US-Japan working together to “defend space”, so imagine a scenario fighting a space-based war over asteroids?

"We were here first, this is our asteroid. If you want it you will have to fight for it."
“We were here first, this is our asteroid. If you want it you will have to fight for it.”

In a previous recent post, Japan’s move into space is well underway outlining how Mitsubishi Corporation can simultaneously manufacture eight satellites a month at their new underground bunker-like facility in Fuchu, Japan. Satellites are the major first step towards moving the economy into space because satellites will control all data networks including all financial transactions especially if some type of a digital currency is introduced.

As this “war on cash” (this makes about the 100th war on something or other) starts heating up initiated by “negative interest rates, which is a tax in case people haven’t grasped this fact yet, satellite technology will become a significant part of this low earth orbit economic infrastructure being built for a push into space. What if when they identify a asteroid loaded with rare minerals, the US-Japan joint effort here to defend space will find themselves destroying competing deep space meteorite-capture (asteroid prospecting) technology looking to profit off meteorite mining? Imagine fighting a war in space over an asteroid densely loaded with extremely rare minerals? One thing is for certain, earth economic systems are moving to space. It’s the only economic option considering there are more minerals floating around in deep space than have collectively been mined on earth.

In this Sputnik news article below, Japan is now working with the US on “defending threats from the space domain”. Although what types of “threats” aren’t discussed, we can postulate. What about an incoming asteroid? Then there is the threat from Russian satellites in which Russia announced the other day they have the capability to knock out satellites from a ground-based weapons system. Satellite communications are like sea lanes that had to be protected 200 years ago if trade was going to be conducted between nations. Since it seems apparent Russia and China are mutually working towards peaceful and mutually beneficial trade by the construction of the new silk road, why is it the Americans are “capturing” Japan to work with them at “defending” space from threats? Let’s postulate some more. Are the US and Japan going to defend space from a coming “alien invasion” as a pretext to further militarize space.
________

Source: Sputnik

US-Japan Meet to Discuss Space Defense Collaboration

March 8, 2016

US and Japanese defense leaders recently met to discuss new bilateral initiative to defend against threats in the space domain.

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — US and Japanese defense leaders recently met to discuss new bilateral initiative to defend against threats in the space domain, US Strategic Command (STRATCOM) said in a press release.

“Japan fully understands the rapidly growing threats being developed by some countries, and has fully committed to ensuring space security with the US in the Pacific theater,” STRATCOM Director of Plans and Policy Major General Clinton Crosier stated on Monday.

At the end of February, STRATCOM leaders met with their counterparts at the Japanese Ministry of Defense to further commitments on “space security partnering initiatives.”

The initiatives include improving resiliency in space, joint security initiatives, and better sensor integration between JAXA, Japan’s space agency, and STRATCOM.

Crosier maintained the US-Japanese bilateral talks will lead to “critically important” developments in the coming years to “increase our ability to protect our systems in a contested space environment.”

STRATCOM pointed out the bilateral talks also included discussion of joint cyber defense, and missile defense initiatives.

The United States and Japan began negotiating regional defense cooperation following Japan’s decision to reinterpret its constitution to allow for greater self-defense and regional engagement in security and stability.

 

Thomson Reuters reveals a plan on how to destroy China’s navy by the Japanese (Huh?)

 Japanese vessels are seen off Genkaijima Island, north of Fukuoka on Japan's southwestern island of Kyushu in this March 21, 2005 file photo. Reuters/Kimimasa Mayama/Files

Japanese vessels are seen off Genkaijima Island, north of Fukuoka on Japan’s southwestern island of Kyushu in this March 21, 2005 file photo. Reuters/Kimimasa Mayama/Files

Apparently, as tensions between North Korea, China and Japan increase almost daily, news was released earlier this year that Japan has a “master plan to destroy the Chinese navy” in a battle if circumstances would ever warrant such a profitable catastrophe. Do people see how the media are used as a weapon of mass influence? Why even publish news like this unless it was specifically designed to be provocative towards the Chinese? This is more British posturing in this region of the world since this news originally appeared in Reuters. Thomson Reuters is of course  owned by wealthy British interests. So why would the British be posturing in this part of the world? Because that’s what the British have always done: posture for war through the central banking model. Isn’t this sort of a strange predicament for the Japanese? Thomson Reuters is revealing Japan’s plan to destroy the Chinese navy? So, are the Japanese themselves in on this plan, or are the Japanese just carrying it out?

Readers should probably be informed as to who is behind the Center for New American Security (CNAS) mentioned in the article published below, a Washington D.C.-based think tank, which include Kurt M. Campbell as CNAS’s CEO. Campbell has business interests in the Asian region so any policy shift between China-US relations would affect his business interests. Campbell is also a member of several extremely prominent and influential organizations that have a huge impact on American foreign policy the least of which are the Aspen Strategy Group and the Council on Foreign Relations.

Also with CNAS as a co-founder, is Michèle Angelique Flournoy who was the former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. That position is the seventh-ranking official in the U.S. Department of Defense. The Department of Defense has nothing to do with “defense” and everything to do with first strike. How can you make money defending shit all the time? The best way to make this profitable is through provocation making your opponent strike first.  Michèle Angelique Flournoy also came out of Oxford, so there is the British connection again. Flournoy currently serves as a Senior Advisor to the Boston Consulting Group, one of the most prestigious investment consulting firms in the world. The entire fixation and careers of people like Campbell and Flournoy is all revolved around war. And not surprisingly, Campbell is also out of Oxford so we come full circle back to the British and central banking. And just as a reminder, Japan’s central bank head Haruhiko Kuroda is also out of Oxford. So, is this a “Japan plan” or a “British-Oxford plan” to destroy China’s navy using its proxy Japan?
__________

Japan’s master plan to destroy the Chinese Navy in battle

By AT Editor

January 2, 2016

(From the National Interest)

By Harry J. Kazianis

It seems that Japan is developing plans to craft its own Anti-Access/Area-Denial (A2/AD) strategy—or what one former Japanese official describes as “maritime supremacy and air superiority”—against the Chinese Navy.

The plan itself, detailed by Reuters, makes a tremendous amount of good sense:

“Tokyo is responding by stringing a line of anti-ship, anti-aircraft missile batteries along 200 islands in the East China Sea stretching 1,400 km (870 miles) from the country’s mainland toward Taiwan. . .

“While the installations are not secret, it is the first time such officials have spelled out that the deployment will help keep China at bay in the Western Pacific and amounts to a Japanese version of the “anti-access/area denial” doctrine, known as “A2/AD” in military jargon, that China is using to try to push the United States and its allies out of the region.

“Chinese ships sailing from their eastern seaboard must pass through this seamless barrier of Japanese missile batteries to reach the Western Pacific, access to which is vital to Beijing both as a supply line to the rest of the world’s oceans and for the projection of its naval power.”

The piece also spells out an overall larger Japanese military presence in the East China Sea, which will certainly not please China:

“Over the next five years, Japan will increase its Self-Defense Forces on islands in the East China Sea by about a fifth to almost 10,000 personnel.

“Those troops, manning missile batteries and radar stations, will be backed up by marine units on the mainland, stealthy submarines, F-35 warplanes, amphibious fighting vehicles, aircraft carriers as big as World War Two flat-tops and ultimately the U.S. Seventh Fleet headquartered at Yokosuka, south of Tokyo.”

Does this plan sound familiar? It should if you have been following the topic. Such ideas have been floated in the U.S. national security community for a few years now. Toshi Yoshihara, a past National Interest contributor and professor at the U.S. Naval War College, who is also quoted in the Reuters piece, presented a similar idea as part of a much larger Japanese A2/AD strategy in a Center for New American Security (CNAS) report back in 2014:

“the Ryukyu Islands themselves could support Japanese anti-access forces. For example, truck-mounted anti-ship and anti-air missile units dispersed across the archipelago would erect a formidable barrier. In wartime, effective blocking operations would tempt PLA commanders to nullify these gatekeepers. Such exertions, however, would tie down significant portions of China’s warfighting capacity while depleting manpower and materiel. Because the islands hold little innate value to Beijing the Chinese leadership might decide that escalation was not worth the effort.”

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑