Skip to comments.Allow Japanese Nukes
Posted on 10/19/2006 9:27:34 PM PDT by AmericanExceptionalist
The first stop on Condoleezza Rice's post-detonation, nuclear reassurance tour was Tokyo. There she dutifully unfurled the American nuclear umbrella, pledging in person that the United States would meet any North Korean attack on Japan with massive American retaliation, nuclear if necessary.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Japan will realize this on their own soon, especially if the american electorate hands the Dems power.
It is important that Japan develop consciousness that it needs its own nuclear deterent vis-a-vis not merely the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (which threw a Taepodong over Japan in 1998) but also against the Kim Family Regime's (KFR) lips-and-teeth control, the Peoples Republic of China.
I'm sorry, having Japan nuclearize has the same amount of appeal as having a nuclearized Germany.
We don't need more countries having nuclear weapons, period.
Ally today, enemy tomorrow.
Whatever newbie. Of all the nations on Earth, Japan is the one we could trust most with nuclear weapons.
Will Japan always be an ally?
Allow 'em, hell! Give 'em to them - and the Taiwanese, too.
Japan * ping * (kono risuto ni hairitai ka detai wo shirasete kudasai : let me know if you want on or off this list)
This is the worst idea ever. Other countries in Asia haven't forgotten World War II. They still fear and loath the Japanese. A nuclear Japan pushes South Korea, the Phillipines, Indonesia, even Taiwan closer to China. Do the South Koreans have any need to see a nuclear Japan as a threat? No. But they will anyway. And they'll see China as their strategic counterweight. If South Korea leaves the American orbit for China's -- as it is threatening to --, that will be very bad for US interests in the region.
What's wrong with a "nuclearized Germany"? They aren't a threat to the rest of the civilized world, and neither is Japan.
What do you suggest? More diplomacy? Clinton and Carter did that and look where that got us.
I'm not sure I understand your point. How does a nuclear Japan help things? If the interest is in deterring a Korean attack on Tokyo, the US could simply reassert its historic commitment to providing a nuclear umbrella. A nuclear Japan isn't any more likely to launch a preemptive attack on Pyongyang than a nuclear Washington is. In fact, it's probably less likely to.
Then what the hell do you call "arming Japan with nukes"?
A nuclear Japan isn't any more likely to launch a preemptive attack on Pyongyang than a nuclear Washington is. In fact, it's probably less likely to.
Of course. NK knows that too. They also know that if they attack first, they will be instantly marginalized from the rest of the world, who will rush to our side, because we're the only nation on the face of the Earth willing and able to deal with the problem.
The very reason we trust Japan as an ally is the same reason they opt out of having nukes on their own accord.
They beleive in stability, and their developing a nuke would simply add to the instability. Of course, they live in a world where not enough countries feel the same.
Ultimately, I think if Japan was nuked by Korea, we would then nuke Korea. The Japanese and probably the Koreans also think this, in my opinion. Therefore, since they would never preemptively nuke another country, they can have their cake and eat it too, without seeming agressive on the world stage.
Meanwhile, they can build any number of "Defensive weapons" and I have no doubt they will.
You can't post the entire article. WashComPost has to be excerpted.
There's all the difference in the world between having an American and a Japanese finger on the button. The US long ago said that any attack on Tokyo would merit a nuclear response from the United States. That should be restated and made explicit. But I'm still not sure how allowing Japan to develop its own nuclear weapons makes things any better, and I do see how it makes things a lot worse.
If Japan was ruled by a crazed dictator, then you might have a point. But, alas, you don't.
Having been in the Navy long enough, I know that we are always nearby in case the ugly stuff hits the fan. Needless to say, we can certainly mount a quick and deadly counter-offensive if need be.
France has a small nuclear arsenal. In a strategic nuclear exchange with any super power she would lose. However, Charles Degaule postulated, would the United States go to war and sacrifice New York for Paris if France was attacked? If I were the Japanese I would get very busy building a nuclear deterrent under their control.