Japan to loosen restrictions on military.

[Sklavinia]

It owns two countries and a part of another, sounds like an empire to me.

Which two country does it own?

Tibet and Manchuria. And I guess if you believe in the idea of "Uyghurstan", 3 countries. And actually, now that I think about it, it owns several other parts of other countries as well. India, Mongolia, and I think Burma.

[Oaledonia]

But ez good. Now they don't need to worry about True China not being able to defend itself.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Tibet for one, not sure about the other though.

Which I would hardly say is a country. And if you are speaking of Inner Mongolia, or Xinjiang, I would not claim that those are countries either. They may have seperatist movements, but so does Britanny, Corsica, and the Basque land.

Ah I didn't think about either of those. That's probably what he meant.

[Sklavinia]

Lolno.

Still can't believe people actually play those games.

Which sucks, the units or the plot?

Both? Both.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

Which two country does it own?

Tibet and Manchuria. And I guess if you believe in the idea of "Uyghurstan", 3 countries. And actually, now that I think about it, it owns several other parts of other countries as well. India, Mongolia, and I think Burma.

Tibet, Manchuria, and the Xinjiang region aren't countries. It is like saying that 'California', 'New York', and 'Ottowa' are 'countries'. They aren't.

[Norstal]

So the Japanese government has broadened their interpretation of the role of the military to include defense of allies in what they are calling 'Collective Self-Defense'. Frankly I approve of our friend and ally Japan becoming more proactive with their military.
More help the better as far as I'm concerned.
But what's your opinion General?

The cabinet != their entire Diet.

Also this means that Japan gets dragged into America's many military adventures. Are the Japanese people ready for that? Polls says, they're not. That and the fact that many of our European friends have been bitching about that same fact too.

[Tyriece]

War bad. Peace good. Being more open to going to war is bad.

Sometimes war is good though.

Wrong

[Norstal]

Their neighbours are just going to love this, given the uncommon amount of revanchist vitriol we get from that region.

I would like it if this includes South Korea. That is, if SK is attacked, Japan has to help SK. I'm not sure they have any existing alliance between the two nations, but it would really dampen Chinese anti-Japanese hatred if they managed to get something like this working. This is the only benefit I can see for the reinterpretation.

[Ifreann]

War bad. Peace good. Being more open to going to war is bad.

What about defending their own region or aiding their allies?

Who even are Japan's allies that they might go to war to defend?

---

War bad. Peace good. Being more open to going to war is bad.

But...war IS peace! Didn't you know?

Dude, woah.

---

War bad. Peace good. Being more open to going to war is bad.

Not when your neighbors are China and North Korea. Japan just wants to be able to defend itself in case either of those two nuthouses go off the edge, and let's face it, their current 'defense force' isn't much of a defensive force. If I were neighbors with the PRC or the DPRK, I'd be doing the same thing.

But they're allowed a defensive military. If they're feeling threatened by China or North Korea they can expand it. What does loosening the restrictions on going to war accomplish for their self defence?

[Blakk Metal]

Kamikaze, anyone?

That's been computerized now.

[The Remnants of Kobol]

America is not your private army. Unless you want to become the next Iraq success story, you'd best learn that fact.

Now, about Japan getting some teeth back. I think it's about time. With China upping the saber rattling, North Korea being North Korea, and Russia deciding it wants to go play America, Japan has all the right in the world to be concerned. I'll be worried it was a mistake when I start hearing "Tora Tora Tora" over some military channel.

Only, China isn't going to do anything about it, North Korea won't do anything about it, and nothing is ever going to come of it. North Korea's missiles can barely get pass the border to South Korea.

Oh, so we're going by Chamberlain standards and just trusting them to do the right thing now?

[Oaledonia]

Remember that Japan still operates miniature drone kamikazes.

[Sklavinia]

Tibet and Manchuria. And I guess if you believe in the idea of "Uyghurstan", 3 countries. And actually, now that I think about it, it owns several other parts of other countries as well. India, Mongolia, and I think Burma.

Tibet, Manchuria, and the Xinjiang region aren't countries. It is like saying that 'California', 'New York', and 'Ottowa' are 'countries'. They aren't.

First off, California, New York, and Ottawa aren't countries because they aren't and never have been (except maybe California).

Tibet and Manchuria, on the other had, ARE countries that were taken over by the PRC. Tibet in the 50's, and Manchuria in the 40's. Uyghurstan is up for debate, as I don't think it's been a country for quite a while, but I believe there is an independence movement within it, just like in Tibet. I don't know if the Manchus have an independence movement, but they were a country once until being invaded by the USSR & PRC.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

Only, China isn't going to do anything about it, North Korea won't do anything about it, and nothing is ever going to come of it. North Korea's missiles can barely get pass the border to South Korea.

Oh, so we're going by Chamberlain standards and just trusting them to do the right thing now?

No, we trust that China isn't staffed by complete idiots who are willing to risk their precarious economic prosperity to enter into a war that they have no reason to expect winning (even if they are allied with Russia, the US still out guns them, and that is not taking to account the possibility that the US may rope in the rest of Europe into it as well).

[Norstal]

But they're allowed a defensive military. If they're feeling threatened by China or North Korea they can expand it. What does loosening the restrictions on going to war accomplish for their self defence?

Exactly. This might also lower Japan's public perception of America considering they will have to be involved more heavily, not just in support, but also combat roles in Middle East wars now. It's not good for anyone except for the military-industrial complex.

[Norstal]

Oh, so we're going by Chamberlain standards and just trusting them to do the right thing now?

No, we trust that China isn't staffed by complete idiots who are willing to risk their precarious economic prosperity to enter into a war that they have no reason to expect winning (even if they are allied with Russia, the US still out guns them, and that is not taking to account the possibility that the US may rope in the rest of Europe into it as well).

...Why would they be allied with Russia? Practically no one likes the Chinese government, not even the Chinese themselves.

[Oaledonia]

But they're allowed a defensive military. If they're feeling threatened by China or North Korea they can expand it. What does loosening the restrictions on going to war accomplish for their self defence?

Exactly. This might also lower Japan's public perception of America considering they will have to be involved in Middle East wars now. It's not good for anyone except for the military-industrial complex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Iraq_Reconstruction_and_Support_Group

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

Tibet, Manchuria, and the Xinjiang region aren't countries. It is like saying that 'California', 'New York', and 'Ottowa' are 'countries'. They aren't.

First off, California, New York, and Ottawa aren't countries because they aren't and never have been (except maybe California).

Tibet and Manchuria, on the other had, ARE countries that were taken over by the PRC.

And before that, since, at the very least, the Yuan Dynasty, they were part of China. Again, it doesn't matter if 'they use to be' or 'they were', because Brittany used to be independent, and California used to belong to Mexico.

Tibet in the 50's, and Manchuria in the 40's. Uyghurstan is up for debate, as I don't think it's been a country for quite a while, but I believe there is an independence movement within it, just like in Tibet

Tibet was an independent country during the 50's, yes, they were part of the Qing Empire before that. Manchuria was not an independent nation in the 40's, if we are talking about Manshū-koku, that was part of the Japanese Empire.

Independence movement also doesn't suddenly make a region legitimately a country. An European example would be the Basque independence movement or the Corsican independence movement.

I don't know if the Manchus have an independence movement, but they were a country once until being invaded by the USSR & PRC.

They were once a colony of the Japanese, before they return to China.

[Norstal]

Exactly. This might also lower Japan's public perception of America considering they will have to be involved in Middle East wars now. It's not good for anyone except for the military-industrial complex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Iraq_Reconstruction_and_Support_Group

Let me restate that. They would have to engage in combat and not just support roles. You understand the difference between the two roles, right?

[The Remnants of Kobol]

Oh, so we're going by Chamberlain standards and just trusting them to do the right thing now?

No, we trust that China isn't staffed by complete idiots who are willing to risk their precarious economic prosperity to enter into a war that they have no reason to expect winning (even if they are allied with Russia, the US still out guns them, and that is not taking to account the possibility that the US may rope in the rest of Europe into it as well).

And what makes you think the US would get involved if China decided to go fight with Vietnam, Malaysia, or any other Southern Asian nation? You think the US would risk economic self destruction to go fight a proxy war for nations that aren't vital to its economy against a nation that is?

As for North Korea, they do have nukes. There are methods of deliver besides intercontinental ballistic missiles...

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

No, we trust that China isn't staffed by complete idiots who are willing to risk their precarious economic prosperity to enter into a war that they have no reason to expect winning (even if they are allied with Russia, the US still out guns them, and that is not taking to account the possibility that the US may rope in the rest of Europe into it as well).

...Why would they be allied with Russia? Practically no one likes the Chinese government, not even the Chinese themselves.

The Chinese government must enjoy some measure of popular support (at least enough that their population doesn't go about overthrowing the government), and Russia and China do enjoy something resembling cordiality.

[Washington Resistance Army]

No, we trust that China isn't staffed by complete idiots who are willing to risk their precarious economic prosperity to enter into a war that they have no reason to expect winning (even if they are allied with Russia, the US still out guns them, and that is not taking to account the possibility that the US may rope in the rest of Europe into it as well).

And what makes you think the US would get involved if China decided to go fight with Vietnam, Malaysia, or any other Southern Asian nation? You think the US would risk economic self destruction to go fight a proxy war for nations that aren't vital to its economy against a nation that is?

As for North Korea, they do have nukes. There are methods of deliver besides intercontinental ballistic missiles...

The DPRK's missile systems are more than sufficient to strike Japan, which is probably worrying to them.

[Norstal]

...Why would they be allied with Russia? Practically no one likes the Chinese government, not even the Chinese themselves.

The Chinese government must enjoy some measure of popular support (at least enough that their population doesn't go about overthrowing the government), and Russia and China do enjoy something resembling cordiality.

They're really good at suppressing dissidents actually. And while that may be, Russia is tangled up in another situation right now.

[Sklavinia]

First off, California, New York, and Ottawa aren't countries because they aren't and never have been (except maybe California).

Tibet and Manchuria, on the other had, ARE countries that were taken over by the PRC.

And before that, since, at the very least, the Yuan Dynasty, they were part of China. Again, it doesn't matter if 'they use to be' or 'they were', because Brittany used to be independent, and California used to belong to Mexico.

Tibet in the 50's, and Manchuria in the 40's. Uyghurstan is up for debate, as I don't think it's been a country for quite a while, but I believe there is an independence movement within it, just like in Tibet

Tibet was an independent country during the 50's, yes, they were part of the Qing Empire before that. Manchuria was not an independent nation in the 40's, if we are talking about Manshū-koku, that was part of the Japanese Empire.

Independence movement also doesn't suddenly make a region legitimately a country. An European example would be the Basque independence movement or the Corsican independence movement.

I don't know if the Manchus have an independence movement, but they were a country once until being invaded by the USSR & PRC.

They were once a colony of the Japanese, before they return to China.

A country can exist within a country, you know. The United Kingdom is a country comprised of 3-4 countries.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

No, we trust that China isn't staffed by complete idiots who are willing to risk their precarious economic prosperity to enter into a war that they have no reason to expect winning (even if they are allied with Russia, the US still out guns them, and that is not taking to account the possibility that the US may rope in the rest of Europe into it as well).

And what makes you think the US would get involved if China decided to go fight with Vietnam, Malaysia, or any other Southern Asian nation? You think the US would risk economic self destruction to go fight a proxy war for nations that aren't vital to its economy against a nation that is?

As for North Korea, they do have nukes. There are methods of deliver besides intercontinental ballistic missiles...

Would they want to risk the backlash from those actions?