US INF withdraw and possible new land-based missiles deployed in Asia.
- Thread starter Pika
- Start date
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
That’s fine as I keep pointing out INF blanket banned all ground based Missiles with a range of 500Km to 5,500Km. Nuclear or conventional. As such conventional warhead IRBMs are back on the table. Russia has stated they intend to build nuclear tipped if the US does. However the only reports I have heard on new nuclear tipped cruise missiles are for subs which was not banned by the INF.
For now it seems South Korea like Australia has no plans for US Intermediate range missiles. But I don't think US ever planned to deploy in those countries. South Korea would be too provocative.
Japan and Philippines are probably the places they want.
But Philippines will likely say no as well considering that countries close ties with China, which leaves Japan and Guam (the latter being an unsuitable option)
Japan and Philippines are probably the places they want.
But Philippines will likely say no as well considering that countries close ties with China, which leaves Japan and Guam (the latter being an unsuitable option)
SamuraiBlue
Captain
Under Japan's present constitution it will be impossible for the Japanese government to develop an US missile site.
You meant deploy right? But doesn't their pacifist constitution only covers Japanese forces and not US Forces?
SamuraiBlue
Captain
The land usage will also be covered by the constitution and any land provided to the US Military will be under the US-Japan bilateral defense treaty in which the Japanese government will need to be informed on the usage.
So the government can't say we didn't know and they will have to reject any request of that nature.
What's the benefit of US land based IRBMs with conventional warheads in Asia. It seems there are so many better options available.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
It should be a case by case based on role and type. Again it banned both IRBM and Cruise missiles. This means things like anti ship missile systems had hard lines of how far they were allowed to go.
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
The INF treaty was one of those treaty that does not age well with the passage of time. Because from a technological stand point it did be much easier to design a missile with a limited maximum range rather than one with so wide a minimum range like what the treaty prescribes. Barring land based cruise missiles, nearly every modern ICBM has a minimum range that falls well within the prohibited range of 500-5,000 km, like the Topol-M but are not in violation because that is not their maximum range.