[RN7]

I think you're missing some important points there RN7...

Japan is resource poor. It imports virtually all raw materials so that it can produce the high tech equipment it does. Once the war turns nuclear, perhaps even before, the flow of raw materials will be disrupted.

Much of Europe is also resource poor, including France. In fact Japan's lack of resources such as oil, and small coal and metal reserves is very similar to France. Both countries also have nuclear power industries second only to America.

It's worth looking at CA's post above for reasons why Japan cannot be a significant threat to it's neighbours. Given a decade or so and a radical shift in public opinion, this may change, but it's not likely.

Do you realy think that Japan's self expressed pacifism or apathy towards the military is going to stop the Soviets launching nuclear missiles at them during an all out war with America and NATO?

Yes Japan probably can produce nukes. Yes, it has the capability of delivering a few of them, but it doesn't have the ability to deliver more than one or two at a time as it's space facilities aren't set up for it (they are after all primarily civilian in nature and design).

Yes it does have the ability to build nuclear weapons (mainly low yield plutonium derived ones), and no it doesn't have the capability to deliver nuclear weapons, but if it felt its national security was in danger by an Asian rival such as China or North Korea it could instigate a programme of upgrading its current rocket technology to military application.

It wouldn't take more than a few cruise missiles or decent airstrike to effectively destroy that capability.

Well if the Soviets respected Japanese neutrality why would they be using cruise missiles or airstrikes against Japan. And if you take out the space facilities your probably going to have to go after the nuclear programme as well and Japan's nuclear power stations.

And finally, the list of units you've posted is PRE war. Very few of the ground units, and virtually none of the naval units will be there circa 1997-98 when the nukes are fired. There is a possibility that the air units will be present, at least the rear area services, but there's also a strong posibility that many of these will have been shifted to other theatres.

Actually the list is 2009, but they were in Japan during the 90's. And yes some of the air, marine and naval units would have gone to Korea and the Middle East, but the logistical importance of US bases would remain for all US forces in the Pacific region. However many forces, particularly units designated to the air defence of Japan are there specifically to defend Japan at the request of the Japanese government.

I believe Japan is still nukeworthy, however less than one may immediately think. Major industrial centres are likely to take the brunt of the attack and possibly military targets also if there is strong intel significant forces remain in barracks. The cities themselves are unlikely to have been targeted directly, however as industry relies on population, the destruction of the cities is still almost certain.

Well I don't understand your logic. On one hand your saying the Japanese constitution and general Japanese pacifism and apathy towards the military would deter a Soviet attack, yet on the other hand your saying that Japanese industrial centres, military targets and cities would still be attacked.