Politics Thread 6

[Trelliz]

It's hilarious to me that Japan apparently doesnt have like an actual army and still spends that much on the military.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Ground_Self-Defense_Force

[VlaSoul]

It's hilarious to me that Japan apparently doesnt have like an actual army and still spends that much on the military.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Ground_Self-Defense_Force

iirc their constitution says they're not to make an army, or at least one that can act outside of Japan

obviously that hasnt stopped them because I kind of doubt a military that well funded is purely for defensive purposes

[Return_of_the_STAR]

It's hilarious to me that Japan apparently doesnt have like an actual army and still spends that much on the military.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Ground_Self-Defense_Force

iirc their constitution says they're not to make an army, or at least one that can act outside of Japan

obviously that hasnt stopped them because I kind of doubt a military that well funded is purely for defensive purposes

For all intents and purpose they have a full military, army, airforce and navy. However they have a commitment that it is purely for defence. I have noted that they are slowly moving towards a traditional armed force and is pretty much a defence force in name and policy only. They currently don’t take part in foreign campaigns however I suspect in the near future it will traditionally become one with the western powers blessing and much disdain from China and Russia.

[Moggy]

twitter.com/iancarterim/status/1465937994448310274

The strawberry floating state of some people in this country.

[Rex Kramer]

Maybe it's just rose-tinted specs but I preferred the days when racists were too embarrassed to openly speak out.

[Outrunner]

It's hilarious to me that Japan apparently doesnt have like an actual army and still spends that much on the military.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Ground_Self-Defense_Force

iirc their constitution says they're not to make an army, or at least one that can act outside of Japan

obviously that hasnt stopped them because I kind of doubt a military that well funded is purely for defensive purposes

For all intents and purpose they have a full military, army, airforce and navy. However they have a commitment that it is purely for defence. I have noted that they are slowly moving towards a traditional armed force and is pretty much a defence force in name and policy only. They currently don’t take part in foreign campaigns however I suspect in the near future it will traditionally become one with the western powers blessing and much disdain from China and Russia.

Not just their blessing. America has been pressuring Japan to rearm since the 1950s. The self-defence force was a compromise but it was much much less than what the Americans wanted from Japan.

[Tomous]

twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1465927734069280768

[Preezy]

I am SHOCKED, SHOCKED I tell you, that our brave COVID hero Sir Matt "Handsy" Hancock of Heroville would be embroiled in any sort of scandal whatsoever, it's just not like him and I don't believe it.

[Rik_]

That spending is partly why the US military produces more greenhouse gas emissions than entire countries:

America's obsession with the military (and the West's more generally) is quite literally killing the planet alongside all the other atrocities it's responsible for.

while I agree that the US does take it to obscene levels, I don't disagree with military build up. At least not practically, though I sympathise ideologically with you. There's a value to having a strong military and the ability to project it. I think it was important that the USSR had one that was equivalent to the US as it meant that neither could entirely run the show like the US did for two to three decades. Also ideally it would be used to spread the revolution but that's probably not realistic, especially in the 21st century.

While I agree that having a military capability in and of itself isn't a bad thing, especially in the context of the Cold War, I think it's misguided to see the military as a potential tool of revolution, or even a proponent for any milder social progression. The US military and the vast majority of other western militaries are imperialist forces to their very core; you might see soldiers defect at an individual or group level but the institutions themselves are rooted in the upholding of a capitalist, imperialist status quo.

[KK]

twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1465927734069280768

[VlaSoul]

That spending is partly why the US military produces more greenhouse gas emissions than entire countries:

America's obsession with the military (and the West's more generally) is quite literally killing the planet alongside all the other atrocities it's responsible for.

while I agree that the US does take it to obscene levels, I don't disagree with military build up. At least not practically, though I sympathise ideologically with you. There's a value to having a strong military and the ability to project it. I think it was important that the USSR had one that was equivalent to the US as it meant that neither could entirely run the show like the US did for two to three decades. Also ideally it would be used to spread the revolution but that's probably not realistic, especially in the 21st century.

While I agree that having a military capability in and of itself isn't a bad thing, especially in the context of the Cold War, I think it's misguided to see the military as a potential tool of revolution, or even a proponent for any milder social progression. The US military and the vast majority of other western militaries are imperialist forces to their very core; you might see soldiers defect at an individual or group level but the institutions themselves are rooted in the upholding of a capitalist, imperialist status quo.

I don't disagree with you there, militaries of capitalist and fascist states are tools of capitalism and fascism, and then so tend to be tools of imperialism. I'd also be lying if I said that state militaries weren't also tools of red imperialism. To be fair to the US, there were points in its history where its military could have been a tool of spreading the capitalist/republican revolution, but they were generally too isolationist to be inclined to do so.

It doesnt help that most communist countries weren't hugely inclined to spread the revolution. The greatest exception I can think of is the USSR, and saying that is hugely controversial. A better example I think is the army of North Vietnam, where their army did indeed spread the revolution to the imperialist backed capitalist states surrounding it. Cuba attempted similar things in Africa and South America iirc but I dont think that went so well. This is all to say, it is possible and thus a communist state should build up a strong military, both as a matter of practicality and moral imperative.

[Jenuall]

twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1465927734069280768

It's just mindboggling the amount of corruption that the seem to just get away with now.

[Stugene]

It's hilarious to me that Japan apparently doesnt have like an actual army and still spends that much on the military.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Ground_Self-Defense_Force

iirc their constitution says they're not to make an army, or at least one that can act outside of Japan

obviously that hasnt stopped them because I kind of doubt a military that well funded is purely for defensive purposes

Japan's military is purely a defense force. I'm sorry you think otherwise, but you're ultimately entirely wrong.

[Moggy]

It's hilarious to me that Japan apparently doesnt have like an actual army and still spends that much on the military.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Ground_Self-Defense_Force

iirc their constitution says they're not to make an army, or at least one that can act outside of Japan

obviously that hasnt stopped them because I kind of doubt a military that well funded is purely for defensive purposes

Japan's military is purely a defense force. I'm sorry you think otherwise, but you're ultimately entirely wrong.

That's not true. They sent have sent troops abroad for peacekeeping missions. They also sent troops to Afghanistan.

[Stugene]

It's hilarious to me that Japan apparently doesnt have like an actual army and still spends that much on the military.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Ground_Self-Defense_Force

iirc their constitution says they're not to make an army, or at least one that can act outside of Japan

obviously that hasnt stopped them because I kind of doubt a military that well funded is purely for defensive purposes

Japan's military is purely a defense force. I'm sorry you think otherwise, but you're ultimately entirely wrong.

That's not true. They sent have sent troops abroad for peacekeeping missions. They also sent troops to Afghanistan.

Peacekeeping missions and NATO commitments don't negate their self-defence status

[Jenuall]

It's hilarious to me that Japan apparently doesnt have like an actual army and still spends that much on the military.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Ground_Self-Defense_Force

iirc their constitution says they're not to make an army, or at least one that can act outside of Japan

obviously that hasnt stopped them because I kind of doubt a military that well funded is purely for defensive purposes

Japan's military is purely a defense force. I'm sorry you think otherwise, but you're ultimately entirely wrong.

That's not true. They sent have sent troops abroad for peacekeeping missions. They also sent troops to Afghanistan.

Peacekeeping missions and NATO commitments don't negate their self-defence status

Article 9 of the post war constitution states: "the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes" - sending troops abroad would seem to go against that last part?

[Moggy]

It's hilarious to me that Japan apparently doesnt have like an actual army and still spends that much on the military.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Ground_Self-Defense_Force

iirc their constitution says they're not to make an army, or at least one that can act outside of Japan

obviously that hasnt stopped them because I kind of doubt a military that well funded is purely for defensive purposes

Japan's military is purely a defense force. I'm sorry you think otherwise, but you're ultimately entirely wrong.

That's not true. They sent have sent troops abroad for peacekeeping missions. They also sent troops to Afghanistan.

Peacekeeping missions and NATO commitments don't negate their self-defence status

No, but it also means they are not "purely a defence force"

[Green Gecko]

It is right though that the US etc are thinking of providing military support to deter China from Taiwan and activity in airspace around that area by Chinese forces? And also the North Korean missile tests landing in near or in territorial waters south of Japan. So it would seem the US does want to support more non domestic ie foreign/overseas military action that's so often a preface for preemptive and often profitable wars. I'm cool with Japan sticking to whatever its doing, as I have family there.

It's still defense, but I wonder if it will escalate if China does decide to "invade" Taiwan, which China doesn't recognise and considers part of China anyway.

[Moggy]

It's hilarious to me that Japan apparently doesnt have like an actual army and still spends that much on the military.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Ground_Self-Defense_Force

iirc their constitution says they're not to make an army, or at least one that can act outside of Japan

obviously that hasnt stopped them because I kind of doubt a military that well funded is purely for defensive purposes

Japan's military is purely a defense force. I'm sorry you think otherwise, but you're ultimately entirely wrong.

That's not true. They sent have sent troops abroad for peacekeeping missions. They also sent troops to Afghanistan.

Peacekeeping missions and NATO commitments don't negate their self-defence status

Article 9 of the post war constitution states: "the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes" - sending troops abroad would seem to go against that last part?

They changed it in 2015.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-34287362

[Jenuall]

It's hilarious to me that Japan apparently doesnt have like an actual army and still spends that much on the military.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Ground_Self-Defense_Force

iirc their constitution says they're not to make an army, or at least one that can act outside of Japan

obviously that hasnt stopped them because I kind of doubt a military that well funded is purely for defensive purposes

Japan's military is purely a defense force. I'm sorry you think otherwise, but you're ultimately entirely wrong.

That's not true. They sent have sent troops abroad for peacekeeping missions. They also sent troops to Afghanistan.

Peacekeeping missions and NATO commitments don't negate their self-defence status

Article 9 of the post war constitution states: "the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes" - sending troops abroad would seem to go against that last part?

They changed it in 2015.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-34287362

Looks like a fight broke out in the parliament over the decision - they can't be trusted, give them a hint of military freedom and they start a ruckus!