Japan, U.S. agree on periodic talks over U.S. nuclear umbrella

Saturday 18th July, 06:17 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 28 Total Comments Show All

TheMarion at 10:47 PM JST - 18th July

To those who offered the eleven postings above: Be thankful for the 64 peaceful years you have just experienced. Now I feel you should pour a cup of coffeee and sit back and just THINK. Realize just how Japan is looked at in the rest of the world and know that an nuclear war WILL spell the end of the planet we live on and it behooves all nations to talk with your neighbors and learn to work together. Let others worry about North Korea and I can assure you this angle is well covered. I feel the new leadership of the young people of the DPJ is a step in the right direction
OssanAmerica at 12:10 AM JST - 19th July

"U.S. nuclear umbrella" In the event of a N Korean/Chinese/Russian nuclear attack on Japan, >Japan will agree to the U.S. killing millions of N >Koreans/Chinese/Russians in a retaliatory nuclear attack

Yes, the knowledge of which will keep Nkorea/China/Russia or any country from ever launching nuclear attack on Japan.
OssanAmerica at 12:18 AM JST - 19th July

Realize just how Japan is looked at in the rest of the world and know >that an nuclear war WILL spell the end of the planet we live on and it >behooves all nations to talk with your neighbors and learn to work >together.

I believe you are unaware of how Japan is actually looked at in the rest of the world. All the dominant democratic nations support Japan's bid for Perm UNSC membership and have no qualms at all about Japan's military. In fact, if Japan went nuclear as a counter to NKorea and China, you can rest assured you'd hear little complaint from England, France, etc. We, the United States obviously prefer to maintain the status quo, the US nuclear umbrella ensuring our military presence in Japan at the doorstep to the rest of asia.The only nations that would seriously complain are China and NKorea for very obvious reasons. I do suggest that you sit back and THINK as to why you persistently support the positions of our unspoken adversary China and blatant enemy NKorea againt our closest strategic ally in east asia.
UnagiDon at 12:29 AM JST - 19th July

The only thing that would cause Japan to develop its own nuclear weapons would be either the US indicating it would no longer protect Japan, or did something to give that impression.
Farmboy at 06:09 AM JST - 19th July

The only thing that would cause Japan to develop its own nuclear weapons would be either the US indicating it would no longer protect Japan, or did something to give that impression.

For a large country, nukes may deter a sane adversary because in the case of a first strike, the possibility of a counterstrike may make an attacker think twice. This way of thinking may not always apply in today's world of fanaticism, but let's accept that argument for a moment.

I would argue that nukes are not protective for a island nation like Japan. Japan would be mostly wiped out by a first nuclear strike, so for Japan to have its own nukes would do nothing except annoy the neighbors and make war more likely. US nukes might provide some deterrent effect, but if they didn't, as I suspect would be the case with a nutcase aggressor, Japan would once again be out of the picture.

One could argue that the US has been deterred from attacking North Korea because of its nuclear weapons, and I would agree, but the difference is that the US can only use conventional weapons against North Korea because of it's proximity to South Korea, Japan, and China.
Conventional weapons would not wipe out North Korea, which is well-defended, and the US does worry about North Korean nukes used in retaliation for a US first strike.

Hawaii, and possibly the West Coast, could be targets. A large group of missiles, when a launch is not expected, would not be easily picked off by Patriot or other defense systems, and serious damage would be done.

At any rate, for Japan to have its own nukes would not be helpful for either defending itself or for promoting peace in the region.
apecNetworks at 08:14 AM JST - 19th July

To Farmboy:

Hawaii, and possibly the West Coast, could be targets.

Your assessment of DPRK is overstated. Google any weapon, then delve into the countless forums and websites that specializes in weapons analysis. DPRK is ready to launch Sputnik II, not engage in intercontinental conflicts.
YuriOtani at 08:37 AM JST - 19th July

Farmboy, it would make any nation think twice before attacking Japan. I do not see China attacking Japan but if Japan has 50 to 100 warheads... China losing 50 of its cities would be devastating. What could they gain from an attack? I do not think the Americans have been deterred from attacking North Korea because of a few low level atomics it may have. The big question is how big are their devices and do they have any left?
OssanAmerica at 08:49 AM JST - 19th July

I would argue that nukes are not protective for a island nation like >Japan. Japan would be mostly wiped out by a first nuclear strike, so for >Japan to have its own nukes would do nothing except annoy the neighbors >and make war more likely.

Totally disagree. Nations like Russia and China could indeed wipe out all of Japan on a first nuclear strike. But would they? Both nations enjoy a good relationship and extensive trade and economic ties with Japan. So that leaves our friend North Korea. Does anyone think NKorea is capable of destroying all of Japan on a first nuke strike? I doubt very much anyone does.
ZetaSagittarii at 09:07 AM JST - 19th July

[...] Japan [is] facing regional security threats from North Korea

That's laughable. Unfortunately, there's nothing to stop the media spin going on and on.

I say NO to nuclear arsenal and YES to nuclear energy, for the real threat that I find menacing to Japan is an abrupt cut in the flow of oil, similar to the one that the "Democratic People's" republic experienced - and quite never recovered from - with the fall of their main energy sponsor, the Soviet Union.
Farmboy at 03:47 PM JST - 19th July

Your assessment of DPRK is overstated. Google any weapon, then delve into the countless forums and websites that specializes in weapons analysis. DPRK is ready to launch Sputnik II, not engage in intercontinental conflicts

Well, I believe that US forces have moved into a defensive position to protect Hawaii, and I infer that someone in the military who knows more than either of us about the issue perceives a real threat. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124535285705228571.html
Farmboy at 04:07 PM JST - 19th July

YuriOtani,

China wants Japan as a customer, and is more motivated to do business than to make war at this point. That might change if Japan became a real threat, which it currently is not.
apecNetworks at 04:49 PM JST - 19th July

To Farmboy:

I have been w/ this toooooo looooooong. How many Americans living in the US believes what you are stating - ballpark percentages (50%, 70%, 90%?).
Farmboy at 08:32 PM JST - 19th July

apecnetworks,

Is that your argument? You have been with this tooooo loooong? As for what Americans believe, it's a big country, and people believe a lot of different things.
rogerbentham at 07:06 PM JST - 23rd July

as long as nagasaki and hiroshima are part of the umbrella, that's fine with me.
maglev101 at 10:40 PM JST - 23rd July

Totally disagree. Nations like Russia and China could indeed wipe out all of Japan on a first nuclear strike. But would they? Both nations enjoy a good relationship and extensive trade and economic ties with Japan. So that leaves our friend North Korea. Does anyone think NKorea is capable of destroying all of Japan on a first nuke strike? I doubt very much anyone does.

that's assuming NKorea can even accurately launch one nuke and even if they did, don't the JDF have interceptor missiles?