Gov't starts airing announcement on protection from N Korean missile attack

so does mean we will do regime change?

Oh yes, this will really work when NK sends their nuclear missile into Tokyo!

umbrellaToday 06:48 am JSTOh yes, this will really work when NK sends their nuclear missile into Tokyo!

No. But it would be pretty stupid for NKorea to target a city first rather than all the US military targets.

Abe and all the right wingers are really enjoying this..

It is the confrontations of America and Russia that resulted in building a country like North Korea. There are many other trouble making countries to which they are responsible.

It seems like Abe and his gang of no-gooders have taken the script from a TV drama or movie and are copying it. Whenever the public start to question what you are doing, or your previous scandals come to light, scare them into thinking that only you can protect them. Unfortunately, North Korea seems to be assisting Abe, with its threats and missile tests, which allows them to ratchet up the rhetoric even more.

No. But it would be pretty stupid for NKorea to target a city first rather than all the US military targets.

I don't think so, why you ask? If NK were idiotic enough to launch a nuke against anyone, US military targets in Japan would be a low priority. NK would have to know their very existence would end and it wouldn't come from the US military in Japan, it would be at the end of a nuclear tipped ICBM launched from the US mainland or submarine.

Strategically speaking hitting Tokyo would cause far more damage, not only to the government, but financial infrastructure as well. Tokyo is by far a higher priority target than any military base in Japan.

Glenn Greenwald nailed this tactic years ago:

"This is what inevitably happens to a citizenry that is fed a steady diet of fear and terror for years. It regresses into pure childhood. The 5-year-old laying awake in bed, frightened by monsters in the closet, who then crawls into his parents’ bed to feel Protected and Safe, is the same as a citizenry planted in front of the television, petrified by endless imagery of scary [foreign threats] who then collectively crawl to Government and demand that they take more power and control in order to keep them Protected and Safe. A citizenry drowning in fear and fixated on Safety to the exclusion of other competing values can only be degraded and depraved"

YubaruToday  08:06 am JST

No. But it would be pretty stupid for NKorea to target a city first rather than all the US military targets.

I don't think so, why you ask? If NK were idiotic enough to launch a nuke against anyone, US military targets in Japan would be a low priority. NK would have to know their very existence would end and it wouldn't come from the US military in Japan, it would be at the end of a nuclear tipped ICBM launched from the US mainland or submarine.

Strategically speaking hitting Tokyo would cause far more damage, not only to the government, but financial infrastructure as well. Tokyo is by far a higher priority target than any military base in Japan.

Launching a nuclear attack against a civilian target like a major city isn't strategic at all. A city isn't a threat to NKorea or anyone. Military targets are.

Launching a nuclear attack against a civilian target like a major city isn't strategic at all. A city isn't a threat to NKorea or anyone. Military targets are.

"Total War" - look it up, son.

Launching a nuclear attack against a civilian target like a major city isn't strategic at all. A city isn't a threat to NKorea or anyone. Military targets are.

Do you know the definition of "strategic?" This is Tokyo we are talking about, not Osaka, not, Sapporo, Tokyo.

Tokyo is the MOST strategic target in all of Japan. It's a no-brainer.

of, relating to, or marked by strategy a strategic retreat

2

a : necessary to or important in the initiation, conduct, or completion of a strategic plan

b : required for the conduct of war and not available in adequate quantities domestically strategic materials

c : of great importance within an integrated whole or to a planned effect emphasizedstrategic points

3

: designed or trained to strike an enemy at the sources of its military, economic, or political power

You forget that NK's military knows it has no chance of defeating a coalition led by the US. So their only "strategic" goal is to kill as many people as possible, before they go down in flames. If the sh@t hits the fan, Seoul will be gone, and NK will be lobbing missiles (not necessarily nukes) into population centers of Japan.

If NK were idiotic enough to launch a nuke against anyone, US military targets in Japan would be a low priority.

Clearly you have not been reading stories out of NK, who have made it clear that they have US Military bases like Iwakuni, clearly in their sites as pre-emptive targets.

Clearly you have not been reading stories out of NK, who have made it clear that they have US Military bases like Iwakuni, clearly in their sites as pre-emptive targets.

And you believe anything that comes out of NK?

The big Abe distraction

YubaruToday 08:32 am JSTLaunching a nuclear attack against a civilian target like a major city isn't strategic at all. A city isn't a threat to NKorea or anyone. Military targets are.

Do you know the definition of "strategic?" This is Tokyo we are talking about, not Osaka, not, Sapporo, Tokyo.

Tokyo is the MOST strategic target in all of Japan. It's a no-brainer.

Do you understand what strategic means? Nuking a city, a civilian center will only invite immediate overwhelming retaliation. It's basically suicide. Nuking military assets reduces the enemy's ability to retaliate.  Which makes more sense to you?

It seems that J government has fanned much fear of N Korea's missiles. Because Abe wants to change the article 9 of the constitution soon.

LandofExcusesToday 08:22 am JSTLaunching a nuclear attack against a civilian target like a major city isn't strategic at all. A city isn't a threat to NKorea or anyone. Military targets are.

"Total War" - look it up, son.

Nations start and carry out wars for the purpose of achieving a goal. Even NKorea has a goal. Get a clue.

If anything does happen, running and hiding are about the only thing Japanese will be able to do. Japan has a military with a lot of equipment and NO experience. They will most likely only be support for the U.S., as they are the most battle tested military in the world. All the rhetoric of terrible things the North spews out to the world the U.S. has already done and is not afraid to do again.

All the rhetoric of terrible things the North spews out to the world the U.S. has already done and is not afraid to do again.

You mean like attacking North Korea with biological weapons?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/7811949/Did-the-US-wage-germ-warfare-in-Korea.html

Or attacking North Korea with chemical weapons?

https://shadowproof.com/2013/12/10/cia-document-suggests-u-s-lied-about-biological-chemical-weapon-use-in-the-korean-war/

Are you boasting that the US is prepared to attack North Korea with chemical and biological weapons as it did during the Korean war? Is that intent behind your comment?

Revealing every precautionary measures to the "enemy"?! Great!!

If North Korea launched a nuclear  missile at any civilian or military target the U.S. retaliation would destroy the country....period.

It is SIMPLE. Deja vu all over again for the 60s. USA children practicing hiding under a desk because the teachers didn't want to tell the truth to children - "you are dust if it hits the USA." It is a good idea to keep children in the dark but the public, especially in SK and Moon's domain, need to know the truth.

The US would retaliate, but don't forget their ally who's trying to postpone the inevitable, biding their time.

Attacking a Japanese civilian target is certainly compatible with at least one possible North Korean strategy - persuading people of the south to follow the fat boy as he reunites the nation with an attack on the ancient enemy: "Follow the Glorious Leader, remember the comfort women, remember the fascists, etc.etc."

For those who find this incredible, remember that the best selling novel in SOUTH Korea a few years ago involved North & South Korea uniting to drop a nuke over Tokyo Bay.

Do you understand what strategic means? Nuking a city, a civilian center will only invite immediate overwhelming retaliation. It's basically suicide. Nuking military assets reduces the enemy's ability to retaliate. Which makes more sense to you?

I see you don't understand the issues here. But I am going to play along and show you the error in your logic here.

One NK attacks Iwakuni with a nuke, they take out the MC air wing, and cause a crap load of civilian causalities along the way...what possible strategic benefit is that? Seriously? Come on, read the definition of "strategic" again. You aren't thinking about HERE, this is Japan.

designed or trained to strike an enemy at the sources of its military, economic, or political power

Hitting Tokyo takes out ALL three at once. It's that simple.

Dishonest Abe, lying Suga and the rest of the LDP organised crime group putting out scaremongering propaganda at taxpayer's expense solely in order to further their own political aims of remilitarising Japan and crushing civil liberties.

Abe doesn't care about ordinary people, in fact he would be happy if some were killed by North Korea as it would give him an excuse to take away more freedoms under the guise of "protecting" the people.

Reminds me of the "safety" videos of what to do if you see a mushroom cloud when we were kids-- "get under your desks and cover your head". If there is a missile strike anywhere nearby, you're done. This is just a major propaganda push because Abe's numbers are down and he needs a distraction that will scare the sheeple.

What a joke. If Abe beliefs that broadcasting like this kind can resolve the problem, he should have his head checked immediately.

Never2late: "If North Korea launched a nuclear missile at any civilian or military target the U.S. retaliation would destroy the country....period."

and WWIII being the exclamation point. Kim and the aging geriatrics in the old guard won't care if they and the people die when backed into a corner and knowing they're dead anyway. Can't say the same about the rest of the world. And if you don't think it would start WAIII, you're nuts

smithinjapan

My post was what I thought the U.S. reaction would be if North Korea launched a nuclear missile against a civilian or military target.  Whether North Korea would launch such a missile if, "backed into a corner" is speculative at best.  However, I think you underestimate the instinct to survive even amongst "aging geriatrics."  And, I think that instinct to survive includes the leadership of China and Russia as well.  You are the one who is nuts if you think they will kill them selves for Kim or any other Koreans.

The government also decided to publicize the instructions in Japan's 70 national and local newspapers this weekend, as well as putting them on the website of Yahoo Japan Corp.

Also, announcement should be made on all domestic and international flights to and from Japan(?!)

Without government commercials, most Japanese are already aware of threats from neighboring countries. It is up to the individual to decide if what Kim III says are mere bluffs or have any degree of truths/possibilities in them.

This is clearly the LDP deflecting attention from Abe enriching his friends.

As for those of you squabbling about which target - city or military - would evoke the strongest reaction from Washington, the answer is both. As for which of the two is a "strategic" target, the answer again is both.

Regarding attacking Tokyo vs US military bases, remember the 1991 Gulf War. Iraq fired scud missiles into Israel for no apparent reason other than to cause panic. To my understanding, military installations were not targeted or hit. Creating a panic among the general populace, while not a strong strategy, can nonetheless be a strategy.

However, my 2 cents is that Nth Korea will never attack Japan first. Their leadership are not totally stupid, it would be simple suicide.

Mlodinow:

Sound analysis.

The DPRK is not going to attack anyone because that would spell the end if it.

The power structure of the DPRK is more intelligent than most give them credit for. Even if the head is looped off, there would still be command and control features still in place. That structure would exploit the cult of personality amongst the people to revenge the deaths.

Trying to push overthrow of the regime through effective sanctions would cause the populace to starve even further.

The solutions to this are few and far between unless we are willing to accept at least a million deaths. This holds true for sanctions and military actions.

Hitting Tokyo takes out ALL three at once. It's that simple.

Pachinko money would be stopped going to NK if they attacked Tokyo.

@Mlodinow, the Iraqi missile attacks on Israel were very much for a reason, they sought to make Israel launch a retaliatry strike, if Israel had got involved it would have shifted Arab public opinion in their favour and made it politicaly impossible for the alliances Arab contingents from participating or any Arab nation providing ligistical support and so crippled the US assault. The US went to extreme lengths to stop Israel getting involved for that very reason.

First strike by NK would only be in extremis if they felt they were driven in to a corner where their survival was at stake (the survival of the elite not the population) at that point they may well lash out in fear, paranoia, vengence as the survival/welfare of the population is of no consequence. They are a narrow isolated elite and a distorted world view/reaction is not uncommon to such groups (eg Hitler ordering everything to be destroyed in Germany on the basis that if he/the NAZI party went down so would the German people. Only saved by Speer disobeying the orders).

The North Koreans know that there only long-term chance is to divide the Seoul-Washington-Tokyo that stands against them. South Korea is the obvious target to carve out from the pack. There is a level of anti-American and anti-Japanese feeling among the population which has no counterpart in the other two countries.

There is an old joke about the US and Canada:

Q. What is the difference between Americans and Canadians?

A. The Canadians care what the difference is.

The same could often be said about Japan and South Korea.

YubaruJune 25 11:56 am JST

I see you don't understand the issues here. But I am going to play along and show you the error in your logic here.

One NK attacks Iwakuni with a nuke, they take out the MC air wing, and cause a crap load of civilian causalities along the way...what possible strategic benefit is that? Seriously? Come on, read the definition of "strategic" again. You aren't thinking about HERE, this is Japan.

Who is talking about attacking just ONE USMC Air Station? What good is that? NKorea's primary targets in Japan will be all US bases that could support an offensive aganst them. NKorea has SAID SO. So please explain what happens is NKorea nukes any city. How many minutes of existence do they have left?