When Japan was initiating 40% tariff on cars in the 50's and 60's the most imported cars were from the US.
When Japan's auto industry shifted gears starting to export cars in the early 70's it was down to 6.4% and was completely abolished to 0% in 1978.
Basically anytime before Japanese car became popular in the US.
-2 ( +1 / -3 )
The current grid demand is 12-27%. majority of power companies use less than 20%.
Plenty of transmission capacity to greatly increase the amount of renewable energy.
This article for grid and transmission line capacities
Actually no. If you read the article more closely you'll find they are talking strictly about the high-voltage core electric power lines, such as 500,000 volts or 275,000 volts.
Most all EVs will be plugging into a local low voltage line which are all connected to an electrical substation which becomes a bottle neck when all the electrical power is loaded resulting to burst of a local substation shutting down the neighborhood electric supply.
Take a look at all the gateways they placed.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
There are 186,000 active US marines. So if you put the two against each other on the battlefield it wouldn't even be a joke.
There is no single battle field that places that many people in one location. If there was MBTs will be more effective.
Basically it all depends on the terrain and how each side is able to use it to their own advantage.
1 ( +3 / -2 )
Aughhh, I think you are forgetting the British Royal Marines they are the original Marine corps.
23 ( +28 / -5 )
To apply for the 1st Amphibious Rapid Deployment Regiment(WAiR) the candidates need to receive certificate of Ranger Training.
3 ( +7 / -4 )
BeerDeliveryGuyToday 05:09 pm JST
> If he wants to beat the USMC, however, he’s gotta step up his game and start making the lower enlisted disgruntled and salty.
In case you didn't know, the 1st Amphibious Rapid Deployment Regiment(WAiR), the core of this Brigade trains regularly with the United States Marine Corps Force Reconnaissance Unit and are considered MARSOC level.
They participate in the Annual Joint Military Training Iron Fist that first started in 2006.
4 ( +7 / -3 )
hattorikun, in the past 75 years, Japan wsn't occupied by any countries with zero marines. Let us see what the first marines will do to Japan in the next 75 years.
Actually, Takeshima and, Northern territories is being occupied now which would had been avoided if Japan had these capabilities then.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
@wtfjapanToday 02:48 pm JST
Hydrogen still requires a combustion engines which make it about 30% more parts intensive than a electric vehicle.
Fuel cells doesn't combust anything, it chemically bonds hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom through a catalyst to create an water molecule and releasing electrons during the process.
Basically it is much like a battery. On top batteries on EV goes through wear and tear making them useless at mid-life compared to other parts within the chasis of an EV requiring to replace the entire battery bank which will cost an arm and a leg for it.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
@Jonathan PrinToday 02:00 pm JST
I imagine those F35B are bombers.
A VSTOL fighter flying off a sky jump has a massive weight penalty against it.
F-35B can only be equipped with relatively light weapons like Air to Air missiles in this kind of situation.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
They keep doing things in apparent violation of the Constitution.
NO WHERE in the Japanese constitution that states she cannot own aircraft carriers.
The constitution does not define what kind of equipment she can own or not own.
Even if a single gun was used to solve a dispute against another nation it would be considered a violation of the constitution but the JSDF owns countless number of them.
Basically your argument is flame bait.
3 ( +5 / -2 )
It's basically a storm in a teacup situation.
With the modern age of globalization simplified comparison of monetary amount in goods imported versus exported is only a portion of the story since items exported may end up imported back in finished goods.
Another is tourism (both inbound and out) and service which is not accounted within these figures at all.
At the end you need to account all these into a comprehensive study to calculate the overall health of a nation.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
So, you wouldn't mind if these statues were erected anywhere besides? You are just making excuses.
The Japan Government has not made any demand against the SK government beside those statues.
SK government is make the excuses like yourself.
0 ( +8 / -8 )
Augggh, NK, Hello!?
I guess some people doesn't follow the news here,,,,,,, wait this here IS a news web site.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
"The reason Japan does not agree to this kind oft treaty" doesn't exist.
Will NK, PRC, Pakistan, Israel, Russia,US, etc. disarm their Nukes just because we asked?
3 ( +3 / -0 )
Yasukuni is not in front of ROK embassy nor any other diplomatic representative offices.
The statues Japan is demanding to be removed is like a rally staged in front of those offices in which the host country is obliged to protect the dignity.
The statues are erected on public street in which the government controls, ROK has no excuse not to remove them.
0 ( +12 / -12 )
The reason Japan does not agree to this kind oft treaty is because the treaty has no force to empower it and countries that are targeted loses any way to retaliate against provocations using those nuclear weapons.
3 ( +3 / -0 )
An artificial island doesn't have EEZs. Under UNCLOS it only gains 400 METERS as territorial waters.
Even then the PRC's claim has no internationally recognized basis,
7 ( +8 / -1 )
not all laws are treaties. Cario Declaration is a part of legal framework of international system, a much higher law than SF treaty.
Nope, sorry but a declaration is just an unilateral announcement and has no legal binding especially in a international framework.
ONLY AN INTERNATIONAL TREATY has that kind of power.
8 ( +9 / -1 )
As for Senkaku there is no dispute it is Japan's sovereign territory recognized by treaty and acknowledged again through the SF peace treaty ratified by 48 nations.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
Read the SF peace treaty article 2b.
(b) Japan renounces all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores.
Where does it say it was given back to any nation?
As for islands in the Pacific like Palau and the Micronesia, they were moved from Germany to Japan protectorate after the WW1 as compensation for Japan's participation to the allies.
5 ( +6 / -1 )
Japan returned Taiwan back to China at the end of WW2.
Wrong, the territory was forfeited and was turned into Terra Nullius till ROC declared it as their own.
Thus it is sovereign territory of ROC.
Whether ROC is accepted as a sovereign nation or not is another story all together.
5 ( +6 / -1 )
@Civitas Sine Suffragio
One problem to your scenario, Russian ICBMs targeting the US doesn't fly over Japan and the SM-3s doesn't have the range to intercept them regardless the flight path.
Basically the SM-3s are there to protect only Japan.
3 ( +6 / -3 )
SM-3s are Surface to Air ballistic missile interceptors. They do not have explosive warheads. The only thing it can do at most is to hit an airplane.
Not what any one calls as an offensive weapon for attack.
4 ( +7 / -3 )
Chinese differentiates their ramen noodles with Japanese varieties calling them Nisshiki or Japanese style.
Mainland Chinese are very well aware of the difference and had accepted that it is different from theirs.
0 ( +2 / -2 )
Doesn't matter what you say, it's written clearly in article 4 that the US is required to consult with Japan IF Japan raises questions.
14 ( +15 / -1 )
Japan can't. The US is free to do whatever it wants from its bases in Japan under the terms of agreement.
Actually Japan does have a word in it under the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between Japan and the United States of America article four which stipulates;
The Parties will consult together from time to time regarding the implementation of this Treaty, and, at the request of either Party, whenever the security of Japan or international peace and security in the Far East is threatened.
11 ( +13 / -2 )
Samit BasuToday 11:31 am JST
Not a problem, since Moon specifically said he was not going to abide by the terms of the agreement.
In other words, neither Moon or the present SK government cannot be trusted in abiding any international treaties or bilateral agreements between nations.
Yeah, the world hears you LOUND AND CLEAR.
17 ( +20 / -3 )
Moon had already violated the agreement when he made this statement,
"This issue cannot be resolved through a give-and-take deal between governments struck over the victims' head," he said.
"A wrong knot has to be untied. Japan should accept the truth, make a heartfelt apology to victims."
Since the agreement states,
Under the deal, South Korea promised not to raise the issue again and Japan transferred 1 billion yen (now $8.9 million) to a foundation dedicated to supporting the victims.
His statement already raised the issue again.
17 ( +20 / -3 )
Completely wrong, Japan till this day have never printed a map stating the Northern territories as Russian/Soviet Union soil.
There is an official bilateral treaty between Japan and Russia signed in 1855 setting the boundaries between the new nations in which it clearly states that those four islands are Japanese soil though.
12 ( +14 / -2 )
Actually this article is not very well written because Russia is not arguing about Japan's missile bases, they are arguing about NATO's AEGIS Ashore bases to be built in Romania and Poland.
If the US sold the SM-3 missiles directly then they will be violating the treaty so the US is offering the SM-3 missiles through Japan, the co-developer of the missiles, which will circumvent the treaty since Japan was not a signatory party of the said treaty.
6 ( +7 / -1 )
Posted in: Osaka a role model, says former Miss Japan