Japan Creates a New Military Industrial Complex

[Brickjectivity]

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-japan-doubling-down-its-military-power

I hope everyone realizes how important this development is. I don't blame them one bit given their strategic situation, and that is unfortunate. China and N Korea have some they are doing to stimulate fear. They are responding. Itch leads to scratch.

I think war happens because it is logical and reasonable. The best thing is to make it as unreasonable as possible. If that fails, make an emotional and illogical appeal.

 

[Stevicus]

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-japan-doubling-down-its-military-power

I hope everyone realizes how important this development is. I don't blame them one bit given their strategic situation, and that is unfortunate. China and N Korea have some they are doing to stimulate fear. They are responding. Itch leads to scratch.

I think war happens because it is logical and reasonable. The best thing is to make it as unreasonable as possible. If that fails, make an emotional and illogical appeal.

It makes sense. For the longest time, the U.S. had been worried about the resurgence of a militaristic Japan, although since the world has changed significantly since WW2, building up Japan's military in the context of an alliance with the West could be a great asset to the West's national security aspirations.

NATO almost seems anachronistic at this point, since it just refers to the North Atlantic. Maybe they could expand it and call it the Global Alliance Treaty Organization or "GATO." The new alliance could have a cat as its symbol and mascot.

 

[Sand Dancer]

It makes sense. For the longest time, the U.S. had been worried about the resurgence of a militaristic Japan, although since the world has changed significantly since WW2, building up Japan's military in the context of an alliance with the West could be a great asset to the West's national security aspirations.

NATO almost seems anachronistic at this point, since it just refers to the North Atlantic. Maybe they could expand it and call it the Global Alliance Treaty Organization or "GATO." The new alliance could have a cat as its symbol and mascot.

A really mad cat.

 

[Stevicus]

A really mad cat.

We have these mascots in my area:

 

[Revoltingest]

I think war happens because it is logical and reasonable.

Those are dubious terms to describe motives for war.
I suppose that one could say Hitler's world conquest
was logical....if one accepts the premises that only
Aryan lives matter, & that a Nazi world would be best.
Was his method, ie, violent conquest & pogroms,
"reasonable"? I think most of us would say no.

But for the allies to wage war against Hitler assumes
more reasonable premises, ie, Nazi rule is abominable,
violent resistance is worthwhile.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Those are dubious terms to describe motives for war.
I suppose that one could say Hitler's world conquest
was logical....if one accepts the premises that only
Aryan lives matter, & that a Nazi world would be best.
Was his method, ie, violent conquest & pogroms,
"reasonable"? I think most of us would say no.

It was heartless and short sighted, and also in hindsight it was scientifically unsound. At the time it was all kinds of reasonable. He was an insane man who was put into power to be evil figurehead to accomplish something that many people thought was reasonable. They wanted a fighter, and he was one. With a little luck they could have won, and then only after decades of their euthanasia experiment might people have realized the problems with euthanasia and with genetic purity. They lost, and the world was free to realize much sooner how stupid it was. Germany made too many enemies and also had some bad luck, but they made a very strong effort and nearly succeeded in their (what they thought of as a) righteous crusade which we only now realize is evil, now that we know euthanasia and purification are failed ideas.

Killing is of course evil, but even in modern times many consider it a necessary evil. Even today many people believe in conquering potential threats before they can become real threats. Just look at Russia and its attempt to strengthen its borders, anticipating threats centuries in advance. Are you going to tell me that it isn't forward thinking?

But for the allies to wage war against Hitler assumes
more reasonable premises, ie, Nazi rule is abominable,
violent resistance is worthwhile.

Are you thinking that you would have known better? Do you already know what will be considered abominable fifty years from now?

 

[Revoltingest]

It was heartless and short sighted, and also in hindsight it was scientifically unsound. At the time it was all kinds of reasonable. He was an insane man who was put into power to be evil figurehead to accomplish something that many people thought was reasonable.

He wasn't insane.
Just ambitious, & willing to kill many in conquest.

They wanted a fighter, and he was one. With a little luck they could have won, and then only after decades of their euthanasia experiment might people have realized the problems with euthanasia and with genetic purity. They lost, and the world was free to realize much sooner how stupid it was. Germany made too many enemies and also had some bad luck, but they made a very strong effort and nearly succeeded in their (what they thought of as a) righteous crusade which we only now realize is evil, now that we know euthanasia and purification are failed ideas.

Killing is of course evil, but even in modern times many consider it a necessary evil.

It all depends upon perspective, & the who + why.

Even today many people believe in conquering potential threats before they can become real threats. Just look at Russia and its attempt to strengthen its borders, anticipating threats centuries in advance. Are you going to tell me that it isn't forward thinking?

I view Russia's conquest as Putin's desire to
expand his empire, & impose his personal morality.
It doesn't appear rational because the risks exceed
the benefits. Tis short-sighted, not forward thinking.

 

[Stevicus]

Those are dubious terms to describe motives for war.
I suppose that one could say Hitler's world conquest
was logical....if one accepts the premises that only
Aryan lives matter, & that a Nazi world would be best.
Was his method, ie, violent conquest & pogroms,
"reasonable"? I think most of us would say no.

But for the allies to wage war against Hitler assumes
more reasonable premises, ie, Nazi rule is abominable,
violent resistance is worthwhile.

It's easy to say that now, due to 20/20 hindsight, but one could look at the same situation and the same set of facts and conclude that there was a profound lack of vigilance on the Allies' part which allowed the Nazi menace to become as powerful and devastating as it did. That's what seems to drive the thinking of policymakers and warmongers of today, because the Allies were ostensibly caught with their pants down and suffered early defeats before they could turn it around and achieve victory. We didn't want to be caught in such peril again, so that's why we adopted a global interventionist policy of Containment.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's easy to say that now, due to 20/20 hindsight, but one could look at the same situation and the same set of facts and conclude that there was a profound lack of vigilance on the Allies' part which allowed the Nazi menace to become as powerful and devastating as it did. That's what seems to drive the thinking of policymakers and warmongers of today, because the Allies were ostensibly caught with their pants down and suffered early defeats before they could turn it around and achieve victory. We didn't want to be caught in such peril again, so that's why we adopted a global interventionist policy of Containment.

No need to quibble over how soon & in what detailed
manner allies should've responded to Hitler. What's
relevant here is that going to war against the Nazis
was most reasonable by commonly accepted standards.

 

[Stevicus]

No need to quibble over how soon & in what detailed
manner allies should've responded to Hitler. What's
relevant here is that going to war against the Nazis
was most reasonable by commonly accepted standards.

Of course. After all, they declared war on us.

 

[John53]

I wonder how those who were forced labour on the Thai-Burma railway would feel about this.

 

[JIMMY12345]

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-japan-doubling-down-its-military-power

I hope everyone realizes how important this development is. I don't blame them one bit given their strategic situation, and that is unfortunate. China and N Korea have some they are doing to stimulate fear. They are responding. Itch leads to scratch.

I think war happens because it is logical and reasonable. The best thing is to make it as unreasonable as possible. If that fails, make an emotional and illogical appeal.

Part of the problem is we think short term. In the next 100 years devils and saints will emerge in different countries from now. Democracy is one defence.

 

[JIMMY12345]

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-japan-doubling-down-its-military-power

I hope everyone realizes how important this development is. I don't blame them one bit given their strategic situation, and that is unfortunate. China and N Korea have some they are doing to stimulate fear. They are responding. Itch leads to scratch.

I think war happens because it is logical and reasonable. The best thing is to make it as unreasonable as possible. If that fails, make an emotional and illogical appeal.

Its why Germany and Japan won the economic war.While the rest put 2-3 % GDP into building tanks and fighter planes.They spent it on building BMW,VW and Lexus.Which is why at least Germany is richer than everyone else.