Could you pls remind me what is #421?, aqnd I will try to explain. Thank You.
here you go!
http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showpost.php?p=123736&postcount=421
Mod note:
Duplicate accounts now, herman2?
Here’s the ip: http://www.google.com/search?q=206.130.173.38&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=com.google:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
RS* was informed he was having a potty-mouth moment by mod pdf27 and was politely asked to stop it. He then agreed to stop the liberal and fluid use of the “F” bomb so there is nothing to see here.
However, as I am only speaking for myself and not the site nor other mods --within bounds (that RS* overstepped) I do not have a problem with occasional usage of visceral language as long as it doesn’t become a regular part of the discourse. Such language provides a vent for anger and lets the recipient know that the communicator is angry. This can facilitate more direct and effective communication at times…
In any case Capt. Ross, if you find the language inappropriate, then I might ask why you decided to fully quote it?
One of the Japanese physicists had pretty much figured out what was needed to make a bomb, and had a reasonably accurate figure for critical mass. His immediate superior couldn’t understand why Uranium had to be used instead of conventional explosives to make a nuclear weapon, he had no engineering support whatsoever for an enrichment or reactor programme, and the US burned down his lab with B-29s before he got much further. I’d say given no interference at all from the US the Japanese were at bare minimum a decade away from a usable nuclear weapon in 1944 or so. And even at that they were WAY ahead of the Germans because at least some of the Japanese realised a bomb was theoretically possible. The Germans thought critical mass was of the order of several tonnes and hence that bombs were impractical.
Nah, the only reason I slapped RS* on the wrist was that I figured he was most likely swearing at a child - adults are big enough and ugly enough to look out for themselves.
I was responding to a troll anyways. Nevermind! 
I am going away for the rest of the week but you can continue without me. I would like to know if anyone knows if Japan has the technolgy yet to develop an Atomic bomb or if perhaps they are developing one in secret.(Like Iran). If so, where can I find these hidden facts.Do we have something to worry? Thank You.
Japan could have had hundreds of nukes by now if they wanted them, and no they have no reason to keep them secret as it is against the Japanese constitution for nuclear weapons to be within its borders…
That’s very kind of you.
Do we need to put up our hand and ask your permission before we leave the room?
You’re welcome to go away for longer than a week.
The village idiot wants to know where to find out about national secrets! :roll:
Another brilliant non sequitur.
Also factually wrong, but that’s to be expected from herman.
Although possession of nuclear weapons is not forbidden in the constitution, Japan, as the only nation to experience the devastation of atomic attack, early expressed its abhorrence of nuclear arms and determined never to acquire them. The Basic Atomic Energy Law of 1956 limits research, development, and utilization of nuclear power to peaceful uses, and, beginning in 1956, national policy has embodied “three non-nuclear principles”–forbidding the nation to possess or manufacture nuclear weapons or to allow them to be introduced into the nation. Prime Minister Eisaku Sato made this pledge - known as the Three Non-Nuclear Principles - on February 5, 1968. The notion was formalized by the Japanese Diet on November 24, 1971. In 1976 Japan ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (adopted by the United Nations Security Council in 1968) and reiterated its intention never to “develop, use, or allow the transportation of nuclear weapons through its territory.” However, if Japan believed that “extraordinary events” had jeopardised its “supreme interests”, under Article X of the Treaty it could withdraw from the NPT. Such “extraordinary events” could include the acquisition of nuclear weapons by North Korea. Japan could then legally use its plutonium to build nuclear weapons.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/japan/nuke.htm
Overstepped bounds?
Moi? :shock: 
Overstepped bounds?
Moi? :shock:
Regarding.Quote:
Originally Posted by herman2
Japan could have had hundreds of nukes by now if they wanted them, and no they have no reason to keep them secret as it is against the Japanese constitution for nuclear weapons to be within its borders…
Another brilliant non sequitur.
Also factually wrong, but that’s to be expected from herman.
Hold on just a minute. I did not add this line nor do I know who did. Probably the moderator. Your response is not directed to me.I do not know anything about the Japanese constitution so how could I of added this post?..anyways, in short, thank you for the info nonetheless.
Does Germany have similar constitution limitations or is it possible they are developing the Atomic bomb unbenounced to us, like the way Iran is doing?. Some theorists claim that East Germany was very close to developing the A-bomb but abandonned all the work with fall of the Berlin Wall.
Hmm, no constitution limitations, but we signed and ratified the non proliferation treaty. We probably could have a nuke in less than 6 months if we wanted to but why should we want one? It only costs loads of money to build and maintain and has absolutely 0 strategic value for us.
East germany had no atomic weapons program, why bother.
They (GDR) had ss-20 en masse on their soil, like we (FRG) had pershings. Technically it would’ve been the US and the USSR who nuked the respective germanies & allies, but that hardly changes the outcome.
He’s banned?
It is an extremely naive statement. Germany is still occupied by American troops and the issue does not depend on wants of somebody in Germany.
Only until 1995, since then the US Army (along with BAOR) have been guests in Germany rather than an army of occupation.
It is just a formality. They are the same guests as they had been before 1995 as they are in Iraq, Kosovo, or the Soviet Army in Eastern Germany. Even that formality was introduced because the treaties between the USSR and the US about Germany were cancelled due to the Soviet Army’s leaving the Eastern Germany so the US had to invent new formal status for their presence in Germany.
I thik the even the Japs knew the theory - it was enough trouble for them to realise it on the practice.
For instance to create the relatively primitive Uranium-235 bomb they have to build about 1000 of Centrfuges and very great labour resources.( don’t forget even to build the additional 1000 airplains was a Problem for them in the 1944)
Even the World Richest USA was able to produce no more then few a-bombs in 1945 per years.
SO i think the A-bomb was TOO expensive for Japane technologically in conditions of total war in 1944-45.
In a peace time - this is an other matter.
Even the USSR has been able to repeat the a-bomb in the 1949. But Soviet was not capable to concentrate seriously on the a-bomb till the most end of war.
Uh huh. Care to list the number of times since 1995 the German government has in any way indicated that it would like the US to leave? I make it zero, and indeed the Germans have been lobbying the US NOT to leave for economic reasons - the US spends a hell of a lot of money keeping troops in Germany, and the German government/local CivPop get rather a large wedge of that…
That’s tripe. 1995 is significant because it is the 50th anniversary of VE-day, and the agreement between the allies at the end of WW2 stated that Germany was to be occupied for 50 years.
That number is slightly misleading - the majority of that time was to build the tools required to mass produce bombs (nuclear reactors, gaseous diffusion plants, etc.). Had the war continued the US would have been able to produce 1-2 bombs per month.
The reason they didn’t produce any from the end of the war for about a year was because they took the (rather brave) decision to completely shut down the production facilities and rebuild them to peacetime safety standards. Once they reopened they were both safer to use and had a slightly higher production capacity, but the US paid for this in the complete lack of weapons production in 1946 or so.
Agreed - and they also had quite a few advantages that Japan didn’t have. Lots of very bright physicists, huge support from the government for the project, plentiful supplies of fissile material and most important of all the certain knowledge that a Plutonium implosion weapon was possible. Japan had none of these, yet they are huge advantages that each knock a year or two off the programme.
The USA is certainly a cash cow for being in Germany, but it is also a cash cow for its other military bases all over the world. The Phillipines enjoys a lucrative finacial incentive as well. Now I know Germany has a small airforce training attachement of under 1000 in New Mexico, which hardly compares to the USA presence in Germany but it seems a lot of countries have some type of investment in other countries when it comes to the air force and the importance of having those strategic air rights in other countries. With Germany it’s more of a flight training interest but nonetheless their is a minor economic gain for having this I assume…I don’t think USA will ever give up its military presence in Iraq and will be some day considered “Hosts” of Iraq, but they will never give up being “Hosts” because of the strategic importance of the air base options in the middle east. The USA never knows when it might find this handy in future unpredictable turmoil in that region. I think Iraq will host a military presence similar to the arrangements Germany and japan has with USA. Another sign of the growing python wrapping itself around the world with no end in sight…
Hahaha, hillarious, you should update your calendar to 2007. The US maintains some of their infrastructure here, since we are allies and we are in a strategically convenient position in the middle of europe, but if germany would say leave, the US troops would have to leave.