politics

Japan eyes budget for long-range cruise missiles

28 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

28 Comments
Login to comment

It has begun. A pity...

-3 ( +10 / -13 )

Japan should go ahead and develop ICBMs for submarines to deter North Korea. Make the rocket man pause.

0 ( +9 / -9 )

It has begun. A pity...

Yes, such a pity that Japan might be able to defend itself.

1 ( +13 / -12 )

Extanker, with the world’s 6th best-armed, best-equipped, largest army, and outsourcing its defense to the world’s largest, most experienced, most belligerent, and possessor of the most nuclear weapons, army, Japan is already able to defend itself,

7 ( +15 / -8 )

Just because Japan may possess weapons that can hit enemy launch sites doesn't mean the first part of Article 9 vanishes into thin air. Japan most certainly should have that capability which even alone acts as a deterrent. The need to upgrade defensive capability has been created by NK and the nations that support it.

4 ( +13 / -9 )

Extanker, with the world’s 6th best-armed, best-equipped, largest army, and outsourcing its defense to the world’s largest, most experienced, most belligerent, and possessor of the most nuclear weapons, army, Japan is already able to defend itself,

Well equipped, yes. Largest? Not at all. Japan's military is ranked 18th in size, behind even Mexico.

But the SDF can't rely on the US for everything and adding capabilities that it was previously lacking is a necessity.

4 ( +13 / -9 )

As the American empire crumbles proxies like Saudi Arabia and Japan will be expected to pick up the slack in the US's global wars. This is just a first step on that road.

Lockheed Martin Corp's JASSM-ER long-range, air-to-ground missile that has a range of over 900 kilometers.

More profit for the merchants of death

its key ally, the United States.

One usually thinks of allies as being equals. This is hardly the case here.

-2 ( +12 / -14 )

A comprehensive offshore submarine nuclear ballistic missile deterrent, would need to backstop a air-to-ground missile capability.

 If the Japanese Government is intending to blow raspberries across the Sea of Japan, best make sure they're loud enough for the Pyongyang dictatorship to sit up and pay attention. History hasn't really taught governments anything.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Extanker, with the world’s 6th best-armed, best-equipped, largest army, and outsourcing its defense to the world’s largest, most experienced, most belligerent, and possessor of the most nuclear weapons, army, Japan is already able to defend itself,

It seems that, just like his grand-daddy, Abe is intent for the Motherland to once again have one of the biggest military forces in the world... him and his cronies obviously won't stop until the have militarized in a big way.

As history has proved, though, Japan is not capable of only using their military for defense. Once they arm up, you can expect the region to quickly be destabilized. Whatever happens after that won't be pretty.

Welcome back 1930's...!

-5 ( +6 / -11 )

extankerToday  07:13 am JST

It has begun. A pity...

Yes, such a pity that Japan might be able to defend itself.

"Cruise missiles aren't defensive weapons"

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Said Article 9 is vanishing faster than they are developing aforementioned defensive weapon systems...

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

"Cruise missiles aren't defensive weapons"

That really depends on what your neighbor is sending your way.

5 ( +11 / -6 )

I would prefer Japan develop a few hundred ICBMs equipped with thermo nukes rather than a few mid-range cruise missiles.. This would act as a true permanent deterrent. A fleet of second strike subs would complete this new defense strategy

8 ( +12 / -4 )

Japan has as much right to defend itself as much as any country. They have a military and to say are for defence only is ridiculous and everybody knows it. Sometimes the best defence is to hit the other guy you know is coming before he hits you.

It's a very thin line, but I hope Japan stays true to it's word.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

extanker

That really depends on what your neighbor is sending your way.

The MIM-104 Patriot surface-to-air missile (SAM) system, is a defensive weapon.

"You're confusing a defensive reaction with defensive weapon, a cruise missile is NOT designed to defend and stop what your neighbor is already sending your way."

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

The MIM-104 Patriot surface-to-air missile (SAM) system, is a defensive weapon.

"You're confusing a defensive reaction with defensive weapon, a cruise missile is NOT designed to defend and stop what your neighbor is already sending your way."

You can argue semantics all day long but having the ability to knock out a nuclear launch site with a cruise missile before they can send another one is most definitely defensive.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

It is illegal under the Japanese constitution. Abe should be “Park ed” in prison or house arrest. We are perfectly capable of protecting ourselves, so Abe&co are a danger to us people.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has said in parliament that the government has no intention of changing the current differentiation of roles with the United States.

There's also the problem that doing so would cost trillions of yen. Keep the U.S on the hook, throw the occasional bone with a weapons contract and engage China to boost Japan Inc.

Its smart play really.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Japan needs the offensive weapons to defend itself. Just do it.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

A boxer can only parry blows for so long. To stop an offensive, counterattack is necessary.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Japan has as much right to defend itself as much as any country.

No. They lost that right after they brutalized the Asia-Pacific. That's why their wings were clipped.

They have a military and to say are for defence only is ridiculous and everybody knows it.

When was the last time Japan was attacked since the war?

Sometimes the best defence is to hit the other guy you know is coming before he hits you.

Ala Pearl Harbor? It may have once been the case, but these days governments (controlled by the MIC) often use preemptive strikes as a means to carry out their agendas. The sheeple have been dumbed down too much to even realize the injustices often carried out in the name of 'peacekeeping'.

A boxer can only parry blows for so long. To stop an offensive, counterattack is necessary.

Very true! But there's no need to walk over and knock out the small, socially awkward guy shadow sparring by himself in the corner of the gym, right? It'd be a bit overboard and could easily be referred to as garden variety bullying, or worse.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

The leaders of the American Imperium are well pleased with the vassal state's show of good faith...as long as they keep this up, they need never fear attack from America again.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

South Korea already have 1000-km range missiles (approved already by the USA 10 years ago).

The USA just gave green-light for SK to develope 1,400-m range missile.

I think it is the time for Japan to have 1,000-km range missile fired from the shore, submarines or ships. However, for aircraft 600-km is more than enough. The current cruise or guided missile from JASDF with a range of 180-km is too short to protect Japan and give a little teeth against Chinese warships who have dreams of going to and maneuvering the vast western Pacific ocean.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Should develop it locally, or at least buy from Europe...

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Article 9 is out of date and in todays climate a disaster waiting to happen for Japan. NK can launch missiles all day long at Japan and Japan cant hit back. Abe wants to change that to make NK not think it can hit Japan with impunity. Self reliance is the goal and its a good one. Nobody wants conflict. If they did it would already be in progress. Allowing one side to get a stick long enough to hit you while they remain out of reach is an invitation to begin hostilities. Better to have and not use than to need and not have. Its called insurance. People get it for their car's and houses. Time for the country (Japan) to also have insurance.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Extanker,

Well equipped, yes. Largest? Not at all. Japan's military is ranked 18th in size, behind even Mexico.

...the might of an army are determined by a number of factors, such as the quality and quantity of weapons available for use in warfare, the number of trained soldiers, funding, weapon diversity, geographical factors, and military tactics and expertise. Based on these factors, it is now possible for smaller countries with advanced technology to compete with or even maintain a stronger army than larger countries with a teaming population.

NK has one of the largest armies in terms of number of soldiers but hardly in terms of technology.

https://www.theclever.com/15-countries-with-the-strongest-armies-in-the-world/

1 ( +2 / -1 )

NK has one of the largest armies in terms of number of soldiers but hardly in terms of technology.

And America with their superior technology have been doing so well against technologically inferior enemies since 1969, right?

Any war with NK with be a counter-guerrilla war like Vietnam, or the battle of Okinawa, not the slam dunk that Desert Storm was.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

When Japan plans to use for purpose of defense, Japan is not violating purpose of Article 9.

Abe is more interested in protecting Japan than worrying his popularity.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites