Matrix Games Forums

Japan has been "re-armed" since the 1950's
The JSDF has approximately 300,000 men available and is one of the best equipt forces in the region.

Talking about Japan needing to "re-arm" as though we are discussing 1949 West Germny is simply bizare as it suggests that Japan is currently unarmed and defenceless, where as it is actually on of the major regional powers.

ORIGINAL: CT Grognard

China is faced by massive geopolitical issues.

They really cannot afford a war.

The best they can do at the moment is rattle the sabre.

Do you think China is able to exist independent of other countries?

Wouldn't people in the West have said the same thing about Japan circa 1940?

Regards,
Feltan

Dr. Hal

Your description of internal Japanese thought is not far off (I am here in Tokyo). That said,
recent Chinese saber rattling has pissed off the average citizen who really could not care less.

Chinese diplomacy recently has been poor as far as Japan is concerned.
----------------------------
As for Feltan.
I agree with you. Actually, seeing China now reminds me of Japan in 1940 in that what used to be very
smart diplomacy has turned into a "how many countries can we anger at the same time". And as mentioned by others
a shooting war could start by accident.

thanks morejeffs... Yes Chinese bellicose activity has certainly helped the right to sing the praises of rearming even more. And as for the point about Japan being rearmed for some time, true I think most are aware they have one of the largest military establishments in the world (6th largest???) but to stand up independently of the US umbrella would require much more than their current situation, including a nuclear deterrent, which is a step most are loath to see happen.

China has been using economics for years to project power, the cornering of the tin market, deals to secure oil from africa to name a few. What they are beginning to do is slowly project naval power. It is important that the US and its allies continue to fly through the no fly zone to remind China that there are limits. If China ever believes that those limits are not enforceable by the US and its allies, well then we have another issue.

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I think Japan MUST rearm. They cannot depend on the USA at this moment in time.

Good looking ship and fine named class (Hyuga) of vessel. Does anyone know how many more are being built? Does the ship have VTOL ability? Don't know if the Japanese have a version of a Harrier but that could be a fine addition to this warship.

They have 2 Hyuga class, and one newer (Izumo class) launched but not commissioned with another Izumo class planned. That second one is due to be laid down early next year.

They could be adpated to use F-35's (using STOVL) but at this time Japan has no orders for that plane that I am aware of

One thing that hasn't changed since WW2 is that Japan is an industrial nation poor in mineral resources and farmland and heavily dependent on maritime trade. If anything that condition has only worsened exponentially.

I'm certain they haven't forgotten the submarine blockade that strangled them then. I believe China had 12 of those quiet Kilo class subs in it's submarine inventory. Ideal for anti-shipping operations. However, Japan is one of China's largest trading partners. I seems strange that it would ever come to that.

ORIGINAL: CT Grognard

China is faced by massive geopolitical issues.

They really cannot afford a war.

The best they can do at the moment is rattle the sabre.

Do you think China is able to exist independent of other countries?

No, but that is not the real question. Does the China leadership think they can exist independently of other countries? .... I'm not so sure of that answer unfortunately.

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: CT Grognard

China is faced by massive geopolitical issues.

They really cannot afford a war.

The best they can do at the moment is rattle the sabre.

Do you think China is able to exist independent of other countries?

No, but that is not the real question. Does the China leadership think they can exist independently of other countries? .... I'm not so sure of that answer unfortunately.

QFT

ORIGINAL: Feltan

ORIGINAL: CT Grognard

China is faced by massive geopolitical issues.

They really cannot afford a war.

The best they can do at the moment is rattle the sabre.

Do you think China is able to exist independent of other countries?

Wouldn't people in the West have said the same thing about Japan circa 1940?

Regards,
Feltan

It's not entirely an apt analogy. Has China recently captured huge swaths of neighboring countries under force of arms? Has it, in the last dozen years or so, liquidated any former government capitals?

China's growth as a military power has to be expected to come with some rough edges. It's got those, but naught more. Personally, I'm impressed that it's been as peaceful as it is. Sure, it's pushing the envelope in terms of neighborly relations and international standards of law. But so did we. So did most nations during their early rise to world powers.

So long as the Chinese are reliant on others for their economic survival, our economic "Frenemies" status will continue. The Chinese would be too easy to blockade and destroy economically. That would be / should be a non-starter for them.

ORIGINAL: oldman45

China has been using economics for years to project power, the cornering of the tin market, deals to secure oil from africa to name a few. What they are beginning to do is slowly project naval power. It is important that the US and its allies continue to fly through the no fly zone to remind China that there are limits. If China ever believes that those limits are not enforceable by the US and its allies, well then we have another issue.

Then again, your average Chinese bloke might see it as American interferance in Chinese regional affairs.

Probably pretty similar to what would happen if Russia started to fly intruder patrols over the American border, just to remind America that there are limits.

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Probably pretty similar to what would happen if Russia started to fly intruder patrols over the American border, just to remind America that there are limits.

No, it's nothing like that.

I think we`re all smart enough to know to never say never. A mistake here, the loss of face there, the need for something (oil, minerals etc.) and everything could go to hell suddenly. Imagine if last week the Chinese warship had been hit by the USN ship. Would they demand payment for damages Would the US pony up What about a pilot who decides to lock on another country`s plane. What happens then A mistake

What happened to my punctuation marks This means war

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Probably pretty similar to what would happen if Russia started to fly intruder patrols over the American border, just to remind America that there are limits.

No, it's nothing like that.

What, US involvement in the South China Sea isn't an assertation of American power projection to force the Chinese to respect limits?

The Soviets quite happily flew 'intruder' patrols near various European airspaces.
They would equally be routine intercepted by fighters.

Don't know if the Russian's have done so in recent years, but I would be surprised if they have not.

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Probably pretty similar to what would happen if Russia started to fly intruder patrols over the American border, just to remind America that there are limits.

No, it's nothing like that.

What, US involvement in the South China Sea isn't an assertation of American power projection to force the Chinese to respect limits?

Over flights over sovereign territory is nothing like passage through disputed territory. And this area is far outside anything the Chinese could claim as international waters. A better example would be if the United States suddenly declared the Antarctic as a military No Fly zone, and made public intentions to defend it. Or the Pacific between California to Hawaii, or Hawaii to Samoa, etc. etc. etc.

ORIGINAL: catwhoorg

The Soviets quite happily flew 'intruder' patrols near various European airspaces.
They would equally be routine intercepted by fighters.

Don't know if the Russian's have done so in recent years, but I would be surprised if they have not.

Sure they do. So do we. In fact, they have started to increase such operations. But the United States does not say "We are gonna shoot the next one down!". Again, different rules of engagement.

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Probably pretty similar to what would happen if Russia started to fly intruder patrols over the American border, just to remind America that there are limits.

No, it's nothing like that.

What, US involvement in the South China Sea isn't an assertation of American power projection to force the Chinese to respect limits?

That's not what you said. If Russia flew patrols over our borders they would be aggressively intercepted and escorted out, or shot down. No talking.

Exaggeration for effect, I presume?

Of course there would be some attempt at communication ... 'talking' in some form or other ...

For a start, you'd want to make sure that the pilot/crew of the aircraft weren't off course, injured, or hadn't declared some emergency that would explain their actions.

Then, of course, you'd want to make sure they weren't defecting.

Shooting down would not be the first option ...

The type of aircraft would also have an impact on US decision making ...

A Strategic Bomber (or equivalent) with an obvious external nuclear payload would garner a different response to a single/dual seat long range fighter with nothing but air to air weapons.

Even if they didn't reply to US queries, there'd be US planes scrambled and some sort of fly-by done to see just what the hell was up, and there'd almost certainly be warning shots before any shoot down.

Hell, the US would be on the Hot Line asap to see if the Russians had any explanation/excuse ... even if they didn't believe it, they'd try.

Unless, of course, tensions were really high and seen as 'just short of war' when, maybe, some of the above might be foregone.

But there'd almost certainly be *some* attempt at 'talking'

Phil

Yes it is an exaggeration, big deal. But parallel to diplomatic action, such planes would be intercepted and escorted out, or even shot down if assessed to pose an immediate threat.

The point is, there is a significant difference between hypotetical russion air patrols in US airspace and US B-52´s violating Chinas freshly invented air defense zone over contested territory. It is not pretty similar, it is apples and oranges.