Comments by "David Ford" (@davidford3115) on "How Japan Hopes to Rival China Militarily" video.

The irony is that Chinese Taipei has much affection for Japan, in stark contrast to many other Chinese populations. Even the Chinese Indonesian community has much better relations with Japan than mainland China.
9
I would assume you are referring to Formosa? It was the crown jewel in the Empire of Japan and was given preferential treatment over all of Japan's other possessions. My understanding is that the feeling of affection was and still is mutual
7
@ruleoftwo6174 For mainland China, that is pretty much a given, and goes without saying because it is blatantly obvious. However, CCP propaganda has a much harder time permeating the Chinese diaspora population. Given the choice, most overseas Chinese identify more with the Taiwanese and Hong Kong folks than they do mainlanders.
5
@mosh.4245 They have already commissioned a JS Kaga. And it is a carrier, despite their claims otherwise.
4
@ivan7453 Agreed. Historically Imperial China was just as aggressive and Belligerent as Imperial Japan in WW2. President Pooh-bear has been showing the same militarism as Tojo Hideki. "Let China Sleep, for when she wakes, she will shake the world” -Napoleon Bonepart.
2
@lati long Sure, infantilize and trivialize key details that completely dismantle your argument. You can make a long decertation about why there isn't one, but that doesn't make it any less of a fact. Japan's willingness to go to war with Red China over Taiwan proves my point. Further, Taiwan inviting the Japanese to build a military base on one of their Islands south of Senkaku further drives home my point proving you wrong.
2
Deutschland remilitarizing is a joke. The Teutonic Knights have forgotten their legacy and refuse to embrace the parts of their history which were NOT dishonorable (such as the Kreigsmarine, particularly the U-boat fleet).
2
@mosh.4245 Yeah, i wasn't talking about the ship sunk at Midway. I was talking about the Izumo hybrid carrier. Context, dude.
1
@user-pn3im5sm7k Yes, they overstate their capabilities. But as Stalin said, "quantity has a quality all its own". The Chinese fighters only need to be good enough such that their numbers can overwhelm the F-35. There are only so many AtAM that a fighter can carry; the Chinese can put up more planes than the west has missiles to shoot them down.
1
@songhan1586 Indeed. It is the opponent you underestimate that defeats you and cleans your clock. So, it is better to assume they are more competent than they might actually be so that the only surprises are good ones.
1
@user-pn3im5sm7k You missed my point. You don't have to be the best. You just have to be good enough and then numbers make up the difference. You also don't seem to understand that the Chinese have more bodies than we have bullets. The CCCP doesn't care about taking massive casualties. To them life is cheap and expendable so long as the goal is achieved. You would think their lockdown policies that starved people to death would make that abundantly clear. And as far as 1940s strategies being obsolete, might I remind you that in the 1980 Iran-Iraq war, the Iranians used human wave attacks and almost overwhelmed the then Western backed Saddam military?
1
@user-pn3im5sm7k Texas has 2 million bullets. And how many bodies does China have? Something on the order of 1.5 BILLION. Almost three orders of magnitude larger?
1
@user-pn3im5sm7k How do you get from Texas having 2 million bullets to all 50 states having over 12 billion? Your math does not compute, for it is off by 900 million. Or are you having difficulty with the zeros and commas? If you are trying to use Texas per capita bullets, I would remind you that states like California, Illinois, and New York are effectively gun-free states so you cannot honestly apply the numbers for Texas to those states' population.
1
Fukushima was nothing compared to the Windscale Fire in England. Or the Swiss Lucens accident. Or Kyshtym disaster in the USSR. Stop the anti-nuclear fearmongering by people who have political agendas.
1
@wroughtforge7547 I seriously doubt you are Japanese. You are pushing hysteria and hyperbole which only serves to create anti-Japanese bigotry.
1
I would have more respect if he used the nickname "figlettes". Most sea dogs know what that means.
1
@user-pn3im5sm7k Declining population makes it impossible to get out of debt. It makes defaulting a dangerous possibility. Or are you one of the Klaus Schwab acolytes who believes in population control?
1
@user-pn3im5sm7k I vehemently disagree with the mass migration argument as a solution to any nation's demographics problem. That is NEVER a workable solution. What I DO wish the Japanese would consider is to allow the naturalization of those who marry a Japanese national. Expedite the process should the couple actually produce half-Japanese children.
1
@user-pn3im5sm7k Have you considered that they are only counting those who stayed in the country? Many Japanese who marry foreign spouses LEAVE the country. And considering how Hafu children have historically been treated, even since the end of WW2, I don't blame them. What Japan needs to do is NOT castigate their "half-caste" children and instead embrace them as one would a prodigal son who has returned.
1
Unlikely that they would use the names of their Super Battleships for mere destroyer-escorts. I could see them using those names for Heavy Command Cruisers (which have basically replaced the WW2 battleship).
1
I saw it too. Are they implying that the giant of South America condones piracy?
1
Indeed. The hacked details of the F-35 are showing that it is the modern equivalent of the Norden Bombsight: overblown and its failures classified to protect the corruption in the industry.
1
Yeah, the definitions today are jacked compared to WW2 standards. The retired Spruance-class Destroyer was easily TWICE the displacement of a Fletcher-class of WW2. In the wake of WW2, the Frigate/Destroyers and Light Cruisers became one mission profile while the Heavy Cruisers took over the role of Battleships as artillery platforms.
1
Can they be trusted? Well considering they have experience first-hand nuclear weapons; I trust them more with nukes than I do the French.
1
"Cold hard fact" huh? I think you conflate opinion for fact. Do keep in mind that Japan has NOT always been in agreement with the US. There have been numerous situations when the Japanese have stabbed the US in the back (selling of the F-15/F-16 to unapproved third parties such as the Chinese). You calling the Japanese puppets effectively denies that Japan has any agency to make its own choices. That is a very myopic perspective and frankly, a lazy infantile one.
1
@eirikarnesen9691 Wow, seems like I triggered you. You are clearly an Anglophobe pretending to be an anti-colonialist (which is just fashionable anti-European racism)
1
@eirikarnesen9691 You are correct. I mistakenly tagged you instead of rsuriyop. My apologies.
1
@rsuriyop Japan's economic downturn has NOTHING to do with the US and everything to do with their own bad economic choices. When the Yen is typically strong against the USD, your claims of America keeping the Japanese on a leash is utter garbage born of Ameriphobia. Incidentally, since Anime is eating Disney and Hollywood's lunch, that is further evidence that Japan is its own master.
1
@rsuriyop More drivel from someone who thinks word salad is "educated". Some of us have actually been to Japan and South Korea and know the truth having experienced it firsthand.
1
Considering the Japanese propensity to adopt new technologies quickly and maximize their efficiency, I have no doubt they would quickly be on par with the best of the NATO block.
1
Japan converting hulls into aircraft carriers is not a new thing. That being said, I would love to see a modern IJN Akagi, IJN Kaga, and IJN Shinano nuclear super-carriers.
1
@ivan7453 The problem is that the age of battleships is over because of guided missiles. Between ship-based rockets and carrier-based aircraft, engagements are at distances well beyond the horizon and outside the range of cannons. In fact, the last time ships did engage in a direct fire-fight was in the Battle of Samar which featured Yamato being dueled by tin-can destroyer-escorts that fought as if they were battleships. It resulted in about the only carrier ever sunk by naval gunfire: USS Gambier Bay. Now, I DO believe there is a place today for battleships as a mobile artillery platform, especially for shore bombardment and close support (think USS Nevada during Normandy). But Heavy Cruisers fill that role on the rare situations it comes up. Battleships could also serve as a command and control (ship version of an AWACS ), but today Cruisers also tend to fill that role. Finally, they can also act as an anti-aircraft platform to protect the carriers on the off chance that enemy planes do get past the Combat Air Patrol. But since US doctrine calls for air dominance, it is not considered a justified use of resources.
1
@unklmonk651 Fishing, and natural resource rights. If they can claim the Island, then everything between it and the home Islands can be claimed as sovereign Japanese territorial waters.
1
@user-pn3im5sm7k Negative population growth is NOT fine. You need two babies per woman to break even and maintain a stable society. Demographic collapse leads to societal collapse.
1
@lati long Wow, no concept of history, do you? You think that anything before August of 1945 never happened. You ignore anything that does not fit your myopic politically driven narrative.
1
@lati long Keep repeating to yourself your fictions that reinforce your delusions. Facts on the ground matter, and indisputable fact is that Japan and Taiwan's economies are intertwined in a way that the Chinese CCCP envies and detests. That would not happen if not for the population being closer to Tokyo than they are to Beijing.
1
@leihtory7423 China hasn't invaded in 40 years? May I remind you of their invasion of Vietnam where Charlie kicked their ass? Then there are the numerous border fights China has picked with India. Don't fool yourself, the Chi-Coms are just bad at War. The ONLY thing going for them is their superior numbers, but as Ukraine has shown, that can easily be overcome.
1
@leihtory7423 The CCCP telling you they are peaceful is like asking a shark not to take a bite of something in the water. China has not fired a single shot? India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, and Tajikistan would disagree with you. They have ALL had incursions by China. ALL of them have traded lead with the "People's Liberation Army" who have acted like petty thugs rather than a professional military force. You are just an anti-West troll who cares nothing about actual facts, only what the CCCP tells you to believe. Gobbels would love people like you.
1
Why would they? How would that benefit them?
1