It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Japan..strikes against n.korea?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 11:44 AM
link   
www.iht.com...

doesnt seem to be much coming up about this but whats the chance of this going further?

apparentley and understandably the Japanese are pretty miffed..

[edit on 10-7-2006 by optimus fett]




posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 12:03 PM
link   
I would say i hope they dont strike NK, but they are justified if they did. North Korea has persistently poked and proded them. I do hope they find a diplomatic solution. I think they will- i dont think they are going to lose their .s.



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 12:09 PM
link   
politics.abovetopsecret.com...

Yeh I posted this an hour ago and they moved it to Politics, but yeh I read abotu Japan making a secert Offense attack force as of late, I been looking for some more information about it though.



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 12:18 PM
link   
I'd like to see more reaction from members in reference to this post...

What if the US was contemplating a preemptive strike? I believe that was on the table at one time, but was more or less taken off due to public opinion (needless to say, a direct result from the Iraq war). Do you think is justified while the US is not? Remember, NK's new missiles can reach US shores.



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 12:25 PM
link   
having an offensively armed japan sounds like a nice addition towards the balancing of power with other countries in the area in regards to china...on paper atleast. also, think of all the $$ that could be made from selling japan more military equipment and tech. could this be in the minds of our gov't officials?? i think so.

[edit on 10-7-2006 by rockieboy]



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 12:32 PM
link   


having an offensively armed japan sounds like a nice addition towards the balancing of power with other countries in the area in regards to china...on paper atleast. also, think of all the $$ made from selling japan more military equipment and tech. could this be in the minds of our gov't officials?? i think so.


this is a pretty valid point, having a powerbase friendley to the west in this part of theworld could certainly cause a few problems but also iron a few out, it would certainly act as a more respected deterent than the us.



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 12:32 PM
link   
think of all the $$ made from selling japan more military equipment and tech. could this be in the minds of our gov't officials?? i think so.

Good point rockie. I think this is good for the US any way you slice it.



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Having a militarily stronger Japan would be a good idea simply for the savings to the US. We could withdraw some of our forces and use them in other areas. It would still be a good idea to have them there, (like the carrier), but we wouldn't have to ALWAYS leave a pretty strong force there. If we needed them in the ME we could deploy them there without having to worry about Japan's defense.



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Personally from what I know of Japan’s capabilities I wouldn’t recommend a preemptive strike. North Korea has hundreds of short and medium range missiles capable of hitting Japan, and these missiles are on mobile launchers. So I don’t see the rational here, stop a possible attack from one missile and draw a counter attack from hundreds? This is probably just a response from Japan.

But I know big brother China cannot be happy at North Korea, a Japan having closer military ties with the US, questioning its defensive position and giving its constitution a look over is NOT what China wants. They don’t want a stronger opposing force in the PACRIM region than the one already there. An offensive Japan with significant force projection would put a damper on their plans but it would help free up the US and help redistribute balance in the region.



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Personally from what I know of Japan’s capabilities I wouldn’t recommend a preemptive strike. North Korea has hundreds of short and medium range missiles capable of hitting Japan, and these missiles are on mobile launchers. So I don’t see the rational here, stop a possible attack from one missile and draw a counter attack from hundreds? This is probably just a response from Japan.

But I know big brother China cannot be happy at North Korea, a Japan having closer military ties with the US, questioning its defensive position and giving its constitution a look over is NOT what China wants. They don’t want a stronger opposing force in the PACRIM region than the one already there. An offensive Japan with significant force projection would put a damper on their plans but it would help free up the US and help redistribute balance in the region.


The only missiles NK has that can reach Japan are their No-Dong A(1 &2) (range 1300km) and their No-Dong B (range ~3000km; Global Security says 2750-4000km). They only have around 10-20 of the Bravos and around 100 of the Alpha. So there are not hundreds of missiles ready to raze the Japanese homeland. Would NK hurt Japan…sure but Japan would have nukes in 30 days.
In addition Japan has Peacekeeper capability (M-V).

Also Japan has quite an air force. ~400 combat aircraft. Global Security list 330, but I do not think they are up to date numbers. The new lines of F-2 are up and running. It looks like they have, at least, 2 squadrons of F-2 (F-16) up now. And considering their defense spend is larger than the UK, I would say they have a very respectable offensive capability. Unlike us, USA, they just make it a point not to brag about it.

But as I have said repetitively, since the beginning of this NK episode, it is my belief that China (and possible Russia) are simply using NK to check out BMD capability.
And it seem that this theory is gaining traction: Human Events Online Article


FAS.org

Japan's MX-M-5


JASDF 1

JASDF 2

NK Missiles

No-Dong A 1 & 2

No-Dong B



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 05:09 PM
link   
Japan shouldn't preemptively strike North Korea as no country should.



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 05:19 PM
link   
There is still a lot of historical angst in the region due to Japanese aggression prior to, and during, WWII. A Japanese pre-emptive attack would not be viewed in a positive fashion by China in particular. Similiar to the US not wanting Israel to become involved in the Gulf in both 1991 and 2003, I'd be willing to bet that the US will offer some more Patriots, and missile defence shield protection as a way of encouraging Japan to remain on the sidelines. If NK attacks first, then Japan will at least have the moral high ground should it respond.



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Imperium Americana do you see why it would be foolish for Japan to preemptively strike North Korea? It does not make sense to start an almost certain war which will be costly to Japan because they are afraid of one missile test, which in all likelihood will not hit their territory. Kim may be unstable but self preservation is a strong influence on any leader.



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Why not...

... especially since Japan's last preemptive strke
turned out so well.





posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Willard856
There is still a lot of historical angst in the region due to Japanese aggression prior to, and during, WWII.


Whilst I support Japan's - or any state's - right to defend itself, I must agree that any offensive move by Japan will be viewed with a significant level of apprehension by a number of nations within south-east Asia. Here in Australia, most people consider Japan to be a friendly trading partner and bear no ill will towards the Japanese people for the mistakes of the past. However, there are still those who remember the Japanese attacks on this country, the threat of a Japanese invasion and the thousands who fought and died to prevent one, as well as the appalling treatment of Australian POWs. Whilst I can appreciate the need for Japan to engage in self defence and can value the advantages a militarily powerful Japan would bring to the region (in terms of off-setting the rise of China and also in terms of relieving the burden on US forces in the region), there are many who would view any military action by Japan as a highly suspicious act. This would be the case even if it were pointed out that the Japanese were acting within the reasonable confines of their constitution, which expressly forbids offensive military action.

Japan has done a wonderful job in atoning for its actions during WW2. It has become a prosperous, well-admired nation which has the respect of many in the region due to its forebearance of war. It would be a shame for them to act without every due consideration in this matter and lose some of that respect. Having said that, future missile launches or the break-down of diplomatic efforts may leave them with little choice.

[edit on 10/7/06 by Jeremiah25]



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 09:09 PM
link   
A strike on N. Korea by Japan could not happen without the U.S. being involved in some capacity. Most of the intel needed to make a precision strike taking out nuke and missle facilities would most likely come from us, not to mention that with all of our military assests in the region how the heck could we not know if Japan was moving from a planing to an operational stage on a strike against N Korea. Plus most of Japans military hardware is US made.

Now, the real question is......... What role would the U.S. actually play in a Japanese strike, and does Washington reveal it's role or put out the talking .s with that BS contrived look of suprise that Japan acted "unilaterally"? I wonder.

I don't like what the NK government stands for or it's policies, I question the wisdom of poking a snake with a stick though. War in that part of the world is as bad or worse than in the middle east. In the middle east it's the oil that hurts the world if it's disrupted. In that part of Asia so much of what is consumed and used in everyday life worlwide is manufactured. What happens when NK retalliates by sinking cargo ships loaded with discount mega-store merchandise?



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Imperium Americana do you see why it would be foolish for Japan to preemptively strike North Korea? It does not make sense to start an almost certain war which will be costly to Japan because they are afraid of one missile test, which in all likelihood will not hit their territory. Kim may be unstable but self preservation is a strong influence on any leader.


West,
I am sorry if your misunderstood my post. If you reread what I posted, I never once advocated Japan attacking. In fact unless they have credible intel indicated a NK missile (with war.) is prepping for launch against Japan, it would be a costly blunder. All I said was that NK does not have "THAT" many missiles, in range of Japan. That Japan has a very large well equipped military. And that, IMHO, Russian and China are using NK to gain intel on US BMD systems and procedures.
What I think, and again IMHO, you are seeing is a US/Japanese counter strategy in the works. Here is my take: US/Japan realizes China/Russian is using NK and the missile crisis to gain intel on BMD, thus giving them the ability to develop systems and procedure to counter the BMD shield. US/Japan know they have been duped and are now forcing China's tactical victory into a Chinese strategic defeat. The Last thing China wants is a re-militarized Japan. Japan is a big country. You add their industrial base, population and technology with the US and China suddenly faces a legitimate threat to their goal of Asian hegemony. So what the US and Japan are doing is playing the "Sleeping Giant" card in hope that China will stop the tests and reel in their proxy.

There am I more clear? ;p LOL J/K



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 09:19 PM
link   
What if U.S is secretly pushing Japan into preemptive strike? If we were to attack NK it would look really bad to the people of U.S, And push for impeachments and crap. But if we get Japan to attack and NK responds then wouldnt we back up Japan? And maybe NK will attack U.S in such response thus giving our New World Order a Green light.. hmm.. im just wondering. Since we are seeing so much of this in the mainstream news, Makes me wonder what real Agenda is behind the media.

[edit on 10-7-2006 by captain spalding]

[edit on 10-7-2006 by captain spalding]



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Imperium Americana
What I think, and again IMHO, you are seeing is a US/Japanese counter strategy in the works. Here is my take: US/Japan realizes China/Russian is using NK and the missile crisis to gain intel on BMD, thus giving them the ability to develop systems and procedure to counter the BMD shield. US/Japan know they have been duped and are now forcing China's tactical victory into a Chinese strategic defeat. The Last thing China wants is a re-militarized Japan.


I agree, China and Russia could be very well using NK to gain very valuable intel. And on the other side the US doesn't have to play a hand if Japan takes the lead militarily with respect to NK. Good point Imperium.

Ahh, makes you glad the cold war tensions of yester-year ar over huh?



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by looking4truth
A strike on N. Korea by Japan could not happen without the U.S. being involved in some capacity. Most of the intel needed to make a precision strike taking out nuke and missle facilities would most likely come from us, not to mention that with all of our military assests in the region how the heck could we not know if Japan was moving from a planing to an operational stage on a strike against N Korea. Plus most of Japans military hardware is US made.

Now, the real question is......... What role would the U.S. actually play in a Japanese strike, and does Washington reveal it's role or put out the talking .s with that BS contrived look of suprise that Japan acted "unilaterally"? I wonder.

I don't like what the NK government stands for or it's policies, I question the wisdom of poking a snake with a stick though. War in that part of the world is as bad or worse than in the middle east. In the middle east it's the oil that hurts the world if it's disrupted. In that part of Asia so much of what is consumed and used in everyday life worlwide is manufactured. What happens when NK retalliates by sinking cargo ships loaded with discount mega-store merchandise?


Sorry but you are incorrect on a few facts.

Almost all of Japan's military hardware is made by themselves. While a slim-majority of it may have been American designed or inspired by US designs, it is factually in error to think that the US makes equipment for Japan. In fact almost all of JSDF equipment is made in Japan. They do have a very large percentage of weapons that were designed and built by themselves, kind of the Israelis but even more so.

Here take a look:

Type 90 MBT
Type 89
Japanese Weapon Systems

I am not saying the JSDF is the best in the world, just they are a military that should be respected. Remember they have a budget as large as the UK., and no one would call the Brits punks.

Secondly you think that Japan receives most of their intel on NK from the US. LOL if anything I would be willing to bet that it is the other way around. But I agree we would know if they made a move, but do not expect us to do anything to stop it. Do not think for a second the US will piss of the Japanese for the North Korean’s sake.
What do I think will happen if NK sinks a roll/roll bound for the US…It will piss China off. Where do you think most of our crap is made. There is a very good chance it was made in Taiwan or China, not Japan or SK.


I agree, China and Russia could be very well using NK to gain very valuable intel. And on the other side the US doesn't have to play a hand if Japan takes the lead militarily with respect to NK. Good point Imperium.

Ahh, makes you glad the cold war tensions of yester-year ar over huh?

Edit:
Thank You.
Naw, I kind of like the whole Cold-War maneuvers. Not the whole MAD thing but the Chess involved was unlike anything the world has ever seen.


[edit on 10-7-2006 by Imperium Americana]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join