


More missile defense. Japan right now has only two PAC-3 batteries around the Tokyo region. This is not enough. The government should try to get the licensing rights to co-produce PAC-3 with the USA, and to deploy more around all major cities, perhaps up to a dozen batteries. There should also be more spending on SM-3, and also more C4ISR and radars and comm/integration for the whole national missile defense shield as a whole entity. $9-11 billion over six years.


More submarines. The JMSDF has only 16 submarines. They are capable, but an insufficient number. Furthermore the time may come when Tokyo will need submarines with more capability and range for extended missions (re: UN peacekeeping commitments, energy security, etc.) and nuclear submarines may be called for. Japan should build 8 more Oyashio submarines and do research and development on SSNs. $16 billion over ten years.


P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft. Japan currently has a fleet of over 100+ P-3C Orion aircraft, built under license. These are getting old despite constant updates. Tokyo should try to either purchase outright, or get the license to build, the Boeing 737-based P-8 Poseidon antisubmarine aircraft. Anywhere between 40 and 70 planes are required to fill the JMSDF's antisubmarine aircraft requirement. $15-20 billion over ten years.


moobie
they should put all the money into the missiles imo. the rest is worthless. no one is ever going to attack japan, except maybe aliens and malfunctioning Sony robots.
Red Fox Ace
QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 9 2007, 02:19 PM) [snapback]2854887[/snapback]

they should put all the money into the missiles imo. the rest is worthless. no one is ever going to attack japan, except maybe aliens and malfunctioning Sony robots.



Moobie, the F-15s have got to be replaced. If nothing else, Japan has to get new fighters. This is a must.
X_Dragon
you guys all suck, its all about GUNDAMS
moobie
remote controlled death robots!
Red Fox Ace
All right guys, this is the "Japanese Serious Talk" forum, so contribute accordingly.
baal
QUOTE(Red Fox Ace @ Apr 9 2007, 01:52 PM) [snapback]2855330[/snapback]

All right guys, this is the "Japanese Serious Talk" forum, so contribute accordingly.


Agreed. Let's keep this real or I'll start posting about my health problems. You don't want to go there.
enomosiki
QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 9 2007, 03:19 PM) [snapback]2854887[/snapback]
they should put all the money into the missiles imo. the rest is worthless. no one is ever going to attack japan, except maybe aliens and malfunctioning Sony robots.


First you were so hyped talking about how China should bombard Japan and now you are saying that "no one is ever going to attack" them. Stop contradicting yourself.

Nuclear weapons are purely POLITICAL TOOLS. They cannot TAKE GROUND or HOLD GROUND. They are useful in political leverages and powerplays for nation-states to negotiate with each other and NOTHING ELSE. You can't use nuclear weapons, or any other WMDs for that matter, without the harsh reality that the other side will not use them in retaliation. This is called Mutually Assured Destruction, where one side using a nuke guarantees that it will spark a chain reaction. If you still don't understand what I've mentioned, it's basically summarized as tit-for-tat.

And, since you've mentioned that everything else other than nuclear weapons are "worthless", then do explain why China is spending so much money to build up their military on their "worthless" equipment that are a FULL GENERATION BEHIND compared to NATO, Korean and Japanese counterparts instead of pouring all that money into building more nuclear weapons. If you can't come up with a reasonable reply (I say "reasonable", because every previous posts that you've made in this thread aren't) to this, then all of your past statements make absolutely no sense.
moobie
it's a waste of money, too. what, do you think conventional forces now are what gives people real power? the power to carpet bomb some muslim civilians.. fantastic.

a nuclear arsenal would ensure that anyone attacking you would be completely annihilated.

if i were in charge of the CCP i'd put all the military spending into making icbms, some with nuclear warheads ;p but then again, according to US reports that's exactly what they're doing.

anyway in what dumb fantasy land is china going to attack japan? are you really enough of a fu-ktard to think china is going to suddenly bomb their second largest trading partner? because every country that updates its military and pays personnel is "rapidly militarizing". if china wanted advanced weapons tomorrow they could have it, 10+ trillion buys a lot of stuff.

nothing you've mentioned can TAKE GROUND or HOLD GROUND either because China will simply overrun you after an attack on Chinese territory and then completely annihilate Japan with nukes. And we're back at square one.
Red Fox Ace
QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 9 2007, 06:18 PM) [snapback]2855626[/snapback]

it's a waste of money, too. what, do you think conventional forces now are what gives people real power? the power to carpet bomb some muslim civilians.. fantastic.

a nuclear arsenal would ensure that anyone attacking you would be completely annihilated.


You don't get it Moobie. Nuclear weapons are not meant to be ever really used. They are there as some sort of ultimate trump card and can be used as a threat in order to provide stability, but they should never be used. If you use them, you open a giant can of worms and no one knows what might result.

QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 9 2007, 06:18 PM) [snapback]2855626[/snapback]

if i were in charge of the CCP i'd put all the military spending into making icbms, some with nuclear warheads ;p but then again, according to US reports that's exactly what they're doing.


Two thoughts:


You don't need to spend all your money on that. China already has a small ICBM force. If you spend a few more billion you can improve your deterrent further. No need for more than maybe 100 ICBMs and maybe 500 warheads.


Secondly:

What if you have only nukes but no conventional weapons? You are in an extremely, and I mean extremely, inflexible and rigid situation. Your only options are to totally nuke your enemy, or don't fight them at all. There's no in between.


What if Taiwan declares independence and you don't have conventional forces? What to do, nuke Taiwan?

What if terrorists kidnap your diplomats and hold them hostage? You don't have conventional forces? Nuke them!
enomosiki
QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 9 2007, 07:18 PM) [snapback]2855626[/snapback]
it's a waste of money, too. what, do you think conventional forces now are what gives people real power? the power to carpet bomb some muslim civilians.. fantastic.

a nuclear arsenal would ensure that anyone attacking you would be completely annihilated.

if i were in charge of the CCP i'd put all the military spending into making icbms, some with nuclear warheads ;p but then again, according to US reports that's exactly what they're doing.

anyway in what dumb fantasy land is china going to attack japan? are you really enough of a fu-ktard to think china is going to suddenly bomb their second largest trading partner? because every country that updates its military and pays personnel is "rapidly militarizing". if china wanted advanced weapons tomorrow they could have it, 10+ trillion buys a lot of stuff.

nothing you've mentioned can TAKE GROUND or HOLD GROUND either because China will simply overrun you after an attack on Chinese territory and then completely annihilate Japan with nukes. And we're back at square one.


Right. Lets say that the Chinese decided to throw out all of their conventional arms and just keep the nukes instead. Then what are the Chinese going to do when Taiwan decides to roll into, lets say, Beijing with tanks and infantry? Will the Chinese nuke Beijing simply to wipe out the Taiwanese garrison all the while killing more than 15 million Chinese citizens residing in Beijing as well as destroying most of the city's infrastructures, or will they nuke Taiwan itself, both of which will certainly provoke a nuclear confrontation?

No, lets go back a little further than that. Lets say that the Americans decided to play some special and covert operations to go after the Chinese missiles before the Chinese can figure out what happened, rendering any sort of pre-emptive strikes by China against the U.S. useless. With what will China fight off the Americans that already have taken over the missiles with and take back the control of them? Nothing.

Going back further more, with what will the Chinese guard those missiles with in case of an imminent attack upon those missiles? Nothing. No anti-aircraft batteries to protect the missiles from hit by air strikes. No trained soldiers to protect the missiles from being destroyed by surgical strikes, special forces or divisions of enemy troops and vehicles.

And, again, you've contradicted yourself, first by saying how Japan should be nuked by China and now how China shouldn't nuke Japan. Try not to hop back and forth between decisions; It just tells a lot about how uneducated you are in matters like this.

With what will the Chinese "overrun" the invading force with since you've mentioned how China should throw out their conventional equipment and keep building nuclear weapons instead? Do you plan to send out militia armed with sticks and stones against soldiers equipped with heavy weapons? Fat chance.

Finally, just to let you know, being the second largest, or even the largest, trading partner doesn't mean jack$hit. Do you know who Germany's biggest trading partner just up until World War II began was? The answer is France.

There you have it. If you don't know anything about things like this, then do yourself a favor and keep out of the discussion until you know better.
moobie
QUOTE
Then what are the Chinese going to do when Taiwan decides to roll into, lets say, Beijing with tanks and infantry?


Completely annihilate the attacking countries if they even land, a pretty sound ultimatum. I don't think Taiwan is going to surprise attack China and then massacre Beijing, but if they did that, they deserve a nuclear holocaust. Some goes vice versa if China attacked Taiwan. It might sound insane to completely annihilate a country with nuclear weapons, but then again, what kind of fu-king retard would attack Beijing?

QUOTE
No, lets go back a little further than that. Lets say that the Americans decided to play some special and covert operations to go after the Chinese missiles before the Chinese can figure out what happened, rendering any sort of pre-emptive strikes by China against the U.S. useless. With what will China fight off the Americans that already have taken over the missiles with and take back the control of them? Nothing.


it's really unlikely that they'll be able to do that with 10,000+ warheads, which might be needed for emergencies. of course, having nukes means having the means to support and counterattack with them, not just leaving an ICBM in the middle of a playground somewhere at an elementary school, without the obvious things to support and guard it.

QUOTE
With what will the Chinese "overrun" the invading force with since you've mentioned how China should throw out their conventional equipment and keep building nuclear weapons instead? Do you plan to send out militia armed with sticks and stones against soldiers equipped with heavy weapons? Fat chance.


By raining nuclear death, chemical and biological weapons on the attacking country, to kill 95-100% of their population and destroy all their infrastructure. Since were in crazyland already.

QUOTE
You don't get it Moobie. Nuclear weapons are not meant to be ever really used.


I don't think you understand. A large scale conflict between powers ISNT going to happen because of nukes and other things. But whatever, apparently people want to fantasize that war is goign to happen. So everyone should fu-king spend all their money on the military I guess. I mean the US spends 500+ billion so why doesn't everyone else.

QUOTE
What if you have only nukes but no conventional weapons? You are in an extremely, and I mean extremely, inflexible and rigid situation. Your only options are to totally nuke your enemy, or don't fight them at all. There's no in between.


Well, the attacking nation has two options: attack and be totally wiped off the map and destroyed forever, or mind their business.

QUOTE
What if Taiwan declares independence and you don't have conventional forces? What to do, nuke Taiwan?


What would China do if that happened now? Invade? I'm not sure here. Sounds like it'd be retarded for both sides. But I guess launch ICBMs with conventional explosives.

QUOTE
What if terrorists kidnap your diplomats and hold them hostage? You don't have conventional forces? Nuke them!


Definitely not throw 90 billion at them, heh.

Anyway let me ask this, under what fu-king retard's rule is someone going to firebomb Beijing or Tokyo today? I know some of you might be going through this young guy phase where war is thought to be so glorious and cool but the truth is that it's a fu-king plague on humanity if you ever read history.
Red Fox Ace
QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 9 2007, 07:59 PM) [snapback]2855970[/snapback]

Anyway let me ask this, under what fu-king retard's rule is someone going to firebomb Beijing or Tokyo today?



Moobie, you are thinking in extreme terms. With you, everything is either a case of total annihilation, or none at all.


Let me feed you a few scenarios. In these scenarios China has only nukes, no conventional military.




Scenario A:
Vietnam sends in warships to take over a disputed island in the Spratlys, which China also claims as its territory. What do you do, nuke Vietnam completely?


Scenario B:
A group of terrorists in South America kidnap several Chinese diplomats and hold them hostage. How do you rescue your diplomats? Nukes are the only thing you have.


Scenario C: North Korea begins sending occasional recon teams north of the Yalu River for the sake of harassing Chinese civilians and gathering intelligence. What do you do, nuke Pyongyang?


Do you realize what I'm driving at here? Military situations almost never are as blatant and extreme as you claim them to be (re: "Japan invades and firebombs and butchers Beijing totally.") No. Rather, they are often complex, limited, and have many variables. Having a "Let's nuke them and wipe em out" mentality is certainly not the answer.
moobie
QUOTE
Scenario A: Vietnam sends in warships to take over a disputed island in the Spratlys, which China also claims as its territory. What do you do, nuke Vietnam completely?


Why would Vietnam be taking such an aggressive action? Sink them. Pull investments, impose sanctions, short currency, I dunno. Isn't the current spending enough to deal with it? I was talking about the additional (meaning the 17% increased spending people are afraid of) spending, btw. I messed up in the line before the "that's what they're doing anyway" part, leaving the word "extra" out.

QUOTE
Scenario B: A group of terrorists in South America kidnap several Chinese diplomats and hold them hostage. How do you rescue your diplomats? Nukes are the only thing you have.


What CAN you do? I haven't seen people send in an entire military for a terrorist hostage situation yet.

QUOTE
Scenario C: North Korea begins sending occasional recon teams north of the Yalu River for the sake of harassing Chinese civilians and gathering intelligence. What do you do, nuke Pyongyang?


What would you do? Invade North Korea? Probably intercept them.
Red Fox Ace
QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 9 2007, 08:37 PM) [snapback]2856112[/snapback]

Why would Vietnam be taking such an aggressive action? Sink them.

How to sink Vietnam's warships? You don't have a navy, remember? You only have nukes!



QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 9 2007, 08:37 PM) [snapback]2856112[/snapback]

What CAN you do? I haven't seen people send in an entire military for a terrorist hostage situation yet.


I would send in special forces, or, if the host nation is friendly to China, to ask them to rescue the diplomats out of diplomatic hospitality (the host nation has to guarantee the safety of the diplomats.) But again, you don't have special forces, remember? You have only nuclear weapons.


QUOTE(moobie @ Apr 9 2007, 08:37 PM) [snapback]2856112[/snapback]

What would you do? Invade North Korea? Probably intercept them.


I would intercept them. But you can't. You don't have a ground army. You only have nukes.
moobie
haha probably launch missiles with conventional explosives at one of their bases i guess.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2009 Invision Power Services, Inc.