Mighty Japan DF

last SG · 2005-11-03T12:59:30+00:00

That's great - we have moved on. How about the Japs? Have they moved on? If Japan has moved on, how come Joizumi visits the shrine to pay respects to dead...

Gun SG

Originally posted by tvdog:
You and your associates are what? Students at some Special school or something?

Is this an honest question or made with jest with missing " Very Happy " again ?

Originally posted by tvdog:
Sorry I forgot to add a Very Happy to help "clever" people like you understand that I wasn't being seriously. Rolling Eyes

Comments made by Simpletons are hardly ever taken seriously. So do you wanna be taken... Seriously ?
Allow me to borrow one your simpleton-based assertion made earlier ( minus that " Very Happy " )

Originally posted by tvdog:
Logically, the Japanese should be wiped off the surface of the earth (by the Chinese, of course) for what they did.

1st: The word "wiped off" of a community is akin to act of Genocide. I assumed you know such ugly word will not sound any more humorous by simply adding a " Very Happy " in your comment.

2nd: Genocide has occured before and considered a sin in humanity.

3rd: Genocide has never been part of Chinese history.

Your adoration of Japanese 'good porn', 'great pop music' & 'nice clothes' implies that these factors makes a great country ? In your context izzit ? Simpleton idealism or a Joker in the making is?

Your choice, for now. Very Happy .

sgdiehard SG

You are right! invasion has to come by sea or air, and who in the world now has the capability to lauch sea and air on Japan?? probably not even america.

and what is there to gain by occupying japan? oil? Mr. Green

china knows it well, territorial ambition to occupy japan is a waste of time, it is nuts considering the possible costs, and they are not even sure if taking taiwan would be possible.

why do ppl think there is a threat that china could invade japan? japanese domestic politics? the hawks justifying more money for weapons? Evil or Very Mad

why should JAF worry about the geography of japan or about the deployability when they only fight wars of invasion? Evil or Very Mad

hmm....does the tiny little red dot hamper SAF? Mr. Green Embarassed

Gun SG

Originally posted by tvdog:
Invading an island nation like Japan will not be easy. It would be more like D-Day or better yet, reference the battle of Okinawa.One figure quoted 500,000 casualty if the mainland of Japan was invaded. This was WW2 and a very weak Japan in 1945.

What an ingenious commentary !
I am impressed ! The wow factor is there !
You a nobel prize winning wannabe ?
I assumed those 2 nuke bombs were put to good use in ending Tokyo's suicidal stubbornness then.

So if someone were to mount an attack on Japan today, with today's modern weaponry involved, the casualty figure would number above a million surely.

Even tried imagine oil embargo, SLOC blockage ?
But hell, why would any country wanna attack Japan in the 1st place in today's world ?

Like you mentioned earlier, for better porn shows and hippop music ? Wink

Gun SG

Originally posted by laurence82:
And i dont understand one thing, whats the link between them not having fought a war before on its land and the geography cannot possibly hampers the deployability of their armed forces?

Question u need to ask is why Japan is attempting change of constitutions at this time ? Why is there a need and the purpose ?

Using your same source from http://www.globalsecurity.org
There is an article that summarises where the pressure is coming from.
Just look where the money is going.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/budget.htm

laurence82 SG

well, wars in the past are not fought for territorial possessions alone u noe

of coz deployability is very important

geez, if the the enemies forced a southward invasions, i got to make sure my airplanes and naval ships are deployed in the area already right? notice the japan isles like indonesia is spread out, not closeted...

and if they managed to land, i got to transfer my land hardware from one island to another right? its the sea which has has become a barrier to them, making them heavily relying on air and naval transport to transfer hardware to the area of action

how to compare to a frigging small singapore island where u can travel from jurong to pasir ris in one hr?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/jgsdf.htm

this could give you a rough picture of what i am talking abt...

laurence82 SG

Okay, this topic got more digressed. How does them not having fought a war ever on its land in his years of history link to the geography not hampering them and the proposed change in constitution?

How does each point conclusively lead to another? sgdiehard actually havent explain this point yet...

tvdog SG

Man, get a life.

Gun SG

Sgdiehard's earlier post has described very clearly how this so-called "Self Defence" force can rapidly manifest into the shape end of a newly re-armed Japan by a stroke of constitution change.(Read "militarisation " )

Let's face it. Japan hv the resource to rearm. However the political will is not there yet...but it is very clearly building up under the constant influence from right-wing elements within and without the administration. This change is also occuring in the interntional areana where Japan is fighting for a permenent seat in the UN security council.

So does that mean a non-pacifist constitution indicate birth of another Empire of the Rising Sun ? Well, just observe what is now to taught in Japanese elementary school on about their WWII conquest and deeds.

A rearmed & assertive Japan will have not only have huge impact on the regional, but to world in the coming decade, all because US still hopes to contain China via her so-called Asian allies.

My concern is some "allies" can bite back.
China had never declared war with US, Japan did.

laurence82 SG

urm i dont think u answerd my qn, but nvm.... Mr. Green

Gun SG

Originally posted by tvdog:
Man, get a life.

I think mine is getting along just fine.
How's yours ? All porn and pop queens ? Laughing

boy in blues SG

Originally posted by lionnoisy:
[b]Japan
Defense Forece first in 7 areas

Reported in a Japanese magazines and reported in PRC press.

1.Counter mines measures
2.counter sub with quantity of P3C only second to US
3.The effectiveness of 16 non nuke sub are hugh
4.F2 fighters is better than F16
5.high tech,eg type 88 missiles can hit 100km away 100%
6.High maintenance capabaility of air force.eg F15 is 90%,higher than US.
7.high quality and education of 200000 strong JDF

Japan F2

As reported in today 01.11.2005 ZAO BAO,some 70,000 of 800,000 of peoples living in Spore during Japanese occupation were believed killed by Japanese.

What can we say.respect for her self defense or......

more JDF news[/b]

sounds challenging

Gun SG

Originally posted by laurence82:
urm i dont think u answerd my qn, but nvm.... Mr. Green

u "don't think" or u aren't sure how to followup ?
I am kinda suprised that you didn't think thru and replied within 2 mins to reading ?

Let's make this simpler: Do you support Japanese re-militarisation via change of her constitution of 6 decades ?

laurence82 SG

its not the constitution i have been harping

u have to look at my earlier posts

the very first question was

what has the fact that japan has never been invaded before, got to do with the fact her geography will never hamper the japanese troops?

and sgdiehard replied me with quite sum bit of consitution part which i have never harp on

therefore, what the first question then also, got to do with the frigging constitution?

sigh...

Gun SG

Allow me the re-phrase your query:
Japan lacks the ability to post militarly threaten becoz:
A) Geographical isolation, island based territories and seperation from Asian continent.

B)Does not hv large force projection force (a/c carriers, bluewater fleets, long range bombers etc) hence no military threat for invasion ability.

So why worry ? Is that it ?

laurence82 SG

Yeap

But something more in A

Japan has never been invaded before. Most faiilures are due to weather (the Mongolian invasion) or political reason (US has never occupied Japan wholly)

So how does these, if i may see from sgdiehard post, lead him to think Japan's geography would not hamper her force mobility?

38 SG

Sigh, Enough for ur much ado ...

To bring Japs knee down, why necessary to attack their main islands?

Cut off their supply line will do the most of the jobs

That means a naval blockage will be a fatal blow to a country that relies so much on the external supply and trade.

Now you may understand why US have to protect Taiwan by all means from taken by China.

Its not because how important the Taiwan itself, but the strategy location of Taiwan, it overlooks the water way where Japans 80% trade and supply by passed.

If Taiwan returns to China, China will effectively catch the Japans throat by controlling the water way.

And then, who is going to risk so many lives and firepower to occupy the Japan main island when the ransom can be easily collected from the big treasury.

laurence82 SG

Well, there are many ways to skin a cat isnt it? Wink

38 SG

Which one is the best is obvious, isn't it?

My point is , stop useless argument when in reality nobody is going to practice it.
Wink

laurence82 SG

Dont know

Like i said, there are many ways to skin a cat..i dont know what is 'best' and what is 'worst'

Laughing

38 SG

Ok, just anwer this simple Q:

Invade Japan easier or carry on a naval blockage of Japan's water way easier?

« Previous Page Next Page »