politics

Japan to buy Tomahawks from U.S. earlier than planned: Kihara

45 Comments

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

© KYODO

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

45 Comments
Login to comment

Great, need to buy those now before yen really dip.

-18 ( +15 / -33 )

In recent history, cruise missiles were used to attack Iraq and were used offensively.

Why is Japan buying weapons that are for offense and not defense?

Japan seems to want to possess the capability to wage war!

Japan should be considering different options.

-22 ( +13 / -35 )

Japan is trying so hard to create an enemy out of thin air. They should focus more on trying to prevent the inevitable collapse of their economy (or at least delaying it one more decade) instead of this nonsense.

Go to the ATM on the night of the 25th each month and you will see endless lines of starving people eager to withdraw their so-called salary. Do you think those people care about buying missiles to "defend Japan from Russia and China"?

-21 ( +18 / -39 )

Can't afford to properly pay their pensioners and help people have more kids but they have so much money for missiles.

It's disgusting.

-20 ( +17 / -37 )

Why does Kihara have his hand on his heart?

-6 ( +12 / -18 )

An obedient vassal state buying the masters missiles as ordered.

-11 ( +20 / -31 )

Go to the ATM on the night of the 25th each month and you will see endless lines of starving people eager to withdraw their so-called salary. 

Just go to your local supermarket any evening and watch the hoards of people hounding the guy with the sticker machine as he discounts all the crappy bentos. It’s like something from eastern Europe. Apparently Japan is a G7 country though!

-17 ( +17 / -34 )

Wise decision, especially in a neighborhood like this.

7 ( +21 / -14 )

Just go to your local supermarket any evening and watch the hoards of people hounding the guy with the sticker machine as he discounts all the crappy bentos.

This has gotten a lot worse lately. It used to be a bunch of sly old grandmas, now its everyone.

-8 ( +14 / -22 )

That's a US $2 billion down payment. Uncle Sam says "thanks". The only way any of this makes sense is if Japan plans to join the US in an attack on China or North Korea. Fun times ahead!

-14 ( +7 / -21 )

what for?

i know that guy on photo at right...still hungry for bloody profits from US ignited wars and propaganda...

-9 ( +9 / -18 )

kurisupisuToday  07:39 am JST

In recent history, cruise missiles were used to attack Iraq and were used offensively.

Why is Japan buying weapons that are for offense and not defense?

Japan seems to want to possess the capability to wage war!

Japan should be considering different options.

Have you ever heard the expression that the best defense is a good offense? I'm not sure a pure defensive strategy has ever been successful for a country.

6 ( +16 / -10 )

EastmanToday  08:37 am JST

what for?

i know that guy on photo at right...still hungry for bloody profits from US ignited wars and propaganda...

Waaaaa! Waaaa! Scary US soldier man!!!

-8 ( +6 / -14 )

ObserverToday  07:46 am JST

Do you think those people care about buying missiles to "defend Japan from Russia and China"?

Have you ever asked them? I bet the vast majority are not marxists.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

Why does Kihara have his hand on his heart?

Given that the honor guards are at the position of “present arms” I’d assume the anthem is playing, or they are returning salute in the civilian manner.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

n recent history, cruise missiles were used to attack Iraq and were used offensively.

Why is Japan buying weapons that are for offense and not defense?

Japan seems to want to possess the capability to wage war!

Japan should be considering different options.

The qualities of China's military capabilities are such that you cannot effectively defend yourself from their attacks with short range weapons. If all you have are short range weapons your launch platforms will be destroyed by longer ranged Chinese weapons before you can even launch your own weapons. It is like a fellow with really long arms fighting another fellow with really short arms.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Do Japanese politician cover their heart during the playing of the Kimigayo? He certainly should not be doing it for the US tune.

-7 ( +6 / -13 )

Why does Kihara have his hand on his heart?

Probably because there was a color guard with the Japanese and American flags marching past. If one is in uniform they would salute. If in civilian clothes one puts their right hand over their heart. Since the service members in the honor guard are carrying rifles and thus cannot salute they are at Present Arms. All standard military etiquette.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

I like how they made him do the Pledge of Allegiance if he wants to get the Tomahawks.

-9 ( +7 / -16 )

Tomahawk missiles can be intercepted, a 40 year old weapon already. Remember 1998 when US struck Afghanistan OBL bases, one unexploded Tomawak was captured and could be sold to China. It was nothing new but a known weapon. The Chinese destroyer armada has phase array radars than can detect these low flying missiles and destroyed them with SAM. Other land based platform interception system can take interception actions as well through the linking with each other.

-8 ( +6 / -14 )

An obedient vassal state buying the masters missiles as ordered.

Yes!

I really don't like the path Japan is following, especially in the lake few years.

High time for Japan to break free and act like an free sovereign nation.

-7 ( +6 / -13 )

These missile will never be used and will RUST in storage but it's good to have them for peace of mind.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

The arms manufacturers will be sending a fruit basket to Xi and Putin.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

What for??..Your people have more important needs..

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Japan is wasting money , no?

Serious wars are fought (but hopefully not) with ballistic nuclear missiles which China, Russia and North Korea possess.

Japan having and using cruise missiles doesn’t make any sense except to keep US factories busy.

-14 ( +4 / -18 )

Tomahawk missiles can be intercepted, a 40 year old weapon already. Remember 1998 when US struck Afghanistan OBL bases, one unexploded Tomawak was captured and could be sold to China. It was nothing new but a known weapon. The Chinese destroyer armada has phase array radars than can detect these low flying missiles and destroyed them with SAM. Other land based platform interception system can take interception actions as well through the linking with each other.

The Tomahawk of 2023 is a completely different weapon from the Tomahawk of 1998. I have been involved with Tomahawks off and on since my active duty days in the 1980s. Block IV is essentially an all new weapon with essentially no carryover from previous blocks. Even the external shapes and control surfaces are different. Everything inside is different too. Block V is the latest update to Block IV just entering service.

Lots of newer and notionally better replacements for Tomahawk have been considered over the years but none really do the job better, meaning avoiding being shot down or spoofed while finding and destroying targets, that the most recent iterations of Tomahawk and the alternatives cost a lot more. The US was testing ducted rocket ramjet screamers way back in the 1970s but they don't hit the target more reliably and in some ways are easier to shoot down than something that flies as low and navigates with TERCOM as Tomahawk does. The closest analog is AGM-86 ALCM and that has been around for a while for the same reasons.

Careful mission planning avoids air defenses. It has an inherently low radar cross section. Using TERCOM the weapon is immune to jamming, It is a very hard weapon to defeat.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

Japan having and using cruise missiles doesn’t make any sense except to keep US factories busy.

Block IV versions would be coming out of existing US inventory.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Why not a single Japanese is able to complain or protest about this??? It's borderline inmoral having so many people on the verge of poverty.

-9 ( +4 / -13 )

Whether we need those tomahawks or not is not the biggest concern. Rather, the way this deal was closed is very disturbing. Much is going on "under the surface", that is very badly concealed. And very much against the principles of democracy. So, who had the say regarding that cabinet reshuffle?

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

kurisupisuToday 10:58 am JST

Japan is wasting money , no?

Serious wars are fought (but hopefully not) with ballistic nuclear missiles which China, Russia and North Korea possess.

Japan having and using cruise missiles doesn’t make any sense except to keep US factories busy.

So clearly you believe in Japan having nukes or else you have no plan for Japan's safety.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Serious wars are fought (but hopefully not) with ballistic nuclear missiles which China, Russia and North Korea possess.

Japan having and using cruise missiles doesn’t make any sense except to keep US factories busy.

Nuclear weapons are more of a terror weapon to hold an enemies cities hostage. But building, maintaining and especially securing nukes are all hideously expensive. They are almost completely unnecessary for actual war fighting.

In the days when weapons had poor to no guidance like free fall bombs, accuracy was measured in thousands of meters. In ordnance the rule of thumb is that to ensure destruction of you target the blast radius of the weapon should be at least equal to the weapons CEP or Circular Error Probable. When CEPs were in the thousands of meters you needed a nuclear weapon to ensure target destruction. But with modern precision guidance, CEPs are down to tens of meters, even single digit meters. Conventional high explosive ordnance is more than adequate to ensure target destruction. With precision guidance and hard target penetrator warheads capable of defeating deeply buried/heavily reinforced targets you don't need nukes to fight wars with. Pretty much every target out there is able to be destroyed with conventional high explosives.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Nuclear weapons are more of a terror weapon to hold an enemies cities hostage. But building, maintaining and especially securing nukes are all hideously expensive. They are almost completely unnecessary for actual war fighting.

Very true, especially of low-yield “tactical nukes.”

Using one to, for example create an opening in an enemy’s defensive line or eliminate an advancing armored brigade, as spectacular as it would be, risks contamination of your own forces and provides your enemy or his allies with a reason to escalate into full scale nuclear warfare. Not to mention the global condemnation and sanctions you’d face for being the nuke first user.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Excellent idea.

Now, bring some A-10’s to Naha and you’ve got the basics.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

You might ALSO want to invest in tons of Exocet type of air to sea missiles as one huge threat is that 300+ ( Chinese fishing fleet) Chinese/Russian navy. Historically the sea has been the main battleground. Sometimes we do t need the big ticket items which grab the headlines. Important as they are! The main threat is the Navy. And China are building another four carrier groups.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

If Japan wants to have 'war' with China, Chinese people can accept that without delay - to compensate Japan invasion during the WW2.

-13 ( +1 / -14 )

Ping AnToday 04:57 pm JST

If Japan wants to have 'war' with China, Chinese people can accept that without delay - to compensate Japan invasion during the WW2.

No one in their right mind thinks Japan will start a war.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Your problem is USA not China on short term and long term. Being independent from USA war against the asian world is not a bad choice. The last time Japan choose USA and Britain over Asia, they became a plague to Asia. Always remember american are overly racist and they help come with a urge price for your liberty and people. What they need from you is the opposite of what they do for themselves.

-

China is not overly war like. This is a defence posture against an aggressor whom we know to be London born influence into USA. And you are far from defenceless.

USA need its army in asia for military support purpose and financing its military size and power. They must leave Asia and you must prepare for them leaving Asia. Too many crimes under their belt to have so many military power in space were they are notorious racist.

-

Note than russia capabilities to create the missile and science that would have weakened this USA military sole domination on the world had accidents, suicide, sabotage, mistakes, fire, explosion… in an unnatural number. Today, CIA admit they sabotage any form of high tech military technology using the cold wars and terrorist wars to kill innocent people and the potential witness.

-

My advice is to realise USA is Japan problem today, and will be a major problem tomorrow. You need to normalise your diplomacy with your neighbours outside the occidental diplomacy influence. Otherwise there will a war, and this war, you will lose because USA may not be here to protect you tomorrow. They are in a worse shape than expected.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

And I recall Aso, among others, calling Kishida a peace -loving moderate.

Glad we didn't get a hawk. Lol.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

There seems to be a few anti Japan posters who want Japan to be as defenseless as possible for when China decides to take over. To them I would simply say, if you love China that much then emigrate there and take Chinese citizenship. (Assuming your not already a Chinese citizen). Most people in Japan do not want to live like those in mainland China, at the pleasure of old cronies in the CCP.

Japan has the right to arm itself with any defensive armaments, all of which could be used to attack and kill people. Japan also has the right to change, alter or rewrite its own constitution at any time of its choosing.

But cruise missiles are an offensive weapon I hear people complain, well so are machine guns, tanks, bombs, fighter jets and submarines. And Japan has all of those things already but has not started a new war, has it? These new missiles are a stop gap until it begins production of its own domestic designed and made cruise missiles. And they still wont start any new wars then. But if anyone thinks to attack Japan it will find a nation able to defend itself, and hit back to deter further aggression's. Should they not have such a right? I think they should.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

There seems to be a lot of wanna be neo-con posters who do not understand the situation at all. China wants to recover the province of Taiwan. We all hope this is done peacefully through negotiations for the benefit of Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.

Once that takes place naval bases will be built on Taiwan. The US navy has to deal with that reality. China does not and never has threatened the Ryukyu and Japanese main islands.

There seems to be a few anti Japan posters who want Japan to be as defenseless as possible for when China decides to take over

0 ( +3 / -3 )

You might ALSO want to invest in tons of Exocet type of air to sea missiles as one huge threat is that 300+ ( Chinese fishing fleet) Chinese/Russian navy. Historically the sea has been the main battleground. Sometimes we do t need the big ticket items which grab the headlines. Important as they are! The main threat is the Navy. And China are building another four carrier groups.

Japan already builds comparable or better air and surface launched anti-ship cruise missiles. Read up on the Type 80, Type 88, Type 90, ASM-2 and ASM-3A. ASM-3A is particularly advanced with a speed in excess of Mach 3. With Japan's F-15s being fitted to launch AGM-158 JASSM they could very easily also launch AGM-158C LRASM anti-ship missiles from US stocks during a war.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

But cruise missiles are an offensive weapon.

Not necessarily. They are an excellent way to defend your coasts from attack. The US Marine Corps has had to rethink every aspect of how it might conduct large amphibious assaults in the future because the ubiquity of anti ship cruise missiles and ballistic missiles has made a traditional beach assault against a defended target in the manner of WWII a suicide mission. An enemy with such missiles can decimate the landing force long before it can get close enough to conduct landing operations and anyone who makes it ashore is going to get bombarded from missiles launched at them from 1,600 kilometers away or more.

The Chinese are using their cruise missiles as an area denial weapon, making it too dangerous to operate big carrier groups inside the First Island Chain. The area between the Chinese coast and that First Island Chain is being turned into a sanctuary for the PLAN. Having one's own cruise missiles can deny China the ability to operate freely against Japan.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Sometimes we do t need the big ticket items which grab the headlines. Important as they are! 

Btw, most modern anti-ship cruise missiles cost as much or more than a Tomahawk. One of the reasons the basic Tomahawk concept has survived so long is that all of the proposed replacements are much more expensive without giving the nation much more, or even any more, military capability. Every system has its strengths and weaknesses but after all the analyses are done and the results evaluated, none of the alternatives seem to get more missiles past enemy defenses, find a target and hit it better than Tomahawk and Tomahawks are cheaper.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Hopefully, they won't be needed. It is part of an insurance portfolio. You buy it, hoping you never need to file a claim.

Preparing for the worst is smart. After all, Japan plans for Earthquakes and tsunamis, right? You hope they don't happen, but better to be prepared "just in case".

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Just because China, Russia, North Korea, and South Korea are neighboring countries, Japan has to waste its defense budget.

Otherwise, South Korea's invasion of Takeshima, which occurred when there was no Japan-U.S. Security Treaty and no Self-Defense Forces, would occur. This is because overseas countries, like the Philippines, will lose territory to China and create bases for enemy countries.

The only people who oppose Japan's increase in defense capabilities are sympathizers of such countries. It's just a useless opinion.

It is natural that defense should be given top priority before economic activity. People who think that their territory can be invaded and still carry out decent economic activities are not ordinary people.

0 ( +0 / -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