Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Japan departs from pacifist stance, plans two aircraft carriers
The Straits Times ^

Posted on 07/15/2003 8:38:05 PM PDT by overtaxed_canadian

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last
To: overtaxed_canadian
But if we have to mix it up with the PRC or NK, I will be glad to have the Japanese on our side.

Quite right. I don't know if I feel good enough about Germany yet to allow them to re-arm as much as they want, but I think Japan is ready. Bushido is dead. They can be an extremely valuable ally if we let them, and we can save ourselves some money by lessening our defense obligations to them (provided we allow them to build up even more).

41 posted on 07/15/2003 10:35:26 PM PDT by squidly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bobby777
Lol, you should read the cyberpunk novel, Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson. The United States Navy ends up selling the USS Enterprise due to budget cuts to the books villain. Anyways, I think this is a great idea for Japan to pursue. I'm sure nobody believed in WW2 that the US and Japan would be allies against a communist China...
PS-Does anyone know if the carriers are going to be nuclear powered, or diesel?
42 posted on 07/15/2003 10:37:39 PM PDT by JohnnyRidden (Your Already Dead-Kenshiro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy
Have you seen the light carriers fielded by the UK, France, italy, Spain, India, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, and Thailand?

I'm shocked at the design. It is so 1970's. I would expect a stealthy one similar to the corvairs the Penatogon is touting.
43 posted on 07/15/2003 10:59:06 PM PDT by rmlew ("Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: JohnnyRidden
I'd never heard of it ... I'd have no problem selling them non-nuke carriers ... I have to guess though, that the Japanese would go for a nuke ship, since they seem to like to modify American equipment ... I think they're building a jazzed-up version of the F-16 ...
44 posted on 07/15/2003 11:10:55 PM PDT by Bobby777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee; section9; overtaxed_canadian
I've been out in front of this a little...the Japanese have been preparing for this for some time. They already have two of the following Amphibious Assault vessels that are suspiciously about the size of the Spanish Carrier:

...and with a little retrofitting or modification on the design would look just like their artists concept where they can easily, quickly build two that are compatible with the F-35 JSF.

In fact, in Volume II of my Dragon's Fury Series, when Japan and China square off, they use the modified version in just the way I describe.

45 posted on 07/15/2003 11:18:32 PM PDT by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: rmlew
Have you seen the light carriers fielded by the UK, France, italy, Spain, India, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, and Thailand?

Yeah, my point It's a carrier.

It is so 1970's

may be appropriate. Japan is in the same position the UK. Italy were in the 70s. A navy that wants carriers, a government that has a political position of no carriers ever,

So.
1. Approval sought for Helicopter carrying Cruiser/destroyer of c.13,000 tons.
2. When that is given it grows in design to 20,000 tons and it is claimed that operating helicopters will be improved if we move the superstructure over to one side (But it's only for helicopters yes Sirree bob)
3. When built it's found that a with a few structural modifications it can operate combat aircaft. Who knew?
4. After a couple of decades operation it's declared that while successful, the next generation carriers should really be twice the size.

46 posted on 07/15/2003 11:30:18 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (hoist by his own petard. always funny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
This is just Japan coming to grips with reality. They depend on open sea lanes for their survival, and they have decided that they need their own big sticks to keep them open.
47 posted on 07/15/2003 11:35:11 PM PDT by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: overtaxed_canadian
For a nation that tends to rationalize their past and not learning much from it, it is kind of scary that they are re-arming with offensive weapons. We don't need another Pearl Harbor.
48 posted on 07/15/2003 11:43:58 PM PDT by Fishing-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
...and with a little retrofitting or modification on the design would look just like their artists concept where they can easily, quickly build two that are compatible with the F-35 JSF.

These were my thoughts too. They build something that can be quickly converted. They thereby acquire the military potential without provoking their peacenik voters.

Say, did Japan ever find that plutonium (enough for two bombs that went 'missing' a few months back)?
49 posted on 07/16/2003 1:03:28 AM PDT by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy
For a nation that tends to rationalize their past and not learning much from it, it is kind of scary that they are re-arming with offensive weapons. We don't need another Pearl Harbor.

I see no reason to worry. We really are talking about a different Japan nowadays.

50 posted on 07/16/2003 1:10:39 AM PDT by squidly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy
1. Approval sought for Helicopter carrying Cruiser/destroyer of c.13,000 tons.
2. When that is given it grows in design to 20,000 tons and it is claimed that operating helicopters will be improved if we move the superstructure over to one side (But it's only for helicopters yes Sirree bob)
3. When built it's found that a with a few structural modifications it can operate combat aircaft. Who knew?
4. After a couple of decades operation it's declared that while successful, the next generation carriers should really be twice the size.

This just cracks me up. :-)
It is such a perfect synopsis of the budgetary games that militaries (and other agencies) around the world are forced to play.

51 posted on 07/16/2003 1:43:17 AM PDT by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy
Japan is in the same position the UK. Italy were in the 70s. A navy that wants carriers, a government that has a political position of no carriers ever

That's right. To get our (UK) Invincible class light carriers through a hostile Labour Parliament, the RN referred to them as 'through-deck cruisers' throughout the consultation process!

52 posted on 07/16/2003 4:10:50 AM PDT by Da_Shrimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: ahadams2
BULLY TO THAT!
53 posted on 07/16/2003 5:02:19 AM PDT by grapeape (Ask nothing of me but time... I may lose a man but I will never lose a moment -Napoleon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Bobby777
Exactly, Japan has much bigger worries that will always throw them into our arms.
54 posted on 07/16/2003 5:03:21 AM PDT by grapeape (Ask nothing of me but time... I may lose a man but I will never lose a moment -Napoleon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
...and not unexpected. Japan already has a destroyer Navy second only to the US Navy with extremely modern and capable ships.

They will put together very effective CBGs...but of course they have a history of it.

55 posted on 07/16/2003 5:46:05 AM PDT by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush
I believe they either already have the weapons, or they are in a position where they have all the materials and can put together quite a few very quickly.

In Volume II of my series that is exactly what they do when they are forced to square off against China...but their leaders are coersed and convinced that China is willing to have a full scale exchange after Japan suffers a major military defet on the high seas and they capitualte with "generous" terms.

56 posted on 07/16/2003 5:48:39 AM PDT by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: hornetguy; Bobby777
Forrestal is decommissioned and I think is in Newport. Saratoga is decommissioned and I think is also in Newport. America is decommissioned and last I heard was in Philly which is closed so I don't know where it is now.

All three of these were in Philly as as 1998, ( the last time I was up that way). You get a real good view of them from the freeway. I served aboard the America during Gulf War I.

57 posted on 07/16/2003 5:55:50 AM PDT by csvset
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: overtaxed_canadian

China-Japan-South Korea Free Trade Area

In 1998, Japan mooted this idea. Lots of discussions took place. Latest news is that it is confirmed, especially after Pres Roh's China visit.

This clearly shows that Nations work on economic interactions with each other while, simultaneously building up their militaries. Part of human nature, I guess
58 posted on 07/16/2003 6:38:13 AM PDT by The Pheonix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hornetguy; Bobby777
info from Naval Vessel Register

Aircraft carriers known to be in existence:
CV 10 Yorktown; Museum in SC. since 1992 (on National register of historic places)
CV 11 Intrepid; Museum in NYC, NY since 1981 (on NRHP)
CV 12 Hornet; Museum in Alabama since 1998 (on NRHP)
CV 16 Lexington; Museum in Corpus Christi TX since 1992
CV 34 Oriskany; To be scrapped. in Beaumont TX since 1997
CV 41 Midway; To be museum, in Bremerton WA since 1997
CV 59 Forrestal; To be museum, in Newport RI since 1993
CV 60 Saratoga; To be museum, in Newport since 1994
CV 61 Ranger; Reserve fleet, in Bremerton since 1993
CV 62 Independence; Reserve fleet, in Bremerton since 1998
CV 64 Constellation; Active duty, (to be decommed soon)
CV 66 America; To be disposed of, in Philadelphia since 1996

Please note that the CV is not neccesarily their last designation (Lex and Forrestal were both AVT's when decommed)

[Of course all the nukes (65, 68-76) and CV63 and CV67 are still in commission]

59 posted on 07/16/2003 6:53:32 AM PDT by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: John O
CV 12 Hornet; Museum in Alabama since 1998 (on NRHP)

Thats Alameda, CA:)

60 posted on 07/16/2003 7:33:13 AM PDT by skeeter (Fac ut vivas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson