Professor: Don't Be Surprised If There's A War Between Japan And China In The Next Year en-us Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 -0500 Thu, 25 Dec 2014 12:22:13 -0500 Rob Wile Denisse Becerra Wed, 23 Jan 2013 10:02:18 -0500 This comment was just epic. Thanks for the comments they were very helpful to get more background information. Elizabeth Mon, 21 Jan 2013 20:19:53 -0500 This article is wrong. The islands do not belong to Japan, and China is not the one trying to start the war. For thousands of years, the islands have belonged to China. But Japan and China had a disagreement about the ownership last World War. Since the last war ended, Japan and China decided to leave the ownership of the islands for negotiation. But recently, Japan decided that it would just take ownership of the islands without talking to China about it. China still wants to negotiate, but Japan refused. Recently, America stated that it would support Japan if a war were to happen, and that annoyed China. America has been butting into this problem which it has nothing to do with. If it would have stayed out of it, it probably would not have escalated so much. Daragh Thomas Mon, 21 Jan 2013 13:27:16 -0500 Hi Rob. You might want to consult with some experts in the region before you come out with this sensationalist nonsense. Both sides regularly posture like this in an attempt to gain favour with the nationalist section of their populations. It has never, and will never lead to war. For one thing, Japan has a first rate military that can only be used defensively.. China has a huge, but second rate military that could never hope to launch a successful attack on Japan.. Neither side have anything to gain from a conflict and neither of them have a recent history of starting such endeavours. Daniellen Sun, 13 Jan 2013 22:02:15 -0500 you thought that was China induced all those cases you mentioned, you guys will never understand China just want to get our belongings back. it was Japan who's the very aggressor, and who wanted to dispossess the islands from China. Peacekeeper Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:37:49 -0500 From 19th century to the end of WWII, China has been invaded by Japan for multiple times. WWII is only one of them. Lots of land including Senkaku and Taiwan have been occupied or invaded by Japan . It's unfair to say one country invade the land, then the land belongs to that country. If your neighbor rob and take one of your house by bullying, wouldn't you want or have the privilege to get it back? Topcoder Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:27:49 -0500 Japan has invaded China for multiple times and killed millions of innocent civilians. Chinese has no intention to challenge US. They are just trying get back territory, which has been occupied by Japan's invasion. Economic Warfare Wed, 02 Jan 2013 04:22:49 -0500 China waging economic warfare: <a href="" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" ></a> Chinese War Agenda Wed, 02 Jan 2013 04:18:57 -0500 China has a war agenda - and its intent to invade and grab land/islands/sea lanes is showing up everywhere. It's showing around Senkaku, which not only has been an internationally recognized territory of Japan since the 19th century but which had also been considered part of Japan in official Chinese documents till 1970. That's when potential oil deposits were discovered near the island. That's when the Chinese started asserting their bogus claims. The same story in their territorial dispute against the Philippines and Vietnam in the South China Sea. The Chinese have been busy rewriting their history to justify their land grabs - and deflecting the world's attention by trying to link this to WWII (yes, a lot of Chinese civilians were killed. We know it. Even the Japanese know it.) It's not going to work this time. ibsteve2u Mon, 31 Dec 2012 18:14:29 -0500 Seeing as this article has been out for a few days, I'd hope by now that Americans understand that indoctrinating a people with tactics such as book-censoring a la the Texas Board of Education, organized propaganda such as "Fox News", and imperialistic actions a la Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, & PNAC, LLP that lead to the horrors of war isn't a purely American phenomenon. China is way good at it, too. But I do regret the fact that our Republicans and their allies among the "Blue Dog"/neoliberal Democrats have been so successful - thanks to enforcing America's addiction to oil, voodoo economics, deregulation, and inequitable free trade - at not just destroying America's industrial infrastructure/tax base/war arsenal/reserve but transferring it to China wholesale over these last 40 years. That's a new one in human history; an out-and-out first. The quadrillion dollar question, of course, is was it a new height in stupidity or a new low in treachery. I figure if it comes to war, the first thing America should do is seal our borders - against outgoing flights, ya know - so we can settle that question at our leisure. In case we decide it wasn't just stupidity. Sound bizarre? I don't think it is bizarre...intentionally destroying what won your nation your previous wars - your industrial infrastructure - sounds like sabotage, to me. Offering up a crack dealer's defense of you were just meeting a demand and it is not your fault if the community was destroyed as a consequence won't hold up, if it comes to war... Raphael Sat, 29 Dec 2012 17:34:35 -0500 This is going to end us. Since first China could bank in all the Debt the US has accumulated (Most of it cause by Obama. ) and Their goes our economy then the United states are going to get hack by the Chinese causing the lost of all ways of simple communication. Then since the US isn't self-sufficient people start to starve. Next all exports to the United states is cut since all the things now a days is made by China. Then North and South Korea joins the war since they are right between those two countries. As the United States are weakening rebellion happens in the States because of no food, no jobs, no new clothes and no technology as this is happening other countries are forced to join the war from other countries and now there is a world war III. How nice I hope if this happens that the US is going to become two and one on china's side and other at japan's side since I would be on the Chinese side. Also I bet that the Senkaku islands is actual the china's land since Japan has been claiming both Korean and China's land as their own as the country was found. marsel Sat, 29 Dec 2012 05:14:33 -0500 when in doubt blame the USA!!! BTW. before colonial times the slaughters and ethnic cleansing in Africa never happened :) they were all peaceful as the white sheep, as lovely pigeons, nobody died, try to read more and then you will know xv Fri, 28 Dec 2012 17:00:57 -0500 How, pray tell, will you use small arms against jets bombing you at 20,000 feet? Or helicopter gunships blasting you with rockets, missiles and cannons? David Zaduk Fri, 28 Dec 2012 03:38:02 -0500 And Africa's wars and ethnic slaughter is the result of European colonialism creating borders without regard to clans or tribes, China's occupation and decimation of Mongolia is because they claim some historic "rights" to control the Mongolians. Any government that claims some "right" to territory that must be enforced by killing a bunch of innocent people is a complete lie and an excuse to steal. Ban ALL governments and lines on a map. PATVASA Fri, 28 Dec 2012 01:52:52 -0500 Nonsense, the war is due to violent video games like angry birds. Joe Anon Fri, 28 Dec 2012 01:45:50 -0500 Yup, just like how the "comfort women" incidences in Korea and the Philippines never happened, and how Japanese textbooks distort how WWII actually started...You and China should just nuke each other out of existence along with the Muslims... OB1 Fri, 28 Dec 2012 00:25:57 -0500 Apparently no one taught you how to read. There's plenty of evidence of sex slaves, no evidence the Japanese government itself enslaved women and forced them to have sex. Individual, private brothel contractors, many of them Korean, are to blame. Again, the Japanese government did not run these brothels - private contractors did. Cathy Thu, 27 Dec 2012 22:58:33 -0500 This is evident through the years China finally has a US President that has to bow down to them so it is really a matter of time for Obama has to reward China for there financial help even though Obama has never had a history coarse except Chicago which is a disaster and now he has thrown Canada under the bus with the Keystone denial and letting Tyson Foods COMPANY DYNAMIC FUELS GET THE THE NAVY FUEL CONTRACTS for votes he will now let the Japanese suffer by turning his head while China moves with a two faced president who is a lamb duck and the Yang money will have value when the US dollar has none. If you do not have a budget you have only time till you fall apart. How many trillions will it take before they turn the lights off at the White House for not paying there power bill he should have at least had a budget, and now when he runs out of golf balls he will get China to send some more because he will be playing on there golf coarse. Demac Thu, 27 Dec 2012 22:44:44 -0500 r.cohn - " Difficulty for China in obtaining petroleum shipments" Unfortunately the stupid government of Canada just gave the Chinese Government (who own outright the companies involved) ownership of a huge amount of Canadian natural resources including a very large stake in the oil industry. Many of us were wondering why - but now it makes a little more sense. World Traveler Thu, 27 Dec 2012 22:05:21 -0500 Japan, China, the US & War As we approach the upcoming war between Japan and China, Americans should be getting ready for the fallout that will ensue. Literally. The conflict will with 100% certainty go nuclear. Japan will be Totally destroyed. Cities leveled, and overrun by the Chinese military. All the pent up anger at Japan for WW11 will drive China to extract a terrific vengeance against Japan. This action will be fully supported / demanded by the Chinese population. The Philippines would be drawn in, and quickly defeated due to the presence of US military bases. China realizes that the US is far more vulnerable to a limited nuclear exchange than China is to a full scale nuclear exchange. 1. In this scenario the US can be essentially defeated by a limited exchange destroying only 12 major cities / instillations. All are within easy reach of a limited Chinese strike. (New York, Washington D.C., Norfolk, Atlanta, Los Angeles, San Diego, Pearl Harbor-Hickam, , Whiteman Air Force Base, Salt Lake, Atlanta, Chicago, Dayton) With this limited exchange US infrastructure would crumble, Mass riots would further destroy what was left of any supply chain for food distribution and commerce. This would effectively defeat the US in as much as the country would be unable to deal with their own internal unrest and civil war that would immediately follow. Any thoughts that the US would not suffer massive civil unrest are delusional at best. Ask any senior military official and their reaction is officially “We’d blast them off the face of the earth” but unofficially their response would be chilling. Adolf Hitler Thu, 27 Dec 2012 20:26:54 -0500 The Chinese claim the discovery and control of the islands from the 14th century. Japan controlled the islands from 1895 until its surrender at the end of World War II. The United States administered them as part of the United States Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands from 1945 until 1972, when the islands reverted to Japanese control under the Okinawa Reversion Treaty between the United States and Japan. USA is the fucking problem here, they've done this(by "giving" the islands to Japan, countries in the axis alliance were to give back any pieces of land that has been taken illegally) on purpose and planned the dispute ages ago.. Maersk Thu, 27 Dec 2012 16:11:10 -0500 The writer must be a typical American kwok zucking kwok zucker employed as writer to badmouth China. How the phuck can the Chinese plane be entering Japanese airspace when the ownership of the island is in dispute. i suggest this writer focus on kwok zucking instead of writing bullzhit. Homer Smith Thu, 27 Dec 2012 14:32:21 -0500 No evidence of sex slaves? Lol you must believe the Holocaust was a hoax too. David Zaduk Thu, 27 Dec 2012 14:16:49 -0500 Sorry I forgot the Philippines, love those people, been there a few times and they are some of the nicest and hardest working people I've ever met. David Zaduk Thu, 27 Dec 2012 14:13:47 -0500 True, however I disagree that their attempt to expand their territory by intimidation is economically reasonable. The price paid for the oil and whatever else is down there would be the same regardless of the geographic borders. The only issue is which nations powerful, incredibly rich conglomerates get the profit. Of course it will be the peasants of all these countries who are slaughtered for the oligarchs greed. David Zaduk Thu, 27 Dec 2012 13:45:48 -0500 I don't think I even implied that western imperialism was a good thing. I also don't support American military bases outside of America, and lastly I wish Japan would strengthen your military so the USA wasn't carrying such a disproportionate cost of keeping the shipping lanes open in the South China Sea. That said fuck you right back you former imperialist, militaristic, delusional pimple on the ass of a real superpower. The only reason you can feel superior to "western" imperialists like America is because your dreams of the "Greater Asian Co-prosperity Sphere" died with your Grandpa when mine snuck up behind him and slit his throat in the jungle of the Philippines. Jack Reacher Thu, 27 Dec 2012 13:14:19 -0500 @OB1 Typical Japanese who likes to revise history and expunge evidence of all its horrific actions by spreading lies. Felix Sotomayor Thu, 27 Dec 2012 11:01:43 -0500 Why does it have to be a goddem australian doing the talking?...Americans can't come up with this simplistic 12/21 nubiru soothsaying pile of stench? tom1295 Thu, 27 Dec 2012 06:36:05 -0500 Next time please just hit the Submit button once. danny vonnegut Thu, 27 Dec 2012 03:56:02 -0500 People's Republic of China agressiveness should stop right now, for the Senkaku islands belong to Japan anyway, at last the presence of US troops in Okinawa will prove itself useful , our Marines will have work to do containing China imperial ambitions instead of raping local women. Anon Thu, 27 Dec 2012 02:58:30 -0500 don't mind the grammatical errors. Anon Thu, 27 Dec 2012 02:57:04 -0500 I don't believe so, not for the amount of oil that's there its location (this isn't oil buried under sand, its more expensive and difficult to extract) and the parity of the two powers. No while resources is a good factor for the start of this whole dispute, to take the next step and actually initiate conflict will be something more visceral and emotional, much like what brought the US into Iraq was something visceral and emotional. For the most part it will be fear and honor. To elaborate, fear of what the other side will do, and the desire to preserve one's (country's) honor. Nationalism is a powerful thing and history has shown that countless times throughout the world. Anon Thu, 27 Dec 2012 02:33:46 -0500 it doesn't take alot of nukes to take out a city, but China has 100-200(generous)~ active ICBM's capable of reaching the continental US, while the US has 3000+ active ICBM's capable of reaching China. This is publicly available and verifiable information. You are telling me China will survive a nuclear strike meant to take out a geographically diverse true superpower like the Soviet Union, including China in that ilk? You dream, and the Chinese generals would have you quietly disappeared and executed before you had any sort of control with your wildly outlandish views. I think you are just an ignorant troll. Anon Thu, 27 Dec 2012 02:26:28 -0500 Well Curby, they actually do sell us opium, and its government practice at that. Oh no not an opiate to the masses (they leave that to the triads who have a thriving presence on our West Coast), it is a governmental opium called cheap credit. They give our government lines of credit, and our government, already hooked, cannot resist snorting it up like a drug addict, no matter the bad side effects. They also flout the globally beneficial norms of free trade to the benefit their own economy, hiding behind and using as a weapon the lines of cheap credit they have given to our government, threatening to take it away. In effect it is an inversion of the mainly British practice you speak of, but the effects are the same on a macro, and arguably micro scale, a weakening of the US as an economic, military, and global power, and the micro scale unemployment of American workers with the Chinese economy reaping the benefits. In return, just like the Chinese populace got the short term high that opium induced, Americans get low cost goods...for the moment. Those who love to paint the US as the big bad and China as the innocent violated country delude themselves, China is just as and more vicious than the US is in diplomacy and geopolitics, as we have ample evidence today. It is using force to 'solve' its disputes all around it (even if not explicit military force). When it comes to nationalism, state control, and enforced state patriotism, it is close to a third reich with Chinese characteristics. Dude Thu, 27 Dec 2012 01:19:50 -0500 You forgot the Philipines too. India will stand with the USA. don roberts Thu, 27 Dec 2012 01:13:05 -0500 Wont be just China and Japan if a war occurs. Guarantee if the U S cannot solve the row by diplomacy, they will back Japan. Let's hope the nuclear stockpiles will continue to stave off a big war as has happened since .....what WW11? SteveLaudig Thu, 27 Dec 2012 01:00:52 -0500 Read the article that you have misrepresented. Sync Wed, 26 Dec 2012 23:45:50 -0500 You clearly have never been to China, the people there can't wait for a war. ninja321 Wed, 26 Dec 2012 23:08:15 -0500 You are the idiot who had a beautiful flower garden in your head. EdwardDodsworth Wed, 26 Dec 2012 22:45:25 -0500 Nothing of the kind will happen ever. EdwardDodsworth Wed, 26 Dec 2012 22:44:23 -0500 ARE YOU HIGH ROB WILE. Any rational mind with any kind of international knowledge will tell you major wars between states have approximately a 0.000000000000000001% of happening anymore. On the basis of economic interconnection alone, there is simply no need for it anymore. This journal, and especially this article is nothing but a bunch of sensationalist, headline grabbing, BULL SHAT. sushilpershad Wed, 26 Dec 2012 22:04:23 -0500 Why this conflict over trivial issues that could drag the world into a devastating conflict that could unfold misery on Humanity.? joe shmo Wed, 26 Dec 2012 22:01:00 -0500 good thing i'm too fat to fight. ninja321 Wed, 26 Dec 2012 21:37:07 -0500 Japan holds the strong self-defense forces and is closely allied with US. US-Japan alliance maintains the ability to repel the local attack for Senkaku Islands and Okinawa by China. Accordingly, there will not be the invasion to Japan by China, for the time being. However, the danger of the war is extremely high in the long run by the following reasons. (１) China is reinforcing the military forces very rapidly and will hold the armaments equal to US before long. (２) A difference of the Chinese poverty and wealth spreads, and Gini coefficient reached a dangerous level 0.61 in 2010. Numerous riots happened already in China, oppressed narrowly by the strong military police. But the riots may increase markedly in the near future, can’t be controlled. (３) The communist dictatorship will try to survive by controlling the dissatisfaction of the nation by driving nationalism. (４) The Chinese nation bears a grudge against past colonial rule by Western powers and will strongly support a war. Probably a local war will break out within five years. The target of an attack with China will be some of Vietnam, India and Japan. Ken Takaki Wed, 26 Dec 2012 20:30:58 -0500 And what about America and western imperialists historically bullying East Asia? Fuck you Americans. Get the fuck out of Japan and we are going to have our military back. OB1 Wed, 26 Dec 2012 20:10:13 -0500 Let's see. China's claim to the Senkakus is a 19th century document detailing an ambassadorial journey in which the islands are sighted and which also clearly details the boundaries of China and the Ryukyu's (Japan) at the time, showing that the Senkakus were in neither country's territory and terra nullis until claimed by Japan in the 20th century. Korea invaded and stole Takeshima ("Dokdo"), killing Japanese self-defense forces and kidnapping Japanese fisherman in the process in the 1950s the second the U.S. military ceded the land back to Japan (Korea had repeatedly asked for the islands and the U.S. government had repeatedly concluded the islands clearly belonged to Japan). The Soviets stole the "Kuril" islands at the closing end of WWII, and would have gone further (think East Germany) if the U.S. hadn't started their Occupation. Pearl Harbor mostly resulted because the U.S. was blocking oil to Japan and some of the idiot higher-ups in the military junta that was Japan's government at the time thought that attacking America would make it go away, despite all of their best strategists insisting that the exact opposite would happen (which, of course, did). As for the "sex slaves," there is no evidence (beyond the testimony of a couple of women who have repeatedly changed their stories - from running away from home to being lured to being kidnapped) that the Japanese *government* actually coerced women into becoming sex slaves - prostitution stations were legal under Japanese law, but all were managed by private individuals, and, surprise surprise, mostly by Koreans - why do you think such stations continued to exist and be frequented by American G.I.s during the Korean War? Curby Wed, 26 Dec 2012 19:04:06 -0500 Oh, they will sacrifice US military personnel and burn your and my tax dollars. Curby Wed, 26 Dec 2012 18:55:20 -0500 Would you rather that China sell us opium? Because that was what us and Brit did. I will take the cheap knives and iphone please. Tyrone Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:47:59 -0500 dude you are fucking retarded. Jason Smith Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:34:58 -0500 Seems to me like they are taking after the US in their unwarranted, yet economically reasonable attempt to venture into land that doesn't belong to them for economic gains. WILLIAM TAYLOR Wed, 26 Dec 2012 16:57:43 -0500 This story is absolutely ridiculous and not worthy of putting out for public consumption. We are sick and tired of the media exaggerations in their attempt a grabbing eyeballs. Well Wed, 26 Dec 2012 16:16:09 -0500 Well it's not like Mao was a little girl raper. He was. He was a little girl raper who killed 50+ million of his own people. Xiao Jia Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:46:23 -0500 GO, GO, JAPAN - I AM CHINESE, AND SICK OF MY NATION'S ARROGANCE AND EVIL. JUST BOMB AGAIN! michaelnz Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:42:14 -0500 4. US treasury bond yields start to shoot up, forcing Bernanke to intervene; 5. Then the value of US dollar goes down significantly causing very high inflation the the USA; 6. the decline of US dollar caused its rejection of some international market, resulting in further dumping of US treasury bonds and USD......... 7. the spiking interest rates significantly shocked the swaps market, derivatives market etc, causing the collapse of the TBTF banks. The US government declares a banking holiday; 8. Sporadic panics start develop. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:27:11 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:27:10 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:27:10 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:27:09 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:27:09 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:27:08 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:27:08 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:27:08 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:27:07 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:26:26 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:26:25 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:26:25 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:26:25 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. Sylvain Allard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:26:18 -0500 The professor knows indeed very little: I suggest you change his name for The student. PT Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:15:39 -0500 Until china can sustain much of its economy based on domestic demand, it is not likely to be overtly aggressive, particularly not full-scale warfare. The loss of foreign trade would crush China's economy and with it, imperil the ruling elite: a most undesirable outcome and something to be avoided at all costs. As you may know from history, War creates much opportunity for change in the aggressor nation, much of it undesirable for those in power. It opens many doors best left closed. Also where is the exit strategy for the Chinese? How do they make such a war stop? How can the localize the conflict? How can they limit/ immunize the consequences of the conflict? Until you can answer those questions, the likelihood of war is very limited. That said, it appears there is no victory to be had, only various degrees of loss. I would suggest this is more about posturing a position of dominance prior to negotiations. Assert control over a lot of meaningless territory so you can keep what you really want when you have to give most of it back...Don't forget we are talking about the birthplace of Sun Tzu. Surely it has been read there. TheRexican Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:15:16 -0500 Yes! In such a densely populated country, instead of valuing harmony as they do, they will suddenly prefer to see a quarter million of their own killed by their the big brother they admire in the US. If American gun ownership were regulated practically at all, that would be a revelation. Guns in the US: not well regulated, no militia to speak of either. QE3 Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:13:58 -0500 Japan has hardly any military, how they going to battle with China? John Hickman Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:12:00 -0500 The hyperlinks in this article take you to commercials rather than useful information. What passes for news here it seems. Maria Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:01:35 -0500 "Claiming the Senkaku islands, a series of small outcroppings in the East China Sea, is China's way of testing America's new posture, White says." Unless you know, it actually belongs to China, just like the Dokdo Islands belong to Korea. And let's not forget Taiwan's claim to the Diaoyu Islands. And how's that dispute over Kuril Islands going with Russia? Didn't Japan also have a number of other disputes that resulted in bombing Pearl Harbor? Japan continues to dispute with Hiliary Clinton over 'Sex Slaves' and 'Comfort Women' this summer. Or maybe this is just to distract the population over how heavily indebted Japan is and there is no real plan to rescue it? Ha ha ha ha Wed, 26 Dec 2012 14:19:35 -0500 " underestaimate the power of the Japanese woman..." You have got a point there. One should never underestimate how much the American GIs are attracted to the little Japanese school girls . So by looking the other way when your school girls get raped , you will have an endless supply of American GIs station in your country. ENJOY ! David Zaduk Wed, 26 Dec 2012 14:13:03 -0500 The dispute isn't over these "worthless" islands it's over the oil and possibly mineral rich seafloor that control of these islands would give to China. China is trying to lay claim to most of the South China Sea, violating territorial water claims by many south Asian countries, not just Japan. China has engendered an adversarial relationship with Vietnam, South Korea, Japan, and Thailand just off the top of my head. If China continues its bullying in the area, the war won't just be Japan and the U.S. vs China, a lot of other southeast Asian countries will be dragged in, and it could be the start of a global war. Ha ha ha ha Wed, 26 Dec 2012 14:07:13 -0500 Meanwhile the US war machine has been fucking the world over and over all these years. The only way the US people will wake the fuck up is for war to hit home. Ha ha ha ha Wed, 26 Dec 2012 14:04:16 -0500 Who is going to win ? A lot of people in China , Japan and America will never find out .They will be nuked to ashes. It does not take a lot of nuke to level a city. What would be a good place to live if world does break out . anyone ? Richard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 14:01:23 -0500 Okay professor, there is at least a 1% you could be right. China is just having a litle fun. A war would serve no purpose. Japan will cede the islands before going to war over them. Richard Wed, 26 Dec 2012 13:43:45 -0500 Okay professor, there is at least a 1% you could be right. China is just having a litle fun. A war would serve no purpose. Japan will cede the islands before going to war over them. Dean Collins Wed, 26 Dec 2012 13:13:29 -0500 Would be interested in hearing peoples thoughts about should the USA let Japan build up their defense forces again - <a href="" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" ></a> dses Wed, 26 Dec 2012 13:04:01 -0500 Will you shut the hell up if someone park their cars on your driveways? blocking your car from using the road? JMR Wed, 26 Dec 2012 12:51:44 -0500 Well, let's see, what would you rather be if a hostile army invaded? Armed or not? I don't know anyone who would say "Yeah, I'd rather be unarmed and helpless and rounded up like cattle." An invasion is unlikely, but is it really? How many years ago was it that Japan invaded China? Blueapron Wed, 26 Dec 2012 12:51:01 -0500 I think China should shut the hell up, behave themselves, and just keep the peace. The whole world has enough problems as it is. end the wars Wed, 26 Dec 2012 11:01:03 -0500 China would kick japans ass so fast the war would be over almost before it stared and in regards to the warmongering neocons who control the u.s. gov and are blowing snot about the so called chinese threat,,,, I will believe china is a threat the day the u.s. corporations start returning the u.s. industrial base back to the u.s. from china until then it is all warmongering blood lust by the elites who control the u.s. gov. Chicom Fanboi Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:57:33 -0500 Now China can try out that missile technology the Clinton administration gave them. march21 Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:55:48 -0500 If it wants to test it's strength, China would first attack a country which does not have US backing, I would think. India, Vietnam comes ot mind... I hope I'm wrong and China's rise is truly peaceful. r cohn Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:55:06 -0500 A cessation of trade Chinese -Usa trade have a number of implications 1. after about 2 months mass riots by the unemployed in China 2..Difficulty for China in obtaining petroleum shipments 3.Shortages of certain type of manufacturing goods in the US.Certain consumer electronics products would become almost unavailable in the US The aftermath of any conflict would crete huge pressures in the USA to eliminate as much as possible ,imported goods from China. march21 Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:51:59 -0500 You mean Adam Lanzas can fight a force which American/Japanese navy/army/airforce personnel can't? I think you should get your head examined. Bob123 Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:16:40 -0500 To think of this as "something intrinsically worthless" says how clueless Hugh White is. To quote him here says much about the quality of BI. dug Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:12:55 -0500 I was hoping for another 20 years until the war with China but I think it is more likely to be sooner now. China is not going to wait until their strength is at a par with ours. They will start the war and use it to accelerate the building of their war machine. To the detriment of the lives of many. Alexander Ač Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:12:34 -0500 I agree with the proposed outcome, i.e. war, but: "It seems almost laughably unthinkable that the world's three richest countries - two of them nuclear-armed - would go to war over something so trivial. But that is to confuse what starts a war with what causes it." - this is not true. My suggestion is OIL. Alex Card Game Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:09:44 -0500 The professor is an idiot. Tokyo Joe dot tk Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:08:34 -0500 First friends, this aint gonna happen. The Chinaland people love Japanese toasters, tvs, cars and computers. They impress their girlfriends with Japanese made things. Second friends, I doubt they would have enough rowboats. Also, they underestimate the power of the Japanese woman. If they are caught taking the train, they can just about forget about getting any action. Take a look friends: <a href="" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" ></a> Take care friends. Aqua Buddha Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:50:15 -0500 Actually JMR is being an optimist because the likely outcome would be nuclear war and the Japanese do have Nukes that were made from materials from Fukushima weapons development reactors. The Chinese know this and will glass Japan! So JMR lets hope there are zero hostilities ! Ford Prefect Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:47:01 -0500 Unfortunately, this is how global depressions war. The easiest way to distract the population from their day to day economic misery is to blame it on someone else and go to war with them. The US government has played this card brilliantly over the past decade with the never-ending "Global War on Terror". China's economic woes may be deeper than we think with all of their saber rattling. back Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:45:51 -0500 you;re right.. that's insulting to gnats. guess who? Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:36:12 -0500 guess who's gonna to win? Greg Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:35:54 -0500 Well naturally. Weapons want to be used and China has to do something with all the sophisticated weaponry they bought using the money they made selling us sneakers, cheap cutlery and iPhones. back Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:32:20 -0500 Americans have the logic of a gnat. JMR Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:29:42 -0500 Japan has the strictest gun control laws in the world and no one owns a gun or even a sword. What happens if the Japanese and US defenses are defeated and Japan is invaded by the Chinese? Bet everyone there will wish for an "armed and well regulated militia."