StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Look at the flag.




Thoughts? As in, is it inappropriate?

The tank is a Type 90.

Not in my oppinion. Why would it be?

Echoes of World War II?

Looks ok to me...

Vympel wrote:Look at the flag.




Thoughts? As in, is it inappropriate?

The tank is a Type 90.

The Japanese have rectified their armour weakness for round two.

Uh-oh...

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
The Japanese have rectified their armour weakness for round two.

Bah- with a weight of only some 50 tons (some of that going into dubious systems such as a complicated suspension system to lower and raise the height of the tank), and no reactive armor to speak of- it may be good in the firepower (same main gun as the Leopard 2) and fire control, but it's armor cannot be strong enough to stop any modern tank ammunition, be it from the East or West.

Why was the old flag done away with in the first place?

Vympel wrote:Why was the old flag done away with in the first place?

I'm not sure. It certainly kicks major ass. And anyways, it's not like it's very different from their official one. It'd be like if they changed the swastika flag to just being a red field with a white disc.
But anyways, I'm not sure of any groups of people who find the sunburst flag offensive. And if there are people who find it offensive, then I'm sure they're sensitive enough to find the official one offensive too, so they don't really count.

Robert Treder wrote:
I'm not sure. It certainly kicks major ass. And anyways, it's not like it's very different from their official one. It'd be like if they changed the swastika flag to just being a red field with a white disc.
But anyways, I'm not sure of any groups of people who find the sunburst flag offensive. And if there are people who find it offensive, then I'm sure they're sensitive enough to find the official one offensive too, so they don't really count.

Personally it doesn't bother me (after all, you're talking to someone who was overjoyed when President Putin gave the Red Army it's old Communist regalia back- i.e. the Red Banner and Star), but I did here expressions of concern where I found it.

*plans for the neo-nihon co-prosperity sphere*

The Naval Ensign was readopted in in 1954


As was the Ground Self Defense Forces' Colors


This is new why?

Bartman wrote:This is new why?

Because I think they just recently re-adopted the rising sun flag as their national flag.


I don't know how to feel about that. I still think the Japanese have a lot to own up to after WW2. Their nationalistic worries me given their attitude of denial or/and or glorification of their past.

That's not the same flag as was used by the military of Imperial Japan. However I have a very low opinion of Japan and its military, until they face the reality of WW2 that's not changing. However all signs point towards Japans next generation taking over without doing so.

I have a simple question that has a simple answer - was Japan not told to stop building miltary forces after the end of WWII?

Vympel wrote: Why was the old flag done away with in the first place?

The rising sun you mean? Probably had something to do with it being the flag of Imperial Japans military and one that led Japan down the seemingly forgotten horror of the second world war.

Stormbringer wrote:Because I think they just recently re-adopted the rising sun flag as their national flag.

Got a cite? They did change the national flag in 1999 but it is almost inperceptiblely different for the national flag adopted in 1870. Both use a single red disc on a field of white. The only difference is that the overall proprtion was changed from 7:10 to 2:3 and the disc was moved 1/100th fruther from the hoist side. As I mentioned the flag on that tank is the same one that has been used as the Ground Self Defense Forces' Colors since 1954. Had you located a picture of a tank from the '60s it would have flown the same flag.

Stormbringer wrote:I don't know how to feel about that. I still think the Japanese have a lot to own up to after WW2. Their nationalistic worries me given their attitude of denial or/and or glorification of their past.

Fair enough. I also find the Japanese attitude toward WWII to be worrisome. But in this case I see no cause for alarm.

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Vympel wrote: Why was the old flag done away with in the first place?

The rising sun you mean? Probably had something to do with it being the flag of Imperial Japans military and one that led Japan down the seemingly forgotten horror of the second world war.

The Japanese national flag has been a red disk on a white field since 1870. The national flag has never had rays. The military in WWII adoped the naval ensign as a general military flag. This flag is the familiar one with rays. It was banned by the treaty of San Fransisco which also banned any Japanese military. In '52 Japan was allowed to begin rebuilding a self defense force and in '54 readopted flags based on the old Naval Ensign.

Bartman wrote:Got a cite? They did change the national flag in 1999 but it is almost inperceptiblely different for the national flag adopted in 1870. Both use a single red disc on a field of white. The only difference is that the overall proprtion was changed from 7:10 to 2:3 and the disc was moved 1/100th fruther from the hoist side. As I mentioned the flag on that tank is the same one that has been used as the Ground Self Defense Forces' Colors since 1954. Had you located a picture of a tank from the '60s it would have flown the same flag.

Okay. I'm no expert on Japanese flags

Bartman wrote:Fair enough. I also find the Japanese attitude toward WWII to be worrisome. But in this case I see no cause for alarm.

About the flags no. But I do find the Japaneses stubborn refusal to admit they did anything wrong troubling. Especially given some of the political sentiments of recent years.

verilon wrote:I have a simple question that has a simple answer - was Japan not told to stop building miltary forces after the end of WWII?

They have a national defense force.

verilon wrote:I have a simple question that has a simple answer - was Japan not told to stop building miltary forces after the end of WWII?

It's part of thier US drafted constitution, and constitutions can be amended.

Given the situation with North Korea, the Japanese are strongly considering eliminating that provision.

verilon wrote:I have a simple question that has a simple answer - was Japan not told to stop building miltary forces after the end of WWII?

It has only in the past few decades been modernised. Even after the US gave the Japenese the ok it was quite nervous and was a mere natonal guard for many years.

verilon wrote:I have a simple question that has a simple answer - was Japan not told to stop building miltary forces after the end of WWII?

Their constitution allows them a "defense force" but not an army. Quite frankly it seems like bandying semantics to me, but I suppose the difference is that the JSDF isn't allowed to deploy outside of Japan.

verilon wrote:I have a simple question that has a simple answer - was Japan not told to stop building miltary forces after the end of WWII?

Another reason is the US Government realise it is too cost prohibitive in terms of manpower, equipment and money to be the sole protectors of Japan.

Andrew J. wrote:

verilon wrote:I have a simple question that has a simple answer - was Japan not told to stop building miltary forces after the end of WWII?

Their constitution allows them a "defense force" but not an army. Quite frankly it seems like bandying semantics to me, but I suppose the difference is that the JSDF isn't allowed to deploy outside of Japan.

Unlike most nations that have a "defense force" the JSDF doesnt have offensive weapons, for now. It is not and has no been mere semantics.

Stormbringer wrote: But I do find the Japaneses stubborn refusal to admit they did anything wrong troubling. Especially given some of the political sentiments of recent years.

What bugs me about it was the U.S.A. practically ruled Japan almost the same the USA, UK, Russia and France did with Germany. Yet the Japanese weren't force to face what they did in WWII and before.

the japanese government said they'd repeal the anti-agression part of their constitution should North Korea attack Japan.

and anvil: there were war crimes trials in Japan just like there were in Germany. The japanese government has been PAYING reperations.

You must remember, Japan has a very pride-oriented culture, and what happened in WWII makes many Japanese feel ashamed today. Many wish it never happened so they didnt have to deal with the shame of being responsible or associated with those responsible for the attrocities commited