North Korean Missile Test

[classicman]

Yeh and a lot of the banks were too big to fail...

not being sarcastic - just sayin' I wonder if that argument holds true anymore.

[Bullitt]

*cough*historical-rise-and-fall-of-empires*cough*

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by Zhuge Liang

Except Japan doesn't have an armed force who can go in and deal with such things (yet). Article Nine of their Constitution specifically forbids them, though as North Korea get more threatening, there will be more popular support for constitutional revision. Also, the (likely) incoming government has made noises to the effect that they do not want to be reliant entirely on American military power, which is usually the stealth argument for remilitarization.

Besides, its a little late to go to war now, since they have been returned.

You underestimate Japan's "Self Defence Force".
True, a section in the constitution forbids them sending troops overseas. But they have a large and well equipped military oops I mean Self Defence Force. Almost 250,000 troops, and, as examples, more than 800 tanks, 100 F4 Phantom fighter jets, 200 F15 Eagle fighter jets, dozens of destroyers, 18 submarines.

However, you might point out that they lack capacity to deploy force overseas in large amounts. That, and public opinion and the constitution, are the only things holding them back.

According to many Japanese, many abductees have not been returned. I don't know the facts on this.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Have the ones that came back been probed?

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Have the ones that came back been probed?

Thoroughly.

[Pie]

The Japanese also have some of the best BMD technology in the world.

[Bullitt]

Originally Posted by Pie

The Japanese also have some of the best BMD technology in the world.

Aegis Combat System. Courtesy of 'Merica.

[Kaliayev]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

You underestimate Japan's "Self Defence Force".
True, a section in the constitution forbids them sending troops overseas. But they have a large and well equipped military oops I mean Self Defence Force. Almost 250,000 troops, and, as examples, more than 800 tanks, 100 F4 Phantom fighter jets, 200 F15 Eagle fighter jets, dozens of destroyers, 18 submarines.

However, you might point out that they lack capacity to deploy force overseas in large amounts. That, and public opinion and the constitution, are the only things holding them back.

According to many Japanese, many abductees have not been returned. I don't know the facts on this.

I disagree. The SDF does not attract high calibre recruits, and many can quit at any time (being, technically, civilian forces). Conditions are hardly what would be called "attractive", even by the relatively low standards of military life in general, and their main combat experience has been as U.N. Peacekeepers and in aid relief. They're highly reliant on the USA for any sort of credible form of deterrence. Their navy is incapable of even defending their own vital trade links with the rest of the world.

In addition, there are problems with large deployments and popular opinion yes, though in the case of self-defence the latter would no doubt vanish fairly quickly.

I've heard the stories too, but without evidence they are little more than stories. Lots of people go missing, for lots of reasons. Some people may prefer the idea that their loved ones were taken by force. Its better than imagining they left of their own accord, or are dead. Some may be true, but without evidence...who's to say?

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by Zhuge Liang

I disagree. The SDF does not attract high calibre recruits, and many can quit at any time (being, technically, civilian forces). Conditions are hardly what would be called "attractive", even by the relatively low standards of military life in general, and their main combat experience has been as U.N. Peacekeepers and in aid relief. They're highly reliant on the USA for any sort of credible form of deterrence. Their navy is incapable of even defending their own vital trade links with the rest of the world.

True, but that is true of most countries. It depends on who they're fighting. Japan Vs North Korea, I'll bet on Japan. Japan Vs China, I bet on China (unless USA jumps in, in which case... arma-bloody-geddon). Japan Vs Australia ... ahh, I don't think we could actually reach each other.

In addition, there are problems with large deployments and popular opinion yes, though in the case of self-defence the latter would no doubt vanish fairly quickly.

Again, true, and again if we are comparing to North Korea I suspect that if push came to shove we would find that a large portion of the people in the NK military only joined because it was the only way to get food on a regulr basis.

I've heard the stories too, but without evidence they are little more than stories. Lots of people go missing, for lots of reasons. Some people may prefer the idea that their loved ones were taken by force. Its better than imagining they left of their own accord, or are dead. Some may be true, but without evidence...who's to say?

Yet again, there are many "possible" abductions, but I do believe there are several certain cases - abductees acknowledged by both govts. As for the rest, you're probably right about some.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

. . .I don't think we could actually reach each other.

Makes power projection very tricky, that.

And I end up imagining JMSDF and RAN frigates waking people up somewhere in the Philippines with gun reports and explosions coming from out to sea.

The respective submarine forces might be the most lethal combatants. Collins-class boats seem to have all the range they need, being designed to operate throughout the I.O.

Or we're faced with the spectacle of each country's P-3 Orions (they'd have the range) popping at each other with aircrew pistols out of the pilots' windows. Determining the winners would have to be by decision, though... counting the bullet holes in the planes' skins. Quick, install some rails for Sidewinders.

But if either nation had to work up its own complete, blue-water navy, their likely urgent theaters of operations would be the Indian Ocean and the western Pacific, covering both the majority of their shipping traffic and their connection with the Persian Gulf oil states.

[xoxoxoBruce]

In May, the government said Australia's defence budget would increase by 3.0 percent to around 22.6 billion dollars (18.2 billion US) and committed itself to extending real growth in defence spending by 3.0 percent a year until 2018.

For instance, within a relatively short period of two to three years, Japan has: (1) sent Self Defense Force (SDF) troops to Iraq; (2) begun maintaining a quasi-permanent maritime presence in the Indian Ocean and the Arabian Sea; (3) decided to implement sea-based missile defense, the first country among the U.S. allies to do so; (4) started to reorient its defense posture toward China; and (5) decided to revise its Constitution, in order to enable the nation to engage in collective self-defense with its ally, the United States.

We may get a show, yet.

[ZenGum]

This explains our policy of kissing America's butt as much as possible. We're hoping you'll decide you like us better than them.

For any "them".


(Seriously though, it's only China we're wary of.)

[xoxoxoBruce]

And India.

[capnhowdy]

And Lumberjim.

[ZenGum]

If the Indians invade, we'll just play cricket with them.

Lumberjim, can you bowl?


FTR, If my sources are correct (daughter of a guy in the air force) Australia does have mid-air refueling capabilities so we could, in principle, bomb Japan. Just a little. Kind of a sony-minaturised bonsai bombing.