After 76 Years, Japan Has Aircraft Carriers Again (popularmechanics.com) 184
The United States Marine Corps and Japan's Maritime Self Defense Force made history last month with an epic flight that relaunched Japan's carrier aviation program. From a report: The flight involving the Japanese aircraft carrier Izumo and American F-35B fighter jets marked the first time Japan has operated an aircraft carrier since 1945. Japan was one of the first pioneering naval aviation powers, but its involvement in World War II saw the destruction of nearly its entire fleet battle force -- particularly the carriers. The flight took place on October 3 in the Pacific Ocean. Two F-35B Joint Strike Fighters operating from Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni took off from mainland Japan, refueled in midair, and then landed on the ship JS Izumo. The F-35Bs landed vertically on Izumo's flight deck and then performed a rolling takeoff. [...] In December 1941, Japan operated the largest and best-trained carrier force in the world. Japan was heavily reliant on its navy for power projection and took a natural liking to the concept of operating planes from ships. The Imperial Japanese Navy built the world's first purpose-built aircraft carrier, Hosho, in 1922. (Other countries, including the United States, built early carriers by using the hulls of other types of ships.)
Yes, but do they attach to the SDF-1? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Please, not Minmay, anything but that. I think that would be called a war crime nowadays.
I totally want a Veritech built though, not sure what it would be realistically used for though.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wasn't one of them an aircraft carrier and the other an amphibious landing ship?
Re: (Score:2)
Correct. Prometheus was an aircraft carrier and Daedalus was an amphibious landing ship (as in it could physically land on a beach and deploy troops, which is weird as the hull below the waterline is not the right shape for that, but that's what they said). How they managed to attach them to the Macross is a mystery given that they did not have any sort of docking port functionality. UN Spacy must have some crazy efficient and skilled welding crews.
In the movie version, Daedalus and Prometheus are destroyed
Re: Yes, but do they attach to the SDF-1? (Score:2)
Well, Japan has always had âoehelicopter carriersâ which based on the design is basically a regular aircraft carrier with different designs painted on the deck. Theyâ(TM)ve done various things like that to maintain a covert readiness state while complying with the allied rules around disarmament and non-offensive platforms from the Second World War.
With China a growing threat and the US and UK/EU effectively drawn back from the region, Japan is getting a bit scared and becoming more and more
Re: (Score:2)
It's 550 miles from Fukuoka to Shanghai. The F-35 has a range of 1,700 miles. Aircraft carriers are not necessary, especially if it's a defensive mission.
They may not be all that useful either, given China's anti-ship ballistic missiles. Concentrating a lot of aircraft on a sinkable airport makes it easier to destroy them in a single strike.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Do you really think the Chinese would pour so much money into ASBMs without thinking about how targeting would work?
Not only do they have a way, it's so well-known that even the US military is well aware of it [uscc.gov]:
Chinese military writings portray space assets as critical for carrying out joint firepower strike operations against Taiwan. They portray ISR satellites as being particularly important. These satellites would be tasked with collecting intelligence used by the PLA to build and update lists of Taiwanese and U.S. targets, monitor and target U.S. ships and planes within 3,000 kilometers (km) of the PRC, and produce battle damage assessments after the initial wave of strikes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Those military satellites have maneuvering capability, which is to say, they're in "easily-calculated orbits" until they decide not to be.
Moreover, one they blew up was orbiting at 865 km in altitude. The ones they're using are in GSO, which is 35,786 km up. Nobody has a anti-sat weapon that can reach GSO and Japan itself has no anti-satellite capability at all and would have to rely on the US getting involved.
This is why no U.S weapon system or strategy relies solely on GPS or any other purely space based system
Yes there are. Those satellite-guided JDAMs stop being precision-guided when they lose GPS.
And tha
Re: (Score:3)
Those military satellites have maneuvering capability, which is to say, they're in "easily-calculated orbits" until they decide not to be.
Moreover, one they blew up was orbiting at 865 km in altitude. The ones they're using are in GSO, which is 35,786 km up. Nobody has a anti-sat weapon that can reach GSO and Japan itself has no anti-satellite capability at all and would have to rely on the US getting involved.
This is why no U.S weapon system or strategy relies solely on GPS or any other purely space based system
Yes there are. Those satellite-guided JDAMs stop being precision-guided when they lose GPS.
And that's irrelevant in any case. There's no reason to think China only has one way of detecting aircraft carriers. I mean, they have aircraft, ships and submarines too, the last of which is also a huge threat to carriers in themselves.
They carry a limited amount of fuel to stabilize their orbits when need-be, not enough to continually adjust their orbits to make them unpredictable. The GSO's sure are high but arguably the hardest part of hitting the satellite is targeting and what is essentially a stationary object help's with that. JDAM's are bomb's, it is nice to have them precision guided but it is not necessary for them to do their job unlike a anti-ship missile which is useless without precision. There is a reason why Carriers trave
Re: (Score:2)
They carry a limited amount of fuel to stabilize their orbits when need-be, not enough to continually adjust their orbits to make them unpredictable.
They can carry more if they're expecting to dodge your anti-satellite weapons. And no, they don't need to continually adjust their orbits, as I'll explain later.
The GSO's sure are high
Not just a little high. To put it into perspective, it's 3 times the distance from China to the US.
but arguably the hardest part of hitting the satellite is targeting
No. The hardest part of hitting a satellite in GSO is reaching it. Assuming you even have a rocket ready to go, or even better, something already in LEO, it still takes up to 90 minutes to reach a position to start the geosynchronous transfer orbit (GT
Re: (Score:2)
Satellite photos ...
pirates *AND* grave-robbers! (Score:2)
Japan is the best thing the US ever made (Score:4, Interesting)
We need to arm Japan with nukes too.
Preferably hypersonic ones that can hit the heart of China inside a few minutes.
Nukes are the only credible deterrent (Score:2)
To be credible they MUST be wielded by potential victims. The US has nukes but no reason to use them in Asia because nothing there is an existential threat to the US (unless Beijing went nuts are tried a countervalue strike).
NeoCons want us to fight China but that does nothing for the American public.
Re: (Score:2)
Any reasonably advanced country could build nukes pretty fast if they needed them. The tough part is building the rockets to deliver them, but Japan has lots of those.
I wouldn't be shocked to find out Japan has some very super secret contingency plans to throw together a few nukes in the event of an emergency. South Korea and Taiwan too.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't be shocked to find out Japan has some very super secret contingency plans to throw together a few nukes in the event of an emergency. South Korea and Taiwan too.
See my post above about known capabilities. I only listed stuff that are established facts, but I agree. Undoubtedly there are secret contingency plans. In fact, sophisticated weapon design work can be reasonably justified as a way of developing threat analysis skills, understanding what other nations are doing/can do. The defence and intelligence establishment would be remiss not to do this. Of course those very same efforts can be turned into production plans.
Re:Nukes are the only credible deterrent (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: No nukes for Japan (Score:3)
There's still a sizeable minority of Japan that believes they are destined to take over the world: what their ancestors failed to achieve, will be finished by future generations.
No nukes for Japan until they stop that mentality.
Re: No nukes for Japan (Score:2)
There's still a sizeable minority of Japan that believes they are destined to take over the world
This is not wrong. However, most of your Japanese Red Army types (they used to circle the Soviet Embassy near our apartment in Roppongi, blaring WWII-era martial music from truck-mounted megaphones) are likely withering away, having spent the last of their years - as well as their yen - keeping the used-panty vending machines profitable for the Yakuza.
Re: (Score:3)
I hope so. You can read the propaganda in English and Japanese if you stay in an APA hotel.
Re: (Score:3)
So glad you see phantofive as the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Who said anything about mental stability? Your comment is attacking an imaginary strawman, someone no one said.
I said, Japan should not have nuclear weapons until they decide they don't want to take over the world. Your comment had nothing to do with that, and showed you can't use logic.
Re: (Score:2)
Your comment implies that any country that contains people in positions of power who want to take over the world should not have nukes. Or it implies that Japan is a special case, unlike other countries. So which are you implying?
Re: (Score:3)
Your comment implies that any country that contains people in positions of power who want to take over the world should not have nukes.
That is basically correct.
Re: (Score:2)
so...you gonna be the one to volunteer to tell china, russia and north korea to hand over their nukes or what ?
Re: (Score:2)
Happy to do so, but of course they won't listen to me.
Re: (Score:3)
That's just nuclear disarmament with more steps. Every country with nukes has asshats with ambitions of world domination. But yeah, taking nukes away from everyone would be great. And while we're at it I want a unicorn.
Re: (Score:2)
Every country with nukes has asshats with ambitions of world domination.
[citation needed]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wha? You mean the country that invaded most of its neighbours and a good chunk of the rest of the world? The one that took over the second independent country in the western hemisphere and the first successful slave revolution, sent all the ex-slaves back to the plantations and held rigged elections run by US Marines?
Surely you're not implying that they aren't far more trustworthy than anyone else?
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't sound like you are using logic at all. Maybe you can explain it a little more clearly.
Re: (Score:2)
Is Japan ready for war? [youtu.be]
Re: (Score:3)
We need to arm Japan with nukes too.
Preferably hypersonic ones that can hit the heart of China inside a few minutes.
Japan is perfectly capable of developing and building its own nuclear weapons if it decides it needs them, and quickly too. Of all the non-nuclear nations of the world Japan has the most comprehensive set if industries, technologies and research capabilities to build not just nuclear weapons, but the most advanced nuclear weapons. Complete array of nuclear industries and technologies? Check. Plutonium separation plants? Check. Huge stockpiles of separated plutonium? Check. [Yes they can use their RG plutoni
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why spend the $$ on them when the west will nuke anyone that nukes Japan?
Flight time.
Re: Japan is the best thing the US ever made (Score:2)
Re:Japan is the best thing the US ever made (Score:4, Insightful)
The US nuking someone who invades Japan is a far less credible threat than Japan nuking someone who invades Japan.
The US notably did not nuke Russian when they invaded Ukraine. I'm not saying that was a bad decision, but the Ukrainians might think so, and it probably wouldn't have happened if they hadn't given away all their nukes.
Yes, but Democratic Japan not Imperial Japan (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
For a moment, I forgot you were talking about Japan and were commenting on America instead.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
The problem in America is the very excited Communist gender warriors, eager to suck the lifeblood out of the bourgoisie without even giving them a "happy ending".
Re: (Score:3)
And in real life on the other hand, we haven't even seen any meaningful political protest on the nationalist side. The opposite is true in fact, LDP has been made to share power with hardcore "peace at all costs" Komeito party.
Though with realities of China, Komeito's support has shrunk in the polls last I looked, so Japan may go to its long term post-war status quo of LDP as the sole party of national government. And if you find the urbanisation causing "moral decay", Japan is well protected against that a
Re:Yes, but Democratic Japan not Imperial Japan (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, but Democratic Japan and Imperial Japan are very different counties. Democratic Japan has demonstrated multiple generations of good world-citizenship that is based on widely held modern cultural values, rather than based on the mercurial whims of an emperor.
True, but it's worth pointing out that Japan got into WWII, and especially into a fight with the United States over the objections of its emperor, who was not mercurial at all, but had receded to a largely ceremonial position even though he still held immense status. Hirohito didn't choose war, he just didn't choose to take on a large enough policy role to stop it. And, indeed, when at the end of the war and after the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, he finally did decide that he had to put a stop to it, the result was that a faction of the military attempted to assassinate him (for a second time -- there was an attempted coup in 1936 by a military faction that was the direct ancestor of the pro-war group that attempted to stop the surrender).
The Japanese emperor today, of course, has a purely ceremonial position with no political power at all. That's almost certainly a good thing, but it's worth noting that had that been the case in 1945 it's unlikely that Japan would have surrendered. The military had too much power, and too much of the military wanted to fight to the bitter end. They were seriously planning to pit untrained civilians armed with makeshift spears against battle-hardened and heavily-armed US Marines when the US inevitably invaded the Japanese home islands.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but Democratic Japan and Imperial Japan are very different counties. Democratic Japan has demonstrated multiple generations of good world-citizenship that is based on widely held modern cultural values, rather than based on the mercurial whims of an emperor.
True, but it's worth pointing out that Japan got into WWII, and especially into a fight with the United States over the objections of its emperor, ...
The Emperor's role was whitewashed by MacArthur because MacArthur understood his value in pacifying Japan.
"But history marches on and fresh information constantly comes forth. There’s a newly released memo floating around, written in 1941 by Japanese Vice Interior Minister Michio Yuzawa. Early on the morning of December 7, just hours before the Japanese strike at Pearl, Yuzawa attended a meeting with Tojo and his top aides. Tojo had just briefed the emperor, and he seemed quite happy with the resul
Re: (Score:2)
But you are aware that the war started roughly ten years earlier ?
When the war is already running, and you have no means/will to stop it, then a preemptive strike on a party that most likely will attack you anyway sooner or later, makes sense. Or not?
Re: (Score:2)
But you are aware that the war started roughly ten years earlier ? When the war is already running, and you have no means/will to stop it, then a preemptive strike on a party that most likely will attack you anyway sooner or later, makes sense. Or not?
Yes the war started much earlier with the invasion of China. The US response was to curb steel and oil sales to Japan. Rather than end their invasion of China they chose to invade neighboring countries to secure new sources of resources, in particular oil. Attacking the UK/US was to prevent hypothetical UK/US interdiction of these new supply lines.
There were many means to stop or avoid war. There was however no will. Rather there was a willi to expand both conquest and war to create a new empire, the Gre
Re: (Score:3)
The Emperor's role was whitewashed by MacArthur because MacArthur understood his value in pacifying Japan.
You mean it annihilates all the excuses for nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Nope. Its stands just as stated.
The excuse for the two atomic attacks is that in the cruel illogical mathematics of war that saved lives. Blockade or invasion would have killed far more Japanese. The country barely missed a massive famine as it was.
Japan had been trying to surrender with the face-saving condition of keeping their Emperor.
Nope, that was an underground effort by a few individuals. Individuals that lived in constant fear of execution if their unofficial reaching out through back channels would be discovered. The militarists were firmly in charge until the broadcast of the Emperor
Re: (Score:2)
My reading indicates that corruption is endemic to Indian society: given only moderate temptation a large minority of the population will take what isn't theirs rather than work. Japanese culture leans much more to orderliness, self-improvement, ambition, and lawfulness.
India is 80% Hindu and 14% Muslim. Japan is 84% some mix of Buddhism and Shintoism. They're not the same.
Re: (Score:3)
Japan still hasn't admitted guilt for a lot of the war crimes/crimes against humanity they committed during the war (e.g., comfort women, POW slave labour/executions, rape of Nanking etc). Apparently, textbooks in wide use in school skips or are very brief on these issues (as opposed to Germany where WW2-atrocities is one of the main focal points of their history curriculum).
One country's religious heritage leant towards confession, the other's towards not saying things that dishonor your ancestors. So its not entirely correct to translate a phrase like "we supremely regret" literally, in their heads you are supposed to read between the lines and see an unspoken admission of guilt. You do not find Japanese folk wearing t-shirts endorsing the warcrimes as we do with fans of the German side.
Yamato cannon (Score:2)
Looking forward to meeting the Yamato gun at sea. Should be fun.
Re: (Score:2)
Looking forward to meeting the Yamato gun at sea. Should be fun.
Great light and sound show but not so useful due to inaccuracy. Or were you referring to the one in space not at sea? ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
I read it as the one from space, but in the sea...
Re: (Score:2)
Yup.
Re: (Score:2)
The space one, at sea. Or both, why not?
Re: (Score:2)
Those naval guns are not "inaccurate". They hit very precisely what you aim at. Problem is the aiming and taking into account the roughly 25 parameters that affect range.
Check youtube, there is a nice movie about what parameter, like air pressure, air temperature, moisture, how hot the gun (is how often fired) etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Those naval guns are not "inaccurate". They hit very precisely what you aim at. Problem is the aiming and taking into account the roughly 25 parameters that affect range.
Compared to the smaller guns of the US Iowa class they were absolutely "inaccurate". That is why most historians consider the Iowa to be the superior ship, accuracy more than making up for smaller shells. And yes, superior fire control had a lot to do with it.
Re: (Score:2)
The Yamato never was in a real gun battle. So: no one knows. And I doubt they were worth than e.g. the Bismarcks guns.
Fire control of course is the point.
Re: (Score:2)
The Yamato never was in a real gun battle. So: no one knows.
The Japanese knew how accurate Yamato's guns were. The US attained those records after the war.
I'm just hoping Japan won't be a carrier (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm just hoping that we don't see history repeating. In WW2, the UK was like one huge Allied aircraft carrier. In WW3, Japan might be the same. If China "sinks" Taiwan, it'll be pretty obvious we're heading in that direction.
Japan just needs an Godzilla to attract China! (Score:2)
Japan just needs an Godzilla to attract China!
Re: (Score:3)
In WW2, the UK was like one huge Allied aircraft carrier.
While its size was certainly advantageous, it lost a lot in terms of maneuverability.
Re: (Score:2)
Unsinkability has a quality all of it own.
Re: (Score:2)
Honest question.. what county is worth fighting a world war?
and Fascist Germany stopped at Poland (Score:5, Insightful)
You so sure? Obviously it would be unwise to make the following a stated policy, but when it comes right down to it, how is Taiwan worth fighting a world war over?
Yeah, CCP China will stop at Taiwan the way Fascist Germany stopped at Poland.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Also unreal is giving all credit for Soviet victories to General January, rather than Russians fighting back when their lands were invaded. 80% of German casualties came at the hands of the USSR, and that was with their veteran units deployed to invade the Soviets. We've had innumerable movies about the Invasion of Normandy, but that was a sideshow featuring German teenagers next to the hell on earth that was the Eastern Front.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:and Fascist Germany stopped at Poland (Score:4, Insightful)
China isn't Germany. It isn't even WWII Japan. Don't judge China with your Western imperialist values.
Imperial Japan was an Asian state, not a western state.
CCP imperialism, as seen in Africa, seems awfully reminiscent of European imperialism.
The CCP can be even crueler than fascist Germany. The latter was genocidal towards "outsiders", the CCP has been genocidal towards its own people. Millions of deaths.
Re: (Score:2)
CCP imperialism, as seen in Africa, seems awfully reminiscent of European imperialism.
No it isn't. There is no fucking slave trade. There is no colonization. There is no invention of some bullshit categorization of Africans as being subhuman or a separate species of a "lower" animal. There's no reminiscence. There are no atrocities being committed by Chinese in those coun
Re:and Fascist Germany stopped at Poland (Score:5, Informative)
Imperial Japan was a Westernized state. They imported Western values.
No they absolutely were not. They accepted western weapon and tactics, western industrialization. However Imperial Japan of that era was very much about rejecting western moral and cultural values and adhering to traditional Japanese morals and culture. A samurai mind with modern weapons.
You Americans literally forced the country open, and then Europeans flooded them with ideas of colonizing and justifying it by dehumanizing everyone else.
Hence the militarist's rejection of western morals and values and raising a generation to embrace proper Japanese culture and values, in particular that of the samurai warrior. Or more accurately their fantasized version of the samurai.
CCP imperialism, as seen in Africa, seems awfully reminiscent of European imperialism.
No it isn't. There is no fucking slave trade. There is no colonization. There is no invention of some bullshit categorization of Africans as being subhuman or a separate species of a "lower" animal. There's no reminiscence. There are no atrocities being committed by Chinese in those countries.
Actually Africans are now saying they are very much treated as second class people and the wealth extracted and removed for the benefit of foreigners, leaving them with only trinkets. Precisely like the Europeans at times. You speak as if benign masters are that different from harsh masters. Keep in mind that Europeans could be quite benign too, until the locals showed resistance. The CCP is hardly known for tolerance towards resistance, even with its own peoples. Why would they treat foreigners any better than they treat the Uyghurs?
Yours is another example of Western paternalism ...
Hardly, my point is that the Chinese believe in paternalism just as much as the colonial era Europeans.
The latter was genocidal towards "outsiders", the CCP has been genocidal towards its own people. Millions of deaths.
German Jews and disabled people were outsiders were they? Millions of Germans weren't killed by Germans, were they?
By the people who murdered them, even the Nazis needed that rationalization. The CCP does not, they merely need rejection of their ideology and/or authority. As for the millions killed outside the concentration camps, that was the price the Nazis were willing to pay to defend their political ideology. A price the CCP has also demonstrated that they are willing to pay given the tens of millions they have already killed with The Great Leap Forward, The Cultural Revolution, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
the CCP has been genocidal towards its own people. Millions of deaths
And when did that happen?
Re: (Score:2)
the CCP has been genocidal towards its own people. Millions of deaths And when did that happen?
Two examples would be the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution.
Re: (Score:2)
Two examples would be the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution.
So in both revolutions, they put millions against the wall or killed them with gas etc?
Are you sure?
Re: (Score:2)
Some of the rhetoric coming out of China indicates that they consider themselves the rightful rulers of the world.
No, there literally isn't.
Stop making up bullshit. And learn to read.
Who's imperialistic?
I said Western imperialist values. That means looking at the actions of China through the eyes of Western thought.
Only the West - Europe (including the Russians) and America - think in terms of expansionism and world domination.
Re: (Score:3)
Wow wow wow. So sorry you were dropped on the head so many times as a child, early and often.
Might not wanna throw stones in that glass house, ...
Its tempered glass so its perfectly safe to do so.
... oh #1 overthrower of democracies ...
Even if you pad the numbers by including faux democracies like Saddaam's Iraq, the US has preserved far more than it has "overthrown".
... in a country built on slavery and actual genocide ...
The genocide of the US is vastly dwarfed by that of the CCP. Contrary to mythology, the indigenous population of the North America was largely wiped out by diseases introduce by early explorers before colonization. When colonists appeared long afterward there were large tracts of abandoned villages and farms due to the pre-c
Re: (Score:2)
Contrary to mythology, the indigenous population of the North America was largely wiped out by diseases introduce by early explorers before colonization.
Mostly introduced intentionally.
Tens of millions died due to the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution.
Yes. But they did not get murdered, liquidated or otherwise killed.
Read a damn history book. You are an idiot with your mostly completely wrong ranting.
Re: (Score:2)
Contrary to mythology, the indigenous population of the North America was largely wiped out by diseases introduce by early explorers before colonization.
Mostly introduced intentionally.
Actually, no. You should take your own advice and read a history book.
And if you would like to cite non-folklore incidents that occurred much later, where the devastated populations were subject to crimes rather than ignorance, these would have been conducted by British citizens, not US citizens. Our crimes don't start until 1776, prior to that the crimes were for the enrichment of the British empire.
Tens of millions died due to the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. Yes. But they did not get murdered, liquidated or otherwise killed. Read a damn history book.
Please take your own advice and read a book. Famine, work camps, etc are weapons as deadly as plague.
Re: (Score:2)
I actually have read such books :P
Yes, you can call them British, or French ... does not change the fact.
Famine, work camps, etc are weapons as deadly as plague
Exactly: they died to famines. Now you finally grasp it. But no: it is always the deadly murderous communists (when it actually had nothing to do with communism).
Re: (Score:2)
Because chain is as strong as its weakest link, and Pax Americana is held up by trust in US countering any and all credible attempts at changing it.
Re:I'm just hoping Japan won't be a carrier (Score:4, Informative)
Ah yes, the "genocide is ok as long as I agree with the ideology genocide is based" narrative. Communism. More dead than every other ideologically motivated death combined over last hundred years, but this is ok, because as undesirables were cleaned out, others were allowed to have children and family size was sufficient to manage anemic population growth during the same time everyone had a post war population explosion.
I suppose I should be happy that your kind of ideologically possessed genocidal sociopaths feel comfortable enough with their horrific views as to air them in the open. That way I can just openly mock you, instead of even pretending there's something there.
P.S. As any good Communist, you think that muslim sectarianism of Yemen's civil war is about the West, that "War on Terror" wasn't literally in Bin Laden's open declaration of intentions BEFORE 9/11, or that Vietnamese themselves call US invasion a blip in history compared to a "thousand year war" with Chinese, latest of which was the Sino-Vietnamese war as Chinese Communists decided that Vietnamese Communism was just not the correct kind of Communism to have and invaded.
Ideologically driven delusion of a sociopath.
Re: (Score:2)
No, that's not genocide. Your masters having another Uighur prisoner killed so that their propaganda bot can get a timely transplant as that stubbed toe caused sepsis that took out his liver on the other hand is.
Who am I kidding. Chinese propaganda bots are bottom of the barrel level of garbage in PRC, to be used and thrown away like condoms. They don't qualify for organ transplants. Heck, they rarely qualify for enough salary to afford anything but Traditional Chinese Medicine.
Re:I'm just hoping Japan won't be a carrier (Score:4, Insightful)
Checking China's rise is worth fighting a war over. Invariably there will be countries that take the lead in global politics, and countries that will be followers. Only a few have the power and capability to take the lead. The US may have it's faults, and certainly has issues with racial tensions. But so does China. The difference is, in China Tibetan occupation and Uighur imprisonment and re-education is State sanctioned, and in a one-party system there is no one to challenge that political party from absorbing all the power. At least in the US, you have 2 bad choices for leaders who mostly are so busy fighting each other that they try pandering to the public instead of imprisoning them for being wealthy or speaking their mind (Jack Ma), or being the wrong religion/ethnicity (Uighurs), or displace a million people for environmentally disasterous projects that don't provide the benefits they were designed to (3 gorges dam), or many, many other things. Frankly I'd rather have a hands-off, disinterested super power with overwhelming firepower to lead the world; it allows other countries to do their own things with less war-like tendencies.
Re: (Score:2)
or being the wrong religion/ethnicity (Uighurs),
that is a (an american?) myth.
or displace a million people for
1st: that is the damn right of the state
2nd: we do that in Germany as well if we build a dam: everyone who builds a dam is displacing the people living in the are going under water. That is common sense.
You are just to uneducated to grasp: all those people got new jobs by the stat, new houses, or flats. They were not put into the desert to die. Seriously, get a damn clue.
disasterous projects that
I'm a veteran, and raised by WWII peeps,but.. (Score:2)
I'm a veteran and rasied by WWII people, but I'm also a child of the 70's and 80's, and well, "all the best stuff is made in Japan"
I wouldn't mind seeing the following names on flat-tops flying the Rising Sun again:
Kaga
Akagi
Hiryu
Soryu
Sadly, these names are already taken for smaller vessels in the Japanese Self Defense Maritime Force. Jesus that's a mouthful. Japanese Navy would work better.
Still, kudos for getting their flattops going again.
Its a destroyer conversion for Akito's sake ... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Destroyers" will continue to grow in size until the "destroyer" in "Imperial Star Destroyer" (estimated at 40 million tons) becomes a reasonable ship type designation.
Taiwan takeover imminent in the next decade. (Score:2)
This action just accelerated China's timeframe on Taiwan, if the early reveal of US training forces in Taiwan didn't.
Re: (Score:2)
If China wasn't possessed by the mentality of a paranoid asshole, it wouldn't consider itself "hemmed in." Does France consider itself hemmed in? Germany? Denmark?
Respect your neighbors and cooperate with them as long as they don't misbehave.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not paranoia when the West is looking to do exactly the
In appreciation... (Score:2)
In appreciation of Japan's effort, the US has undertaken a kamikaze climate change policy.
Chinese threat not due to Japanese defeat (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting thought.
Re:Chinese threat not due to Japanese defeat (Score:5, Informative)
They were not so much a threat to the USA. They were a profound strategic threat to the rest of Asia and the Pacific islands, who were in reach. They're much more of a threat now to Australia, a loyal US ally.
Re: (Score:3)
Lulz. Kissinger is only superseded in the "worst war criminal of all time" category by Adolf. And as if the #1 overthrower of democracies has any business throwing stones about the imaginary "massacre" at Tiananmen Square.
Sorry but you apparently have no clue what Kissinger's involvement here is. His involvement is as the 1960s/70s architect of the idea that imbalanced interactions with China are OK because increased interaction with the west will ultimately liberalize China. So any economic losses suffered by imbalanced trade, ie US is open but China can keep barriers, is outweighed by the eventual liberalization.
Kissinger has zero involvement in the interpretation of the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989.