Slashdot Mirror
Japan's Military 'Needs Marines and Drones'
arisvega writes "The State of Japan is apparently seeking 'Deter and Respond' military capabilities, perhaps as an artifact from being 'embroiled in a bitter row over islands with China' and being 'deeply concerned by North Korea's nuclear ambitions,' as reported by the BBC. Since the end of WW II, under Article 9 of its post-war constitution, Japan is blocked from the use of force to resolve conflicts except in the case of self-defence. Now, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is looking to expand the scope of Japanese military activities — potentially a highly controversial move that would anger its neighbours. The post-war constitution was of course put in place by the then victorious west, who would now have an interest to fully back up this move: though Japanese officials claim that any new upgrades will not be used for preemptive strikes, the result will be arms and battalions installed close to The People's Republic of China, The Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and The Russian Federation. It will be interesting to track how this plays out."
As always, follow de Monet...
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Unless Abe has some unwisely-published rantings about the reestablishment of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere stashed in his closet somewhere, this seems like the sort of 'controversial' that will lead to grumblings and not a whole lot else.
It's not as though any of Japan's neighbors are necessarily going to like it; but nation-states maintaining armed forces, even potentially threatening ones, is sufficiently universal that there isn't exactly any complaints department who would take you seriously. "Dear the UN, I think Japan may be deciding to maintain a military larger than the one that the Americans let them keep after fighting a particularly nasty war with them, that's mean!"
It also wouldn't be a total surprise if some of the Japanese increase is aimed specifically at replacing the (never entirely popular) American bases in the area, which would leave the total amount of force roughly constant, just changing the label (and hopefully saviing the US some cash).
We sent Japan six divisions of marines not too many years ago. Now they need more? Those weren't enough?
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
How will this effect anime?
Just call everything self defense. It's like how congress can do pretty much anything just by saying interstate commerce and the supreme court even said that covered some things that happen completely inside one state because by not affecting interstate commerce they were affecting it
If you disarm somebody, you're morally responsible if they get attacked.
Well, if it successfully withered away and died, how can it possibly be a threat to China? :)
(There's an inherent contradiction in what you say.)
it better be the cool robot/jet anime kinda shit, and not the tentacle kind.
Not sure in which part of the Art of War he said that the best defense is to create new enemies, or promote new weapon races (even in fields where you can participate with widely available and cheap technology, like the internet based ones), but it should be somewhere because US is following that to the letter and the rest of their (for now) allies are following the example.
one Godzilla is not enough ???
The military was neutered, but the constitution that was forced on Japan was basically a Western system of government with a token emperor. Surprisingly, this worked really well for Japan. Without any possibility to create a hawkish foreign policy and with a government that generally respects human rights, Japan advanced faster than almost any other country in history--from rubble and millions dead to massive manufacturing industries and cities full of skyscrapers in less than 50 years. This is what can happen when you spend 1% or less of your GDP on the military. Perhaps this should be a lesson to some other countries in the world.
The USA is in South Korea for one reason, and one reason only- to prevent North and South Korea reuniting, just as East and West Germany did a little while back.
Although most people have the memory of a goldfish, try to think back. EVERY pundit in the West told the sheeple the re-unification between the two Germanys was impossible, and even if it did become possible, it would take DECADES. When the USSR withdrew from East Germany, reunification happened virtually overnight. Many of Germany's current leaders are from the East. Many are of East-German secret service background.
If America left South Korea, North and South would reunify just as quickly, under the capitalist system of the South. Korea would become the OTHER power-house, and Japan's time would be over. Worse for Japan would be the desire to see Japan punished for war crimes that occurred during WW2- crimes that the Americans ensured went unpunished after the war ended.
Japan has always been the vile murderous bully of the region. It has no chance of regaining this status. As an economic powerhouse, Japan is in terminal decline. Japan is now preparing for a future where it will go to war again purely to keep its second place status next to China. America has ensured Japan is a major nuclear power, and by this I mean MILITARY nuclear power. The nuclear power stations America ensured Japan built are designed to produce the nuclear material for warheads.
Japan is looking to emulate Israel, another murderous racist state that exists by periodically attacking any neighbour that dares to build itself up economically or militarily. Japan is planning for an 'Israel' flavoured action where it would engage in a short war against a united Korea, putting back Korea's progress by a decade or two. Japan's population is as nationalistic and racist as it was in the years before WW2, so getting support for such a war would be child's play.
In this scenario, Japan expects the major powers to either be on its side, or neutral. In this thinking, Japan is literally insane. Rather than building up its armed forces, Japan should be reducing them, and doing everything to earn the forgiveness and friendship of its neighbours. A militaristic Japan reminds EVERY neighbour of Japan just how evil this nation has been in the past, and how little it seems to want to change in the present.
This part of the world has a LOT of unfinished business. If Japanese leaders had even one brain cell, they'd understand that every major Asian neighbour has an incentive to see Japan invaded and put down as a regional threat once and for all. For Japan, China and Korea, WW2 didn't end, but was just put on hold.
The military was neutered, but the constitution that was forced on Japan was basically a Western system of government with a token emperor. Surprisingly, this worked really well for Japan. Without any possibility to create a hawkish foreign policy and with a government that generally respects human rights, Japan advanced faster than almost any other country in history--from rubble and millions dead to massive manufacturing industries and cities full of skyscrapers in less than 50 years. This is what can happen when you spend 1% or less of your GDP on the military. Perhaps this should be a lesson to some other countries in the world.
Yeah, every country should sign a defense treaty with the United States and have America provide a security guarantee.
I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
If the prevailing powers wish to enguage in offensive acts then Japan has no choice but to defend itself. I understand the ill will that Japan represents to the other asian nations during WWII but I for one wouldn't blame Japan for defending itself. Also Japan has a very moddern fighting force and any asian nation that wished to test it's defensive might should do so with caution.
It probably helped that they had over 50 years of both political technocratic and modern industrial engineering know-how. I mean... you know... just a little bit. There's nothing like efficient government and solid science & engineering to help rebuild a country. Second only to a small military budget, of course.
As always, follow de Monet...
It will be interesting to track how this plays out ... unless you happen to live in a country or belong to a race that the Chinese think have historically wronged China, or a race that the Chinese see as being inferior, in which case it could be scary to see Chinese attitudes of resentful nationalism closely tracking those of Japan and Germany prior to WW II.
I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
What? You mean Japan doesn't already have giant robots? The manga was a lie?
Uh, I thought they all have, with the possible exception of Russia and China and a few smaller ones like Cuba, Venezuala and Ecuador?
@de_machina
Perhaps he should be more like the people of Aneyoshi, in that village carved into a 4 foot stone obelisk is a warning "Don't build your homes below this line".
That village survived thanks to the warnings from the past.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
It worked really well up until the point corruption went wild, they had a massive real estate bubble, followed by one going on two lost decades where they've propped up their economy with massive public works projects and piles of debt. Of course lately they are printing money at a furious place to try to break the deflationary spiral they've been in for like 20 years.
They also have a demographic time bomb because young people have stopped having jobs, hope or babies so they can't support their rapidly exploding senior population.
@de_machina
So what you're saying is we should ship Mexicans to Japan?
Yeah, every country should sign a defense treaty with the United States and have America provide a security guarantee.
There are a number of countries that spend even less. Most countries have no disputed borders, and no hostile direct neighbors. Most military spending in the world is out of tradition or political calculation rather than any real security need. Even countries that need to keep their military, often have more than they need, and they focus on the wrong skills and capabilities. For example, two decades after the end of the cold war, Germany's military is built around heavy armored divisions, when there is no plausible scenario where they would be useful. On the eve of the 9/11 attacks, the US Army's top priority was the Crusader Artillery, a 99 ton monstrosity what would have proved nearly useless in the the ensuing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Even GWB had enough sense to kill that.
Lets shove barbed wire up the vaginas of the enemy!
Fuck the Japs. Deserved the two nukes they got up the ass.
Well, if it successfully withered away and died, how can it possibly be a threat to China? :)
As a forward base for US+allies. It would be like the UK during WW2--a huge aircraft and troop carrier parked off the coast of Germany. No disrespect to the British, who just happened to be living on "the carrier" when the extra troops arrived, and were instrumental in defeating fascism.
Drones with made in Japan optics.
Components made in Philippines, Vietnam and Laos.
A bit like any pro/consumer* camera but new Warlord friendly prices.
*autoland is extra
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
They import Brazilians actually. Just as good as Mexicans, and with just as much as racist bullshit, but more exploitable.
Oh, that's rich. First you force a country to sign your treaty and then you blame it for doing so.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Realize what this means! Drones, made in Japan. They'll fit into your pocket, be able to hit whatever square inch on this planet you tell them with more force than anything anyone else builds, come with a sleek, chrome polished design, are invisible to radar and whatever other detection you could come up with, cost way less to produce and of course in retail (but you'll never be able to afford spare parts, if you find any that is) and of course look like Mechagodzilla.
On a less funny note, ponder that one of the few areas the US are still at the cutting edge of technology and without any competition is arms. Now ponder what happened with EVERY other tech field the US led and Japan muscled in.
Think it will take long before the US will be using drones "made in Japan"?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
There where a respectable number of British troupes involved in operation Normandy and the final push against Hitler, along with British air support which had a major role. If you think that we where nothing more than a passive part of Hitler's defeat then you likely have only got your information from moves. With most war moves being made in America with Americans as their fist target audience they have easy access to American army props and accents because of this and the desire to appeal to local audiences they do not usual bother to include or even mention and sometime even outright whitewash or re-attribute non American actions.
In reality the defeat of Hitler was caused by a mixture of two flaws the first was the resource costs of the whole 3 front war, in Africa, against Russia and the UK, as long as none of them went down all of them took resources that could have been spent to beat the others.... The second flaw was the Nazis insufficient respect for the greatest Russian general, General Winter which cost them dear. Hitler was already defend at that point without too much further ailed intervention, but without the allies forcing the issue early Russia would have simply steamrollered Europe as their opponents ran out of resources (and probably finished the UK as part of that), and so for saving us from that I am definitely grateful to all those who fought.
It worked really well up until the point corruption went wild, they had a massive real estate bubble, followed by one going on two lost decades where they've propped up their economy with massive public works projects and piles of debt. Of course lately they are printing money at a furious place to try to break the deflationary spiral they've been in for like 20 years.
They also have a demographic time bomb because young people have stopped having jobs, hope or babies so they can't support their rapidly exploding senior population.
You sir, are on point!
Abe and their Central bank ideas are running out of steam and they have had to intervene by completely stopping markets to stop from a full on crash because of their intervention. They are running out of ideas, so the next best thing. Give the people and enemy and go to war! (pulling a US style tactic)
Central banker probably says " Get people on board with fighting China. This will fix our economy! "
^^^ Remember, someone take a picture of this here.
Why? Years from now after they have changed their constitution and claim that it wasn't for preemptive strikes, and then the begin to attack people. I called it. Keynesian Economics. Run out of ideas, start blowing shit up. ( Broken Glass Fallacy )
Realistically, it was the US that handled all of Japan's defense duties. Because Japan was essentially disarmed, any attacks from China or Russia would be responded against by the US, just as if the attack was against New York, not Tokyo.
Europe enjoyed that luxury as well to a lesser extent.
However, things change. Japan militarizing is going to definitely change the Pacific Rim balance.
China still has the upper hand. In 24 hours, they can easily overrun Taiwan, shell Seoul via their proxy, "pacify" Signapore, and possibly do serious damage to Japan, breaking the backbone of the West's manufacturing capability.
Yes, since surely grandparent was alive during the time this was voted for and executed and had an effect in the decision. That's right fellow americans, the rest of the world not only sees us as a hivemind but a hivemind with longevity.
You should try belonging to $Nation_with_colonial_past then, you yes you personally killed someone's grandfather, and they'll give you an earful about it too.
Categorising is easy, and often wrong, but you still can not blame another nation for the actions of your ancestors or begrudge them too much for taking time to fix the problems left behind.
And risk nuclear war? I think not. There is no upper hand when nuclear weapons are in play. There is no strategy. There is no way to win.
Japan militarizing has no impact on China. A country without nuclear weapons is not a credible threat against one that does. Period.
Attack is best defense.
Do you really hate history so very much?
(Nod to JC.)
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Hong Kong and Macau would like to have a chat with you.
Along with these other places.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
There's no contradiction.
(You switched to past tense.)
The numbers speak for themselves. The number of American troops during the Normandy beach landings = 63,000, British =60,000. The casualty figures are similarly even.
As you say, Hollywood revisionism is to blame for a lot of the misconceptions about the American role in the war. It was a big role, but far from a one-nation-show.
Also, if Japan allowed China and NK to have near permanent military bases in Japan (after letting them drop a couple of nukes to be complete), there would no need to fear either of them. Seen this way, instead of using a "solution" that worked, they are experimenting.
The stupidity of fears over China/NK bombing Japan, while having the military bases of the destroyer of nation is astounding.
"Hollywood revisionism is to blame for a lot of the misconceptions about the American role in the war".
By the way, it was the Eastern Front, which claimed 80 percent of all German military casualties in the war. So basically, it was one evil empire against other and the winning one got away with its crimes. That is the reality. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/21/arts/a-job-for-rewrite-stalin-s-war.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
I disagree. They had the terrible punishment of being stuck with Stalin for quite a few more years.
Compare that to the USA which doesn't have the public works projects but still has piles of debt. I'd prefer the place where they built the fast trains if all else was equal.
Well, I wasn't alive during WW2 either. But I get told time and again that I should still feel remorse for what some idiots did in my country back then. Care to explain why I should feel responsible for and pay for Nazi war crimes?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Now that China isn't using them to spy on India!
Japan lives under the American nuclear "umbrella". Nuclear attacks on them would be responded to with same.
Not so sure about what'd happen if every outlying island in the region had a Chinese military base on it; they need not use nukes, and they never need to fire a shot to change the balance of power enough to impact any negotiations for trade or treaty in the region.
you should not and don't let anyone tell you that you should. And Germany should stop paying the jews. How many generations should be allowed to collect from Germany this is insane.
Germany's military is built around heavy armored divisions, when there is no plausible scenario where they would be useful.
Zerg rush wins every time. That's their plan.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
The current constitution has a lot of popular support in Japan. You have to remember that the Japanese people were largely victims for WW2. Few really supported the military and they suffered greatly due to its actions. The idea that the government should not make war or allow military build-up is very popular, and a lot of people believe has kept Japan safe from neighbours that would otherwise feel far more threatened than they already do.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Like, when the Japanese started rebuilding the Kido Butai? Personally, I'm untroubled by the announcement, but I think it's funny that "marines and drones" are getting notice, but the 27,000-ton carrier under construction and the two 19,000-ton carriers in commission get no mention.
The Germans sold a lot of their tank inventory all over Europe and elsewhere after the Cold War ended. They have like a fifth of the tanks they used to have.
Are you implying that the Japanese want to use the drones to break into Louvre?
Yeah, every country should sign a defense treaty with the United States and have America provide a security guarantee.
If by 'provide a security guarantee' you mean park 35 000 soldiers that pretty often get drunk and do some really stupid shit, then yes...obviously.
Sorry, I'm not clear on which "free" China it is that I'm supposedly a lackey of. Kindly elucidate.
Afterwards, we can discuss who's paying you to post nonsense.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
you mean Marines and SCV's.
Probably the same reason white Americans (even ones descended from peope who immigrated post 1865) are responsible for slavery.
FTFY.
All it takes is one coup for the Pontipines to invade Wottingerland.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Not only British soldiers, but, British engineering gave a much needed boost to the allied war effort. Think about the difference it would have made if we did not have the British Merlin engine, or the British radar tube, I think they called it the Magnetron...
Ancient Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times
1. This story is at least a few weeks late, Abe has been talking about this crap for a while, and nobody cares. 2. Without changing the constitution, they can build up the "self defense" army more. Every country says their army is for self defense anyway. 3. I seriously doubt he has the backing to actually amend the constitution. 4. The real reason for the Senkaku island dispute is not oil, but this: The territory of a country is basically defined as xx miles from the farthest out land. Having those islands under Japanese control extends Japan's territory quite a bit - and that includes keeping outsiders farther away from places where the u.s. army has set up camp. So not only Japan, but the US has a vested interest in keeping those islands just for the ocean territory they can claim with them. Japan's economy has been "bad" lately, so people don't want to spend more on things they don't have to. ("bad" means in comparison to the 80s bubble... I still see all of the bars and restaurants full every single night ...)
All it takes is one coup for the Pontipines to invade Wottingerland.
The solution to that problem is collective defense. An agreement like NATO's article five "An attack against one is an attack against all", means that the one country that seeks war must be stronger than all the countries that seek peace.
"We agreed we wouldn't have a standing army, not a flying robot one. My god, look at our movies!"
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
considering that their 'self-defense' force is far more powerful than many, many others' total military prowess.
[citation needed]
like the UK during WW2--a huge aircraft and troop carrier parked off the coast of Germany. No disrespect to the British, who just happened to be living on "the carrier" when the extra troops arrived
You obviously got your "history" from the movies. Apart from the numbers of American and British invading Europe in 1944 being of the same order, it was the British who stopped a collapse of the US forces in the Battle of the Ardennes in the following winter. Basically the US army, like the French Army, had (still has?) a similar (and fatal) trust in "elan", so the troops had little training in fighting defensively or in retreat; they considered to train for such situations was defeatism. The British OTOH were used to colonial wars in which remote outposts might need to defend themselves for weeks against revolting natives until re-inforcements arrived. The US attitude was fine until they found themselves needing to fight defensively, as in the Ardennes; then they panicked and ran - an episode that US historians tend to gloss over.
The exception in the Ardennes was the US Airborne divisions. Those paratroops were trained in defensive fighting because of their role in capturing bridges etc behind enemy lines and waiting for ground troops to catch up. Hence the brilliant and tenacious defence of Bastogne by the US 101st Airborne.
Drones will eventually provide enough offensive capability that you'll need ground troops only to invade and repel invaders. With ranges > 1000 miles, you can have a swarm of them protecting your shipping lanes. With enough of them, you can overwhelm any seaborne invasion force relatively cheaply. They'd be a good, cheap way to do power projection without the expense.
They need to start thinking about drone carrier bases instead of aircraft carriers.
Swarming technology will get good enough that you'll only need a few real pilots.
They're also prone to jamming, which is why they need some autonomy.
Overall, they're really pretty cost-effective. Link them to some image recognition technology and you'd have an automated seaborne monitoring system that optionally can drop some missiles on someone. What's not to love?
On the eve of the 9/11 attacks, the US Army's top priority was the Crusader Artillery, a 99 ton monstrosity what would have proved nearly useless in the the ensuing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The link says it weighs less than half your 99 ton. Just looks like a modern 155mm Self Propelled Gun to me.
But it changes the situation from one where China can launch a limited conventional attack (say, annex the Spratlys) and win by a walkover to one where it might have a fight on its hands.
Assuming that fight goes against them or even turns into a stalemate China must either use nukes or lose face.
If you've ever had dealings with Chinese people you'll know which is more likely.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Does anyone actually believe that?
I mean, Assad was warned about using chemical weapons, and he didn't even get a strict telling-off.
Not that I believed it before that. Obama is more likely to dither and say that perhaps tempers got a little heated, yada yada yada yada, there's a lesson here we can all learn, bla bla bla.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Japanese defense is based on maintaining a shadow capability couched in political vagueness, which can be instantaneously converted in moment of need to a first class military resource. For example IIRC they have no bioweapons level lab, but converting an existing one to a higher grade could be done in days if not hours. The applied physics capabilities of Japan could easily be turned to warheads if they really wanted to do so. It would be child's play for them to build a nuclear bomb, but the Japanese really hate nuclear weapons and for good reason.
Drones on the other hand are great. Developing them will push robotic weapon systems technology in general, and they can easily be routed with an explosive payload when their mission is ostensibly to monitor compliance. Instead of having coast guard boats that are not allowed to fire towards a belligerent vessel, drones can obtain shots of the faces of the enemy and you could even imagine drone "accidents". And when you get to a certain level of technology (supersonic speed, sub-orbital altitude) you can make devastating kinetic impacts that cannot be defended against.
And China has just been asking for it. The Japanese have shown a lot of restraint. So you can expect extremely high technology used behind systems that can have multiple purposes including something vaguely deployed for observation / news gathering in response to incursions. Stealth drones that take good pictures will also be very likely. Expect tons of money to go into flight capable robotics and science fiction / hollywood style weapons systems.
The Japanese didn't NEED to spend on a military to defend them during the Cold War because the US military did that for them instead.
That's not a victory for pacifism. US forces were ready to nuke China and North Korea at no notice. Nukes were loaded on aircraft sitting Alert at many Asian bases including some in South Korea.
The same fellow who helped give Japan its sudden taste for pacifism by burning hundreds of thousands of its people to death in WWII "fire raids" (some of which bagged more of them than either Hiroshima or Nagasaki) then helped build and run the Strategic Air Command whose nuclear umbrella sheltered Japanese growth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_LeMay
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Nothing is stopping you from making your own war movies. Except money and a lack of interest.
Yeah, every country should sign a defense treaty with the United States and have America provide a security guarantee.
You say it flippantly, but it might actually be a good idea.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Today's Japanese perhaps, but back then, no. I mean shit, 5,000 civilians committed suicide upon report of US advancement of Saipan because they didn't want the shame of being captured. It was a regular saying/chanting there that should Americans reach the mainland, they (the civilians) will all rise up and kill millions. The nukes prevented that.
Japan was a very militaristic society. Even today they remain highly xenophobic.
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
That's what they need to defend themselves.
I think you're confusing things here. It's estimated that 5,000 Japanese soldiers committed suicide. 2,000 committed suicide, outright. Another 3,000 did so by charging directly into the face of U.S. Army and Marine units, actually managing to overrun the frontmost U.S. units. This gained some time for their comrades to carry the counterattack forward, but we all know how that turned out; more than 24,000 of the 25,000-man garrison was wiped out.
As for the civilians, various reports say that 1000-3000 civilians committed suicide (e.g. Wikipedia says 1000, About.com says 3000, etc.). The majority committed suicide because they had been incessantly told by the military that white men were savages; the women, children, and elderly would be tortured, raped, and murdered without pity. Anybody who balked was either coerced to commit suicide or was shot by the (fleeing) soldiers.
Also, some civilians were forced to act as "bait" to lure unsuspecting U.S. soldiers into ambushes. In the end, a lot of civilians were killed ("accidentally on purpose" as mentioned in one document) because the U.S. soldiers couldn't be sure if they were being suckered. Oddly, I've heard that these deaths were also considered suicides.
Anyway, I guess the point is that the suicides (both military and civilian) show very clearly the power of Imperial Japan's military propaganda during WW2.
p.s. Before being accused of talking out of my ass, I just want to say that my heritage is Japanese. I have relatives there who witnessed things firsthand, including the A-bomb drops. Reports of the nature that I described above are commonplace.
I found the saying by the way, I posted earlier on my smartphone so I did some wreckless paraphrasing, but here are the original quotes:
The sooner the Americans come, the better...One hundred million die proudly.
-- Japanese slogan in the summer of 1945.
Japan was finished as a warmaking nation, in spite of its four million men still under arms. But...Japan was not going to quit. Despite the fact that she was militarily finished, Japan's leaders were going to fight right on. To not lose "face" was more important than hundreds and hundreds of thousands of lives. And the people concurred, in silence, without protest. To continue was no longer a question of Japanese military thinking, it was an aspect of Japanese culture and psychology.
-- James Jones, WWII
We will prepare 10,000 planes to meet the landing of the enemy. We will mobilize every aircraft possible, both training and "special attack" (kamikaze) planes. We will smash one third of the enemy's war potential with this air force at sea. Another third will also be smashed at sea by our warships, human torpedoes and other special weapons. Furthermore, when the enemy actually lands, if we are ready to sacrifice a million men we will be able to inflict an equal number of casualties upon them. If the enemy loses a million men, then the public opinion in America will become inclined towards peace, and Japan will be able to gain peace with comparatively advantageous conditions.
-- Imperial General HQ army staff officer in July 1945, from Weintraub's "The Last Great Victory"
"We hated the Japs but nobody had the slightest desire to go there and fight them because the one thing we knew was that we'd all be killed. I mean we really knew it. I never used to think that, I used to say the Japs would never get me. But there was no question about the mainland. How the hell are you going to storm a country where women and children, everybody would be fighting you? Of course we'd have won eventually but I don't think anybody who hasn't actually seen the Japanese fight can have any idea of what it would have cost."
-- Austin Aria, veteran of the Okinawa campaign
But if you have Japanese heritage, I'm sure you're already familiar with how Japan treats immigrants (dare I say not even qualify as second class citizens) and indeed even how they treat hibakusha and even their descendents.
Today I view Japan as an honorable nation with an honorable culture for the most part, but they certainly haven't always been that way. It really did take western pressure to turn them around. Whether that is a good or a bad thing (i.e. western civilization destroying what was otherwise a rather unique militaristic culture) I don't know, but they have a very dark history - in fact most Asians I know (that is, ones who spent most of their lives in Asia) seem to have a distaste for Japanese. I.e. Koreans and Chinese have a rivalry thing going on, but they dislike the Japanese more than they dislike one another, and that largely seems to stem from what happened in the 40's - a very long time ago to the point of being mostly forgotten in the US it seems.
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
Being US ally sometimes has a high price tag. Having a single power protecting everyone is a recipe for abuse.
I never denied that Japan has an ugly past. I was merely stating that the numbers that you posted were questionable.
;-)
As for being disliked by other Asians, you forgot the Filipinos, Singaporeans, and to a lesser extent, Indonesians and Malaysians. I live in a multi-ethnic neighbourhood in Vancouver, B.C., Canada. I have a Chinese neighbour on one side, a Korean neighbour on the other side, and a Filipino neighbour across the street. I also work with a guy who hails from Indonesia. They've all told me at one time or another that they were taught as children that Japan was " Teh Debil!1!!!11 ", mostly based on Japan's history. I find this somewhat amusing because my Chinese neighbour sounds like a mouthpiece for the Communist Party. In light of the brutality of China's current regime, any talk about Japan's past imperialistic exploits seems incredibly hypocritical.
Anyway, the wartime ugliness extended to this side of the water, as well. Perhaps you're aware of the internment of Japanese-Canadians and -Americans during WW2? More info:
Japanese-Canadian Internment
Japanese-American Internment
On a personal note, despite being Canadian citizens (all were born here), my family was stripped of their possessions, their rights, and their freedom, and loaded onto cattle cars and shipped by train to internment camps in the remote B.C. Interior. The men (including my 15-yr old Dad) were forced to go on to Ontario to work on a road gang. My grandfather suffered a broken back while working there and was permanently debilitated. Two of my aunts died of tuberculosis without medical intervention. Their last moments were spent in a tar-paper shack in a remote prison camp in the dead of winter. After the war, some of my relatives were forcibly repatriated to Japan. For most, this was their first time setting foot there.
So, you want to talk about a dark recent history? Does anyone really believe that only the Japanese demonized their "enemies"? Well, I have news for everyone; the propaganda machine was working overtime on this side of the Pacific, as well.
Hey, want more? My uncle died in the Fukushima quake in 2011. If we're still making recriminations, then I suggest one of these:
"This was payback for Pearl Harbor!" or "This was payback for Japan beating the U.S. in the Women's World Cup!"
I've personally heard both of those in the last couple of years. It's bad enough to read it on Twitter (and Slashdot), but to have someone say such things to my face was almost beyond belief. Well, I guess I should expect these kinds of things. People harbour all sorts of irrational hatreds. Maybe it's xenophobia, as you touched upon, or maybe it's jingoism.
p.s. AlphaWolf_HK, I'm wondering why you've expressed such interest about Japan's "dark history". I'm guessing that the "HK" in your username stands for Hong Kong? Are you still sore about Nanking?
Just what was it that persuaded Thatcher to give up Hong Kong island (which was given to Britain permanently, it was only the new territories that were under lease)? Was it a promise to remain peaceful?
I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
Japan has hardly been sabre rattling. Nor have the Phillippines, India, Taiwan, and Vietnam been sabre-rattling. The sabre-rattling has been on the Chinese side.
I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
Who said I was blaming them?
My point was only that the method of having a pacifist doctrine and tiny military doesn't work for all countries. How long would Taiwan or Israel last if they shrank their military to practically nothing (we may find out with Taiwan)?
I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
Whoever told you that is an idiot and/or a jerk. I don't think you should feel responsible for Nazi war crimes.
As for paying for Nazi war crimes, that's a bit more complicated. Certainly you shouldn't be punished for them (sometimes "be punished for" is what people mean when they say "pay for").
However when it comes to fiscal depts - medical treatments for surviving victims still suffering from WWII era wounds, for example, there is a collective debt of the country (Gemany) and no good way to separate the obligation owed by the older generation vs the younger generation. Unfortunately that's the way government debt works. American children today who have no voice in government will spend their lives paying off the debts incurred by reckless borrowing of the Clinton-Bush-Obama years (I don't include Reagan and Bush I because their debt was arguably needed for fighting the Cold War).
However, the number of Nazi War Crime victims grows smaller and smaller. I wouldn't worry to much about a dwindling financial obligation. However if their children start demanding payment when those children didn't suffer - then I think you have something to complain about.
Inter-generational moral-debt is a recipe for permanent war. See the middle east, for example. At some point you have to accept what you were born to and try to better yourself through your own efforts rather than trying to blame each others' grandparents did to each other.
I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
For that to work at least some of the peaceful countries must have sizable armed forces, they must be prepared to use them and last (but probably the most important) they must be perceived as being prepared to use them.
We've seen indecision about Syria already. Even if you consider the chemical weapons (they were warned about that, remember?) an internal matter, a Turkish village was shelled and a plane shot down. Last time I looked Turkey was a member of NATO. And NATO has done what, exactly?
Once the body-bags start coming home Faux News will be all "Why are we wasting our boys on Bumfuckistan?" and no politician is going to risk Chicago or NYC (or London or Berlin) getting turned to cinders over that place with the octagonal postage stamps.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Were not where. Troops not troupes (unless you're talking about actors).
And finally, British Empire and Commonwealth, not British. A quarter of them were Canadians.
Which would you rather be, a Japanese internee in the US/Canada, or a prisoner of the Japanese?
They aren't even in the same league.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Not to mention all those people in an obscure military installatiom (bletchley park) who invented the first digital computers and were pretty much reading encrypted german comms in almost real time throughout most of the last half of the war. Even the metadata was useful, let alone the content.
The main scene of the Nazi's downfall may have been the Soviet Union, but the evidence that the Soviets would have collapsed completely without massive amounts of foreign aid is overwhelming. Something else military historians have always known, but which largely escapes popular treatments of the war, apparently including that by the NY times.
For example, just about everything that rotates requires anti-friction bearings, otherwise known as ball bearings. Hence, your WW2 era tanks, artillery pieces, planes, and so forth, plus the machine tools needed to make these, all depended on high quality ball bearings. Guess where the Soviets got the vast majority of their ball bearings?
Then we have the additives and processing equipment needed to make high quality aviation fuel. Without this, you don't have an air force capable of competing with the enemy, since you can't get the needed performance out of your engines. Ever wonder who supplied this stuff to the Soviets?
Similarly, WW2 era warfare depended massively upon huge amounts of supplies being able to be shipped to the troops at the front from the factories. Minor things like ammunition, food, and medical supplies. Guess where the Soviets got most of their trucks and trains from (over 600,000 vehicles), after the Germans destroyed or captured most of their vehicles (and, despite myths to the contrary, many of their factories) in the early days of the invasion?
Then we have the 100,000+ machine tools supplied to Soviet factories. Hard to work metal without machine tools.
Also, the Soviets had a massive manpower problem. This was caused by the enormous losses of people and territory in the first few months of the German invasion (or, if you prefer, pre-emptive strike). They needed to free up people from working in a wide variety of industries such as food and textiles in order to send them off to the front. Guess who made up the slack, supplying massive amounts of food and clothing (including quite a bit of winter clothing)?
Think about what would have happened in the famous campaigns if the Soviets didn't have most of their tanks, airplanes, guns, and ammunition, not to mention a smaller (and starving) army. Despite the high quality of some of their technology, they simply wouldn't have had enough to win against opponents as dangerous as the German army and air force proved themselves to be (even taking into account massive Nazi blundering).
WW2 was a team effort, but if anything, the current trend is to under-estimate the US role simply because most casual commentators don't understand military logistics, how things actually work, and the process of manufacturing them.
Japan has had token Emperors since 1192 when the Shoguns took over the real power.
Sure enough, the cow costume was hanging up next to the superhero outfit and sailors uniform. (S,Spud)
The only reason and literally the only reason the nazi's lost is because Hitler was nuts. He had all but broken the isle of Britain with near constant shelling, rocket attacks and bombings. If Hitler had invaded Britain and then waited to invade Russia in the spring of 41 all the Americans would have been able to do is watch as the world turned black and red. Instead he thought the isle of Britain broken, devoid of exploitable resources and attacked Russia in winter. During this time high quality American steel and arms were flowing into Britain in advance of our own troops. The British commando forces were invaluable to the landings at Omaha and Normandy; as an American I would never devalue the blood, sweat and tears our European allies put into liberating themselves; however were it not for the American supplies and troops the entirety of Europe would speak German or Russian as a first language.
Not sure what this has to do with the original topic.
In a nutshell, we were discussing the use of propaganda to sway the outlook of a civilian population. AlphaWolf_HK's mention of civilian suicides during the Battle of Saipan and my mention of the internment of Japanese-Canadians and Japanese-Americans are examples of the effects of propaganda (in general, the demonization of the enemy).
But, if we're going to veer off onto the topic of the treatment of prisoners, then I guess we can can expand this to a discussion about Gitmo. Or maybe the treatment of dissidents in China or Myanmar. Seems like a completely different discussion, though.
Actually the HK is an old reference to a gamer tag I have long since stopped using. I tend to respect Asian cultures for their high disciplinary values (which is why they are so damn successful in academia that affirmative action throws them under the bus - yet another reason why I think we need to get rid of it - we should be encouraging talent, not condemning it) but I am about as white as casper and have no Asian ancestry whatsoever.
But anyways I don't think bringing up internment camps is a prudent thing to do in the greater context of things.
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
There were 55,000 British, and 610,000 Americans involved in Battle of the Bulge
In reality the defeat of Hitler was caused by a mixture of two flaws the first was the resource costs of the whole 3 front war, in Africa, against Russia and the UK, as long as none of them went down all of them took resources that could have been spent to beat the others.... The second flaw was the Nazis insufficient respect for the greatest Russian general, General Winter which cost them dear. Hitler was already defend at that point without too much further ailed intervention, but without the allies forcing the issue early Russia would have simply steamrollered Europe as their opponents ran out of resources (and probably finished the UK as part of that), and so for saving us from that I am definitely grateful to all those who fought.
I highly recommend you read about the German desert campaign. It was a tertiary front for Germany and a secondary front for Italy. The Germans never gave any serious consideration to it. In fact, if it hadn't been for Churchill pushing for an intervention somewhere else in the Medeterranean in the middle of Operation Compass that made the British stop short of Tunisia which provided the breathe needed for the DAK to get deployed. The Axis forces were constantly struggling with a lack of mechanization. The majority of Italian infantry units, for example, had no trucks with which to move their troops long distances make them only really useful when sieging cities like Tobruk or in places where dug in positions could be created for the soldiers. The 15th and 21st Panzer divisions did a large amount of the heavy lifting during the conflict with the Italian Ariete and Trieste divisions providing some help though in most situations they were outgunned by British armored units and could often times not even penetrate the British tanks.
Perhaps the most chilling thing about the DAK is that when you look at the units commited by Germany to Africa, they total head count was only a fraction of what was contained in a single army on the Russian front. In all, the Africa campaign and the committed to it by Germany was a token gesture in light of the alliance with Italy. Nothing more, nothing less.
France and Britian as a second front. Most of the units stationed over there were units that had been taken from the lines in Russia and moved to France in order to rest and rebuild. The majority of effort in that theater was performed by the Luftwaffe which was perfectly acceptable as the Soviets had entrenched and the air commitment of a Blitzkrieg was no longer as supportive.
That brings to the primary front. While "General Winter" played a part, it was by no means the significant reason for which the Germans became crippled fighting the Soviets. There were some significant strategic blunders put into play, not the least of which resulted with the total loss of an entire army group.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
We're close to 70 years later at this point. I think that given the generations involved in the previous war in question are gone or rapidly fading, we can pretty much safely say Japan isn't the Japan which attacked Pearl Harbor at this point.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
I don't know if it's Hollywood revisionism. I don't know of any films that portray the war as if the US won the war single handed. Since as you mentioned, most were created for american audiences, that is portion they showed. People wanted to see what their fathers, uncles, and grandfathers went through. For D-Day the forces were largely divided by which part of the Normandy beach they attacked. This means for the most part the Canadians, Americans and British would not come in contact with each other on the battlefield. The majority seem to focus on Omaha Beach was was slated for US troops. Many (especially modern movies, miniseries and documentaries) do in fact include British troops and the parts they played. I know of no veterans who ever downplayed the British military in WWII.
I am very proud of the part the US played in the war, and I do believe we were a very important part of winning (though it is easy to argue a large portion of that was due to our ability to manufacture an insane amount of war machines and materials). I am also proud of the Canadian and British forces. Together, we all made a good showing of ourselves.
It has plenty to do with the post I replied to.
Discussing the topic of the largest paragraph of your post (a third of the whole) is veering off?
Now answer the question. For maximum marks, include references to the Burma railroad and comfort women.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I already stated that Japan had an ugly past. I do not see the point in rehashing things.
:-D
But, if you really want an answer, then I'd have to say that I'd rather be a prisoner of the Japanese. Considering that I'm Japanese and all.
I should clarify...
.
I mentioned in an earlier post that Japanese citizens were under the sway of wartime propaganda. As I also mentioned, demonization of the enemy was de rigueur. Some of that had to do with the fear (instilled by the military) that white men were amoral savages, but also from the notion that almost all non-Japanese were sub-human. That probably explains the dehumanizing treatment inflicted on prisoners of war and on the citizens of nations that Imperial Japan invaded
Assuming that I was a Japanese citizen around at that time, I would probably have agreed with that policy. Not doing so meant imprisonment and the infliction of that same dehumanizing treatment on one's own person. It would be nice to think that conscientious citizens would rise up and protest, but the truth is that the majority of people would be looking after their own hides. It's a cliche, but we are products of our times and surroundings.
Today, we look back and say that the treatment by the Japanese Army of prisoners of war and citizens of occupied areas was exceptionally brutal. Would I want to be treated in that fashion? No, obviously not. Would I prefer internment In Canada over imprisonment in a wartime Japanese POW camp? I truly do not know. After losing half of my existing family during and immediately after internment, it doesn't seem like either option was particularly savoury.
Why not? My intention was to show that wartime propaganda from both sides was used to justify various actions. I exemplified it with events that occurred in Japan and in North America. Also, I think it's safe to say that propaganda was even more important to the war efforts of certain European nations at that time.
Unfortunately, some people seem to be keying on the example used and ignoring the reason why I used the example in the first place.
The original topic was obscured, and it seems that we're now just trying to corner people in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" dilemma. Frankly, I don't know if the new topic is truly of overriding importance to the person concerned (for example, he had a relative who were prisoners of war in WW2 Japan, or had relatives in an occupied area), or if it's just a case of faux outrage.
Assad's forces didn't use chemical weapons (if they even used them at all) against anyone the US actually cares about, despite stern warnings. What the US actually cares about is those weapons getting out of control, especially if they fall into the hands of non-state actors hostile to the US, Israel, Britain, and key EU allies. Sadly, as long as Assad keeps a firm grip on the WMDs, and avoids any attention-grabbing large-scale massacres, he's probably safe from the US and EU.
If that Turkish village which had been "mistakenly" shelled by Syrian forces had been hit by nerve gas instead of simple artillery, we'd all be talking about how unbelievably fast the US-led Syrian invasion had gone, how long the US can possibly maintain 3 wars even with significant EU/Turkish contributions in Syria, and how the coalition has no credible Syrian exit strategy and is bungling attempts at nation-building while internal Syrian and external Islamist factions violently vie for ascendancy within the power vacuum. All of us, including Assad, have seen this wretched movie before, and he knows how to avoid a starring role in another sequel.
- T