IPOD
RADIO
TOPICS:
NOV 30, 2006 07:28 PM
Colinism said:
AceT said:
I can see Colinism is trying to create some open discourse here on different topics, and that's to be commended. However, it would probably be best simply to post stories without commentary, as his last few attempts weren't terribly successful.
Oh come on now, I am not trying to be FTR here, I post the article complete and uncut, Usually end it with what isto me Obvious sarcasm but essentially harmless. I think everyone is just so used to people posting wild outlandish stuff that it's knee jerk reactionism. 
That being said Thank you Ace for getting where Iam coming from.
Yes it's just speculation on what the Japanese are doing ATM.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20050808-121636-3027r_page2.htm
If you read this article Japan already has enough plutonium to produce several THOUSAND nukes, getting that much nuclear material is the hard part. I will be honest I am not sure about how hard it would be to build the rest of it, I am researching it a bit now ifsomeone can help with the info that would be great.
Once again, all that article does is state the contrary to your claims. Just because Japan has and uses plutonium for nuclear energy doesn't mean they are planning on or creating nuclear weapons. It just means they have the ability to do so, which is the only thing stated in your original article and not at all news to anyone.
More than 90% of Japan's population are against nuclear proliferation, so I don't see how it could ever get off the ground. As mentioned in the article, the argument is baseless and any and all mention of it is likely used as a debating tactic during multi-lateral negotiations with NK.
NOV 30, 2006 07:42 PM
AceT said:
Colinism said:
AceT said:
I can see Colinism is trying to create some open discourse here on different topics, and that's to be commended. However, it would probably be best simply to post stories without commentary, as his last few attempts weren't terribly successful.
Oh come on now, I am not trying to be FTR here, I post the article complete and uncut, Usually end it with what isto me Obvious sarcasm but essentially harmless. I think everyone is just so used to people posting wild outlandish stuff that it's knee jerk reactionism. That being said Thank you Ace for getting where Iam coming from.
Yes it's just speculation on what the Japanese are doing ATM.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20050808-121636-3027r_page2.htm
If you read this article Japan already has enough plutonium to produce several THOUSAND nukes, getting that much nuclear material is the hard part. I will be honest I am not sure about how hard it would be to build the rest of it, I am researching it a bit now ifsomeone can help with the info that would be great.
Once again, all that article does is state the contrary to your claims. Just because Japan has and uses plutonium for nuclear energy doesn't mean they are planning on or creating nuclear weapons. It just means they have the ability to do so, which is the only thing stated in your original article and not at all news to anyone.
More than 90% of Japan's population are against nuclear proliferation, so I don't see how it could ever get off the ground. As mentioned in the article, the argument is baseless and any and all mention of it is likely used as a debating tactic during multi-lateral negotiations with NK.
I am saying they could build them quickly because they have the most important material already at hand, I am not saying that they plan to any time soon. Of course Japan is going to wave the we CAN build nukes card. They have an every growing China at their doorstep and NK is run by a madman.
Ok lets get back on track a bit here. With NK having nukes and the growing potential for conflict in the region, what do you think theodds are that Japan will keep it's Defence forces small, and will they build nukes if needed?
DEC 01, 2006 04:02 PM
Colinism said:
I am saying they could build them quickly because they have the most important material already at hand,
Relatively quickly, I'll give you. Within a year, perhaps; two is more like it. Don't forget the enrichment; despite what you may have heard, it's very hard to build a functional nuclear weapon without highly-enriched material. (When I say "very hard", I mean "requiring new theory and techniques"; i.e. not impossible, but not very bloody likely at all 
)
I am not saying that they plan to any time soon. Of course Japan is going to wave the we CAN build nukes card.
Beg to differ. Domestic Japanese opinion will not permit it.
They have an every growing China at their doorstep and NK is run by a madman.
Ok lets get back on track a bit here. With NK having nukes and the growing potential for conflict in the region, what do you think theodds are that Japan will keep it's Defence forces small, and will they build nukes if needed?
hm. I suspect your approach here is the one lots of people use with climate change; "oh we'll build it if we need it". The lead time is long on this sort of project; sometimes very long. You have to see the need coming before it arrives, and that's not an easy thing to sell to a very hostile public.
Will Japan move into military hardware production more? Probably. Will Japan expand its military? I tend to doubt it. There's not much point, really. The economic impact - to get anything even close to military parity - would be colossal, and the political impact huge. I think Japan's likely to stay military-light for the foreseeable future.
No doubt that judgement will come back to haunt me
loading your activity feed...
PointBlank
New York, NY
November 2004
NOV 30, 2006 07:27 PM