Japan Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

AndrewS said:

But the problem is that everyone in the world (except Japan) recognises the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands as disputed territory, not Japanese territory.

Click to expand...

No nation officially recognizes it as disputed since they all see it as PRC unilaterally making assertion but that does not make it disputed since it is an unfounded claim. For it to be disputed PRC would need to file claim at ICJ so claim of both sides could be heard, evaluated and a verdict is made.

In other words another nation cannot unilaterally make it disputed through assertions and force alone.

AndrewS said:

China has the capacity to simply keep pushing Japan until Chinese jets are routinely overflying the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands.

Click to expand...

This is called an invasion of territory that no nation will accept nor tolerate.

I'm not talking about a strict legal interpretation.

I'm talking about how the global view is that the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands are in dispute.

===
And here we come to the crux of the problem. The Senkaku/Diaoyu are a bunch of uninhabited islands taken during the First Sino-Japanese war.

Plus need I remind you of what has happened in Ukraine? Ukraine did not accept or tolerate the Russians moving in.

But that still doesn't change the fact that they have lost badly, partly because the US and Europe have no wish to go to war with Russia which would inevitably go nuclear.

The Russians haven't exactly come out as winners either, but they should be able to get past it. We can already see the US and Russia working together in Syria with joint airstrikes

So yes, without US involvement, China could push its air force to the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands. But having the US around does inject uncertainty. Plus China would have to consider very carefully the risks of trying to establish air superiority over the Senkaku Islands.

My view is that they probably wouldn't do this as it would be too risky and it would threaten to derail China's domestic development. But if relations do continue as they are with Abe, I can definitely see the Chinese Coast Guard or Navy moving towards those islands, as there are all sorts of games they can play against the much smaller Japanese fleet.

Look at how we saw a joint Russian/Chinese naval contingent sailing near the islands recently and causing panic in Tokyo. Or if China sends in the monster coast guard ships (is it innocent passage or an assertion of sovereignty?), and the only way they can be stopped is if they are sunk by the Japanese Navy. But then will the Japanese Navy have started a battle which they cannot win against the Chinese military?

===
At the end of the day, Japan needs workable relations with China, otherwise it will be always be insecure and vulnerable. Everyone else in Asia already realises this.

Janiz said:

Getting behind an aircraft is necessary for lining up with it to the distance that a pilot can see the other plane's pilot and fire a round of shots into the air without a risk of hiiting the other plane. Or you can come up with any other means of performing this manouver in a plain, easy to understand from the start for everyone and responsible way?

Click to expand...

or one can choose not to shoot tracer rounds?

I don't think there is a better way to do what you want. This kind of situation is about blinkmanship, nobody is going to blink first, so both side would seem aggressive in the eyes of the other side by turning to an attacking position. So my point was not about laying blame on either side. My point was about the exact sequence of the events, what came first which lead to the counter action. If someone (maybe you in your post) really want to lay blame on one side, I think one has to look at the sequence and PLAF should not have been the first to be blamed. That difference between you and me is why I replied to your post.

Anyway, I hear what you say.

SamuraiBlue said:

People really do not take much attention to the things other people posted do you.

Click to expand...

No offense intended, but the same can also be said to you. Actually especially you considered how many more times you dodge other members' question. They may not agree with your points but they do make respectful replies when you frequently ignore their statements and sometimes even direct inquiry.

And yes the last time I checked they all have response to your video post.

SamuraiBlue said:

If you watch the vid you'll find your answer even if you do not understand the language since the pilot's dialog is self explaining enough.

Click to expand...

This video does not give us any infomation about this specific incident because:
1.This is the standard procedure when we are talking about an isolate event. There are all possibility that the event might not unfolded as in the procedure.
2.This video is years old thus anything in it is old and could be changed during the past years especially when you considered how the situation have radically changed recently.

Less arguing, more weapons news. Will be more interested to see any new update of the ATD-X or missile engine technology..

kriss said:

This video does not give us any infomation about this specific incident because:
1.This is the standard procedure when we are talking about an isolate event. There are all possibility that the event might not unfolded as in the procedure.
2.This video is years old thus anything in it is old and could be changed during the past years especially when you considered how the situation have radically changed recently.

Click to expand...

And shows how much you have not paid attention to the vid and post.
If you compare with what the retired general described with the procedure shown in the vid you'll see it is identical in which you can approximate at which point the PLAAF plane headed towards the JASDF.

SamuraiBlue said:

No nation officially recognizes it as disputed since they all see it as PRC unilaterally making assertion but that does not make it disputed since it is an unfounded claim. For it to be disputed PRC would need to file claim at ICJ so claim of both sides could be heard, evaluated and a verdict is made.

In other words another nation cannot unilaterally make it disputed through assertions and force alone.



This is called an invasion of territory that no nation will accept nor tolerate.

Click to expand...

And what are they going to do about it? It's not like Tokyo can try what Qaddaffi did over the southern Mediterranean.

Skywatcher said:

And what are they going to do about it? It's not like Tokyo can try what Qaddaffi did over the southern Mediterranean.

Click to expand...

The actual question is what is China doing or planning to do in changing the status quo. Japan doesn't have to do anything. Japan's responsibility is like any sovereign nation in administering its own territory.

Skywatcher said:

And what are they going to do about it? It's not like Tokyo can try what Qaddaffi did over the southern Mediterranean.

Click to expand...

Go nuclear? It will take a couple of months but they will succeed in this aim without a doubt if US won't back them up in serious case.

That will change the status quo surely and end up Chinese little game 100%.

Don't be stupid, Janiz; this is obviously someone thinking with his emotions not his mind. Japan go nuclear? 1. Will the US allow it? 2. Will Japanese people allow it? 3. Under what circumstances would Japan consider getting into a nuclear war with a country as large as China even if they had nukes? Are they sick of living? LOL Even with nukes, nothing changes because Japan dares not open that can of worms with China and Japan has no choice but to continue playing the same game as it does today. China won't nuke Japan either because 1. it's just not kosher to do that unless directly invaded and 2. Japan is under American protection. Given that, quite frankly, it's a waste of money for Japan to get nukes even if it got permission from the US.

"...end up Chinese little game 100%."

WTF is this supposed to mean? LOL Brush up on your English before you try to get sassy, K?