Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Japan's new "Helicopter Destroyer"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
TheMightyFavog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-11 03:53 PM
Original message
Japan's new "Helicopter Destroyer"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJXhm421tqI&playnext=1&list=PLBE1753816400EC03

Bull. Fucking. Shit. It's a carrier. Why not just come out and say it's a carrier?

Just like the whole "Self Defense Force" concept. It's been 60 years, why can't we let Japan have a real military and defend themselves for a change? I mean, we let Germany re-arm shortly after WWII, why did we not do the same thing for Japan?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-11 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. The argument I've heard:
is that we "oversold" disarmament. Apparently the concept of not having an a military except for self-defense is completely ingrained in the Japanese public.

could be a bs argument
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cali_Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-11 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
2. Japan spends over $46 billion annually on their military
Not exactly chump change. They're ranked 7th in the world in military spending.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-11 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
3. Japan does have a real military
The "self-defense force" thing is a relic of the past and doesn't reflect their actual capabilities. They are in the top 5 worldwide in defense spending, and it doesn't go for home-defense shotguns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheMightyFavog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-11 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Isn't due to a treaty obligation or something?
If it is, can we not, by mutual agreement, end that obligation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-11 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. No reason to
It's a convenient diplomatic fiction with a null real-world effect.

If Japan goes to war, that "self-defense force" becomes a full-fledged military just by renaming it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheMightyFavog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-11 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. interesting...
I thought it was a treaty thing, but in reality, you gotta somewhat admire Japan here...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
old mark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-11 04:00 PM
Response to Original message
4. Japan CHOOSES to call their military a Self Defense Force-we had nothing to do with it.
They established it after we stopped occupying them.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Self-Defense_Forces


Not everything stupid in the world is our fault.


mark
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheMightyFavog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-11 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
8. But getting back to the ship...
How easy you reckon would it be to convert this ship to carry VSTOL fighters like Harriers or the VSTOL Joint Strike Fighter, (if it ever gets off the ground pun intended). What would be China's reaction if Japan DID do that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-11 04:12 PM
Response to Original message
9. It has been a long time since we controlled what Japan did.
How they portray their military is a domestic issue. It seems that the total fucking disaster that their WWII leaders lead them into did not sit all that well with the people of Japan, and much of the population is not too keen on anything that resembles a return to that era.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidDvorkin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-11 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
10. We changed our Department of War to the Department of Defense long ago
It's standard wording for a lot of countries.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC