Japanese General: “We Must Acquire Nuclear Weapons”


One of Japan’s top generals and the former chief of staff of its air force has used the memorial day of the Hiroshima atomic bombing to hold a lecture in Hiroshima demanding Japan maintain its own nuclear deterrent, lest she be bombed a third time by the likes of China or North Korea.


Lieutenant General (or Air Marshal) Toshio Tamogami gave a lecture to 1300 people on the 64th anniversary of the bombing, advocating a Japanese pursuit of nuclear armaments:

“To avoid being atomic bombed a third time, the normal way of thinking about this is that we should pursue our own nuclear armament.”

Toshio Tamogami himself is no stranger to controversy, having been sacked from his position as chief of staff of the Air Self Defence Force for irritating nearby countries by arguing that Japan should not be considered one of the belligerent nations of WWII.

Hiroshima’s notoriously leftist city administration is unhappy the day’s pacifist theatrics were disturbed by a note of realism, with the mayor having tried to get the lecture date changed “so as not to increase the sadness of the bereaved as they mourn the spirits of the dead.”

Calls for a revision of Japan’s Constitution to allow a more robust ability to defend itself in the face of regional tensions are increasingly heard in the ruling LDP, though for the moment no politicians openly advocate an independent nuclear deterrent.

With North Korea having threatened to kill 40 million Japanese in a nuclear strike, and with the ever increasing military build-up in China, it seems likely that paying billions to maintain American bases in Japan with no absolute guarantee of American intervention will become increasingly hard for Japanese politicians to justify…

Leave a Comment


  • I don’t think that’s really necessary anyway with the American troops stationed there. If they screwed with Japan then America would screw them right back.

    Either way, read the mood. (not that the US ambassador to Japan did such a bang-up job with that subject either)

  • Anonymous says:

    “””it seems likely that paying billions to maintain American bases in Japan with no absolute guarantee of American intervention will become increasingly hard for Japanese politicians to justify…”””

    Wait what? I thought they HAD to protect them. Isn’t that one of the core values in the US/Japan relationship set up immediately after WWII

  • Why all of a sudden to acquire nuclear armaments in Japan? It will not benefit to any party who need to take care of the high expenses the the nuke bear or to blow it and nations suffer. I think all of these nuclear weapons building should be stop to avoid world war III which is not fought by men but at the press of a button.

  • Is acquiring nuclear weapons really the best option?

    They’d have to test it somewhere,and testing it on native soil(as a few countries have done) probably wouldn’t sit well with the citizens. There may be other deterrents that can be used that wouldn’t leave the affected area unable to support life for thousands of years that could be used(as for what they are,I don’t know).

    Considering north korea’s latests threats, I really cannot blame japan one bit for wanting to protect their country.

    • Nuclear testing is prohibited by international agreements and policies so even if Japan decided to build their own nuclear armaments they wouldn’t be able to test it.

      North Korea violated such and therefore is subject to so much heat by the international community.

      Japan would still be able to acquire nuclear armaments from allies, or be capable of producing their own with a clear certainty/aid that they would work.

  • This is stupied, didn’t russia recently agree state that if china were to destroy all of there nukes they would do the same? We should be moving towards destroying nukes and here this dude is asking for there own? I smell another cold war…

    • No, they almost certainly did not. Russia is not stupid enough to want to disarm. Neither is the PRC. Then again, both are not dangerously unstable.

      And unilaterally disarming nukes is an dangerously naive idea. Even bilateral disarmament is not all that smart of an idea is the other parties are not particularly trustworthy – this is the same Russia that has threatened nuclear attacks on Poland within the last year for the Poles agreeing to have American missile defenses on their soil.

  • Doesn’t he remember the laws the were created by the USA so japan never creates war again they dont even a army any more and any way the usa would defend japan if north korea attacks

    • Anonymous says:

      sure spend billions of dollars/yen on suit that might not work as we expect it to and worse if they even make one thats it one because maintaining such machines also require billions. This machine can also be one of the biggest target to smash by tanks that can hide behind houses while this machine can only hide effectively behind skyscrapers .

  • Never happen. Developing nuclear weapon alone costs shitload of money. We’re not talking about millions of dollars but billions of dollars. Also keeping it functional and SAFE will drag another millions out of budget. Russia keeps only 20% of it’s nukes functional, and still plans to scrap most of them, since that simply kills their millitary budget (though they stopped this for now, because of this US missile defence system). And no, few nukes won’t do anything more than attract unnessesary attention. They would need at least Israeli-size nuclear pottential (around 80 nukes). I hardly see Japanese goverments wasting such money for some empire-wannabe generels. And, unlike “We are peaceful society, lololol” this is real argument why local hardhead generals won’t get these toys for sure.

    • Japan is the second richest in the world and is the cradle of the latest tech. If they learn to develop nuclear weapons, think about how much improvement will happen and how much deadlier Japan will be. Also, Japan can spend money if they want to, they’re one of the world’s leading lenders of money. developing nuclear weapons will not be a problem for them when they have the thing they need, money and brains. Japanese are the most intelligent people in the world, their IQ average for every people is about 110 and they have the money to develop nukes. they can use subs to keep these weapons, just like the US trident subs.

    • True. The general probably wants to have nukes to boost his street cred. Just think of South Park’s Cartman.

      Besides, there is not much of a reason for N Korea to attack Japan. Japan’s economy, though stagnant for quite some time, is still vital for the world. And despite what N Korea says about the capitalist pigs,I bet they are secretly planning to open up.

      Now I only worry about China. Being an important world leader, its time it buckle up and act like a respectable leader instead of being the school bully.

  • Many people don’t realize this, Japan is actually the fifth most funded military in the world. It is second in Asia only below China. Japan does not need nukes to defend itself against North Korea. If it wanted to, it can increase its air force capability from defense to more of an attack capacity. I do believe in selective preemptive strike for Japan when dealing with North Korea.

    Building nukes is crazy for Japan, who are they going to lob it at? North Korea? China (especially China) and Russia would have serious issues with a nuke attack so close to their lands. The nuke fallout could even affect South Korea. If Japan ever launches nukes at China, well it would mean total obliteration for Japan when China nukes back. We all know how small and densely populated Japan is.

    When Japan has come clean about its brutal past in WWII and nut jobs like this General aren’t in power, then maybe one day, if at all, Japan will be ready for nuclear weapons

  • Quoting Fallout 3: War… war never changes.

    Or is it even more direct to the point to say: Humans… humans never changes.

    The world turns and spins and always ends up in the same place.

    It’s pretty simple: Human stupidity will never cease to exist, it’s proven humanity never learn from it’s mistakes, so it’s innevitable that one day we’ll end up being the cause of our own extinction.

    We create weapons with the potential to destroy Earth thousands of time over, but we claim it’s for our own protection.

    Innevitably, one day, one of those weapons will end up falling in wrong hands, they will be used, and we will all be screwed by them, because of a very simple fact: BECAUSE THEY EXIST.

    Unfortunately, with warmongers like Bush and this guy, there’s no other way for them to learn how bad having nuclear weapons is other than they experiencing an attack of said weapons themselves.

    And humanity, as history passes and people forgets about WWII will end up needing another war to remember how bad things get.

    The only question is: Will Earth survive WWIII? Will humanity survive? And do our kind really deserves to?

  • I don’t see why not. I mean, they say it’s gonna be for deterrent purposes. What makes Japan different from any other countries anyway? I mean, aside from the fact that their defeat in World War II has made them into a country that is hell-bent on selling us the latest iteration of Sony and Nintendo’s latest console?

    • Sarkhan Vol says:

      They have no place to hide their missile silos. With MIRVs a single missile can carry up to 12 warheads. If a nation intends to do so, they can carpet bomb Japan with just a few missiles. It is quite unlikely that their nuclear launching infrastructures would survive if the attack is not apprehended before hand. By stationing them in submarines would theoretically allow for a second strike but it’s a big if, and Japan would be inevitably destroyed anyways. Small nations aren’t meant for nukes(with Israel being an exception, well they’re Jews).

      • actually. I think the launch sites will be immune to nuclear attacks. that’s how the Us works. Their silos are underground are actually housing hundreds of ICBMs, there are about a thousand silos spread in USA and can be moved from one place to another in case that some of the silos get affected even though they were built to resist nuclear strikes. I think Japan would do the same.

  • Oh gawd…This is how the nuclear apocalypse is gonna start.Anyone ever play Fallout 3?This is evidence that it will happen.Unless there are 0 surviors,and we all get Nuclearly fucked.

  • I think this “general” forgets that Japan is a relatively small country… if Japan was the target of nuclear attacks the attackers could pretty much wipe out their whole nation with a small fraction of whatever nuclear stockpile they had. All warheads in Japan would do is add more fuel to the explosions.

    He might as well say lets develop Gundams, atleast beam rifles or a huge defensive anti air particle cannon would be more useful than nukes to a country like Japan.

    • Sarkhan Vol says:

      That’s a very valid point. Considering the TNT equivalents of modern nuclear weapons, they have no safe place to hide their terrestrial missile silo in a preemptive strike. The best they could do is to put them in submarines under standby around the clock. Even then, it is only retaliative in nature, and highly skeptical if it will function without a proper chain of command. Not much deterrence there. Procuring nukes would do more harm than good for them.

  • Sarkhan Vol says:

    All of the former Axis nations have the capabilities to produce nuclear weapon but only they didn’t. Why? Because the rest of the world would jump on them if they try to pull something like that. That’s a price you pay for losing WWII. This guy is an idiot, no wonder he got sacked.

  • Well they’re are the second most powerful country in the world, financial-wise. I would think that their country’s one of the most likely candidates to rival the U.S. in any way… save for population at least.

  • oh yeah japanese economy is been in rescission for what 30 years now ? all they need now is to waste billions on bloody nuckes . Not to mention they were the only nation to suffer from nuclear strike ….. should people learn ?

  • Technically, they can’t have nukes ’cause it’s not really for “defending”. If Japan is worried about nukes so much then they should just develop anti-nuclear technology and make nukes useless. Sorta like the nuclear jammer in Gundam SEED.

    • by only using that they won’t make it last longer…
      that why they build genesis to eliminate all the threat…

      that as a warning… if you burn my house.. i will burn your house too… that why they start build “the Torch” as a warning if you burn my house i have a “torch” to.. to burn back your house…

  • Just for information: Most of Japan’s “pacifists” are anti-American and other capitalists, pro-communist China and Pro-North Korea. Some of them have relation to ultra left terrorist groups (kageki-ha).
    Whilst many of conservatives are pro-American although some of them are not so.
    But even among most nationalistic (right wing biased) people, it is hard to find Japanese who want to revenge American with nuclear attack.

    • DieHardjagged says:

      Well, from what i saw, a nuke wouldnt even reach America for example.. have you seen those Anti Rocket Turrets…?
      They will shoot them down before they even touch the earth.. well , it would be a devastation explosion in Mid-Air.
      I dont know if they are already installed.

    • Not necessarily, at least in terms of Japan.

      Japan pays a percentage of the operational costs, considered host nation support, to maintain US military bases. In turn, the United States has lease agreements with the country in order to use the land.

      Some digression, the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base is under lease – however – due to the Castro regime declaring the US occupation illegal the country has yet to cash any of the checks they have been issued.

      Either way, Japan could stop and the US would still maintain those bases as they prove to be of important strategic importance.

    • The Tokyo Trials tried to push all the responsibility for the war onto Japan. And that mind
      control is still misleading the Japanese people sixty-three years after the war. The belief is that if
      the Japanese army becomes stronger, it will certainly go on a rampage and invade other countries,
      so we need to make it as difficult as possible for the Self-Defense Forces (SDF) to act. The SDF
      cannot even defend its own territory, it cannot practice collective self-defense, there are many
      limitations on its use of weapons, and the possession of offensive weaponry is forbidden.
      Compared to the militaries of other countries, the SDF is bound hand and foot and immobilized.
      Unless our country is released from this mind control, it will never have a system for
      protecting itself through its own power.

      • Creating a structure where we can protect our country ourselves allows us to preemptively
        prevent an attack on Japan, and at the same time serves to bolster our position in diplomatic
        negotiations. This is understood in many countries to be perfectly normal, but that concept has not gotten through to our citizens.

        • Japanese textbook revisionism has misinformed a lot of the kids growing up in Japan for the past 60 years. A Japanese professor recently commented that 70% of all Japanese today don’t even realize that Japan invaded any countries during WWII. Just ask around the Pacific ~ Japan is still hated for their constant political denials of what happened in WWII.

        • I’m from Southeast Asia, and although I enjoy the Japanese culture, I can say that many(if not all) Southeast Asians DO NOT hold the Japanese invasion in high esteem at all.

          The war was a terrible thing. To suggest such a thing is an affront to all the victims. And for your sake, I hope you are a troll.

        • “It is certainly a false accusation to say that our country (Japan) was an aggressor nation.”

          Don’t make me laugh out of your babbling, you sick fuck.

          Was the invasion of China and Southeast Asian countries aggressive enough? If no, I really pity the likes of you.

          And hey, my grandpa was a survivor of the Bataan Death March. He might die out of heart attack if I told him that the Jap soldiers treated prisoners of war, including him, very well. 🙂

        • Even now, there are many people who think that our country’s aggression caused unbearable
          suffering to the countries of Asia during the Greater East Asia War. But we need to realize that
          many Asian countries take a positive view of the Greater East Asia War. In Thailand, Burma,
          India, Singapore, and Indonesia, the Japan that fought the Greater East Asia War is held in high
          esteem. We also have to realize that while many of the people who had direct contact with the
          Japanese army viewed them positively, it is often those who never directly saw the Japanese
          military who are spreading rumors about the army’s acts of brutality. Many foreigners have
          testified to the strict military discipline of the Japanese troops as compared to those of other
          countries. It is certainly a false accusation to say that our country was an aggressor nation.

  • i say they need nukes….

    for the war against agnes-chan!

    for real now:

    german militarys said the same thing back in the 50-60s… something like “tactical nukes are anyway just an evolitionary step of artillery, lets get nukes!”

    the german people didnt wanted it, so we didnt got nukes…
    exept the american b61 nukes that are stationen in germany, lol… some in our airforce bases, most in the american one(rammstein)…

    i´d say the same thing is going to happen in japan…

    btw. germany and japan have the strongest none nuclear military in the world…

  • I would think arming Japan with nukes would provoke North Korea even more. Lets face it, Kim Jong-Il is not the brightest or the most reasonable person in the world. He has already threatened a rain of nuclear fire on the US with out having any missiles that can reach the US. I doubt he would show more reason with a nuclear armed Japan.

    If I was Japan I would be looking more into the United States direct energy weapons that can shoot down a missile from miles away. And if North Korea ever launches any kind of attack on Japan, the US would retaliate almost instantly.

  • finally.i been waiting for this for a long time.all the money they pay america to station troops in japan is only harming it.after they guild their nukes they better get started on building some nuclear powered gundams

  • Even though some have intentions of defending themseleves, as far as anyone knows it, those nuclear weapons are still dangerous. The kind of power that the nuclear weapons is one of those reasons why some other countries want to have it and don’t let it go.

  • I don’t know but I doubt that any country in that area ( China, Korea or Japan ) can really know that they are being bombed with more than 5 minutes of anticipation. A nuke will be over their capital in less time that a guy faps.


    PS: Japan, Dedicate yourself to making VN and great Animes/Mangas.

  • If Japan ever does go through with getting their own nuclear armament, I’d officially say they fail History FOREVER. 😐

    I can understand how having such belligerent neighbors can ruffle feathers, but that gives those strutting attention whores what they want. To get noticed by the rest of the World.

  • PLENTY of countries beg for us bases. mainly ones worried about invasion. Places like Poland, the Philippines and Japan ask and lobby for it.

    Personally i think we should go home because it would save TONS of money and it’s honestly not our business. War should only be in self defense or to stop genocide.

    Nukes are an oddly good deterrent. It’s why we never attacked mainland china during Korea and Vietnam like the psycho generals wanted. Its basic Dr. Strangelove theory. If both sides possess a doomsday device you get a Mexican standoff and therefor world peace forever… or until someone gets really drunk.

    • You know shit about a global economy then.

      If US minds it’s own business and all of it’s allies that make money and goods appear in it are gone, what do we do then?

      Well, now we go to full on war or just wait to be attacked as our country declines.

    • Actually, we did briefly go into China after taking the capital of N. Korea during the forgotten war, which is why the Chinese got involved and pushed us back. If it weren’t for McArthur that disobeyed Truman’s orders not to do it, there wouldn’t be such a thing as a “divided” Korea today.

  • I symphatize with General Tamogami, but I do hope, if his government pursued this “nucular arms” powah that he wants, I hope Japan be not another aggressor nation just like almost 60+ years ago. But I don’t think Japan will be like that, she has learned the lessons of history. 🙂

    Militarism… -_-

  • Vampire Lord says:

    They just need Metal Gear Rex, or at least something which can actually defend them aganist nuclear weapons, when I think about it, that would solve the problem without the need of more nuclear weapons, just a truly defensive program instead of the usual “you pose a threat, I’ll pose a threat”.

  • That’s pretty sad, considering what I learned in Hiroshima only a few weeks ago. The staff at the peace memorial park were all really serious about the goal of eradicating nuclear weapons, I can’t tell if this would be either aggravating or saddening to them…

  • Things may change in the future, but at least for the next several decades any nuclear attack on Japan IS absolutely guaranteed to result in a military response from the US. Japan also has the ability to assemble its own nukes in as little as a few months should its politicians decide it needs them, which would almost certainly be enough time to prepare for any potential large scale attack.

    That being said, nukes are cheap insurance, and there’s no reason for a nation like Japan not to have its own. While any major war is unlikely any time soon, the US would also benefit from a stronger ally in the region, since nukes would make it less likely that Japan would be attacked and the US would have to be involved in the first place, and since if the US and Japan do have to go to war, Japan would be able to contribute more to its own defense.

    • You see, having Nukes in Japan is a bad thing for Russia though. Because ballistic missiles so close with them being a ally to the US isn’t exactly ideal.

      There is a lot more to getting nukes into your country then just saying “LETS STICK SOME NUKES HERE”

    • People say that the US with its allies did everything to provoke Japan to do the attack. They also had the information that it would happen days before Pearl Harbour and notified no one there. They seem to have been successful if you really believe the history books without causality checking this blindly.

      • Yeah, well, and Hitler was Roosevelt’s close friend, and acted entirely on his instructions. The end result was supposed to make US a hero nation for decades, disregarding the millions of lives sacrificed. Which happened. Even the fact that Russian role in victory over Germany was just as immensive as US’s wasnt made public in the US. I can tell you all ’bout conspiracies.

      • Yeah well people say a lot of stupid shit, it dose not make it true. The fact is Japan attacked the United States because the US stop selling its oil to Japan because of Japans attacks on French Indochina.

        And save the conspiracy theorists for someone who gives a shit.

      • Rape of Nanking, Bataan Death March, Second Sino-Japanese War, Three Alls Policy, Okinawan Mass-Suicide Orders, Pearl Harbor, etc.

        The Empire of Japan started the war. Japan engaged the Asian mainland countries, Pacific Islands and then finally the United States. Japan clearly started the war and the United States clearly ended it.

        I love Japanese culture, but I also have to accept the truth about its sick and twisted history.

        They started shit in the Pacific that their xenophobia and pride hasn’t quite let them live down. Making matters worse, what with Japan’s huge problem with textbook revisionism, this Tamogami guy thinks Japan has some sort of moral high ground to wield nuclear weaponry? Japan’s political apologism aside, and with the latest xenophobic statistics released by Sankaku on the Japanese dislike of Asian countries, I think Japan’s in a terrible moral position to even CONSIDER nuclear weaponry.

        I guess it goes to show that all that sakoku and military belligerence still hasn’t died in the old Japanese bones. >=\

        • No sir, I’ve loved and studied Japanese culture/language/anime/manga for well over 10 years now. I used to excuse away Japan’s actions during WWII, but reality is reality, you just can’t run from the truth, you’ve gotta’ accept it and learn from it. They say Germany remembers too much, and Japan too little, about WWII. It’s a travesty there are still some Japanese who carry such a militaristic spirit.

  • it seems likely that paying billions to maintain American bases in Japan with no absolute guarantee of American intervention will become increasingly hard for Japanese politicians to justify…

    hahahahaha, and how much money do you think we spend over there “defending you”

    • Too much.

      The US has military bases all over the world, and nobody was asking for them.

      Like an uninvited guest who puts his nose in business that does not concern him and that you can not kick out.

      The world does not need a self elected policing agenda.

      • “Too much.

        The US has military bases all over the world, and nobody was asking for them.

        Like an uninvited guest who puts his nose in business that does not concern him and that you can not kick out.

        The world does not need a self elected policing agenda.”

        Most US bases were first established at the end of WW2 or some earlier or later war. With that said, when your nation is completely defeated, you dont get to ‘ask’ anything.

      • Hm, most US bases are simple residue bases left over from the cold war era and also there is not too much effort from home nations to have these bases removed.

        Due to American Naval supremacy all over the world. Many American military bases are obsolete.

        Bases in Saudi Arabia, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Iraq, Cuba and other regions of the world, are for the most part accepted by the home countries. Contrary to major belief, these US bases do not recieve high levels of hatred.

      • ReddHeretic says:

        Tyrants and dictatorships have rarely ever become threats to the world, potential or otherwise, without economic backing by Western nations or the Western banking industry.

        A great amount of the money that North Korea has used to fund its weapons programs has come from the United States in a variety of ways. In 1930s Germany, the Third Reich was financed by Wall Street through the Federal Reserve.

        Are some people here really trying to rationalize American military bases in Japan and a defense commitment to that country in the event of war? Don’t count on the United States to solve problems we ourselves have created with our foreign interventionism, political, military, or economic.

        Maintaining all these bases in over a hundred nations around the world has been a major factor in the bankruptcy and fast-approaching economic collapse of our nation. Furthermore, our presence in all these areas of the world further antagonizes hostile nations, only increasing the chances of armed conflict breaking out at some point.

        Military welfare is still WELFARE. If Japan so desperately needs us there, tell me this: What are they going to do when we are in Third World poverty?

        We need to get back to the foreign policy advice our Founding Fathers left us. Refraining from entangling alliances, nation-building, and policing the world while maintaining free trade and open travel with all countries is the only policy that works on a lasting basis.

        Nothing keeps the peace more effectively than trade. Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor is proof of that among other innumerable examples throughout history.

      • TheAdmiral says:

        Well, while I don’t think Japan should be paying money to maintain American bases, there are two sides to the issue. One side is that, yes, America has been engaged in what almost seems like “colonial/imperial” foreign policy, and their presence in many places is neither welcome nor particularly necessary.

        On the other hand, in cases like Japan, Japan’s military was restricted post-WW2 to prevent a repeat in the heated aftermath of the war. Today, Japan has changed greatly, and that threat is likely gone, but for now, Japan’s military is only adequate for defense of Japanese territory. They are not equipped for retaliatory strikes, and would be dependent upon America and foreign assets to launch a counter-strike or to fend off a large scale invasion. Even if restrictions on their military were lifted today, they would probably require time to build up to the necessary levels.

        It’s a complex issue that treads along lines of where an allied military presence is seen as helping as opposed to interfering. Co-operation is good, but it is also often the way of governments and militaries to take advantage of such situations for the betterment of their own nation, even at the expense of others. I believe a compromise would be possible if people were willing. The problem is that often they are not, as compromise often takes on a false meaning of “weakness”.

      • If you cannot see the logical reasons behind bases in Japan your retarded.

        The Japanese were as bad as the Nazi’s in WW2, so we took away their rights to have a army, but they said “hey man they can come attack us” because, well, everybody hates Japan in Asia, so we said, “Don’t worry, we will protect you while you become a economic investment.”

        If not for American involvement in Japan it wouldn’t be some crazy place with loli and robots right now, it would just be some shitty military state trying to take everything over again.

  • “Hiroshima’s notoriously leftist city administration is unhappy the day’s pacifist theatrics were disturbed by a note of realism” I don’t think you quite understand the concept of MAD and the current general opinion on how to properly use nukes I.E. leave nothing behind.

    • TheAdmiral says:

      I have to say, that part of the article was a bit off-putting to me. The language used suggests an obviously slanted view-point. I think Japan should have more autonomy over their own military force, but I feel that people often don’t take the time to fully think about the horrors of nuclear war. It’s one of the few cases of something that actually exists, right now, that could wipe humanity from existence, and scour almost the entire, if not the entire, surface of the earth with fire, and definitely with lethal levels of radiation.

      • yeah, as i read the article, it seemed to first slander the air marshall and then slander the city of hiroshima and then lightly comment on Japan’s own military defenses.

        I agree that Japan may need something of its own but certainly not nuclear weapons. The possession of such weapons will domino effect Far Eastern Asia and soon, S. Korea will them, Indochina, etc. etc.


    • Forlourned says:

      @drippy wet wing -tree hugger no doubt-

      In a no doubt while typing high whiny welp limp dick whin, “Nuclear as power plant? Yes.
      Nuclear as weapon? FUCK NO!!” finishing it off with waggling wrists…eh yeeah~

      Power plants…? Sure.. if the fucking libertards (That’s BOTH sides of the aisle!) let Americans build them!





      FUCK YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      FUCKing FUCKITY FUCK FUCK- FUCK YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Oh..FUCK.. yeah.!

      We should be building more of what was made to plaster Nippon twice because they’re both where proven to be very small. Very precise! And leaves a radiation hot spot that lasts for… wait for it…..


      That’s right limp dickers, Right from the LAST panel at the Memorial -That I WENT to and read EVERY FUCKING Panel since it’s both in Japanese and English!- lays a teeny tiny smaller font paragraph at the very bottom that as an aside…

      Mentioned that the radiation levels returned to NORMAL levels by the middle of the THIRD MONTH. The majority of victims where exposed to radiation when they came back INTO the city to clean up the wreckage. Got that? The people who suffered from the Actual explosion was OUTNUMBERED by the people who in pure ignorance handled the irradiated debris! You have to look at the back of many.. many books that as an asides mention this Very telling TRUTH.

      AGAIN, think I’m lying on this shit? Drop a ticket to Tokyo, take the bullet train to Hiroshima and READ IT YOURSELF!!!!

      …The bullet train is pretty cool. Very smooth and it goes about 90 to 100 miles an hour. I bought two neat slim little aluminum bottle of Coke and still have one with me! Only 600yen ($6) for one!

      • perhaps forlourned does not realize how many warheads were manufactured and how many remain. During the height of the cold war the U.S.S.R. and the U.S. alone had enough nuclear capability to carpet the earth six times over.
        It does not matter to the earth what we do,nuclear war, global warming, whatever, it will abide.
        Those of us that survive the holocaust if it arrived would last long enough to start puking black vomitus, and watch our skin swell and fall of.
        Even if one survived that, your social support systems will have collapsed.
        Odds are though it will be a virus that removes human kind from the face of the Earth
        I will hand it to you ,those that returned died. Watch the U.S. documentary film of the navy personnel boarding the ships used as test subjects to wash the residual radiation off with seawater. They were dying and didn’t know it.

      • ugly american says:

        You are right about residual radiation killing those who survived the blast and those who went in to rebuild including American Gi’s who were among the occupational forces. My own father died in 1973 from radiation induced cancer. The U.S. kept track of thousands of army and naval personnel, as well as Japanese citizens that were exposed to radiation from either Japan or the Bikini tests.
        I understand the anger at the U.S. for the nuclear attacks, but why are the Japanese not enraged by the fire bombing that preceded the nuclear attacks. The incendiary bombing which included antipersonnel bombs with delay fuses to prevent anyone from fighting the fires took many more lives than the nuclear attacks. Check the facts.
        Japanese civilians were fare targets during world war two.

        • ugly american says:

          We did sign. WW2 was a different time It was later years that dupont gave us napalm and we sold our souls. Oh yes , agent orange was classed as a chemical weapon as well as napalm. We were disqualified because of the ban on chemical weapons that arose from mustard gas, phosgene and chlorine used during WW1.

        • ^ Im pretty sure the U.S. has been in many, if not all of the Geneva conventions regulating international conflict. If we were disqualified as you say, it does not change the fact that we did sign that agreement.

          Not up to snuff on Geneva convention facts but am know that USA did sign several times.

        • ugly american says:

          I was speaking ironically about civilian targets.
          the U.S. was never a part of the Geneva Convention. They refused to give up napalm which disqualified us.
          We also refuse to give up land mines and bomblets which are still taking casualties in Laos, especially children collecting scrap metal.

        • To answer why Japanese people do not hate Americans for the Tokyo naplam bombings, many elderly people who remember or their children do infact harbor ill wishes for Americans.

          To address the issue that Japanese civilians were ‘fair targets’ – according to the Geneva convention, which the US signed, they should not of been targetted. But all that changed in 1942-43 once the carpet bombings/’precision’ bombings began over Germany. So was it fair game? Not really, but that doesnt stop nations in a war that they believe is for ultimate survival. No civilian that does not pose a threat to military forces is ever fair game by conventional laws of war.

      • Dude. You’re so right. Why didnt i think of getting one into my basement?

        Tomorrow morning, im going to start handing out city destroying nuclear weapons to everyone on the street!

        *** on a side note, i believe that current nuclear weapons would radiate an area for approx. 50 years and cause environmental problems for centuries.

        • kortaku is right. I did some reseach about nuclear fall outs and nuclear thingies and the chernobyl disaster thing is the worst. Until now people in Ukraine can still feel the aftermath of the disaster.

        • What are you arguing or trying to say? Instead of simple telling me to read things i already know, and calling me retard, make something with an argument plox.

          Im pretty damn sure, that a modern nuclear weapon, with its enhanced explosive compounds and lingering radioactive particles would last 50 years easily, causing unsafe living conditions.

          There are reports in the Ukraine where people still get high levels of radiation and likelihood for cancer in areas almost 100 miles or more away from Chernobyl.

          So clue me in where i said something wrong or ‘retarded’.

      • Oh yeah, how come I didn’t think of this myself! Since the radiation is gone after only 3 three months, there’s ABSOLUTELY NOTHING objectionable about a weapon designed to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in a matter of seconds left! This is genius!

    • Their argument is more like:

      “If we build nukes and someone pokes as with nukes, then we can poke them back with nukes.. effectively making it less likely being poked.

      If we don’t have nukes, well, we got a problem Huston..”

      If WWIII breaks out, more than 80% of us are fucked anyway (and more later on), so this is just an aggressive political measure. Anyway, as long as nobody launches the nukes, I don’t really care.

      • I loled at this post.

        yeah. fuck with einstein who gave the nuclear data to the us government and fuck with the US government who didn’t keep up with their promise that they aren’t going to use the nuclear technology for war, which they did in less than 6 months…

        this topic makes me remember red alert 3

      • ugly american says:

        Anybody remember the cold war. My favorite part of the cold war was “MAD”. We were promised that “MAD” would prevent any use of a nuclear device by either side.
        For those of you who are too young to remember, or who have forgotten the logic of our most brilliant leaders “MAD” stood for
        “Mutually Assured Destruction”. We had nothing to worry about. If we were fried so was the other side. Who could ask for more!

        • The most effective weapon today would be to stop pumping up oil. If all the oil producing nations went together and stopped it all then half the world would stop in no time. At least until some alternative fuel was as available at the same price as today’s oil.

          There was even a guy in America that decided to sue Norway when Norway decreased the oil production. Because it caused the prices to rise.

          Nuclear weapons are powerfull indeed. But the nature itself is way more powerfull. The energy of an average storm is similar to that of a 20 000 tonn nucelar bomb. Not to mention the forces dragging the continental plates around. Earthquakes, volcanoes and tsunamies.

          And then we have the upcomming Anti-matter. It reacts with any kind of matter. And the reaction is said to use 100% of the energy of the particle. while the reaction in nuclear bombs use 0.5% of the possible energy. Making Anti-matter 200 times more powerfull than nuclear power.

          You heard about the world’s end when they started that huge machine in CERN, even if the particles launched there would collide and create Anti-matter a year after launch.

        • ^ you seem to be a troll. And a very angry troll at that.

          There seem to be many things wrong with what you stated. It doesnt matter if all the nuclear weapons on earth could not physically destroy it (which they actually could). If every weapon was denotated in every major city and largely populated area of the planet, the human population would be near extinct in a matter of minutes. Secondly, you argue for the use of nuclear weapons as tactical weapons. This is a poor idea. There is no need for tactical nukes anymore, as conventional high explosives are currently more than enough and continue to develop into larger, more massive weapons (cite MOAB).

          Yes, naturally wonders on earth are more powerful in many cases than man-made products. But a nuclear weapon is something than has only occured in the Core of the sun. A nuclear reaction is in the essence, the life of the sun and for that to be recreated by man, is like being able to create a sun star. Secondly, a massive enough nuclear explosion will be able to surpass that of any natural wonder, man has simply yet to try to create it (i believe it does not exist yet).

          How do you argue that there are no environmental effects/lingering traces of nuclear weapons once used? There are clear reports by many around many areas of the world where the rate of cancer and radiation related diseases rise tremendously where a nuclear weapon or plant was used/tested/melted down. Genetic mutation is NOT normal, and it is NOT healthy, and it is NOT okay to suddenly have 8x times the normal radiation level in a animal’s body.

          Radiation is not a normal part of the organic body and it is a major issue in the onset of early death.

          The simple fact that it 2009 and that there is STILL radiation lingering is a huge blow to the use of nuclear weapons.
          About Chernobyl, sure its probably BARELY okay to live near there again but would you personally live there when there is clear cut studies of genetic mutation in the wildlife?
          If so, make yourself an example and document it for all of us.

          It seems like you’re a troll.

        • Forlourned says:

          I gotta laugh at this diatribe. Armageddon? End of Days~ Fallout 3 styled wastelands…

          Guess what; you know how the world could be Actually affected by nukes? You need to collect Every one of them and put it at one spot of the globe.. flip the switch and BOOM! Depending on the direction the explosion was facing, the planet will move further away or toward the sun… slightly. If every bomb blew at once and you tried to equate it to the Sun, I’d guess a football sized bit of sun would minutely compare. We think so Big of ourselves don’t we… HA!

          Krakatoa and Mount Pinatubo where actual game changers to the globe. This shit happens almost every Decade and when just one of these suckers pop. Actual Global temperatures drop during that year. Fuck, if the sun doesn’t “blow up” too much. We get an actual DROP in GLOBAL temperatures like in 2007!!!! What a glorious year that was… It felt like fall all year long and I lived near the Equator!

          All Nukes are AIR DETONATIONS and don’t blow much up into the sky, what you’ve seen in those many pictures and film are super heated STEAM! Not debris or bits of people. The Bikini Atolls was the site of the test of the first FUSION BOMB.. very spectacular film of the boom.. Yet nobody mentions the MASSIVE SWARMS of sea life teeming around GROUND ZERO nowadays. They only fixate on the concrete dome that covers the actual point where it blew.. you can Stand on top of that Fucking dome with a Geiger counter and get readings a touch above normal background radiation!

          Ah..Chernobyl. If you’ve read the wiki, you’ll notice a little about the Explosion of wildlife now in the area these days. It baffled the “scientists” there, so they had to find something Baaad about it. And they did; noting that the radiation was changing the animals -mutating Them!-. Making them unproductive and noting that many birds don’t come back… and the scientists where happy again since that still fits the idea that that explosion !kills! NOTHING will survive!!… yet still I read small reports not backed by government or college money making notes that that wildlife is still thriving in that -HELL ON EARTH- to this day.

          Again, Don’t buy what I just wrote? The two links are from this year 2009. Remember that, some of the other links date back to 2007 of which that wiki “reporter” only mentioned and failed to note the newer reports.



          Nukes arn’t the game changer, just the applications of it by ragheads in eurotrashland, Southeast Asia, S. Korea, Japan or America. Yes, I still think we should’ve accelerated the manufacturing of those MOAB bombs for use in Afghanistan.


          Read it a weep ragheads, but take heart. the limp ass teleprez is still pissing in his pants at the mention of your name so the pr bullshit is still working.

        • ugly american says:

          You are absolutely right. The chances of some zealot deciding he should launch is getting more and more likely as each day goes by. For example look at the Christians in Israel trying to initiate Armageddon. The only reason I sight Christians is that I don’t wish to sound like a hypocrite.
          We were lucky to live through the cold war. It is supposedly over but now we have India, Pakistan, North Korea, Iran, And God knows who else having or developing nuclear and biological capabilities.
          I live forty miles from Lawrence Livermore Lab, Americas main weapons developer. I am familiar with your unease as you pass those warheads.
          It just struck me, The irony of letters like these on a website concerned with Anime and Pretty girls!

        • TheAdmiral says:

          No one being fried at all? Just because the deployment of a nuclear weapon would spell Armageddon doesn’t necessarily mean someone won’t be crazy enough to try. Someone might think they can manage to take out a country’s nuclear armaments, another might think they can press their luck with a “tactical nuke”, or yet another may simply be actively trying to end the world for some insane religious or other motivation.

          Nuclear weapons are truly a horrific thing, and not to be taken lightly in any context. Where I live, there’s a naval base not far where nuclear warheads are stored and maintained. It’s somewhat disturbing knowing that as you drive past, inside there is the power to end the world as we know it.

          That said, this general could definitely have picked a better time. Giving a lecture advocating nuclear weapons during a memorial dedicated to mourning those lost to a nuclear weapon doesn’t seem like a good way to drum up support.

        • Maybe for people whose reasoning doesn’t stretch beyond “oh no, it has destruction in the name!”…

          One side holding all the cards makes them more likely to act with impunity. It’s like police and criminals; yes, by having a police force we are giving people guns and sending them out onto the streets, but if you don’t ignore all those other relevant facts you won’t think it leads to more danger/violence.

    • SkyNet approves of this. Each country should store more nuclear-based weaponry.

      We surely are moving towards a bleak future indeed. The world’s powers are deluded by distrust, and paranoia. Basically, no one wants to let go fully of their own weapons until the other party has done so.

      • Forlourned says:

        That plant was originally used to manufacture NUCLEAR WARHEADS, and the morons of the peoples republic of red rusted sickles thought it cool to use it for “public” interests WITHOUT training the many.. MANY.. lazy and bored “technicians” into how to deal with little things like MELTDOWNS and MINI-NUKE EXPLOSIONS.

        To this day, at least three-3- / quarter-4-s (3/4) of the “electrical” plants in “Russia” where designed to make Beetle(german car)sized NUKES to drop on the U.s. of A.

        • Wasn’t the difference between the Chernobyl Disaster and the Three Mile Island Disaster due to fundamental differences in containment design? E.g. Chernobyl’s reactor did not have a containment system, or at least a sufficient one for an extreme amount of energy, while the Three Mile Island did; and thus, when that one reactor out of four reactors blew up, the radiation leaked into the area.

        • If you want to say Chernobyl was designed by army rejects and janitors then how about the nearly catastrophic Three Mile Island; or twenty or so other incidents throughout the world in Japan, the UK, the US, or etc over the past 20 or 30 years that have had near disastrous accidents.

          Don’t get me wrong I am love nuclear power, but just because they were Russians, well soviets since it wasn’t simply Russians at the time.

        • Tex Arcana says:

          The disappointing thing is not that this guy wants nukes, it’s that he fails at strategy.

          North Korea has nothing to gain from bombing Japan, but the threat of same makes gets them far more face-time then their lowly regime warrants. If push came to shove, it could be turned into a crater-state in about 3 days.

        • Forlourned says:

          Get your brain cells straighten out!

          That facility was designed by very smart men, but then Given retarded janitors and army rejects.

          That sucker made at the very least over a Thousand Working NUCLEAR WARHEADs without blowing UP before the morons started to crowd out the Average Thinking Scientist assigned -not working..ASSIGNED- there.

  • No absolute guarantee of American intervention? I could have sworn there was an agreement between the US japan and S Korea if something pops off all 3 would be in it together? At least thats what they are telling the American troops over here.

    • kajunbowser says:

      Zomb1e13 is right. However, this sentiment is also up to the current President at which time such an event should happen. I a US President believes in a strong military and/or honoring such treaties, then US intervention is assured. On the other hand, if the US President is one that doesn’t care for a powerful military (or vilification thereof) and/or sees such treaties as nonsensical things of the past (current), then chances of such an intervention will leave Japan’s arse blowing in the fallout-carrying wind.

      It’s about time that Japan at least make provisions to fend for itself just in case. All the anti-nuke f4gs will rage at me for saying this, but nukes are a necessary evil. Having none opens up space for less peace in the world (peace through strength, or fear, if you please) or the lamentation of a lack thereof if a world ending meteor come calling. Responsible ownership w/ high class anti-terrorist defenses, as well as keeping crazy ppl in check (Jong-Il, Kohlmeni) and there will be nothing to fret over.

      Besides, there’s always the Miracle, amirite?

      • No, the security/defense treaty between Japan and the US is a matter of federal law (It was ratified by the US Senate.) from the American perspective. Like the treaty that set up NATO, it has to be enforced, even if the President does not feel like it.

        The US Constitution gives the President broad powers when it comes to his responsibility as Commander-in-Chief (i.e. almost anything that happens outside the US.). Treaties ratified by the US Senate, and which are not in violation of existing US laws, are one of the few exceptions to that.

        Unless the Japanese cleverly inserted a prohibition on when American aid was required (Similar to NATO prohibiting NATO aid to certain parts of the world.), the US would HAVE to come to Japan’s defense.

        Other issues, including whether the general is a fool (I do not believe in Germany getting nukes either, and Germany is quite a ways better than Japan in accepting its responsibility for Big Mistake #2.), will be mentioned by others.

  • Hmmmm I learned in physics that Japan has the largest supply of enriched plutonium in the world and has the greatest potential to create the most nuclear weapons… that would be quite interesting to see.

    • The only issue I see with nuclear deterrent is that it’s like saying arm everybody with a gun and nobody will want to shoot.

      Course, in america it’s already like that and look at deaths by gun wounds, injuries by gun shots.

      Nobody’s going to want to shoot on average, but there’s always that occasional nut who gets his hands on nukes and doesn’t give a shit about what happens after. You know, the kind that just wants to create chaos.

        • yeah. nukes… warheads are mostly made up of U-235 and plutonium 239. U-238 don’t cause much fission since the neutrons will just be absorbed and so the chain reaction will fail. Plutonium-239 is more effective in terms of radioactive bombing and in nuclear strategy since the radioactivity of Plutonium-239 lasts longer than U-235. in short, plutonium-239 will make fall-outs even deadlier.

          And yeah. Nukes are deadlier than 1 million soldiers since it can kill millions in one nuclear strike.

          Japan is protected by America and in the book I’ve read, US of A shall launch a full-force retaliation against any force that tries to bombard a protected country with nuclear bombs….

          however it’s hard to trust the US government. XP

          That’s why I’m supporting Japan’s military officer toshio-san’s claim that Japan should have nucler weapons. I’m have a Japanese blood that’s why it’s okay for me.

          And so the third world war shall begin and kuro no kishi will save nippon from britannia and etc etc etc.

        • TheAdmiral says:

          North Korea, possibly, but not China. It’s enough to irradiate all of China (and more), but not to wipe it out completely. Most nuclear weapons these days are not the “city-destroyers” that are often pictured, but rather, are kilo-ton range “tactical nukes”. That said, do the current treaties that restrict the Japanese military even allow nuclear weaponry?

        • Vallen Chaos Valiant says:

          Yes, Plutonium is a synthetic element. But because Japan had possessed nuclear reactors for decades, they have stocked up on excess plutonium as a by-product. Japan is nearly entirely powered by nuclear powerplants due to a lack of any alternatives. They have enough plutonium to make 200 nuclear warheads, as well as the technical know-how.

          The only reason Japan isn’t already a nuclear power, is that they don’t WANT to. They could have nukes in a year’s time if the Japanese public demands it.

        • Zabber, I’m thinking you didn’t play Defcon either. Did you miss the part where EVERY THING DIES?

          And Defcon doesn’t really properly introduce missile interception strategies. Or fully the concept of first strike. Or the fact that a planned successful nuclear launch involves complete and utter decimation of EVERYTHING. EVERYTHING. So, either we have every one dies, or an entire country is wiped out before it can even begin to react.

          But regardless, nuclear missiles aren’t a deterrent for nuclear missiles. Nuclear strategy already takes this into account. The only real deterrent for nuclear missiles is the fact the international community will anally rape you for using them and increasingly advanced interception technology.

        • 2Kocs&1cup says:

          hmmmmm if everyone has a nuke than wouldn’t that just be peace through fear of getting your ass blow out of the water?

          besides if we ever found a way to jam a nuclear weapon…….than i guess war has finnaly started to be entertaining again

          (i know im evil for finding the act of mass death entertaining, but i’m not intrested in people killing each other im intrested in how people solve there problems when they have 2 choices.)

          1. talk it all out and eventually come to an agreement after much debate

          2. pick up a gun and blow the other guys friken brain out and just take what you want

        • Peace through power…

          Yea, it only works for countries who are able to build up that power. In this day and age, it’s a button war. Having a strong military is great, but for a country to not have their own nuclear arsenal, it’s like going into a battle without any anti air defense. Unless… Some smart genius creates something like a N-jammer… Then that would turn some tides in world power.