Could Japan attack.

FreeAsia, Thanks for correcting my spelling..sorry about that.

What occured 60-70 years ago on the Korean Penisula and in China will not ever be forgotten...But I do not want to get political.

The problem with the Kim Jong Il regime is that they may do anything if attacked. More than likely retaliate in some military manner.

Well I don't really see what Japan could do, given its limited offensive capability. It has a lot of fine assets, but not really the means to deploy them in large numbers/use them effectively against North Korea. I guess it could establish a naval blockade, but I don't see why it would do that.

If Japan wants to hurt North Korea it will stop Koreans sending money home and stopping trade with it.

That said in the future I could see Japan developing a "sword" to match its "shield", so that it could launch an attack on say North Korean launch sites.

Go look at the JMSD.... the best in Asia...
I think Japan can rattle Kim alittle bit if they wanted... I mean they have more amphibious forces than China... and China is trying to take Taiwan.
They can definitely hold Kim at bay till Japan's big brother arrives to finish the job.

Perhaps they will develop their capabilities in the future, but not now. They certainky are not going to be able to launch an airstrike on their own. And there are not many known military sites they could attack - Yongbyon would go up in a nuclear fallout if attacked. And often, many of these missile launch sites are small, and only contain a few tents and huts, and an open space for launching. Any strike attempted would have to be precise to the square inch, and accurate intelligence would be required to determine the exact location of the missile stocks. And given the very little information that comes out of North Korea - it would be difficult.
Japan would have to operate with American suppourt. I would recommend that the JASDF send F-15s with precision weapons escorted by USNAF F-18s.
A SEAD (Supression of enemy air defence) system should be used, possibly the "Wild Weasel" system. If possible, the bomber force should be supplemented with F-22s or F-117s. The attack should be carried out at low-level and co-ordinated by an ELINT or AI system similar to the one used in operation Iraqi freedom. The attack should also be kept as brief as possible - the planes will refule for most of the time, then once they hit their targets they get out like hell - before the North Koreans can react.
That would be a very difficult operation, judging by the current state of the Japanese air force, old resntment to Jpan in the region, the growing leftist movement in SK, the strong opposition to U.S. prescence, and (as I have said before) the unknown capability of the North Korean air defence. Don't forget that during the korean war, the North Korean air defence capability was better than expected - the majority of U.N. air losses were due to groundfire.

For info on the Japanese airforce, take a look here:

y $.02

Japan may be bound by treaty to not build cruise missiles, but that does not mean Japan will abide by the treaty.

"Taiwan is not alone in exploring the possibility of preemptive strike options. In October 2004, a Japanese Defense Agency panel report stipulated a requirement for launching preemptive strikes against ballistic missile launch installations. [12] Such tactics were at first thought to revolve around the use of ballistic missiles, but Japanese defense officials are now considering using cruise missiles, in part because they anticipate fewer adverse reactions, both inside and outside of Japan, to acquiring LACMs rather than ballistic missiles. [13" -

As well, perhaps an attack on Korea would actually cause South Korea to join the North in defence (a recent movie blockbuster in the South named "Habando," describes the unification of the North and South to stop Japanese aggression, source the LA Times). South Koreans are less afraid of the North than Japan (the recent manouvres around the disuputed island chains are a clear example). And then, it would be a South Korean vs. Japan war, the technologies would become nearly equal (the best of both worlds, the Korean Liberation Army using US tech). It probably is better to just let DPRK develops it's nukes.

Most likely, Japan would become even more isolated than before. Not only would Japan become a pariah, it would effectively destroy their chances of gaining a seat in the Security Council (who in Asia would want an even more powerful Japan after seeing a brazen attack?).

DarkEminence said:

y $.02

Japan may be bound by treaty to not build cruise missiles, but that does not mean Japan will abide by the treaty.

Click to expand...

That article proves nothing. The key points of Article 9 are alive and well.

Most likely, Japan would become even more isolated than before. Not only would Japan become a pariah, it would effectively destroy their chances of gaining a seat in the Security Council (who in Asia would want an even more powerful Japan after seeing a brazen attack?).

Click to expand...

1. Japan is not isolated today.
2. I doubt an attack on North Korean nuclear sites (given it couldn't do much else) would make it a pariah. It would be congratulated by most states for doing what they don't have the balls to do.
3. The only people that would oppose Japan entering the UNSC would be those that already did so.

FuManChu said:

2. I doubt an attack on North Korean nuclear sites (given it couldn't do much else) would make it a pariah. It would be congratulated by most states for doing what they don't have the balls to do.

Click to expand...

Yeah.. of course if you use conventional bombs.... but those things are in the mountains..
If they do use the nuke, I'll bet you South Korea, China, Russia, and Japan would be pretty pissed because the radiatoin can fly what ever direction the wind takes it

I'm sure that Japan could at least drop some bombs on Yongbyon and majorly screw things up and delay the nuclear program. However, it would not be worth it because it is doubtful that the North's nuclear program would be totally destroyed, and as mentioned before the backlash would be large. When I say backlash I mean two seperate things: Surrounding Asian nations, especially South Korea, getting very angry and the North Korean response in the form of ballistic missles and possibly even DPRK Naval forces attacking merchant shipping. I can see that happening.

Anyway, the US is the only country that would attack that has the capability to destroy the North's program throughly. To accomplish that effectively, the US would probably have to mount multiple attacks, targeting Yongbyon, North Korea's nuclear-capable missles, hidden nuclear facilities and possibly air defence targets. So Japan does not have the capability to accomplish that sort of thing.

Other than an airstrike, Japan does not have many options. A commando strike would not be worth it, as you could not take out the North's nuclear program with one commando raid (unless you landed commandos in many locations, all of which heavily guarded, etc. That's not feasible). And isolating the North any more is not really an option. It is so isolated already that a naval blockade or something like that would not have an effect.

DarkEminence said:

...perhaps an attack on Korea would actually cause South Korea to join the North in defence (a recent movie blockbuster in the South named "Habando," describes the unification of the North and South to stop Japanese aggression, source the LA Times). South Koreans are less afraid of the North than Japan (the recent manouvres around the disuputed island chains are a clear example).

Most likely, Japan would become even more isolated than before. Not only would Japan become a pariah, it would effectively destroy their chances of gaining a seat in the Security Council (who in Asia would want an even more powerful Japan after seeing a brazen attack?).

Click to expand...

:coffee: :coffee:

Currently, the last thing Japan wants is to remind Eastern and South Eastern Asians of their doings in WWII. It won't be wise to risk others' trust of Japan's commitment to peace, especially if Japan want to be the leading country in Asia.

I think Japan has a lot more to gain from not attacking Korea and simply let others to criticize the notorious North Korean leader.
:coffee:

If South Koreans do side with the DPRK, they will find after their victory they have made a horrible mistake, becuase they did not observe just what kind of regime lurks less than a 100 miles North of them....
Anyway, I don't think they will. SK politicians are calling for restraint because they are afraid of a NK response (like a nuclear test or a missile firing over SK). They realise Kim-jong-il is an easily provoked psycopath, and sanctions may cause him to revke to his usual "missile an nuke" bargaining tactic. SK and China definetly do not want that. Nobody in that region or the U.S. wants that. So they do need to be careful just how much pressure they put on them - but China will probably be able to influence the situation the most, although it is vurrently a very shaky allaince between them and NK.