Its time to let japan build their own military again. I think the window for an elba style resurface by the emperor is long closed.

We are on the verge of being bound by treaty to be involved in a conflict with china because japan won't let them have barren islands. Entangled alliances all over again.

11/18/2012 12:41:27 PM

Pretty sure it doesn't expire.

Although, as far as I know, the current treaty doesn't state that they can't build a military, it merely gives us a right to have bases. Their own constitution prevents a military build up, but they've gotten around that by incorporating a defensive military as a police force.

[Edited on November 18, 2012 at 1:06 PM. Reason : ]

11/18/2012 1:01:51 PM

Japan actually has a very modern military, they are 6th in global defense spending

11/18/2012 11:48:36 PM

the US gov't would like nothing more than casus belli to spank the mild expeditionary forces China has. Their defense industry pals would make billions, the Chinese gov't would be embarrassed and discredited, and the Japs would then be even more our bitches like the England.

11/19/2012 12:22:34 AM

Quote :

"We are on the verge of being bound by treaty to be involved in a conflict with china because japan won't let them have barren islands. "

If you actually think there's a threat of real conflict, let alone one that would involve us, you're clueless.

Quote :

"Entangled alliances all over again."

Quote :

"the US gov't would like nothing more than casus belli to spank the mild expeditionary forces China has."

Hrm yes the US would just love to get into a military scuffle with our most vital trading partner outside of the North American continent. Yeah, terrific idea, I'm sure our leaders would like nothing better than to basically render 90% of the shelves in every Walmart empty. That'll lead to reelection, surely.


[Edited on November 19, 2012 at 11:03 AM. Reason : .]

11/19/2012 11:00:34 AM

Yo, people, here's the tldr on China: They are the most important country for our prosperity, and we are the most important one for theirs. Military conflict would be economic suicide for both countries, if it ever happens it wont be for another 50+ years when the global economic order is completely different from what it is now.

11/19/2012 11:05:19 AM

Let's give China the opportunity to make up for the spanking they received from Japan last time around.

11/19/2012 11:06:03 AM

Not going to happen. There's no reason for the Japanese to give up the treaty: they get tremendous benefit from it in a neighborhood filled with people that don't trust them. If anything, the US has constantly pushed for Japan to build up its military since the 1950s, but the Japanese government just goes and hides behind Article 9. No benefit for the US to give it up either: the Japanese bases give the United States its foothold in East Asia/Pacific.

The stupid stuff with the Senkaku Islands is a concern, but if anything, the US presence helps keep that one from becoming a bigger issue since the Chinese are far less likely to start sinking Japanese warships if there's fear of US entanglement. US involvement helps keep both sides honest.

11/19/2012 1:22:47 PM

so what happens in 10-20 years when china catches up in technology and we have no more money to run the bases?

11/19/2012 2:05:55 PM

They'll have 2 billion people to feed and a transit system that's not even fit for their population 20 years ago. They'll probably still be relying on us for consumption, so no, it would still be suicidal for them to do anything that might stir relations with the US.

The stalemate with China and the US has absolutely nothing to do with military comparisons, it is strictly due to our unofficial economic partnership.

11/19/2012 2:08:49 PM

Brazil, South Africa, and India will dwarf our consumption in 20 years.

11/19/2012 2:12:06 PM

Yes two smaller, poorer countries are going to become economic titans in a couple of decades.

Why don't you throw Mexico and the Ukraine in there also?

11/19/2012 3:11:45 PM

...as soon as they stop selling playstations.

11/19/2012 3:59:56 PM

what is good for a government is not the same as what is good for the country as a whole. The Chinese government certainly would start a war if the alternative were losing their grip on the people. The US gov't doesn't like competing for oil with China and doesn't like their human rights record.

Can they get away with it with the American people and the Intl community? Yes. China has a bad Intl image and Americans hardly blinked an eye over the wars in the Middle east.

I don't think the US needs China as much as US retailers find China a convenient source of slave labor. Shit could be shifted to SE asia practically overnight: Obama is there right now talking to the king of Thailand getting it ready.

lastly: wars kick off regardless of their economic impact. open your history book, fool.

11/19/2012 5:34:40 PM

Quote :

"Yes two smaller, poorer countries are going to become economic titans in a couple of decades."

Its common knowledge that they will be economic titans in a couple of decades just like China has made a huge leap of continued growth.

India 1200million people and rising
Brazil 200million people and rising
South Africa 50 million people and rising

Thats 1500 million people and growing. If 15% of those are consumers then the us has been replaced overnight.

All of these economies are growing like crazy with a growing middle class of consumers and an upper class of consumers that will out-consume us in the next few decades. These are undeniable facts. They may still have majority of their populations living dirt poor, but their rich will outnumber our rich.

11/19/2012 8:46:13 PM

Quote :

"I don't think the US needs China as much as US retailers find China a convenient source of slave labor. Shit could be shifted to SE asia practically overnight: Obama is there right now talking to the king of Thailand getting it ready."

Haha what? SE Asia is already packed to the brim with our factories. Do you think these businessmen just choose China for fun because they're bored of Thailand?

And...seriously, you're going to suggest that we prepare for a war against the most populous country on the planet by moving production to its border countries. Okay.

Quote :

"lastly: wars kick off regardless of their economic impact. open your history book, fool."

You said yourself:

Quote :

"what is good for a government is not the same as what is good for the country as a whole. The Chinese government certainly would start a war if the alternative were losing their grip on the people."

Ask yourself the converse: Would the Chinese government avoid a war if doing so would cause them to lose their grip on the people? What effect would a war on the US (and thus a pullout of US investment and production) have on the people of China?

[Edited on November 20, 2012 at 9:39 AM. Reason : .]

11/20/2012 9:37:51 AM

Brazil will not pass us anytime within our lifetimes and south africa never will.

If you're just going to add them all together and say they are going to be bigger as a group it's pointless, you can already do that with plenty of other countries.

11/20/2012 10:27:16 AM

^Thats the whole point. China doesn't have to sell its stuff to one country when an entire US equivalent of consumers is going to develop out of those countries in the next few decades.

11/20/2012 11:26:11 AM

China doesn't show any signs of improving the technical capacity of it's labor force. Their Universities are WAY behind the West and they will stay that way. Their labor force is aging rapidly and because of their generally bad international reputation, they won't be drawing in any immigrants beyond the ultra poor and uneducated to replace them even if they do liberalize in a hurry. Nothing they have built in the past 20 years is designed to last beyond 2050. It isn't only their educated that are abandoning them, also their New Money types. They are sending their money out first and themselves too as soon as they can swing it. A lot of the entrepreneurs here in Shanghai are mainlanders that left for Canada and Taiwan long enough to get citizenship, then returned to do business. Basically, they're never going to surpass anyone in anything other than biomass. They're just a big swath of 3rd world under a single flag: it looks big on paper but let's not forget their GDP per capita is 1/8th that of the US.

11/21/2012 2:06:55 PM