Japan thinking of attacking N. Korea

[al2n]

CNN Story (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/10/us.nkorea.ap/index.html)

Seeing how Japan is the only nation on earth to have been attacked with nukes before, I can see how they would be nervous about N. Korea's weapons tests.

[N2ACX]

I don't feel Japan will do anything premptively with respect to N. Korea unless one of their missle tests misses and drops in Japan's waters or mainland. Even a missle falling "short" could still land in downtown Tokyo.

If that happens I believe the crazy man in pajamas will get his wish of an all out war. The problem with using any nuke, limited tactical or conventional is that from that point on, today, the only responses would most likely be nuclear.
Especially when Korea has a million or more brainwashed, "at the ready" soldiers ready to carry out this nutcases orders, your not going to win a ground war with them and one would be foolish to do even try.

Kim Jong, I would think, would invade S.Korea in an instant using any provocation as an excuse to do so. The stakes are high, but if Kim Jong uses one nuke Iam sure at that time his mighty army would be vaporized in a nuclear response from Japan and the USA. The world does NOT want to see this happen and hopefully it won't, but we cannot be afraid not to use them if they are used against us.

If anything, it seems this is a well orchestrated attempt to keep the USA and others' looking the other way so that Iran and others' can plan their evil deeds against the free world. My eye would still be on the M.E. as the primary.

73 N2ACX

[W2ILP]

n2acx

I agree with what you say here...but...
I don't want to find out that a crazy president in a suit and tie is planning for all out war. We must learn from Vietnam and from Iraq that war can not change the culture of any nation...only TECHNOLOGY can. By this I mean productive technology not destructive technology.
I believe that the leadership of Japan will never use nuclear weapons against North Korea...even though there has always been a feud between Japan and all of Korea. The Japanese know well enough what nuclear bombs can do...They know because the U.S. used two A-Bombs on them. They are no longer the cruel and ignorant aggressors who raped China and bombed Pearl Harbor. Today they are humanists...even more so than many Americans or South Koreans. The Japanese have not accepted Christianity to the extent that Americans and South Koreans have. This shows me that they have more common sense and do not blindly follow crazy political leaders., as well.

w2ilp ( I Like Peace)

[N2NKW]

I thought Japan doesn't have an offensive force? Wasn't one of the terms of surrender after ww2 an order to not allowed Japan an army except for defense? If so, how are they going to attack NK?

[WA3KYY]

Japan does not have, AFAIK, nuclear capabilities in their Defense Forces. In fact, their entire military is well below what they had available during WWII and is jkept that way by Treaty. The members of SEATO are (or were) charged with aiding Japan should they be attacked.

There was an interesting editorial on the local news station today. The speaker suggested full diplomatic relations with N. Korea (and Cuba) with a full influx of aid and Western culture would be a faster way to topple both Communist regiemes than any other method. It sure would be a lot less bloody and maybe even be good for our trade balance. Besides, I hear Havana is a nice place to visit and the cigars are great!

73,
Mike WA3KYY

[KB1NIV]

Japan's constitution prohibits the use of the military to settle conflicts with other nations except in the case of self-defense. Accordingly the Japanese military is named the SDF (self-defense force). Japan has no nuclear weapons and in fact forbids their presence on Japanese soil.

In recent years the U.S. gov't has been encouraging the Japanese government to take a more active military role. To date the Japanese have replied that their constitution forbids it. There has been talk in Japan of modifying the Japanese constitution with respect to the role of the military.

The nation with easily the most adanced nuclear technology is Japan. Therefore, if they changed their stance on the presence of nuclear weapons in Japan it would be relatively easy for them to build plenty of nuclear weapons. In recent days it has been proposed by some Japanese politicians that Japan begin building nuclear weapons. My guess is that this is to provoke China into pressuring North Korea into stopping the missile tests. The absolute last thing that China or either of the Koreas wants is a Japanese military armed with nuclear weapons.

Whenever Koizumi (current Japanese prime minister) visits Yasakuni jinja the rest of Asia is in an absolute uproar and it is front page headline news in China and the Koreas. This noise and posturing is nothing compared to the outcry that would ensue if Japan was to announce that it possesses nuclear weapons.

Japan already has a weapon that can exhibit considerable influence on the behavior of North Korea and China - money. Every year Japan gives billions of dollars in development "loans" to China which have never seen any servicing payments and never will. North Korea is also the recipient of Japanese largesse in the form of remittance payments made by Koreans living and working in Japan. It has recently been suggested in the Japanese Diet that the remittance payments to North Korea be stopped along with foreign aid to that country.

[n0jaa]

I am quite surprised that this Middle-Eastern conflict we're involved in hasn't yet escalated into World War III.

[WB2WIK]

Quote[/b] (n0jaa @ July 10 2006,14:09)]I am quite surprised that this Middle-Eastern conflict we're involved in hasn't yet escalated into World War III.
It hasn't?

Damn. Lost another bet.

[G0GQK]

Someone said in the "Times" last week that the world is now a more dangerous place than it has been since the Cuban missile crisis.

It hasn't been helped by foreign policies which have irritated foreign governments all over the world. Take Iraq as one example, doing what was done was completely foolish and the involvement of many nations has not helped the situation. The lack of trust from one government to another has created many very dangerous situations.

Governments start wars, not people, and don't tell me that governments do the bidding of the people.

G0GQK

[kb9rqz]

Quote[/b] (n0jaa @ July 09 2006,15:09)]I am quite surprised that this Middle-Eastern conflict we're involved in hasn't yet escalated into World War III.
really I thought it had

[N3ATS]

What constitutes a world war? I think if we get involved militarily in Iran or Korea WWIII is imminent.

[N7RJD]

Quote[/b] (N3ATS @ July 10 2006,09:57)]What constitutes a world war? I think if we get involved militarily in Iran or Korea WWIII is imminent.
It is already imminent. It's just a question of which of the chest puffers starts it and how many have to die before they come out of the bunker and decide it isn't worth it.

[ke7imb]

Quote[/b] (Guest @ July 10 2006,05:18)]CNN Story (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/10/us.nkorea.ap/index.html)

Seeing how Japan is the only nation on earth to have been attacked with nukes before, I can see how they would be nervous about N. Korea's weapons tests.
Well just to say this Japan was never attacked by the U.S.. Now Japan attacked us on Dec 7th 1941. We sent request after request to Japan to have them surender prior to using the A-bomb. But they wanted to fight to the last person. They meaning the leadership at that time. Now the more corect term would be Japan the only country to have a Nuke used on them in a unrestricted war that they started. Plus it saved millions of US service mens lives. We the US would have never used it had not Japan brought us in to the war.

Side note what definds a world war? could it be say over 18 countrys fighting or having troops in Iraq or afganistan a world war? maybe but probly not.