Is it time for Japan to have nuclear arms? Trump uncertainty sparks debate

22 comments

1. Strategically and logically speaking, the answer is definitely yes.

2. Yep.
   There are only benefits from it, even though it’s costly to maintain

3. The answer is no. Always no.

4. There aren’t many places in Japan one could hide a missile silo that would be outside of Aegis anti ICBM range. Usually a missile silo should be several thousand miles inland away from any ocean.

5. As we’ve seen with Ukraine, absolutely yes.

6. Paywalled.

   Even if it’s a good idea in theory, it’s probably unlikely. We also should differentiate which kind of nukes we’re actually talking about.

   A nuclear bomb on Japan soil? Don’t think so. You want to see real protests in Japan here you go. Completely feasible, but very unpopular.

   Second Strike. Maybe. Japan only has diesel submarines. Where are you gonna get nuclear powered submarines from? The US? Don’t think so. Not anytime soon. We can cross this one off the list.

   Within the next 4 years, highly unlikely. The only fear is if Russia straight up invades Japan. That’s unlikely given the current situation. The SDF would have a field day with them.

   Not only that, but no one wants to let Japan out of it’s bottle. No one.

7. Is it time to lift sanctions on North Korea?

8. Seems like political suicide regardless of the need

9. It is time for Japan to make their own American godzillas. I, for one, will let them fight

10. Every country is on their own now.

11. None of the US East Asian allies are allowed to have nukes. The US will destroy the weapons program.

    Unlike Taiwan, where the US needed to infiltrate the weapons program to confirm and destroy it.

    The US has multiple military bases on Japan soil.

    The US would destroy Japan again. Then, rebuild the government again.

    US security concerns are primary among Asian allies. They are not allowed to have security sovereignty.

12. Japan is a defacto nuclear country, it has a space program, it has each and every piece needed. It just needs to put those pieces together so it doesn’t need to rely on unreliable partners.

13. Absolutely yes, unless they don’t mind losing territory to China and possibly also Russia and North Korea.

14. Japan needs its own standing military.

15. Taiwan should get them first.

16. Whether or not they should, the chances Japan will have nuclear weapons is pretty close to zero. Being the world’s only victim of nuclear aggression is such an integral part of the national identity.

17. Hell yea

18. Nuclear Japan

19. Yes. You can’t trust the US, they’re just not a reliable ally

20. I would bet that Japan could have capable nuclear missiles ready in less than a year.

21. China would stop being an arsehole to them so yep go for it.

22. For countries like Japan and many European ones as well the discussion is actually less important than it might seem.

    They currently might not have nuclear weapons, but the deterrence does exist nonetheless – because they are technically advanced enough AND have access to all required resources to allow them to build bombs within weeks if so desired. They also already do have aircraft/conventional missiles that would be able to carry them.

    So the question of having them ready is more or less a technicality/only relevant for an immediate response scenario.