View Single Post
  #29  
Old 01-06-2010, 10:23 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 5,070
Default

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.

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.

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

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.

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.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote