• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Japanese Magazine Talks about Possible War with South Korea

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blackace

if you see me in a fight with a bear, don't help me fool, help the bear!
If somehow that did ever happen, as much as I love Japan id have to say the US(if it has to be involved) should side with South Korea.
North Korea would probably jump at the first chance after South Korea is attacked.

Will never happen though.

Japan couldnt mount an attack on mainland Korea.. They could but it would be as foolish as attacking America in WWII...
 

Kuro Madoushi

Unconfirmed Member
Japan couldnt mount an attack on mainland Korea.. They could but it would be as foolish as attacking America in WWII...

Why would they even do so? The States is there on both sides and I'm sure would step in and stop it since they do need stability to ward off China there.

Makes no sense.
 

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Why would they even do so? The States is there on both sides and I'm sure would step in and stop it since they do need stability to ward off China there.

Makes no sense.
Yeah. I agree with the person on the last page who said it reads like an Onion article.

All this over a damn rock.

It's just like that island Canada and Denmark are fighting over... Except in that case, we have no rivalry, and consequently no one cares about it for a second.
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
Japan couldnt mount an attack on mainland Korea.. They could but it would be as foolish as attacking America in WWII...

It would more foolish than that, because even if the U.S. stayed out of it, there's no way in hell China wouldn't back Korea. They don't want a Japanese presence on the mainland.
 
Japan couldnt mount an attack on mainland Korea.. They could but it would be as foolish as attacking America in WWII...

Currently they couldn't, but what if a nutjob decides to take control of the country, get rid of Article 9 and spend 20 years building up the military?. I think this has the possibility of happening in the next 8 years max, Nationalism is on the rise in japan and a small but growing number of people wants the country to not seem weak. Obviously since these are both allies of US none of them will be invading each other anytime soon, small Naval skirmishes might take place though.
 

Blackace

if you see me in a fight with a bear, don't help me fool, help the bear!
Currently they couldn't, but what if a nutjob decides to take control of the country, get rid of Article 9 and spend 20 years building up the military?. I think this has the possibility of happening in the next 8 years max, Nationalism is on the rise in japan and a small but growing number of people wants the country to not seem weak. Obviously since these are both allies of US none of them will be invading each other anytime soon, small Naval skirmishes might take place though.

They could do that, but I think most know that Korea and China are prepared to go to war.. It isn't like when they westernized first and took advantage of that during the Meiji era..
 

ChiTownBuffalo

Either I made up lies about the Boston Bomber or I fell for someone else's crap. Either way, I have absolutely no credibility and you should never pay any attention to anything I say, no matter what the context. Perm me if I claim to be an insider
Currently they couldn't, but what if a nutjob decides to take control of the country, get rid of Article 9 and spend 20 years building up the military?. I think this has the possibility of happening in the next 8 years max, Nationalism is on the rise in japan and a small but growing number of people wants the country to not seem weak. Obviously since these are both allies of US none of them will be invading each other anytime soon, small Naval skirmishes might take place though.

Any increase in Japanese amphibious capability would result in a reactionary build up by Korea.

And, I still think Korea has tougher soldiers/marines.
 
Yeah. There is zero chance for war between South-Korea and Japan (or between any developed nations). We are not living in 40's anymore when economy in most countries was based on agriculture and average person was dirt poor. Economy and infastructure of developed nations can't sustain full scale war. You blow up couple of nuclear plants and the whole country will be in chaos without electricity. There is nothing to be won in war between developed countries.
 
Any increase in Japanese amphibious capability would result in a reactionary build up by Korea.

And, I still think Korea has tougher soldiers/marines.

Japan has already started increasing their naval capabilities (though incremental), they are increasing their submarine fleet from 18 to 24, they are building an even bigger Helicopter carrier called the 22DDH.
 
C'mon people. We're in the Internet Age. Conflicts between countries such as these two should be resolved in the proper way: online multiplayer matches!
 

SMT

this show is not Breaking Bad why is it not Breaking Bad? it should be Breaking Bad dammit Breaking Bad
C'mon people. We're in the Internet Age. Conflicts between countries such as these two should be resolved in the proper way: online multiplayer matches!
I hear it's all the craze in Korea, Japan wouldn't stand a chance.

Why believe a glamour idol \ porno mag?
 

EVOL 100%

Member
Why the fuck would Japan attack Korea or vice versa anyway?

This boils down to 'oh noes you hurt my pride you meanies' from both sides anyway. Who the fuck would start a fucking war over pride?

Well I guess there was the War of 1812 but that was a tad bit more complex

The best way to resolve this is to put the president of Korea and the PM of Japan in a ring and make them fight. Now that would be awesome.
 

Natetan

Member
I don't understand how this would even work. The SDF can only defend, they can't have an unprovoked attack. Although I guess if you have a vague definition if provocation like the prez visiting takeshima.

And wouldn't the US have to help Japan in such a war?
 

tino

Banned
Out of morbid interest how long would it take Worst Korea to complete a crash nuclear weapon program? I've often heard Japan would only take 6-9 months.

I don't know about it now. Japan was pulling little tricks with its nuclear power plants. That was before their nuclear disaster. Japan has decided to switched to non-nuclear power from now on.

On the subject of Japanese war ships and subs. They retire their subs very quickly and seal them. So basically these old ships can be put back to work on a moment of notice.

Plus Japan historically has had a winning naval tradition (up till Midway). IMO a winning karma is very important to naval warfares. Neither SK and China's navies are proven. Frankly USSR's navy had never won anything either.
 

kmfdmpig

Member
I don't know about it now. Japan was pulling little tricks with its nuclear power plants. That was before their nuclear disaster. Japan has decided to switched to non-nuclear power from now on.

On the subject of Japanese war ships and subs. They retire their subs very quickly and seal them. So basically these old ships can be put back to work on a moment of notice.

Plus Japan historically has had a winning naval tradition (up till Midway). IMO a winning karma is very important to naval warfares. Neither SK and China's navies are proven. Frankly USSR's navy had never won anything either.

Japan's naval ships, on average, are much newer and more technologically advanced than South Korea's. When looking at the actual ships South Korea has that are counted in its superior numbers many are US leftovers from WWII, which I would imagine would be next to useless against a ship made in the last 30 years.
 

Sealda

Banned
Is not SDF not like the worlds most underated military? Basically sounding like this small and restricted versaille treaty type of thing but actually very well financed and huuuuge + modern.
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
So apparently the Japanese Diet's lower house today voted to officially protest president Lee's landing on Takeshima/Dokdo and his words about the Japanese emperor. They are stating that, "Shimane prefecture's Takeshima is Japanese territory and we strongly demand that Korea end its illegal occupation of the island immediately." Regarding the president's demand of an apology from the Japanese emperor they state, "It is completely unacceptable and we request that the Korean president retract his statement."

Apparently they are also going to vote to protest about the Senkaku islands and request that China take action to ensure that a similar incident does not occur again.

Over in Korea, apparently a high-ranking official in the government has issued a statement that he is surprised beyond imagination at Japanese backlash to the president's statement and that the president's demand for an apology was not meant to offend.
 
I don't know about it now. Japan was pulling little tricks with its nuclear power plants. That was before their nuclear disaster. Japan has decided to switched to non-nuclear power from now on.

On the subject of Japanese war ships and subs. They retire their subs very quickly and seal them. So basically these old ships can be put back to work on a moment of notice.

Plus Japan historically has had a winning naval tradition (up till Midway). IMO a winning karma is very important to naval warfares. Neither SK and China's navies are proven. Frankly USSR's navy had never won anything either.

Actually they haven't, Noda doesn't want to stop the reactors

Is not SDF not like the worlds most underated military? Basically sounding like this small and restricted versaille treaty type of thing but actually very well financed and huuuuge + modern.

They are ultra Modern but they are not really huge, the whole JSDF numbers just under 300,000. They spend 50 billion dollars or more every year on their Military, i still don't know where all that money goes.
 

numble

Member
I don't understand how this would even work. The SDF can only defend, they can't have an unprovoked attack. Although I guess if you have a vague definition if provocation like the prez visiting takeshima.

And wouldn't the US have to help Japan in such a war?
The US declared about 60 years ago that the Liancourt Rocks don't fall under the security treaty with Japan.

On Dec 9, 1953, the US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles cabled the American Embassy in Tokyo, "US view re Takeshima is simply that of one of many signatories to the treaty. The U.S. is not obligated to 'protect Japan' from Korean "pretensions" to Dokdo, and that such an idea cannot...be considered as a legitimate claim for US action under the U.S.-Japan security treaty."
 

KuroNeeko

Member
I think there is very little risk of a war breaking out. First, I doubt America would allow either of the two nations to actually go at it. If they DID, then North Korean, Chinese, Russian, and American involvement would be inevitable and I can't see that happening.

As others have pointed out, the publication in question is trash and has no real value or influence. I will say that after 10 years in Japan, it feels like nationalism is on the rise. Whether this is a result of white-washing the textbooks, backlash against the gradual rise of non-japanese, or some sort of misplaced nostalgia - it's a bit unnerving. I don't think we'll see anything really change on that front in the next 5 years, but some of the newer, upcoming politicians could change the political landscape in a decade or so. I think Japan's best chance is to keep progressing down this multi-cultural society that they're being dragged into. The more they assimilate other people and cultures, the more flexible they'll (hopefully) become. The signs that this is possible are there, but there's still plenty of stuff to be concerned about.

US foreign policy in Asia has shifted quite a bit in the last few years... Already the US is getting ready to pull all the way out of Okinawa, something that would have never happened in the 80s 90s or 00s...

Are you sure about this? I know Okinawa has been quite vocal about getting American troops off their island, but the US response from what I've seen on the news has basically been "lol, no."

Japan has decided to switched to non-nuclear power from now on.

There is a growing vocal minority that opposes nuclear power, but the government has been doing a good job of quietly sweeping the matter under the rug. If anything, they're actually bringing power plants back online for pretty laughable reasons. There is little, to no transparency about the matter. Very little in the way of investigative reporting. News publications know that if they ran with anything they'd be ostracized from press clubs (the new organizations that the government feeds information to) so no one wants to dig around for the truth. It's a huge problem. I want to say that there is so much wrong with this country on a fundamental level (in terms of the government and basic human rights), but I'm speaking from a western perspective so who's to say I'm right.
 

lupinko

Member
Yes, the Marines are leaving Okinawa, but that has more to do with the better offer the US received from Australia than anything else for the most part.
 

KuroNeeko

Member
Yes, the Marines are leaving Okinawa, but that has more to do with the better offer the US received from Australia than anything else for the most part.

Wow. I'm going to have to look into this. I bet the ruling party will try to spin this in their favor. Still pretty big news. It'll be interesting to see how the local economies adapt.
 

ChiTownBuffalo

Either I made up lies about the Boston Bomber or I fell for someone else's crap. Either way, I have absolutely no credibility and you should never pay any attention to anything I say, no matter what the context. Perm me if I claim to be an insider
ugh. all this for a rock that got nice fish and oil. UGLY.

Dude, Korea keeps its secret robot under those rocks.
 

Blackace

if you see me in a fight with a bear, don't help me fool, help the bear!
Are you sure about this? I know Okinawa has been quite vocal about getting American troops off their island, but the US response from what I've seen on the news has basically been "lol, no."
America has been slowly giving ground on a lot of bases. The new bases in Australia is most likely where the marines will end up unless japan ask us to stay

Our lease in Okinawa is done
 

ChiTownBuffalo

Either I made up lies about the Boston Bomber or I fell for someone else's crap. Either way, I have absolutely no credibility and you should never pay any attention to anything I say, no matter what the context. Perm me if I claim to be an insider
America has been slowly giving ground on a lot of bases. The new bases in Australia is most likely where the marines will end up unless japan ask us to stay

Our lease in Okinawa is done

I makes more sense to operate in Aus for the US anyway. At least with Marines.

Aussie would less hesitant to give the US crap for influx of troops or arhsips in the area.

Also, maybe due to cultural similarities, there might be less of a tendency for some US Marines to treat locals poorly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom