Could the JSDF: 1) Successfully repel a Chinese invasion or

As in no outside help?
Lol, no.
I'd be surprised if the aging japanese population would even fight, they'd probably all just let China roll in whole whatever JDSF forces get pummeled.

>>31190674
Yes. Because >>>/gif/9195904
Chinks tend to commit unintentional sudoku more than Japs.

No
Fuck no
Thats not the plan though, if china tries anything funny then the US will be there to tag team them. Thats literally the point of Anpo joyaku

>>31190674

The chinese would just drop a few nukes on strategic locations like military bases and naval bases then the japs would just surrender just like last time.

>>31190702
I am sure with 1.3+ billion people, they could stand to lose half and still steamroll Japan in current day status.

>possibly
>no way

China has no way to get a land army large enough ashore to take Japan. They could go the whole flatten Japan with ballistic missiles approach but something so maelific would undoubtably provoke an international response.
China has the capability to steamroll Japan simply by Hiroshima Nagasaki'ing the fuck out of them with non nuclear munitions but what would they gain by flattening Japan?

>>31190710
0.5 yuans were deposited into your account.

>>31190714
I'm sure those rice farming peasants that get shit on by the Chinese government would be high morale, effective troops

>>31190674
Japan would be able to hold them off until US reinforcements arrived.

There are a couple of reasons why
>most of China's personnel are not even trained to fight just trained to be loyal to the party
>none of the military branches cooperate with each other
>China quality anything is normally shit
>the military doesn't serve the country but their party
They wouldn't be competent enough for a full on invasion even if it was planned out.

>>31190710
The US would just drop a few nukes on stratigic locations like military bases, naval bases and dams then the chinks would just surrender, much like their entire history with war with westerners

>>31190762

China has 300 nukes so if USA nukes china then 300 of american largest cities will be vaporised.

I don't know why you are so mad, though. It's as if you had attached your identity to the USA-Japan military alliance and feel personally offended when somebody says something you don't like about them.

top lol

>>31190770
>get BTFO
>y-you're mad
lmao, yeah, nah cunt

>>31190724
Well the "fight or we kill your whole family" tactic has prooven itself more than enough.

Sorry for bad english, yugoslavijanac here

>>31190772

stay angry kid

File: 1462745179104.gif (2MB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x225px

>>31190770
>300 nukes means 300 nukes are ready and prep'd for launch

I'm afraid you have no idea how readiness works.

>>31190708
this isn't there like some bill or policy usa has that if certain countries decide to go to war usa automaitcly also enters it

also usa's been itching for a war with chinna for years now

>>31190796
Even 10 cities being nuked would make defending Japan be very unprofitable for the US.

>inb4 muh missile shields and raids on launch sites prevent every single warhead

>>31190807
China launches one nuke and it's gone. China's nuclear delivery capability is nowhere near USA's. UK and France would probably lob a few nukes into China as well.

You and I both know China is well aware it wouldn't win the nuke lobbing battle.

>>31190720
>JSDF shill detected

>>31190823
>implying you can actually pull off an opposed landing in this day and age

>>31190824
why couldn't you?

>>31190819
Of course, going nuclear would be the worst option for both sides. It just seems stupid to me to underestimate the nuclear capabilities of lesser armies.

>>31190819

>win the nuke lobbing battle.
>nuke lobbing battle
>win

idiot

>>31190830
To call the US advantage in nuclear warfare vs China as "Shockingly Overwhelming" is not underestimating Chinese nuclear capability.

>>31190832
First country to get completed annihilated loses.

Too much for your feeble mind to comprehend?

>>31190807
I don't think you understand how nuclear war with the US works.

We would have ample time to shoot down any icbms and our huge fucking navy is constantly following China's nuclear attack subs

File: 1471698307376.png (603KB, 657x573px) Image search: [Google]

603KB, 657x573px

>>31190830
No one is underestimating China's capability. But it's "capability" is overshadowed that the US has been ready and able to wipe Russia off the map for the past 60 years and that can easily be transferred to China. China has nowhere near the nuclear readiness the USA does, not even close.

>>31190829
Computer controlled self propelled artillery, massive airpower with infinite loiter times, the Abrams tank

File: 1471420602232s.jpg (7KB, 243x240px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 243x240px

>>31190853
Air superiority, jamming systems and close air support prior to landing.

I assume you are going to be a potato and pretend advancement in technology can't be applied to the opposing force.

The PLAN is not capable of forcing a hostile landing on Japan. Key weaknesses are insufficient landing craft and logistics to sustain a major invasion, insufficient air defence (from AA destroyers and active aircraft carriers), and insufficient ASW capabilities to counter the threat of the large Japanese SSK fleet.

The only plausible war is a Falklands-style occupation of the the Senkaku islands. Japan would be unable to force China off the islands militarily, so they would de facto pass into Chinese control (like Crimea, but without a local population).

>>31190859
The US and Japan would have air superiority in a Chinese invasion of japan.

I'm assuming you are going to be a potato and forget that the defenders have the advantage.

Not to mention that the US is technologically, tactically, and logistically superior to China.

>>31190840
What would actually happen oppenheimer?

Would the west just shoot down all the planes and icbms transit and sink all their subs while nuking the fuck out of them?

They can't win by themselves, but they can stall long enough for America and South Korea to come to the rescue.

And that's all they really need to do.

File: 1452434882975.jpg (241KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 600x600px

>>31190876
Well first, it was just stationed JSDF vs China, not USA and JSDF. Potato alert 1

Next, you claim defender in air war have advantage. If the enemy is already at your door and attacking you with air power, you are at a disadvantage. Air superiority isn't like a land invasion where numbers necessarily matter. Potato alert 2.

Finally, you continue to argue that USA is so much better than China, when the question was about the JSDF. Potato alert 3.

Congrats on full potato.

>>31190724
They're not people. They're robots. Hell yeah they'd be effective. Look at every other Chinese war ever.

>>31190907
America is already in Japan it's likely that the first forces to meet an attack would be US forces. They would detect any kind of air or naval advance

>>31190848
>But it's "capability" is overshadowed that the US has been ready and able to wipe Russia off the map for the past 60 years
And Russia could do the same to US- MAD FTW
>>31190674
>1) Successfully repel a Chinese invasion or serious attack meant to cripple Japan?
Um, yeah. The Japanese only have like the biggest and most capable navy in the Pacific right after Russia(nukes make every rustbucket much, much more powerful) and US. With no way to beat the Japanese navy, the Chinese won't be able to set foot on Japanese soil anytime soon.

>2) Successfully counter-attack?
Only until the extent of outright attacks on Chinese soil- the Chinese coast is heavily defended by probably the densest IADS net on the planet outside of several Russian installations, as well as protected by quite a few airbases with hundreds of capable aircraft not to mention the ASM batteries onshore and Kilos traipsing near the coast as well.

>>31190911
You really think they wouldnt detect Chinese planes flying across to ocean in mass to attack Japan?

File: 1453011606542.jpg (69KB, 395x450px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 395x450px

>>31190926
>And Russia could do the same to US- MAD FTW
Yes, but the subject is about China you half-wit.

File: 1462030110867s.jpg (7KB, 250x156px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 250x156px

>>31190930
China is very close to Japan. China is separated from Japan by Ocean. You can fly very low to the Ocean and avoid radar very easily.

What's so hard to understand?

File: 1472756357870.jpg (125KB, 1375x749px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1375x749px

>>31190770
>300 nukes...
...Would be shot down in the china sea by a floatila of freedom while virginia subs prepare to rape the Chinese coastline.

>>31190905
>What would actually happen oppenheimer?
Lots of variables and you can create a scenario where anything is possible if you want.

The issue is the Chinese level of readiness.
In a crisis, the US would be watching very closely the Chinese nuclear forces readiness.

So look at this situation as two separate, but related events. They are independent of each other, but can effect the outcome of the other.

You have the Conventional Crisis. This can take any form and the details of it are largely unimportant.

Then you have the alert level of nuclear forces.

So if its early on in the crisis, and one side or another starts increasing its nuclear alert level, that can in turn increase the intensity of the conventional crisis (one side might step up the tempo of operations to force a conclusion before thinks get to radioactive).

However, if its later in the crisis, increasing alert levels can actually initiate the very nuclear exchange you want to avoid (presumably). If one side sees the other increasing nuclear forces alert levels late in the conventional crisis, this can be interpreted as a last resort to end the conflict on favorable terms. At this point the other side may chose to execute a preemptive strike to stop what they perceive as the imminent use of nuclear weapons by the other side.

Here is how this effects the US and China issue. China's existing nuclear posture is so low in terms of readiness, that any increase during a crisis is likely to spur the US into a preemptive strike. The later in the crisis this increase happens the likelihood of US first strike increases.

On the flip side, US nuclear forces are already at a much higher state of readiness than Chinese forces. Combine this with China's limited strategic early warning capability and you find that, from a standing start, the US can execute almost any strike on China.
The US doesnt need to increase its alert level in a manner that would be... CONT

>>31190943
It's like a thousand miles. further if you are flying from any actual base to any actual target. The east china sea is also filled with ships. They aren't going to just sneak and invasion up to japan without them having time to intercept

>>31190963
...noticeable to the Chinese.

So if the US and China are locked in a crisis, and China starts to raise its alert level, it would be advantageous to strike first while you can inflict maximum damage to the Chinese nuclear forces.

Waiting only decreases the ability to attrit those nuclear forces before they are launched.

So China can attempt to attack with no increase in readiness. This has problems as well. While US ABM capabilities are pretty limited, the dozen or so missiles that China could launch from a standing start is within the capabilities for the US to stop all or most.
Combine this with the unknown reliability of Chinese delivery systems and warheads, and China might not even hit anything.

On the flip side, the US would have little to no issues hitting Chinese nuclear forces and command and control infrastructure, even from its current state of readiness.

>>31190963
>>31190991
So we already have a rifle pointed at their head and they have a knife in the glovebox.

>>31191012
Well, the blade in the glove box. The handle is locked in the trunk.
In another car.
Parked across town.

>>31190991
Couldn't the chinese increase their readiness prior to actual hostilities? So that they would have their nuclear forces as a deterrence and have the first launch option without having to bump the readiness in midst of conflict which can be interpreted in many ways? This would of course obviously signal that they are intending to something major in the region which would prompt a response of its own.

Quick wiki check tells me that the Chinese rely a lot on road mobile ICBMs, does it take days or weeks to get them from sitting in storage to launch ready?

>>31191029

This is about the warheads not being paired with the missiles, right?

>>31191036
>Couldn't the chinese increase their readiness prior to actual hostilities?
Sure, but if you are the US you know somethings up, so you raise your nuclear and conventional forces alert levels and now whatever the Chinese were planning is even harder because they have surrendered strategic suprise to the US.

Road Mobile systems are Chinas most capable but you can deal with them in mutiple ways. You can hit their garrisons, destroying the non deployed systems. You can hit their launch sites limiting them to ad hoc launches with limits the missiles accuracy. You can also hit the Chinese command and control so that release authorization never arrives to the systems.

>>31191037
It was hyperbole but yes.

>>31191091
Thanks for making this thread interesting

>>31190991
>>31190963

>this much delusion

How exactly would the US know when China is about to use its nukes. They don't report on CNN.

> the dozen or so missiles that China could launch from a standing start is within the capabilities for the US to stop all or most.

There have been no technology that is proven to stop ICBM in its terminal stage.

>namefag acting like he's an expert

File: Japanese-army-soldier-size0-army.mil-91238-2010-11-08-081129.jpg (34KB, 640x425px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 640x425px

>>31190674
Assuming US offers no assistance (as absurd as that is) + no nukes.

China would eventually, and comprehensively destroy Japan.

1. China is much larger in terms of potential industrial capacity/population/resource production
2. Japan is precariously dependent on imports for everything (through routes very vulnerable to Chinese interference), and does not have enough of a naval advantage to protect all or enough that shipping to continue a viable war effort.

It wouldn't be a lightening strike, rather it would likely be a protracted affair, but it seems doubtful that Japan in its current state could bear the weight of China coming down on it (plus China are gagging for a crack at the Japs for obvious reasons).

>>31191179

Japan can resupply via shipping from the US via the pacific

>>31191165

>all of this dumb

Wew

>>31191203

>le shitpostnig

>>31191165
>How exactly would the US know when China is about to use its nukes.
Increased activity around nuclear weapons storage facilities, increased signal traffic between nuclear command and control facilities, national technical means.


>There have been no technology that is proven to stop ICBM in its terminal stage.
I wasnt talking about terminal interception.

>>31191199
>Assuming US offers no assistance
Was the premise I was working from.

Obviously, in reality Japan relies on the US almost entirely for defence, and as long as they are there the Chinese won't try anything on.

But if we pit Japan and China in isolation against one another, China wins.

>>31191232
>Increased activity around nuclear weapons storage facilities,

easily hidden

>increased signal traffic between nuclear command and control facilities

not detectable

>I wasnt talking about terminal interception.

then what are you talking about?

>>31191240
>>Assuming US offers no assistance

its not assistance when you get paid.

derp

>>31191252
>aiding the war effort of a nation
>ensuring their continued survival and sovereignty
>not assistance

>>31191243
>easily hidden
Indeed. How?

>not detectable

Lol.

>then what are you talking about?
Mid course defense.

>>31190807

Here's the problem: the Chinese view their entire military as a political tool. In fact, the PLA is not actually a national military, it is an armed extension of the Communist Party. This includes nukes.

Their warheads are stored in seperate underground facilities from the launchers, and preparing for an exchange is extremely noticeable from a well developed country.

China maintains a minimum-deterrence doctrine as well as a very strict no first-use policy, their nuclear weapons are essentially locked away under guard in seperate pieces at the lowest possible readiness. In order for them to be used, they must assemble the warheads, ship them to the launchers, fuel the launchers, mobilize the launchers, and fire. Most of these actions take an act of only the highest levels of the Party, and all of them are highly detectable by the US, and any one of them could lead to a decapitation strike. If a US decapitation strike is successful in eliminating most warheads, launch vehicles, or severing the chain of command, the missiles will not be launched, and without a nuclear deterrent in a war where the nuclear seal has been broken, they lose, and if they don't surrender outright, the international response will be swift and brutal, because now you have a nation with active nuclear weapons in a deteriorating strategic position with little to no military or political leadership. Even enimies of America will help them end the war to prevent loose nukes. The best way for China to survive is to take its licks, lose its navy, and agree to a ceasefire.

>>31190770
Literally any country that intiates a nuclear war with the USA will be signing it's own death warrant, if there's one thing America is undisputed on, it nuclear capabilities,

A single Chinese nuke hits the US anywhere, you will see a country with a population of 1 billion become non-existant. The Chinese would never nuke America without extreme and intense provocation, and even then, the chances are still slim.

>>31191259

>Japan buy stuff from you
>you deliver stuff to them
>assistance

read a book you idiot

>>31191268
>Indeed. How?

How do you plan to detect it?

>Mid course defense.

lol

>>31191286

>still talking shit

He does this for a living, I think you should stop.

>>31191286
>How do you plan to detect it?
Magic.

>lol
Ah. I see whats going on now. Proceed with your trolling.

>>31191303

>namefag with zero self-awareness

kek

>>31191317

>[shitty greentext]

[Meme]

File: 5191591.jpg (205KB, 600x712px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 600x712px

They could withstand a sudden attack overseas, sure. A prolonged siege would end them.

...until they release their hidden weapons. You see, Japan has spent decades developing super soldier technology and modifying fetuses. They have several thousand teenagers with the ability to fight ghosts, angels, demons, mutants, corrupt governments, and other teenagers using apocalyptic levels of force. After the world is leveled they also have been embedded with the capability of rapidly and efficiently reproducing using a combination of software and polygamy. The unfortunate side effect is every 1 in 10 you get a crazy girl that murders half the group, but losses are acceptable.

File: plastic-baby-high-chair.jpg (33KB, 328x367px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 328x367px

>>31191317

>dont know Oppenheimer

welcome my newfriend, please take a sit

File: chinese-girl-skeptical-face.jpg (45KB, 479x435px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 479x435px

>>31191323

>namefag's pet

>>31191273
The Chinese wouldn't be the first to attack, and the US would be publically shaming themselves if they wiped out around an eighth of the world's population.

Anywho, China would cripple Japan in a batlle, assuming that Japan only has assistance from current US forces stationed in Japan. The US helping Japan any more than that is off-topic.

File: 131745012_161n.jpg (243KB, 900x714px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 900x714px

>>31191354

>[shitty greentext]

[Meme]

>>31190674
No.

Japan simply does not have the power to repel a full on naval/air/land attack from China.

>>31191317
Just in case you arent trolling and would like to learn here.


Anyone else that would like a modern take on Chinese nuclear capabilities as well as how a nation goes about determining things like arsenal sizes, CEP, and other capabilities, this is a good book.

https://www.iiss.org/en/publications/adelphi/by%20year/2014-de9e/paper-tigers--china-s-nuclear-posture-371a

>>31191353

>implying I don't

>>31191286
>>31191317
>>31191354
You're trying to hard there, buddy.

Now go and stay go. Adults are talking.

>>31191361

>off topic

Current US and US-friendly forces in the Pacific are more than enough to shit on the PLAN.

>>31191372
Are you the guy that keeps turning up and getting owned by Oppen?

>>31191367
>iiss.org

>>31191275
In this scenario, by selling to Japan the US would literally be assisting in the Japanese war effort.

>>31191269
Hey, are you the foreign relations dude from previous threads?

>>31191361
If it comes to nuclear war, shame won't matter much. Not to mention, if the US resorts to nukes they're probably not going to be too worried about repercussions.

>>31191387

So when China buys some ore from zimbabwe is zimbabwe assisting china in the war effort?

with such retarded definition any meaningful discussion is not possible

kys

>>31191386
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Lewis_(academic)

Yeah this guy has no idea what hes talking about. Clearly.

File: 1472554063829.jpg (80KB, 445x720px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 445x720px

>>31191397

Depends, am I going to get doxxed again like /new/?

If no then I am, if I am getting doxxed then fuck off I've no idea what you're talking about.

>>31190674
>1) Successfully repel a Chinese invasion or serious attack meant to cripple Japan?

They could definitely prevent a landing. Japan has extensive land-based mobile anti-ship and anti-landing craft missiles. China would take far too much attrition in the act of moving troops to shore to have enough left to control the island.

>>31190935
China vs. Japan, exactly.

Why in a realistic scenario, the US would certainly get involved, but this isn't about the US.

>The subject is about China you half-wit.

>>31191399
>So when China buys some ore from zimbabwe is zimbabwe assisting china in the war effort
In a war situation of course it is, that's why embargoes are a thing.

>>31191398
I doub't they would want to be known publically as something worse than Hitler.

>>31191380
Not realated. Thisnisnstrictly about China and Japan, not their allies. You realize that you're trying to bring friends to a 1v1 fight, right?

>>31190770
>300 nukes
>300 of american largest cities will be vaporised

You don't really get nuclear strategy, do you?

File: burn-heal.jpg (432KB, 600x776px) Image search: [Google]

432KB, 600x776px

>>31190762

>>31191472
You're failing to realize that if it comes to nuclear war, no one is going to give a fuck about anything that isn't themselves.

>>31191491
>hurr durr
>hurr durr durr

you don't understand basic logic, do you?

>>31190922
>Hell yeah they'd be effective. Look at every other Chinese war ever.

Uhhhh, anon....I dont think that will make the point you are trying to make.

>>31191480
This thread is to the point where it's mostly shitposting, but if we're cutting off one side from aid/supply/trade shouldn't we be cutting off the other side? I don't know what shape China would be in if all their trade ceased.

>>31191165
>namefag acting like he's an expert

Oppenheimer is actually a nuclear expert though. Is this your first day here?

>Japan's military is built around the presence of the US military
>hey guize if you nutpunch Japan's military structure and don't give them time to reform/rebuild could they hold off a serious Chinese invasion

>>31191571

>implying you can tell if somebody is an expert in nuclear technology

>>31191587

He posted his credentials, you fucking worthless newfag shill.

Lurkmore, like the other shills.

>>31191594
No. He was doxxed. He didnt post his shit

>>31191614

He was doxxed due to his posted credentials.

That was just pure confirmation.

>>31191614
he prob fake 'doxxed' himself. it's something a namefag would do

>>31191522
if that is true, it would be a civil war, and not one with us, japan, china.

>>31191622
>(You)

Lots of chicoms here.

>>31191643
>>>/pol/

dont forget your tinfoil

>>31191646
Odd how all these dumbasses appear the moment he shits on china, and at no other time.

BAH, most likely the strong, working, patriotic people of china, who do it for free!

File: laughing-nazi.jpg (76KB, 750x390px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 750x390px

>>31191660

As opposed to the mindless american internet defense force that operates 24/7?

>>31190807
10 cities being nuked means the US civilian population would not be satisfied with anything less than a parking lot from Vietnam to Russia.

>>31191675
Exactly anon, im glad you get my point.

>>31191622
Do you know the difference between a namefag and a tripfag? Just asking.

>>31191704

No, he is a worthless newfuck.

>>31191704

do you?

>>31191718

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k0SmqbBIpQ

The whole video anon.

>>31191660
To be fair he didnt shit on China. He just explained what they were capable of.
The Chinafags just cant deal with it.

>here is a loaf of bread
>cool im going to use it as a shovel to dig a hole
>you cant use it like a shovel because its not designed to be used like a shovel
>YOU FUCKING FAG THAT BREAD CAN DIG THE PANAMA CANAL IF I SAY SO

>>31191728

Why don't you?

File: ITS TIME TO STOP.jpg (98KB, 1193x354px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1193x354px

>>31191747
>

File: ITS TIME TO STOP.jpg (84KB, 1055x353px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 1055x353px

>>31191763
>>31191763

ENHANCE

File: ITS TIME TO STOP.jpg (81KB, 1055x353px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1055x353px

>>31191771
>>31191771

ENHANCE

File: ITS TIME TO STOP.jpg (82KB, 1055x353px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1055x353px

>>31191771
>>31191771

ENHANCE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiqkclCJsZs

File: ITS TIME TO STOP.jpg (77KB, 1055x353px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 1055x353px

>>31191784
>>31191784

ENHANCE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhF_56SxrGk

>>31190674
Without the US China would fuck Japan up, Nanjing style.

But as long as the burgers stay where they are China will restrict itself to chest beating and willy waving.

Only if the weather is on their side

>>31190747
>none of the military branches cooperate with each other
>China literally created a JCS-style command a bunch of decades ago during the Great Chinese Post-Gulf War Copypasta of US Command & Control.

>>31191367

Why doesn't China upgrade their nuclear arsenal to provide a credible MAD deterrence?

Hard to believe that a nation so butthurt about getting its ass kicked repeatedly over the past few centuries, and so intent on building up its conventional military, would leave itself so open to a decapitating first strike.

>>31192006
Because an enterpriseing general decided that he should be the nuke king, and almost did it.

Now the goverment keeps the warheads far as fuck from the actual missles, behind lock and key and miles of commie red tape.

>>31191179
your logic actually says Japan would win, not China.

>1. China is much larger in terms of potential industrial capacity/population/resource production
2. Japan is precariously dependent on imports for everything (through routes very vulnerable to Chinese interference), and does not have enough of a naval advantage to protect all or enough that shipping to continue a viable war effort.

Remember China is really one big island. It gets 98% of its GDP from oceanic trade. Hence Japan just needs to disrupt the ships getting to China through various straits and chokepoints, whereas China has to protect their own lanes and then somehow camp the entirety of the western pacific ocean, where there are no chokepoints. Hence, China will experience a greater disruption in their import export, which will cause a dramatic reduction on their manufacturing capability. Japan probably ends up winning this because having more people is a liability when trade is cutoff.

Further, what naval combat experience do Chinese leaders have? What doctrinal advances have they made in naval warfare? Machine-gunning unarmed Vietnamese soldiers does not count. Then Look at Japan, which has worked closely with the USN, and has built a doctrine that will work quite well in war. Quantity may be on China's side, but if you don't know what your doing you will run into the same problem the russians did at Tsushima.

Also, when was the last time China successfully invaded Japan?

>>31190674
Think of this in dick standards
China is black, it has a huge dick and doesn't need to be that hard to get the ladies
Jsdf is an Asian dick. It can be diamond hard, but it'll always be laughable.

>>31191952
underrated

>>31192047
Japan is significantly more dependent on imports for even basic functioning, and even slight interference would wreak havoc. China does have other options which Japan does not, if shipping lanes are threatened.

China has a large number of submarines, intended for just this reason, I'm not sure how effectively they could be used, but the same goes for Japanese Navy in this regard (without the US holding its hand).

>>31190674
This >>31190747, partially because the USN 7th fleet is already in Yoko plus several other US mil large assets and bases in country. When you add the 7th fleet alone to what the Japanese already possess plus the half dozen SSNs always in the area, you've got a very nice wall holding the line until the rest of the big swinging dick gets there.

>>31190770
>China has 300 nukes so if USA nukes china then 300 of american largest cities will be vaporised.
And how many launch vehicles capable of reaching anything but the US west coast? Oh, right...

>>31190674
1) Probably yes

2) Probably no

>>31190911
>Well first, it was just stationed JSDF vs China, not USA and JSDF. Potato alert 1
Again, they can't be separated. At the very least, you have to posit the JSDF plus the USN 7th fleet, some Marine forces and a significant USAF force level all based in Japan.

>>31190747
>They wouldn't be competent enough for a full on invasion even if it was planned out
That's a lot of assumption, dangerously close to underestimating.

We haven't seen much action from the PLA over the years, but it would be rash to write them off.

>>31190943
As of yet you can't fly under the water, which is about the lowest altitude radar can work at, at Sea. Secondly, your fuel efficiency will be the absolute worst at sea level, where the air density and humidity is the highest.

>>31191763
>>31191771
>>31191777
>>31191784
>>31191797
Fucking kek

File: 027.jpg (39KB, 640x512px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 640x512px

>>31192040
>Because an enterpriseing general decided that he should be the nuke king, and almost did it.
Story? Would love to know more.

>>31190710
t. ching

>>31193581
While you are right in conclusion (air forces are not getting through that naval screen easily) your reasoning is a little off.

Remember that the earth is curved, so the radar horizon for surface vessels is actually very close in radar range terms. This is why we need AWACS/naval patrol craft operating with naval forces.

>>31190911
0.5 Yuans have been subtracted from your account.

>>31191269
Whats your sauce on this? Just wondering because it's utterly fascinating if it is the case.

>>31190674

No and no, but invade Japan and you win a free visit from the USA

>>31193729
>but invade Japan and you win a free visit from the USA
Invading Japan is already invading the US, considering how many assets the US already has in country. See >>31193259.

>>31190770
>China lunches 300 nukes in surprise attack
>1/4 of them explode on their launchpads
>1/2 crash into the sea or are intercepted
>remaining 1/4 lack the range to reach past the west coast into the American heartland
>Commiefornia is wiped off the map
>China gets raped by NATO
>nothing of value is lost
>world is now a significantly better place

>>31193796
Forgot one thing
>New California Republic rises out of the blasted landsacape.

孙子说的“避其锐气, 击其惰归”

All great powers fall eventually, America cannot last forever, China will be master of the East again in time.

Time is on China's side.

>>31192040
>Because an enterpriseing general decided that he should be the nuke king, and almost did it.

Dont forget Mao's nephew too...

>>31193907
1st world living will eventually destroy them too. No nation can be censored like they are before some elements start to fuck shit up en mass because they see the rest of the world NOT living in a smog-filled cramped metropolis.

>>31190724
Anon, the last time we faced Chinese troops they would charge our machine gun nests in droves, some with bayonets taped to sticks just to waste our bullets.

However, 50 years have passed, so maybe they've cooled down.

>>31193966
China will not develop into a plural democracy, it may have the trappings of a developed Western nation, but the cultural background does not lend itself to the political system of European style countries.

>>31190841
Nobody wins a nuclear war. Is that too much for YOUR feeble mind to comprehend?

>>31192040
>enterpriseing general decided that he should be the nuke king
Wait what?
Who and how. Give me details.

>>31194088
What do you call "winning"

>>31190807
Depends on which cities

LA
New York
Detroit
San Fran
Chicago

No great loss.

>>31194066
It's not the political system that causes a collapse. China experienced untold amounts of rising and falling dynasties, empires and warlords.

>>31193986
>However, 50 years have passed, so maybe they've cooled down.
Those were men who had either been fighting the Japanese or each other for nigh on 20 years. Hard, hard and experienced men.

China has nothing like that generation in their military anymore.

Oppenheimer & """""friends""""" actually think shitposting increase muh """""credibility"""""?
I don't think most Japs think they can repel a Chink invasion.

>muh 7th fleet
It's going to be Falkland pt 2.
Except the Chinks aren't Argentinian-tier.

>>31195552

I know you are baiting, but being 1984-Argentinian isn't an insult. They were very well equipped and what little professional forces they had, were very well trained.

File: get a load of this retard.jpg (431KB, 2544x2370px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 2544x2370px

>>31194088
>Nobody wins a nuclear war

>>31190770
>China has 300 nukes

Compared to our 6000 and 2000 on standby? That's doesn't include putins stash across the pond which is another 5000 nukes and 2500 on standby (numbers my vary slightly)

China would shit their sideways ass cracks.

>>31190674
What most people don't account for is the fact that Chinese cannot fight, as shown by every engagement they've been in in the past 200 years. They are mudslime with a gun tiers of operator.
I'd say sure for repel.

>>31190747
t. 2005 poster

>>31195683
Not insulting Argentinians at all.
But China would be 10X more effective than the force that ALMOST BTFO UK..

>>31191269
[citation needed]

>>31196236

Certainly does seem that way.

>But China would be 10X more effective than the force that ALMOST BTFO UK..

proofs

>>31191269
[citation needed] >>31192040
>Now the goverment keeps the warheads far as fuck from the actual missles, behind lock and key and miles of commie tape
[citation needed]

>>31196260
>>31196312

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=NZsfBgAAQBAJ&lpg=PA146&ots=unPF9KxxNJ&dq=China%20nuclear%20take%20over%20%20Mao's%20nephew&pg=PA146#v=onepage&q=China%20nuclear%20take%20over%20%20Mao's%20nephew&f=false

>>31196366
for
>>31196252
>>31196312

>>31196252
>>31196312
go back to /his/ you autistic fuckstain

File: PRC nuclear operations.png (170KB, 1451x1087px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1451x1087px

>>31196312
>China appears to continue to store nuclear warheads separately from ballistic missiles during peacetime. A description of a mobile missile launched in the Gobi desert – likely at the Da Qaidam training area – describes the unit mating the RV to the missile on the fifth day of the exercise, following manoeuvres in the field, then erecting and launching the missile, though it would seem more typical for units to mate warheads before deployment.


>The vulnerability of the Second Artillery is exacerbated by the policy of riding out a first strike, as well as the long times associated with moving units into launch areas and arming missiles with nuclear warheads. China’s apparent solution to this problem is to put their forces on alert in a crisis situation, both to reduce their vulnerability and to signal China’s resolve to an adversary. As the next chapter will explore, this approach runs some risk of escalating a crisis, particularly if Washington or Moscow misinterprets alert operations as the early stages of an attack.

>>31195552
>>muh 7th fleet
>It's going to be Falkland pt 2.
>Except the Chinks aren't Argentinian-tier.
And conversely, the US isn't Britain in 1982-tier (no offense to the bongs ofc, they exceeded everyone's expectations of them there). The Falklands in 1982 was a complete backwater with a few squads stationed, and required a task force to sail halfway around the world to retake it. Japan is a lot more akin to the Falklands now which is packed with Brits that would stop another invasion dead in its tracks in case the argies got froggy again. And the US has plenty of assets already in the area and is capable of projecting a hell of a lot more power.

>>31196260
>proofs

counter proofs

>>31191273
Doubt the US would glass all of China, even if it could.

1. It would be unwise to waste all your toys on one current foe, leaving none/little left to deter the other arseholes on the block (insert others here).

2. Killing half a billion peasants would seal the US' fate as inhuman for several generations, and is unnecessary. Those half billion peasants are a liability that need to be controlled by the party, and city folk. Waste the strategic targets, undoubtedly wasting several important cities in the process, and the peons will revolt in the ensuing power vacuum.

Point 2 leads to victory. That said, social collapse in the US after the coons lose their HBO would be fairly similar.

/shitposting Ausfag.

>>31191363
Would root. Proceed. I wasn't reading what you wrote.

>>31196422
Link needed.

>>31196366
That's literally not what I greentexted.

>>31196375
Kill yourself faggot. You are all making unsourced claims.

>>31196422
This looks outdated. The Chinese have modernized their nuclear/rocket forces immensely in the last decade.

>>31196791
>This looks outdated. The Chinese have modernized their nuclear/rocket forces immensely in the last decade.
Feel free to provide a counter source that the CCP leadership has suddenly changed their operational stance on nuclear weapons deployment and storage some time in the last few years.

>>31196772
Fuck off you little sinoboo shit.

>>31196536
>And the US has plenty of assets already in the area and is capable of projecting a hell of a lot more power.

The tone of your posting is already one of resignation "plenty" is likely insufficient and that more power is likely necessary.
IOW, you implicitly conceded that China has a tangible advantage...thanks for agreeing with my assessment.

>and required a task force to sail halfway around the world to retake it.
Hawaii seems like a good sail from Japan.

>>31190770
This would mean Chinas 5,000 year old civilization would forever remain 5,000 years old.

And I'm saying that as a Chinese.

>>31191675
Its not really an american defense force when almost everyone formally recognizes American supremacy.

>>31196855
>The tone of your posting is already one of resignation "plenty" is likely insufficient and that more power is likely necessary.
That's not what I was insinuating at all, but if that's what you want to take away from it than whatever. What I meant was that the only reason why Britain had such difficulty in retaking the Falklands was because they had next to nothing there to begin with, and the Argies were able to take the Falklands more or less without a fight initially. That's not going to happen with an attempted invasion of Japan, you're seriously delusional or baiting hard if you can't see this. It's going to be more like the Mongol invasion of Japan, but the divine wind that wrecks China's shit will be the US Navy.

>>31196855
>Hawaii seems like a good sail from Japan.
Nigger, what part of the seventh fleet is already based in Japan don't you get.

>>31196772
>Link needed
Here.
https://www.iiss.org/en/publications/adelphi/by%20year/2014-de9e/paper-tigers--china-s-nuclear-posture-371a

>>31196791
>outdated
2014?

>>31191660
Nah, Oppenheimer more or less has a asshurt flock of various anons he's rekt over the years following him around in most threads now.

>>31197020
>Oppenheimer more or less has a asshurt flock of various anons he's rekt over the years following him around in most threads now.
It is fascinating how education, knowledge and experience attracts viscerally combative attitudes regardless of the content or context of a discussion from those who are threatened by such things.

>>31190770
chicom spotted

>>31196825
>Feel free to provide a counter source that the CCP leadership has suddenly changed their operational stance on nuclear weapons deployment and storage some time in the last few years.

I've seen no sources that say they have such a doctrine. All I have is a screencap of a book from who knows when.

>>31197008
2014 is quite outdated.

Also, I doubt the accuracy of that report. The "Gobi desert test" it cites, is a test shown to the public from earlier in this decade.

How is one public example representative of their entire nuclear doctrine?

http://english.chinamil.com.cn/news-channels/china-military-news/2016-01/01/content_6839967.htm

>>31197069
I've only ever seen him get hostile a total of one time, too. Sometimes I'm impressed by the patience he has to keep sticking around here.

>>31197008
Here is an update

http://carnegieendowment.org/2016/06/30/china-s-nuclear-doctrine-debates-and-evolution-pub-63967

>>31196994
>now the insufficient "plenty of assets" is the "divine wind"

kek

>>31197107
>All I have is a screencap of a book from who knows when.
From 2014.

>>31197107
>2014 is quite outdated.
Indeed.

>>31197131
Is there anything there that contrdicts Jeff Lewis?
I can't seem to find it.

>>31197107
>I've seen no sources that say they have such a doctrine. All I have is a screencap of a book from who knows when.
See >>31197008
>2014

>>31197107
>How is one public example representative of their entire nuclear doctrine?
Because, if you actually look at the source much less read the actual book, you might understand the depth of information, observation and study that goes into such considerations.

>Also, I doubt the accuracy of that report. The "Gobi desert test" it cites, is a test shown to the public from earlier in this decade.
Nuclear forces readiness and operational procedures are one of the highest priority targets of not only intelligence gathering but public sector analysis in game theory. Saying that China could have implemented a sea change in nuclear readiness and operations in two years is like saying Russia could have retired every single Soviet-design SSN and SSBN and replaced them with Yasens and Boreis within the same time period.

Just pants on head retarded all around.

>>31197138
>insufficient
That's just you putting words in my mouth.

>>31197131
>http://carnegieendowment.org/2016/06/30/china-s-nuclear-doctrine-debates-and-evolution-pub-63967

>At first-class warning status, missile forces are fully ready to fire and are either deployed or in combat positions with their support elements, warheads, and fuel, waiting for a launch order

So in anything other than First Class warning status, the missiles do not have their warheads?

Thanks for helping to prove the point.

>>31197127
>I've only ever seen him get hostile a total of one time, too. Sometimes I'm impressed by the patience he has to keep sticking around here.
Hell, first time I ran across him we were having a discussion about the precise definition of "tactical" and "strategic" in different contexts. He politely destroyed my argument while I got more heated by the post and then someone finally gave me a clue as to what he did for a living.

I was embarrassed until I remembered where I was. /k/ is weird like that sometimes. People get emotionally invested in posted concepts for the weirdest reasons.

>>31197164
There have been numerous developments in the Chinese nuclear force ever since January of this year. The new rocket forces are a clear example of this, and the deployment of THAAD has led to an increased alert status of the nuclear forces.

What I'm saying is that I doubt the veracity of the claims of your book. One public example from (I think the Gobi desert video is from 2012) is not representative of the forces in September 2016.

>>31197131
>http://carnegieendowment.org/2016/06/30/china-s-nuclear-doctrine-debates-and-evolution-pub-63967
This literally supports Opp's/Lewis' assessment that any assets not in First Class Alert status are separated physically from their payloads.

What are you doing, fiddy cent?

>>31197215
And could you tell me how many rockets are at first class status today?

>>31197188
>Saying that China could have implemented a sea change in nuclear readiness and operations in two years is like saying Russia could have retired every single Soviet-design SSN and SSBN and replaced them with Yasens and Boreis within the same time period.
*without anyone noticing

Damn, I need sleep.

>>31197208
sure loser

>>31197237
I'm arguing that they keep a number of missiles at first class status, or something approximating it.

Nor everyone who disagrees with you is your boogeyman, Cletus.

>>31197127
>I've only ever seen him get hostile a total of one time
Oh I have gotten heated more than that.

>>31197233
>There have been numerous developments in the Chinese nuclear force ever since January of this year.
Ok. Feel free to provide something that actually contradicts what has been stated here.

>>31197249
None.
The change in alert status requires a warning order from CMC that the enemy use of nuclear weapons is likely.

From your own source:
>Under normal conditions, the missile units are at third-class warning status. At this status, forces train, conduct exercises, and conduct normal maintenance. If the CMC receives a warning that an adversary may use nuclear weapons, the CMC directs units to raise their readiness levels to second-class warning status.

Perhaps you should read your own source.

>>31197215
By the way, thanks for providing a source.

I'm someone who actually appreciates China backing up its policy of no-first-use.

I just wanted some sources for that claim.

>>31197268
>I'm arguing that they keep a number of missiles at first class status, or something approximating it.
You are incorrect.

>>31197268
>I'm arguing that they keep a number of missiles at first class status, or something approximating it.
As they always have at differing alert levels. You're cherry picking out of either complete ignorance of how the system works or stubborn autism.

Either way, when you only have 300 nuclear weapons, a limited number of which can be installed as ICBM/SLBM payloads, ANY number of them being regularly physically detached from their primary delivery vehicle is just silly when game planning against an adversary with an order of magnitude more weapons and delivery vehicles. Especially when that opponent does not handicap himself like you do out of political paranoia.

>>31197289
>Feel free to provide something that actually contradicts what has been stated here.
I haven't stated anything that contradicts what has been claimed here.
I simply posted a source showing the ongoing debate and changes in Chinese nuclear doctrine.

>None.
>The change in alert status requires a warning order from CMC that the enemy use of nuclear weapons is likely.
And how do you know this? The Chinese have to do drills mating the weapons and testing them every year.

I understand I'm being pedantic though. Thanks for the source

>>31197304
SSBN missiles ought to be in first class alert me thinks

File: PRC nuclear operations2.png (177KB, 1557x1068px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 1557x1068px

>>31197345
>And how do you know this?

>>31197361
They would be if the Chinese had managed an SSBN nuclear deterrence patrol yet. To my knowledge they have not.

>>31197424
Sitting in port is sufficient to level every useful military asset in Japan and Hawaii.

>>31197491
>Sitting in port is sufficient to level every useful military asset in Japan and Hawaii.
You are (incorrectly) assuming SSBNs in Chinese ports are loaded with fully assembled nuclear payload SLBMs. Which, per Chinese strategic policy, is not the case unless their alert level is the equivalent of a US DEFCON 2.

>>31197589
Obviously they are not sitting in port.
But even if they loitering along coastal waters, it's cocked and loaded.

>>31197732
>But even if they loitering along coastal waters, it's cocked and loaded.
No, it's not.
http://chinapower.csis.org/ssbn/
>According to the Department of Defense, China will probably conduct its first SSBN nuclear deterrence patrol sometime in 2016.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/26/china-send-nuclear-armed-submarines-into-pacific-us
>A recent Pentagon report to Congress predicted that “China will probably conduct its first nuclear deterrence patrol sometime in 2016”, though top US officers have made such predictions before.

http://carnegietsinghua.org/2016/06/30/china-s-sea-based-nuclear-deterrent/j2oc
>China is investing heavily in its nuclear ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) capability. Western analysts point out that China’s first-generation SSBN, the 092-class, yielded only one submarine, which never conducted any patrols.
>But beyond just building a large second-generation SSBN fleet, China is also having them conduct patrols, which it never did with the 092-class. According to the most recent report from the U.S. Defense Department, China’s nuclear ballistic missile submarines may start to conduct patrols in 2016.4 This, if true, would represent a major milestone in the development of China’s strategic nuclear submarine capability, which could raise alert and cause reactions in the Asia-Pacific region.

China has literally never sent an SSBN out on patrol with nuclear-loaded SLBMs before.

>>31197848
>2016
Your point being?

Also
>random websites

Also
>Chicom SSBN sails with blanks even if just in coastal waters? Unlikely.

>>31197964
Well, you are free to provide a better source to the contrary. However, aside from one erroneous and later retracted report in the Diplomat from late 2015, there's nothing out there to support your assertion. And you can bet there would be if it happened, considering the naval tensions in the area and how closely things like this are watched.

>Chicom SSBN sails with blanks even if just in coastal waters? Unlikely.
You do realize that the CCP has only 300 total nuclear warheads, right? That these are divided up between the 2nd artillery (ICBM) forces, the strategic bomber forces and the submarine forces, with the majority going to 2nd Artillery?

Considering how troubled JL-2 + Type 094 testing has been over the years, it is not at all surprising to me that they don't routinely put any of their very limited eggs in that basket.

>>31198068
>Well, you are free to provide a better source to the contrary.

How about a source that's not reveling in the glorious last last gen type 092?

>Considering how troubled JL-2 + Type 094 testing has been over the years, it is not at all surprising to me that they don't routinely put any of their very limited eggs in that basket.

What trouble are you talking about?
But I'm glad to hear cops in your city carry airsofts.

>>31198183
>How about a source that's not reveling in the glorious last last gen type 092?
Pic any one of the three posted above and actually read the articles, you lazy shit.

>What trouble are you talking about?
If you really can't even be fucked to learn about the operational history of the weapons themselves, much less the C&C and deployment procedures in their use, what the fuck are you even doing in this thread?

>But I'm glad to hear cops in your city carry airsofts.
This analogy doesn't even qualify as a strawman it's so ridiculous.

If you're not flat out trolling, I feel pretty damn sorry for you, anon.

>>31191243
1 ¥ was deposited in your account

>>31191571
>namefag senpai please notice me

>>31198267
>Pic any one of the three posted above and actually read the articles, you lazy shit.

But you're the moron that highlighted 20 year old data from muh random website.

>If you really can't even be fucked to learn about the operational history of the weapons themselves, much less the C&C and deployment procedures in their use, what the fuck are you even doing in this thread?

So you got nothing, thank you very much.

>>31193796

75 nukes is still enough to wipe out nearly every population center in the U.S. I am pretty sure those DF-31A/41s can hit the east coast

>>31196171

they did put the us into a stalemate in korea

>>31190907
>South Korea
>helping Japan

>>31190714
>I am sure with 1.3+ billion people, they could stand to lose half and still steamroll Japan in current day status.

Without sealift capacity, their population is useless.

>>31198511
>20 year old data
All literally articles from 2016. The Type 092 which was commissioned in 1987, by the way, is still in active service and still very much relevant in any discussion of current Chinese SLBM capabilities. Which you would know, if you bothered to educate yourself on even a basic level on the topic.

>So you got nothing
You have brought precisely zero sources, data or rational discussion to the subject and instead chosen to demand being spoon fed.

Do not be surprised when you receive a slap instead of a meal.

>>31198560
>75 nukes is still enough to wipe out nearly every population center in the U.S.
With zero devoted to counter force or suppression strikes? Is this your first day at the big boy table, anon? You should watch and listen while the grown ups are talking.

>I am pretty sure those DF-31A/41s can hit the east coast
DF-31 range: 5,000 miles (not far enough to even get over the Rockies)
They claim the DF-41 range at 7,500–9,300 mi but have yet to perform a full-range test on the system. The furthest it has been observed actually flying was just under 5,500mi.

>>31198762
>1987
30 year old data now

>You have brought precisely zero sources, data or rational discussion to the subject

Let's get real here, you claim type 094/JL-2 is troubled.
You can't back it up.
You got nothing

>>31198916
>30 year old data now
not even that anon, but it's STILL IN FUCKING SERVICE. And they still haven't figured out how to run a deterrence patrol with it.

Face it fiddy, your shit is pathetic.

10 years ago the JSDF could have easily defeated a Chinese invasion.

Now it would be a mutual knock out.

Japan is a ParaNulcear State with their own space program. so they have the expertise and materials on hand to produce ICBMs with in a year. In fact, they probably have a secret stash of tactical nukes. The LDP was majority party in Japan for decades and they would do something like that.

>>31198916
I'm pretty much done with your brand of retardation. Feel free to respond when you've actually got some data or a source to back your claims.

>>31198916
>>31199022
>Feel free to respond when you've actually got some data or a source to back your claims.

Nigga is at least gud at regurgitation...amirite?

>>31199022
>>31198916
Call each other faggots, fuck, and be done with it.

>>31198970
There is a Tom Clancy book about that called Debt of Honor. They secretly made ICBM bases in volcanic rock, used spies to sabotage stock market computers, the sucker punched the US Navy during a joint training exercise, and lost an air war against them.

>>31199186
I have that book at home. Never read it. I should. Red Storm Rising is my fave of all time. Would I be disappointed?

File: download.jpg (30KB, 450x302px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 450x302px

Some nips seem to think so, hilariously enough.

>>31190770
>~290 Chink nukes are destroyed by American ICBMs
>the remaining 10 are shot down by USN PATRIOT batteries

File: sailorgitout.jpg (31KB, 347x387px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 347x387px

A shitty redneck militia from the deep south could probably steamroll Japan. China would have no issues if it wasn't for American repercussions. The JSDF would have absolutely no chance of a counterattack.

>>31196236
Yeah but the US is 10x more effective than the UK too

Holy fucking weaboos. 250k vs 2.3 million

They're all gook shit anyway

>>31193986
They were all piss and vinegar, enthusiastic about the revolution and all that. Upstart nations tend to be like that.

Now most young chinese probably realize it was a crock of shit.

Assuming the burgers aren't there to spank the Chinese if they tried anything, or the Russians don't take the opportunity to start trouble:

1) Maybe, as long as they could knock out any beachheads fast enough. Once China got a good foothold with a secure shipping route it would be all over but the screaming.

2) Other than some nuisance bombing and commando raids, not really.

File: 1472533690589.png (400KB, 750x742px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 750x742px

>>31196422
> this approach runs some risk of escalating a crisis, particularly if Washington or Moscow misinterprets alert operations as the early stages of an attack.
>misinterprets alert operations as the early stages of an attack.

Well that kinda reminds me of WW1's whole "mobilization begat mobilization begat war because people saw their neighbor mobilizing and assumed they were about to attack"

>>31200596
Yup. That's why so many routes for de-escalation were built into the nuclear systems, including the red telephone and numerous back channel diplomatic lines.

>>31190674
While Japan has gotten uppity lately as a whole, they are still basically a US Vassal state as far as international policy goes.

Same with south Korea, the only difference is that the south koreans on the whole realize its a good arrangement for them.

>>31190674
maybe.

>Japan countering a god damn thing
United States would be removing ricebarr in a matter of minutes after the first nip gets killed. Nevermind Japanese counter-attack.

>>31197363

Keep up the good work, Opp. Your well documented arguments going up versus internet rumor and superstition are hilarious as always.

>>31190926
Why would Russia attack the US if China started started an exchange?

>>31202977
and to further complicate the picture, the Koreans and Japanese fucking hate each other, making any mutual defense situation in the west Pacific a potential nightmare for the US.

>>31191354
>posting a selfie on 4chan