Japan Examines Nuclear Options

[GePap]

The currenty system of nuclear segregation was maintained by the balance between the US and USSR. Now that the balance is gone, it is difficult to say why other players should stay out of the nuclear game. And since no better system of nuclear segregation is being proposed, we might just very well stumble unto a new equilibrium, but it won;t be pretty.

[ajbera]

Y'know, it'd be cool if someone made a movie where Kim Jong throws one of his periodic hissy fits and threatens Japan with nukes, and then Godzilla/Gojiro wakes up and stomps the shit outta Pyongang, and then NK shoots some nukes at Godzilla, so the lil' Japanese twins sing their Mothra song, and Mothra shows up to help out the Big G, and some other monsters show up too, and there's a great big ass-whompin', then SK invades and the sensible members of the NK population overthrow their overlords, and the NK pop goes south to be reunited with their SK brethren, and a chunk of NK breaks off (monster fights are kinda rough) and becomes the new Monster Island.

[Alinestra Covelia]

Gatekeeper, does your name have anything to do with the theory of mass media?

[Soul Survivor]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
in any case, the "feminine" east has been ruined by the "masculine" west, and we need to fix it, but it's now so twisted that it's a ****ing gordian knot.

well thats why we need swords not nukes

[SlowwHand]

What I'm wondering is if anyone remembers my asking about the possibilities of being concerned about Japan as relates to North Korea, months ago.
Drew the usual laughs and chuckles; and sure, right Sloww.

Now laugh.

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by Alinestra Covelia
Gatekeeper, does your name have anything to do with the theory of mass media?

Theory of mass media? Well, I am a journalist IRL, and it says so in my profile. Most of the time when I'm at 'Poly, though, it's strictly for a good time, mixed in a bit with posting of articles that I find on the raw news wires at work (mainly to stimulate discussion, if nothing else).

Gatekeeper

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by Q Cubed

I take it you're a wee bit depressed right now about the state of human affairs, hmm? Been there, done that, likely will be there again in the future.

not general human affairs. just human affairs re: ne asia, because discussion is dominated by idiots who have no idea about what that entire region's like, politically or socially, as well as the fact that the entire region was quite well ****ed over/raped by the west in their crazed drive towards modernization, trampling over everything that stood in the way of progress, leading to the occupation of the peninsula and its subsequent division, to the creation of a communist china and other such things.

jesus, i sound like a donghak revolutionary there.

in any case, the "feminine" east has been ruined by the "masculine" west, and we need to fix it, but it's now so twisted that it's a ****ing gordian knot.

It's good to vent, Q, it really is. **tiptoes unobtrusively away**

[PLATO]

Originally posted by GePap
The currenty system of nuclear segregation was maintained by the balance between the US and USSR. Now that the balance is gone, it is difficult to say why other players should stay out of the nuclear game. And since no better system of nuclear segregation is being proposed, we might just very well stumble unto a new equilibrium, but it won;t be pretty.

GePap, you addressed the world wide balance of power. It is now becoming an issue of regional power. This brings a whole different set of problems. It is not difficult to say why others should not proliferate. First of all most signe the non-proliferation treaty. Secondly, the acquisition of nukes upsets regional stability. Pakistan/India simply caused an arms race between the two in an area where it already existed. Fortunately the balance was fairly well maintained in that area. Adding Japan to the East Asia formula shifts the balance of power in that region. China would have to eithier accept a new equilibrium that is less favorable to them or they would have to take some action to restore the balance (one possibility being the elimination of semi-independent Taiwan). It is hard to gauge weather or not some balance would emerge. The best case is to work to maintain the current balance.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by PLATO
Adding Japan to the East Asia formula shifts the balance of power in that region.

What are you talking about? No country in the region is going to invade Japan, and Japan can't invade any other country in that region. Even thinking about nuclear weapons will only increase tension in the area, and likely to push everybody else away from Japan.

[Ned]

Originally posted by GePap
The currenty system of nuclear segregation was maintained by the balance between the US and USSR. Now that the balance is gone, it is difficult to say why other players should stay out of the nuclear game. And since no better system of nuclear segregation is being proposed, we might just very well stumble unto a new equilibrium, but it won;t be pretty.

I personally think that every nation should abide by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The UN should declare any nation that is violates or withdraws from the Treaty to be an outlaw nation subject to embargoes and sanctions until it gets rid of its nuclear weapons.

The one exception to this general rule should be India, who should be permitted to join the treaty as a nuclear power. India was never part of either the Soviet or US Blocs in the Cold War, and needs nuclear weapons to offset the power of the Chinese.

I am also the opinion that the United States should enter into a formal treaty with Israel guaranteeing its existence, but in exchange we should demand that Israel give up its nuclear weapons.

We should also give Pakistan some guarantees against India if Pakistan restores democracy and ends terrorist activity in India.

Finally, I think the nuclear powers should annually meet in an effort to reduce their own stockpiles of nuclear weapons to zero as soon as possible..

[ixnay]

They need to invest in giant robots instead of nukes. That'll show those North Koreans.

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by Ned


I personally think that every nation should abide by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The UN should declare any nation that is violates or withdraws from the Treaty to be an outlaw nation subject to embargoes and sanctions until it gets rid of its nuclear weapons.

The one exception to this general rule should be India, who should be permitted to join the treaty as a nuclear power. India was never part of either the Soviet or US Blocs in the Cold War, and needs nuclear weapons to offset the power of the Chinese.

I am also the opinion that the United States should enter into a formal treaty with Israel guaranteeing its existence, but in exchange we should demand that Israel give up its nuclear weapons.

We should also give Pakistan some guarantees against India if Pakistan restores democracy and ends terrorist activity in India.

Finally, I think the nuclear powers should annually meet in an effort to reduce their own stockpiles of nuclear weapons to zero as soon as possible..

Sounds like a good Idea.

With two Exceptions:
1. The question about the nuclear Weapons in Israel seems to be a complex one. I don´t know if a Guarantee of Existence might be enough to let the Israelis abandon their Nuclear Weapons.
It might be fine if rthey do, but aftr all I think it gives the Israelis a further feeling of Security, to be safe from an arabian Invasion.
Teh big Problem of course is, that the Arabian Countries on the other Hand could feel Threatened by Israel with nuclear Weapons. Hard to find a Solution.

2. All existing nuclear Powers should also sign a treaty, not to develop any further Nuclear Weapons, neither strategical nor tactical ones.

[Az]

actually, Israel got it's nukes in the first place, when the SU has threatened it with a nuke attack a couple of times, and the USA has denied it it's nuclear shield, i.e. nuclear retaliation for attacking Israel. Nowadays, it's way too late to turn the wheel back.

Personally, I'd hate to see one of our last sovereign symbols taken away from us.

[yavoon]

Re: Japan Examines Nuclear Options

Originally posted by Gatekeeper
Everyone:

I found this story while perusing the raw news wires at work earlier tonight. Per my occasional custom, it's posted below for your reading pleasure. After you're finished reading, feel free to contribute to this thread as you see fit.



The part that piqued my interest was this: "Even journalists with dovish reputations said the option was a valid card to play for political leverage, not only against North Korea but the United States and other nations. ..."

If this attitude becomes ingrained, Japan would be wise to avoid any nuclear ambitions, no matter what North Korea does. Heh. Like that guy said at the end of the story, who would "shoot an unarmed man?" But if Japan gets nukes and couples the capability with the idea of political leverage over other nations ... well, Japan might find out that such leverage isn't always what it's cracked up to be. Nah. Better to be protected by America's nuclear umbrella — perhaps even its anti-missile system, whenever that gets up to snuff — than to go ahead with a nuclear weapons program.

I mean, c'mon, what are the odds someone's gonna pull a Poland on Japan?

Gatekeeper

the only nation to ever drop a nuclear weapon "shot an unarmed man." I think that answers your question.

[Q Classic]

even so, nobody's going to pull a poland on japan.

the japanese are too smart to be fooled by marching backwards. *ba-dump-bump-bum*

but seriously, the terrain is too mountainous and it's an archipelago... nobody would be able to project enough power without using nukes.

'course if japan got nukes, it'll cause the rest of east asia to develop/increase their stockpiles. a nuclear japan will beget a nuclear taiwan and a nuclear skorea. all three democracies have the technology and the cash...

and sloww, japan's always been a factor in that region. there's a reason why everything is cjk... language, culture, and politics have always been an interplay between the three throughout all of history, most of it unfriendly.