China's defence budget worries Japan

[Nomenclature]

There's little sense in talking about whether a particular weapon is offensive or defensive. You can use aircraft carriers defensively if you employ them as deterrence against potential attackers, on the other hand even SAM can be used offensively if you move them to a border.

 

[xdrive]

There's little sense in talking about whether a particular weapon is offensive or defensive. You can use aircraft carriers defensively if you employ them as deterrence against potential attackers, on the other hand even SAM can be used offensively if you move them to a border.

The whole purpose of aircraft carriers is to have a mobile airfield to project power long distances, it is purely an offensive weapon. If a country wanted to defend just it's land, it would just have ground airfields, not aircraft carriers.

 

[somebozo]

Well guilt speaks..even after 60 years!

It is funny that the Japanese consider themselves "victim" of WW-2 with annual fancy parades in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

 

[Nomenclature]

The whole purpose of aircraft carriers is to have a mobile airfield to project power long distances, it is purely an offensive weapon. If a country wanted to defend just it's land, it would just have ground airfields, not aircraft carriers.

With your logic of classifying weapon systems by range, guns would be offensive weapons and knives defensive weapons. Therefore even though there are other people who carry firearms, if one just want to defend himself he would only carry a knife and use it to fight guns when attacked. I hope you can see how absurd this is.

 

[somebozo]

With your logic of classifying weapon systems by range, guns would be offensive weapons and knives defensive weapons. Therefore even though there are other people who carry firearms, if one just want to defend himself he would only carry a knife and use it to fight guns when attacked. I hope you can see how absurd this is.

knives could be offensive too when used against unarmed person or with superior tactic..

 

[xdrive]

With your logic of classifying weapon systems by range, guns would be offensive weapons and knives defensive weapons. Therefore even though there are other people who carry firearms, if one just want to defend himself he would only carry a knife and use it to fight guns when attacked. I hope you can see how absurd this is.

No that's clearly not the same logic, and in no way is aircraft carriers and firearms comparable lol.

Aircraft carriers are made for force projection, in other words, they are made to bring your airforce and an airfield anywhere in the world. Purely offensive. You would not build an aircraft carrier just for defensive purposes, as just a normal ground airfield would suffice.

 

[siegecrossbow]

No that's clearly not the same logic, and in no way is aircraft carriers and firearms comparable lol.

Aircraft carriers are made for force projection, in other words, they are made to bring your airforce and an airfield anywhere in the world. Purely offensive. You would not build an aircraft carrier just for defensive purposes, as just a normal ground airfield would suffice.

Which is funny because the Japanese have 5 "heli-destroyers" capable of supporting VTOL F-35s while China doesn't even have a single one. Unlike Japan China is allowed to develop carriers, by International Law.

 

[Nomenclature]

No that's clearly not the same logic, and in no way is aircraft carriers and firearms comparable lol.

Aircraft carriers are made for force projection, in other words, they are made to bring your airforce and an airfield anywhere in the world. Purely offensive. You would not build an aircraft carrier just for defensive purposes, as just a normal ground airfield would suffice.

Nonsense, the purpose for a defensive military is to deter any potential attackers from attacking and if deterrence fails the second job is to force attackers to cease their aggression.

A force projection capability strong enough to bring the war to shores of potential attackers serves as a powerful deterrence, and without force projection to threaten attackers' bases of operation and military-industrial production base the chance of stopping attackers from continuing to wage war would be very limited.

Therefore for a country like China, force projection is not only a legitimate part of an overall defensive military, it is in fact an essential part.

 

[xuxu1457]

How do you to defend if you have only one Body armor but not any gun,when facing an Ak47~~~~

 

[xdrive]

Which is funny because the Japanese have 5 "heli-destroyers" capable of supporting VTOL F-35s while China doesn't even have a single one. Unlike Japan China is allowed to develop carriers, by International Law.

We are talking about China, not Japan and no ones saying "China isn't allowed to have aircraft carriers" go back and see what we are talking about.

Nonsense, the purpose for a defensive military is to deter any potential attackers from attacking and if deterrence fails the second job is to force attackers to cease their aggression.

A force projection capability strong enough to bring the war to shores of potential attackers serves as a powerful deterrence, and without force projection to threaten attackers' bases of operation and military-industrial production base the chance of stopping attackers from continuing to wage war would be very limited.

Therefore for a country like China, force projection is not only a legitimate part of an overall defensive military, it is in fact an essential part.

An aircraft carrier isn't a defensive deterrent. It's purely offensive. If a country wanted to invade China, they wouldn't say "oh we better watch out for their aircraft carrier" because it isn't a heavy defensive weapon. It's an offensive support weapon, designed to transport a countries airforce around the world and provide a mobile airfield to launch offensive attacks.

I agree offence is a good defence, but claiming a countries military is purely defensive even though it has large offensive weapons is silly.

 

[Ras]

Which is funny because the Japanese have 5 "heli-destroyers" capable of supporting VTOL F-35s while China doesn't even have a single one. Unlike Japan China is allowed to develop carriers, by International Law.

Wrong..International law(what is that?) says nothing about Japan building carriers.

 

[Honor]

AC is a offensive weapon! Depends on the user, it will be for good or for bad!

 

[CardSharp]

Wrong..International law(what is that?) says nothing about Japan building carriers.

I think he meant Japan's pacifist constitution that prohibits offensive weapons (don't know if carrier qualifies, maybe) not international law. Though the fact that America/MacArthur forces the constitution on the Japanese as a second party may qualify it as an international law.

 

[Honor]

Wrong..International law(what is that?) says nothing about Japan building carriers.

Japan own law does not allow her to own offensive weapon! In reality, Japan have Heli Carriers that can be used as offensive platform.

 

[Mirza Jatt]

firstly whats the issue here ?? just that china is building a huge military ??

If japan wants even it can increase its forces...who's stopping ??