Why Japan is spending a lot of money on armament?

jiehunzheng

Having examined a number of his (her?) posts, I would not be surprised if this individual is actually trying to be a mouthpiece for the very PRC government he claims to support. Wondering which government building in Beijing he works in.
 
loki said:
Darcia said:
technicly Japan cannot go nuclear until around the year 2050. Also japan is one of the worlds most active nations in opposing Nuclear weapons, I think you know why or at least I hope you do.
Can you explain on that a little? What do you mean by technically? Due to treaties with i.e. the US? I would say given enough pressure from the outside, Japan could do it in a year.


1-Treaties With America
2-Surrender Treaties
3-Clause in thier Constitution says they will not seek nor produce nor maintain nuclear wepons.
 
I would look at your own build up as the reason for Japan's increased spending. Oh wait, that's right, China is a peaceful nation which does not seek to harm or provoke their neighbors. That explains their ever increasing military budget and numbers.
 
Damien435 said:
I would look at your own build up as the reason for Japan's increased spending. Oh wait, that's right, China is a peaceful nation which does not seek to harm or provoke their neighbors. That explains their ever increasing military budget and numbers.

Umm couldnt the same statement apply to the ever increasing US military budget?.

Rank Country Military expenditures Date of Information
1 United States $ 370,700,000,000 March 2003
2 China $ 67,490,000,000 2004
3 Japan $ 45,841,000,000 2004

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2067rank.html
 
MontyB said:
Damien435 said:
I would look at your own build up as the reason for Japan's increased spending. Oh wait, that's right, China is a peaceful nation which does not seek to harm or provoke their neighbors. That explains their ever increasing military budget and numbers.

Umm couldnt the same statement apply to the ever increasing US military budget?.

Rank Country Military expenditures Date of Information
1 United States $ 370,700,000,000 March 2003
2 China $ 67,490,000,000 2004
3 Japan $ 45,841,000,000 2004

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2067rank.html

Yes, but I am not saying that my neighbor whom I have a violent history with lasting thousands of years should stop building up his defense forces while I continue to build mine.

Is it just me or is there one very important country missing from that list? First person to name it gets a cookie.
 
Damien435 said:
MontyB said:
Damien435 said:
I would look at your own build up as the reason for Japan's increased spending. Oh wait, that's right, China is a peaceful nation which does not seek to harm or provoke their neighbors. That explains their ever increasing military budget and numbers.

Umm couldnt the same statement apply to the ever increasing US military budget?.

Rank Country Military expenditures Date of Information
1 United States $ 370,700,000,000 March 2003
2 China $ 67,490,000,000 2004
3 Japan $ 45,841,000,000 2004

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2067rank.html

Yes, but I am not saying that my neighbor whom I have a violent history with lasting thousands of years should stop building up his defense forces while I continue to build mine.

You sure about that?
I hear the american administration saying frequently that Iran, Syria etc. cant have WMD's and need to be raked over the coals for developing them yet I hear nothing of the US outrage at Israels nuclear program nor do I see the US getting rid of its nuclear program or reducing its military capacity.
 
PershingOfLSU said:
Lastly, Japan has apologized no fewer then a dozen times to China for conduct during the Second World War.

when and where? it surely wasn't a government level appoligy...and there certianly wasn't one for the Aussies, or any of the asian countries who had people tortured etc.


THATS the appoligy i want to hear
 
That info is old American war spending has broke the 400 billion mark, in fact American Military spending is more than the Republican Axis of Evil,and PRC and Russia's Military spending combined. But thats OT.

Japan has had a few incidents when China(PRC) has invaded thier territorial waters and the Japense has had to chase them out. The Japanese claim China is wanting to build a new submarine to attack the Japanese Isles.


However when you look on the scale of thins Japan has gone many years without a large increase in military spending,and with the current changes going on in the pacific Rim Economic Community along with the ontinuel power gaining of an Imperialistic America it cannot be denied that most likley Japan will begin to build up a larger defense force just in case,say The Korean War starts back up, after all there is still a level of war between them.
 
MontyB said:
You sure about that?
I hear the american administration saying frequently that Iran, Syria etc. cant have WMD's and need to be raked over the coals for developing them yet I hear nothing of the US outrage at Israels nuclear program nor do I see the US getting rid of its nuclear program or reducing its military capacity.

Quite positive.

Spending on conventional weapons and spending on nuclear programs is two different things.

Why would America have a problem with Israel possessing nuclear warheads? Israel has been on the defensive for 50+ years now, surrounded by hostile nations who have made little effort to hide their aggressive stance towards Israel. Syria and North Korea have both invaded their neighbors in the last half of the 20th century and do not have near as stable or level headed leaders as Israel does. North Korea has been threatening her neighbors for years, digging tunnels into South Korea and attacking US engineers who were merely trying to trim back a branch on a tree in the DMZ. Syria has been occupying Lebanon since the 80's and has invaded Israel multiple times. Not even China, possibly the only country in the world that has a less than hateful relationship with North Korea, wants Kim Jung Il to have nukes.
 
Israel already has an estimated 40 nuclear weapons. And is content to sit on them because the nearby Arab nations know what will happen if they ever get close to wiping Israel off the map.

You'll notice that the Arab nations haven't launched a campaign against Israel since leaks about its nuclear program.
 
PershingOfLSU said:
Israel already has an estimated 40 nuclear weapons. And is content to sit on them because the nearby Arab nations know what will happen if they ever get close to wiping Israel off the map.

You'll notice that the Arab nations haven't launched a campaign against Israel since leaks about its nuclear program.

Indeed but my point is that it is somewhat hypocritical to be demanding nations not arm themselves to the teeth and that they follow international agreements "or else" while nothing is said about an allied nation carrying out the same actions and breaking the same agreements.
 
MontyB said:
PershingOfLSU said:
Israel already has an estimated 40 nuclear weapons. And is content to sit on them because the nearby Arab nations know what will happen if they ever get close to wiping Israel off the map.

You'll notice that the Arab nations haven't launched a campaign against Israel since leaks about its nuclear program.

Indeed but my point is that it is somewhat hypocritical to be demanding nations not arm themselves to the teeth and that they follow international agreements "or else" while nothing is said about an allied nation carrying out the same actions and breaking the same agreements.

But it would be much more hypocritical if Israel a recent history that was as aggressive as North Korea's or Syria's. Plus, if I recall correctly, Israel is a democracy where as North Korea and Syria are dictatorships. IMO established democracies are much more stable and less likely to do something radical because the politicians are held accountable for their actions.
 
Damien435 said:
MontyB said:
PershingOfLSU said:
Israel already has an estimated 40 nuclear weapons. And is content to sit on them because the nearby Arab nations know what will happen if they ever get close to wiping Israel off the map.

You'll notice that the Arab nations haven't launched a campaign against Israel since leaks about its nuclear program.

Indeed but my point is that it is somewhat hypocritical to be demanding nations not arm themselves to the teeth and that they follow international agreements "or else" while nothing is said about an allied nation carrying out the same actions and breaking the same agreements.

But it would be much more hypocritical if Israel a recent history that was as aggressive as North Korea's or Syria's. Plus, if I recall correctly, Israel is a democracy where as North Korea and Syria are dictatorships. IMO established democracies are much more stable and less likely to do something radical because the politicians are held accountable for their actions.

Not really, one of the problems the west seems to have is this theory that everyone wants to be "like us" we have a major problem understanding how different others can be.

Essentially if you are going to be "open minded" about things you have to accept that as long as one nation maintains an armament plan then all nations have the right to the same (regardless of political orientation) in order to defend themselves and it is nothing short of hypocritical to accuse a nation of being a danger to the world because it spends 70 billion on its military while you spend 400 billion maintaining a growing military and WMD program.

We may not like other nations politics or religion but you have to respect their right to equality with other nations in all area's.
 
No matter how you look at it Nuclear weapons are more defensive weapons than offensive weapons. Mostly they are used to prevent a war instead of being used halfway through the war, that or to prevent senseless deaths in a war.
 
Nukes, etc

Darcia, you are on the money again - not bad for age 15

The ONLY use of a nuclear device (or devices, since there were 2) as a weapon of war was to stop a war.

The purpose for their use was to save the lives of countless thousands of US and Japanese military members, as well as the Japanese civilian population.

The Battle of Stalingrad - which has been noted on this board as the bloodiest of the 20th century - would have paled in comparison to the Battle for Japan.

Fortunately, we never had to fight that battle.

Since that time, possession of nuclear armaments has been - primarily - for the purpose of defense: to prevent an enemy from launching an attack by pursuading that enemy that the response to such attack would be far to costly.

Remember MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction)?

But when renegate states which have a history of not respecting the rule of law begin to lust for and develop nuclear weapons for different reasons, the world must take notice, and act to prevent their spread.

India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons for the same reason the US and Russia had them - to prevent all-out attack by one side against the other.

Israel has nuclear weapons because their ability to destroy Mecca with a single strike is the best defense they have against another all-out Arab attack.

But a third-world country with first-world weapons? The only reasons for that are a - to influence others under threat of attack; b - to attack to right some percieved historic wrong; or c - to attack to eliminate a rival nation, sect, or population.

None of these reasons is valid and permissible in the civilized world.
 
jackehammond said:
BTW> When is China going to pay the US for the design information on the J-10 strike fighter. Yes, I know the information came from Israelis canceled Lavi program, but the US funded 90% of that program. Fair is fair. javascript:emoticon(':D')
Very Happy

and when is the US going to pay China for the design information on gunpowder, which was invented by the Chinese?
 
queens_ranger said:
jackehammond said:
BTW> When is China going to pay the US for the design information on the J-10 strike fighter. Yes, I know the information came from Israelis canceled Lavi program, but the US funded 90% of that program. Fair is fair. javascript:emoticon(':D')
Very Happy

and when is the US going to pay China for the design information on gunpowder, which was invented by the Chinese?

The US will pay the regime which actually did the discovering... if they can find the true decendants.. right after they pay slavery reparations...
 
MI Blues said:
queens_ranger said:
jackehammond said:
BTW> When is China going to pay the US for the design information on the J-10 strike fighter. Yes, I know the information came from Israelis canceled Lavi program, but the US funded 90% of that program. Fair is fair. javascript:emoticon(':D')
Very Happy

and when is the US going to pay China for the design information on gunpowder, which was invented by the Chinese?

The US will pay the regime which actually did the discovering... if they can find the true decendants.. right after they pay slavery reparations...

one would imagine that the decendants of ancient chinese are modern chinese..and you can bet China will pay the US for design info on the J-10 right after all that's done
 
Sadly the Chinese failed to properly file a patent application for gunpowder and forfeited any monetary gains.

Some say this was actually a brilliant move to avoid possible litigation from those harmed by gunpowder.

Edit: This is sarcasm.
 
Back
Top