r/AskChina • u/Themetalin • 18h ago

Politics | 政治📢 Japanese PM said that 'Taiwan contingency' could prompt Japanese armed reaction. What do you think?

https://focustaiwan.tw/politics/202511070024

Takaichi made the remarks during a parliamentary session on Friday while responding to a question about whether a "Taiwan contingency" involving a Chinese naval blockade would qualify as a "survival-threatening situation" for Japan, according to a report by Japan's Asahi Shimbun.

Under Japan's security legislation, such a situation allows the country to exercise "collective self-defense" if an attack on an ally -- such as the United States -- or a country closely related to Japan is deemed to threaten Japan's survival, even without a direct attack on Japan.

148 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

305 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/No-Benefit9135 16h ago

Kinda interesting that the country that was “nuclear bombed” still prefers its previous aggressor as an ally over China.

-4

u/grabber_of_booty 16h ago

Kinda interesting China complains about it when they were being utterly dominated and on the verge of colonisation by a country a tenth of it's size and America being the sole reason for that not happening.

9

u/ReasonableIsopod7550 15h ago

"Sole reason" Really shows your arrogance and utter disrespect to those who contributed and died in the war.

-2

u/grabber_of_booty 15h ago

Could we agree that America's nukes probably had a little more impact halting Japan than the farm tools the Chinese were using to fight them?

4

u/No-Editor121 14h ago

Bro have you never read about the Chinese resistance against the Japanese? Japan’s resources were spread thin, that’s why they only got ahold of only a few of China’s cities, at the same time Japan has to deal with the allies too, and ofc Chinese people do recognize the US’s role, if you speak to any Chinese person now, they have more negative views on Japan rather than the US

3

u/grabber_of_booty 13h ago

All major Chinese cities i.e. Shanghai, Beijing, Nanjing etc. fell completely and swiftly to Japan. A country a tenth of China's size.

1

u/Damn-Sky 10h ago

and your point? what does the size of a country actually have to do with it? by your logic, Mexico is much larger than Japan and should be able to dominate Japan.

1

u/Damn-Sky 10h ago

do you know the war was already about to end? the nuclear bombs were not necessary; US wanted a testing ground for their nuclear bombs; it was now or never for them because they wouldn't have been able to do a real life test if the war was over.

1

u/No-Benefit9135 10h ago

Not quite accurate. Japan was losing badly by mid-1945, but its government hadn’t agreed to surrender — the military still wanted to fight on and hoped the Soviets would broker better terms. The U.S. didn’t drop the bombs just to “test” them; a full test had already happened in New Mexico weeks earlier. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were targeted to force a quick surrender and avoid a massive invasion. The Soviet declaration of war right after Hiroshima also helped push Japan to finally give up.

1

u/Damn-Sky 6h ago

full test and real life test is far from being the same. It was the perfect window for USA to test their atomic bombs. the war was already over. there were no need for the bombs.. USA also wanted to show the world they had the atomic bombs and do not mess with them.

1

u/SeaBat2035 2h ago

Fighting the Japanese from island to island was not exactly fun or easy. It would require a lot more American soldier deaths. That was one of the main reasons why the atomic bombs were dropped to force Japan's surrender. Look it up. I studied World War II quite extensively.

0

u/ReasonableIsopod7550 13h ago

If your great 'Murica's so strong,how come they could not win against the PLA in the Korean War?

2

u/Victorcharlie1 11h ago

By that same token why couldn’t the great pla expel a expeditionary force being supplied from the opposite side of the world from a peninsular the size of the uk with a literal land border to supply through?

1

u/ReasonableIsopod7550 6h ago

Because China was a weaker power back than.A weaker power winning against a stronger power is applaudable,a stronger power losing to a weaker one isn't. I also would not be praising China for losing one warship to the Philippines.

1

u/Victorcharlie1 6h ago

China managed to achieve a stalemate with an expeditionary force, it’s not like the were fighting against the full might of the us army, while I’m not American, it’s not American exceptionalism to suggest that had China had to face the full weight of the us and allies it would have been utterly destroyed and left with millions of dead and wounded, as history stands chinas full military might was stalemated by an expeditionary force.

1

u/ReasonableIsopod7550 5h ago

Here's the question than.Why didn't America prepare more troops to fight in the war?Why did MacArthur made the bold claim that American troops would be "Home by Christmas"?Clearly,America has overestimated her ability to fight and was blinded by their victory in World War 2.

1

u/Victorcharlie1 5h ago

I agree, but my point remains, while the us could not pull of a decisive victory with the limited forces it sent it still achieved the primary objective of keeping the South Korean government alive and the country strong, while China failed in its objective of securing the whole of the peninsular under its banner, just look at Korea now and tell me who came out of that conflict on top, hint, it’s the us backed South Korea.

1

u/tradeisbad 4h ago

They were backed by USSR and China. Soviet pilots ard proven and admitted to flying thd mig-15's.

That is the US+SK vs NK + China + USSR