China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[cmb=1968]

Re: cmb=1968

Japan had an active nuclear program during WWII that actually pre-dated the US Manhatten project. They were about six months ahead of the US when a B-29 raid over Japan missed their target and wiped out an important Japanese lab. Had not the US nuked Japan first, the US would have been the first nation to suffer a nuclear attack. Take Japanese protests with a grain of salt.
Japan uses the tactic of not having a nuclear stockpile while letting everyone know it would be simple enough for them to go nuclear if there was a necessity.

So because Japan Sixty five years ago when they had a vicious government tried, but failed to develop a viable nuclear weapon before their lab was destroyed. Has no right to be apprehensive of it's larger neighbors nuclear capability.

Yes Japan can if they had the political will and the people were wiling to tolerate the building of a nuclear deterrent.

Unlike in China the Japanese can rally and protest any government attempt to circumvent the section of the Japanese constitution forbidding japan nuclear weapons.

So unless the United States ceases to exist their will not be any danger of Japan developing a nuclear weapons capability.

 

[Ambivalent]

Re: cmb=1968

there is a big difference between israel and sweden. israel has a "israel lobby" in the US, sweden prolly does too but prolly not as influential; sweden is prolly safer now without nuke; and the difference between sweden and israel is like the difference between south korea/Japan and israel. israel is isolated and surrounded by enemies with no room for failure...meanwhile sweden is supposed to be under the protection of the US, if sweden gets away with it, everyone gets away with it, then the US lose its leadership role in the west...

Sweden was not a US allie during the cold war, nor were they a NATO member. Sweden was neutral, hence their interest in an independent nuclear deterrent. Back during the Cold War Sweden considered itself to be in a very dangerous neighborhood indeed. They still do to a lesser extent, as the words of Mr. Putin have put some planned defence cuts on the shelf. The US and Nato never were and are not now obligated to come to Sweden's defense. There defense equipment and procedures are very different than Nato standard, although they are perfectly willing to make Nato compatible versions of their equipment for sale abroad. As an example, Swedish data links are not compatible with anyone else's ( reportedly better than Link 16, and they were data linking back in the 1960's ) and their aircraft use metric measurements of altitude, airspeed, rate of climb/descent, etc, making it very difficult to fly them outside Sweden where airspeeds are commonly in knots, altitudes in feet, etc. It is only in the last half dozen years that there has been some expression of interest by the Swedes in possibly joining Nato.
As for the citizens of Japan protesting the development of a nuclear deterrent, it would depend on the situation. It would have to be pretty dire for Japan to make such a decision, and I think the populace would go along. Japan's political and legal systems are nothing like the west's. Don't let the superficial similarities fool you. There is no meaningful opposition to the bureaucrats in Japan. Ever see a TV series called "Yes Minister". Japanese politicians are about as ineffective. Policy is not written they way we westerners are accustomed too, bureaucrats wield vast power, and it is intertwined with corporate power due to the way bureaucrats move freely from industry to the bureaus they manage and back again. You are right however that the US would have to have withdrawn from Asia leaving a major power vacuum. I will caution that just because the US is powerful today is no guarantee for tomorrow. Nations rise and fall, fact of life.

 

[Troika]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

A note to the wise:

The Japanese nuclear programme during WWII was a joke. It's even funnier than the German one. The nations with the capability to develop a device, saying nothing of the ability to actually deliver it, by order of likelihood and time, ranks as follows: US, UK then Soviet Union, the second and third place being rather close.

I can go into details later if people want, but suffice to say, History Channel is not a source.

 

[cmb=1968]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

I found these documents on a web sight for George Washington university.
They are National Intelligence Estimates in PDF form their is one from 1957 that has some info on Sweden Potential nuclear potential.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I tried to put a web link directly to the page with the PDF files but something went wrong and it goes to the Main GWU web sight with a missing file error sorry.

It is in the National security archives if you put National Security Archive in to the search section of the Main web page for GWU in will take you to a list of sections. The page for the National Security archives will be at the top of the list.

If you have any problems finding they area I am talking about please ask questions in you cant find it.

 

[williamhou]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

lol the biggest land threat to China is still russia in the long term. Japan will have to conquer korea first in order to be a threat to China. the US has many bases but too fragmented. some of China's best units such as 38th and 39th GA are stationed in the north. i would have been better if China regain mongolia or something, at least there is more of a cushion for Beijing

Russia is fine, they are selling a lot of weapons to help PLA, why would they want to invade China in the near future? Current PLA army is strong enough to deter any major land invasion from neighbours.

 

[cmb=1968]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

Why do many people on this board think that there is a threat of invasion by Japan?

Japan has not fought in a major land battle in seventy years, and does not have a excess population to form a large army for a occupation much less a full scale invasion.

The only reason japan was able to invade China in the early nineteen thirty's was because they were in the middle of a Civil war; had China been a cohesive nation Japan would not have been able to force them to do any thing.

The Korean war proves this when China sent a massive human wave attack to prevent Korea from being taken over by the UN, and fought the UN forces to a stand still.

Japan does have the ability to develop a offensive Navy and Air force which could visit destruction on a distant area, but air power alone cant defeat a adversary. Look at the US operations in Afghanistan and the tribal area of Pakistan Air power alone has not ended the Talaban/Alqeda threat.

In Conclusion Japan short of developing a giant robot (gundam) or a autonomous AI killing machine (Tachkoma GITS.SAC) Japan has no possibility of actually invading any one successfully much less carrying out a occupation on its own.

(GITS.SAC Ghost in the shell Stand alone complex)

 

[Ambivalent]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

A note to the wise:

The Japanese nuclear programme during WWII was a joke. It's even funnier than the German one. The nations with the capability to develop a device, saying nothing of the ability to actually deliver it, by order of likelihood and time, ranks as follows: US, UK then Soviet Union, the second and third place being rather close.

I can go into details later if people want, but suffice to say, History Channel is not a source.

No only did the UK not have a nuclear program during WWII but when President Truman informed Prime Minister Churchill of the Trinity test ( at a meeting with Stalin ) Churchill's minister of defense thought it was an American bluff. He did not believe such a destructive weapon was possible. King George, however, never doubted. The Brits were never privy to the Manhatten Project before Truman's mention of Trinity.
The German program never achieved a critical mass, but the Japanese program was no joke. The Japanese declassified their material in the 1980's and some of this was presented to us in a brief. They were indeed ahead of the US for a time and had serious plans to use atomic weapons on us.

 

[guomax]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

We need harmonious society... oh.yeah.

 

[Troika]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

No only did the UK not have a nuclear program during WWII but when President Truman informed Prime Minister Churchill of the Trinity test ( at a meeting with Stalin ) Churchill's minister of defense thought it was an American bluff. He did not believe such a destructive weapon was possible. King George, however, never doubted. The Brits were never privy to the Manhatten Project before Truman's mention of Trinity.
The German program never achieved a critical mass, but the Japanese program was no joke. The Japanese declassified their material in the 1980's and some of this was presented to us in a brief. They were indeed ahead of the US for a time and had serious plans to use atomic weapons on us.

Look up tube metal.

And the Japanese had all of ONE spinner working. Their theory was also down some hilariously wrong allies. They also never had a chance in hell of an actual deliverable device... assuming they ever found enough material to build one.

And History Channel is still not a source.

 

[Ambivalent]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

Look up tube metal.

And the Japanese had all of ONE spinner working. Their theory was also down some hilariously wrong allies. They also never had a chance in hell of an actual deliverable device... assuming they ever found enough material to build one.

And History Channel is still not a source.

My source was an unclassified briefing by the US Navy in the mid 1980's on nuclear developments world wide. They were as stunned by the material the Japanese had declassified just a year or two prior and passed to them. It showed far more progress on a workable nuclear weapon that anyone had given them credit for. Their program pre-dated the US entry into WWII and was within months of a workable bomb when an errant B-29 hit the wrong target and destroyed a facility critical to their effort. That one setback gave the US the opportunity to be the first to use nuclear weapons in combat.