Climb Mount Nitaka

[bigwheelzip]

Looks like the Japanese have the votes to rescind Article 9 of their constitution, renouncing their pacifist stance, and redeveloping a full-fledged military again.

This was a long held desire of recently assassinated former PM Abe, and the current PM Kishida.


Sent from my motorola one 5G using Tapatalk

 

[NYlakesider]

Looks like the Japanese have the votes to rescind Article 9 of their constitution, renouncing their pacifist stance, and redeveloping a full-fledged military again.

This was a long held desire of recently assassinated former PM Abe, and the current PM Kishida.


Sent from my motorola one 5G using Tapatalk

Shades of the beginning of WW2. The Germans are back in a undivided country, and the Japanese are looking to be a highly functioning military.
Nostradamus have anything to say about that?

 

[twodog max]

Past history sure has a lot to say about that.
I have a good friend, retired army officer, that spent a lot of time in Germany pre reuniting. He told me long ago that it is only a matter of time before the Germans try to whip the world again. All the turmoil of today make the situation ripe for the process to begin again. IMO

 

[DWalt]

Time for the Japanese to dust off the plans for the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere. I would not be surprised to see it happen.

 

[swsig]

The Japanese have benefitted greatly in their world standing from having adopted Article 9. Their world standing prior to Article 9? Not so great. I'm wondering what they think they'll gain by going back.

Geography note: Since Mount Niitaka no longer belongs to the Japanese (it's in Taiwan and is now called Mount Yu), the new code will have to be, "Climb Mount Fuji". Let's hope they never use it.

 

[chief38]

Personally I see nothing out of the ordinary for a Country to have the right to defend itself against foreign attackers. ESPECIALLY located next to the giant Bully that they are. Quite honestly, I am surprised it took this long!

REMEMBER - even if there are laws set in place (like in post WW1 Germany) that never stops a Country from arming up anyway. Hasn't stopped anyone I know of for very long - including Countries in the Middle East. Just like gun laws don't stop criminals.......

 

[biku324]

The Chinese, both Nationalists on Taiwan and the billion-plus of the PRC, have not forgotten the 20-30 million dead at Japanese hands from 1936 through 1945. If/when Japan'a Article 9 is repealed, the Chinese will make some initial response and grimly prepare for eventual payback.

Contest to kill 100 people using a sword - Wikipedia

 

[BSA1]

As a history buff I have mixed feelings about Japan changing it’s Constitution and rearming. On the negative they have a terrible relationship with China and Korea in the past. On the positive for us is they are needed to counter balance Chinas aggressive moves and invasion plans for Taiwan. It shouldn’t take long for them to convert their helicopter carriers to handle the F-35.

 

[pharmer]

On the positive for us is they are needed to counter balance Chinas aggressive moves and invasion plans for Taiwan. .

World has always been a dangerous place, Lately it is for the wrong people. Joe

 

[Onomea]

Anyone think it would be a good idea if Japan militarily supported the US and Taiwan if China invades Taiwan?

Until 2014, when the government very controversially reinterpreted Article 9 of its constitution, Japan could not participate in collective self defense. If the Chinese, for example, attacked the 7th Fleet, Japan could not have come to our aid.

Japan already has a potent military. And it has already decided that it can participate in collective self-defense. Revising Article 9 to allow for a normal military would mostly be acknowledging, to themselves, an existing reality.

The Far East is a dangerous place. Japan, as a democracy, has the right to allow itself to have a normal military that, if need be, can project force internationally in protection of itself and its allies.

****

WWII ended 77 years ago. That's three generations ago. The discussion about whether Japan has sufficiently atoned for its war guilt is endless.

Time to move on.

And in a time when US global power has declined, and China and other nations are challenging the post war order that has kept the peace, having strong armed allies is a good thing for the US and our friends.

https://wapo.st/3yBHZOH

 

[MDF4]

^^^
With slight trepidation, I agree with the above.
Flip the coin; will the US support Japan should the Chinese become the aggressor threatening the Japanese?

 

[bigwheelzip]

Anyone think it would be a good idea if Japan militarily supported the US and Taiwan if China invades Taiwan?

Putting aside any security agreements, Japan is the "Israel" of the Pacific, with no nearby friends, only belligerent neighbors.
The planned doubling of the defense budget clearly makes sense, considering recent aggressive actions by Russia, China, and N. Korea.



Sent from my motorola one 5G using Tapatalk

 

[llowry61]

I think any country should have the right to defend itself.

The question is not if there will be another attempt to take over the world it is a matter of who, when and how.

It just seems to be human nature.

 

[S42N8]

Putting aside any security agreements, Japan is the "Israel" of the Pacific, with no nearby friends, only belligerent neighbors.
The planned doubling of the defense budget clearly makes sense, considering recent aggressive actions by Russia, China, and N. Korea.



Sent from my motorola one 5G using Tapatalk

If only our NATO allies would double their defense budgets. Say what you will about Japan, but they are pragmatic.

 

[Onomea]

^^^
With slight trepidation, I agree with the above.
Flip the coin; will the US support Japan should the Chinese become the aggressor threatening the Japanese?

I have long thought it a given that the US would defend Japan were it attacked by China. We have a longstanding treaty with Japan that says we will.

But we have behaved somewhat erratically towards our allies in recent years, and our political struggles at home have made us less the rock of stability that we were in the past. (I think it looks this way from both inside and outside the US.)

So, would we defend Japan if it were attacked by China? I sure hope so, in our own interests as well as theirs.

***

On a side note, I worked in the aerospace/defense industry. About a dozen years ago, give or take, I was astounded to learn from a Japanese colleague that he questioned whether we would actually do so — defend Japan from China — if push came to shove.

I think the Japanese are wise to see to it that they have their own military capability and the constitutional right to use it.

 

[biku324]

If only our NATO allies would double their defense budgets. Say what you will about Japan, but they are pragmatic.

You're late - NATO members are on a spending spree since February.

 

[Onomea]

Putting aside any security agreements, Japan is the "Israel" of the Pacific, with no nearby friends, only belligerent neighbors.
The planned doubling of the defense budget clearly makes sense, considering recent aggressive actions by Russia, China, and N. Korea.

It is good to see the recent rapprochement between Tokyo and Seoul, both US allies, under the new South Korean administration.

 

[HOUSTON RICK]

World War 3 will come from a nuclear armed despot in the middle east.

 

[S42N8]

You're late - NATO members are on a spending spree since February.

After 80 years of US largesse? Methinks others are late.

 

[biku324]

After 80 years of US largesse? Methinks others are late.

Think about this...at NATO's 1947 formation, with the Treaty of Dunkirk, the signatories were the UK, and France. In 1948, the Brussels Treaty added Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg. We, Canada, Italy, Portugal, Iceland, Norway, and Denmark joined in 1949.

Of this group, all but us, Canada, Iceland, and Portugal were still in ruins since after V-E Day (you may recall the Marshall Plan to help rebuild and stop starvation). For Heaven's sake, it took the UK until 2006 to pay off their WWII debt to us. Especially through the first two post-war decades, no other countries had anything like our capacity for defense. So; as Western Europe gained strength through the 70s and 80s, their contributions grew, as did NATO in the face of the Soviet threat.

Then the Soviet Union collapsed, ecpnomically and financially. Germany reunited, and the EU developed in a relatively threat-free environment. Only when South Ossetia happened did NATO begin to redefine itself, after 25 years, as again defensive with one major threat.

It's not so simple as 'we always paid because NATO wouldn't;' for decades, they couldn't, then for decades, there wasn't much threat.

Since February it's been different. Good. Better late than never.