I think if you would give Japan military freedom, I'm 100% sure they would build an army out of machines just like in cartoons. I mean these guys are so smart they can build a freaking H-Bomb out of sand and water. Imagen what those guys can build if they had absolute military freedom from the rest (US) of the world. GO JAPAN!!!!
@MegaJizzem lol they are a step ahead of you actually. These are made for future vertical take off versions of F35s. So yes they can and will be used as an actual aircraft carrier in a real conflict.
As far as the JMSDF building an actual carrier, and calling it as such, I'd say they might design one similair to maybe the HMS Invincible-class (wiki "Falklands War" for the article on the ship) or the HMS Queen Elizabeth, possibly even the russian carriers. I'm not too sure if the JMSDF would want to go the USS Forrestal route, though. Either way, I do believe it is time for the Japanese people, not just the government, to reconsider Article 9 of their constitution.
@nicktk Yes, we should really fire nuclear missiles and kill millions of people and plunge the fragile world economy even further into the shit over someone building a warship shouldn't we?
It says nothing of the kind, and besides the peace treaty went out of effect several decades ago. (Around the same time the US started selling them weapons by the boatload funnily enough)
@chrthiel so this means everyone can trust japan ? and who cares what US sell to Japan anyway this doesnt mean the treaty is off same as germany they will commit same murder again one day.
Actually it does.The "Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan" from 1960 voided the original "Treaty of San Francisco", so they're not breaking any treaties.
You might be thinking of the Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, but it doesn't mentions carriers at all. It does have a lot to say about what you can use it for, but it doesn't say it's illegal to built and operate them. Besides, the JSDF was created by MacArthur himself.
There's nothing in the "Security Treaty Between the United States and Japan" or the later "Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan" that prevents Japan from building carriers. In fact, the latter actively encourages them to built a strong military.
@xTanGOkiLleRx that's why they call it a destroyer. There are always ways to get around stupid treaties. Japan doesn't want revenge against the US now, they should be allowed to have a military, but most people in Japan are against it because they want world peace. However, Japan has one of the largest defense budgets on earth. Kind of ironic isn't it?
@tiberianexcalibur Japan buys a majority of their military equipment from the US and they are strong allies. The US doesn't have anything like this so it is not a copy. Stop saying bullshit.
@kazzemg Actucally Yes the US does operate several amphib carriers for the marine corps. That said its a warship saying it is a copy is ludacris. Japan uses its HD for Anti sub activities mostly. Though if they decide to build Real fleet carriers i would be interested to see if they go the British route with queen elisabeths or the American route with something like the forrestal class.
Japan doesnt really need nuke carriers though they would could operate them quite well i figure,
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were 2 cities with most orthodox christian Japanese. I'm starting to think that Americans didn't choose which one to bomb by the number of people that lived there..... but in fear of orthodox Russians that were able to consider Japanese as better allies after war.. They might have been "allies" in war- but USA hated Russia more than Japan I guess.
Btw, if you want to reply a stupid post to this- first read few books about it and don't be idiot.
@ShomiTheGreat Actually Japan and Russia were enemies long before wwII started. They choose those cities due to the industrial facilities that were there. Hiroshima had the mitsubishi shipyards, many ammunition and weapons industries...They were by far strategic objectives.
@gargoloso They were enemies but it's impressive how sometimes great enemies become even greater allies. War often brings religion to different countries so I doubt they would be for too long.
@ShomiTheGreat Yes you are right, is impressive. But what I have learnt from history is that almost ever, religion is the excuse but not the real cause to make wars or alliances.
@gargoloso Agreed but only if nation hasn't got it's real religion that is well shaped. Then religion does not have to be the cause but just another ingredient to unintentional alliance :)
@aziqbal ...I'm Japanese and I find your comment very offensive to my country's past. -_- I also presume you don't know the actual meaning of Kamikaze unless you "google" it or check on whatever source. So I won't believe you if you reply the actual meaning NOTE: It means "Divine Wind".
Why would you say that? C,mon man...why you tring to buy hates from other countries? U Crazy ? Or You like Japan to be hated ,Huh? that's why you posted this stupid comment on here. get lost.
@ascendead1 Accually no one here cares if Japan rearms it would benefit us greatly if they did. Japans ONE obstacle to rearming is themselves. THEY can change there own constitution. Not our place.
Hell the Japanese are one of the Very ,Very feel confident that they would keep american military tech secret and secure.
@ascendead1 LOL first off Japan has a great navy its mostly turning into BMD destroyers similar to the Arleigh Burke class (they basicly are the same ships just slightly modified). Its forces are very proffesional and very well trained. It Needs to rearm and as a American i welcome it. Most of our allies in the world have such over bloated social systems they are disarmed.
And the ships are helicopter destroyers because they are good at hunting subs and such.
@cabbievonbump Italy has same problem due to WW2 treaty in the 80s , when we built our first aircraft carrier "Garibaldi" ...well ...we also called it "helicopter carrier" but we did a last minute change, adding a "sky jump" on the deck. Therefore, few years later when restrictions ceased, ship was fitted to carry Harrier MKII planes too :-D
@sendaiueno I was going by memory of an article I read several years ago. The closest article or treaty I've found on the subject is Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, see the wikipedia article on it. Technically, it prohibits "offensive" weapons but not "defensive" weapons. Carriers are considered offensive weapon systems, whereas a destroyer is a defensive weapon system. Comments and healty debates, please.
@cabbievonbump OK .In the first place, the Japanese Constitution is not the treaty .
Treaty is agreements which is concluded between one country and another.
You are confusing the constitution with the treaty.
And in Japanese Constitution , there is no description about the definition of distinction between defensive weapon and offensive"weapon in Japanese Constitution .
why dont people ever think about preventing a war...? its the 21st century and people are still behaving the way they did thousands of years ago...is this the best we can do??
@sailingforde04 Yeah I too think Japan should build true carrier. Just like Germany, Japan is no longer any restriction. They CAN build if they want to. But the problem is Japanese people won't allow their governement to change Constitution so easily. Looks like it is going to take some more time to change its Article 9.
@Sitti2300 From what I've gathered, that may be the way things are heading. Growing opposition to the U.S. bases in Japan, opposition within the U.S. to having so many bases world wide. If things do head in that direction, and the perceived threat from China/North Korea grows..then I could see Japan greatly expanding its military, even building nukes would be relatively easy for them to do. And as negative as all that may sound..who could blame them?
I fail to understand why Japan are still not allowed to build true aircraft carriers. World War II is long over, and now Japan is a key ally of the west and a bulwark against Chinese expansionism in the Eastern Pacific. I say the JMSDF should be allowed to generate true carrier battlegroups and put some stick about with the chinese!
and this isnt an aircraft carrier, how???? i just wish everyone would stop doing this kabuki dance and call it a carrier, not a destroyer. this is a destroyer like a cabin cruiser is a rowboat. plop down a few v/stol fighters and viola! aircraft carrier. i think its time to reword that peace treaty. they are, a freaking army a freaking navy and a freaking airforce.
@nomadnametab I'm glad you asked why this isn't an aircraft carrier. The answer is, because aircraft carriers...ummm...well, as the name implies....yeah. Does that clear it up for you? :) All joking aside the reason is because aircraft carriers carry jets for offensive operations. Jets being the operational difference, and offensive being the selling point. Destroyers carry helicopters for defense of freedom of the seas. Agreed about the Kabuki dance.
@ShitFromTransASS Yes, as independent nation, Japan is free to have military forces just like any country. It is just their constitution that doesn't allow Japan to have offensive forces. And most japanese people don't agree to change it. Even though Japanese military forces are among top 10 in the world, this is why they call themselves "Self Defense Force". Since carrier is "offensive" force, they don't classify Hyuga as carrier. Its kind of stupid isn't it? Change the constitution Japan!!!!
@ShitFromTransASS Japan is ALLOWING us to stay. US no longer occupying Japan. We don't even own the property. We are RENTING the property for our bases in Japan. Rent is being paid to property owners. If Japan wants us to leave, they'll give us 1 year notice, then we HAVE TO LEAVE whether we like it or not.
I think what a lot of you guys are missing is that the days of war between world superpowers is long gone; death tolls on both sides would simply be too high for war to be favorable for either side. If anything were to happen, it would be far more likely that the world would feel another "Cold War" than another World War.
@8888kama No, actually it's not. With 7 carriers, 30 frigates, 20 submarines, 8 destroyers and more Japan is perhaps the strongest ally of South Korea in case of North Korean sudden invasion.
@8888kama How the hell do you suppose that the lovely japanese people would start WW3? When WW3 starts, it pits China against USA. Hopefully China wins.
@OnlyLifeMatters china wins ww3..keep dreaming,you do know u.s have a larger n more advance navy n air force than china,u.s also have more modern tanks than china..u.s have 5000 abrams tank n china only have 500-800 Type 99 tanks,u.s also have more special forces,marines than china..lets not forget u.s soldiers are far more well trained n well equip than china..china also is under u.s n europe arms embargo..so china military will not be that advance,china have numbers,but numbers dont win wars.
@fmoa You don't get it, don't you? China isn't like western powers. They don't plan to go and invade other countries. They follow defensive doctrine and use naval deterrent to retain peace on their soil. In WW3 China wouldn't be the aggressor against the US, but it would be the other way around. Thanks to China's DF21 defense system, submarine and surface fleet, no navy could invade China. It's purely a myth that China relies on numbers.
@OnlyLifeMatters last..china doesnt have the capability to conduct expeditionary warfare anywhere in world in under 2 wks..only france n u.k have force projection capability like the u.s..china doesnt,china will have a hard time invading u.s,they will have to cross the pacific ocean..good luck china,while the u.s can strike n invade china from phillipines,s.korea,japan or australia..u.s also can blockade china n starve the chinese economy..so if ww3 starts,u.s have all the means to win.
@fmoa China is building 4 LHDs and 3 carriers - possibly to reclaim Taiwan - so soon they'll have as good or better capability to project power abroad. USA couldn't invade China even if it concentrated all of it's LHDs and CVNs to do it. Why? Because the Chinese have an ballistic missile system that can destroy any given surface ship large enough, and it cannot really be countered with any defensive anti-missile system.
And obviously you don't know ANYTHING about present global economy.
@OnlyLifeMatters Correct, the Chinese have missiles that are designed purely for taking out USA carrier fleets and even the US has said they have no defence against them. China is a great power just now but soon she will become a super power. Her economy is now the second largest in the world and in 10 years will be the largest. The world needs China, not the USA anymore. Russia and China together could take on NATO and win.
@MrScotia That's the cold hard truth. And what's more, China also possesses anti-satellite missile systems capable of taking out US satellites from the orbit. In addition to that, China makes up 98% of the global rare-earth trade. Rare-earth is used to make high-tech equipment, such as missiles and if China decided to close it's rare-earth exports before war, the West couldn't manufacture ANYTHING high-end equipment on neither civilian nor military side. China is rising, fast and firmly.
@MrScotia China has only claimed to have "anti-carrier" ballistic missiles. They've never demonstrated this capability and military analysts have said it sounds very far-fetched. The U.S. has not said they have "no defense" against such missiles, they've said they don't know if theirr fleet air defense missiles could take they out. But, that's only because China's anti-carrier missile capability has never been demonstrated, only claimed.
@fmoa The UK can no longer project power around the globe, we don't have a carrier anymore. You missed out Russia, she could wipe out 90% of the USA population with 6 subs, 3 from her northern fleet and 3 from her pacific fleet. Also, what use is all they ships that the USA has against China we she has the power to sink them with supersonic missiles designed to sink carriers? China at a whim could take out 40 million Americans, and they know this!!
@MrScotia Russia would only be able to fire its sub-launched missiles provided their missile subs weren't sunk first by our attack subs (or somebody else's attack subs) - not a likely possibility. Besides, I don't think Russia would want to do this even if it could. As for China, even if they took out 40 million Americans, that would leave 250 million alive. America could take out all of China with its missiles and they certainly know this.
@virtuousmission Why do you bring up an event that took place over 20 years ago? China has changed radically since then with all sorts of economical and society reforms. It's like comparing today's Russia to Soviet Union, it just isn't comparable. Btw, even today's Russia is more like Soviet Union than modern PRC is like the PRC of the 80s.
I don't hope China's victory because of communism, but rather because it would mean the demise of the US.
@OnlyLifeMatters i brought it up because the same thing essentially is still happening in tibet.
china becomes the domineering superpower and begins spreading its foreign policy throughout the world. with it, comes internet censorship, centralised markets, no freedom of speech etc.
what happens then? are you going to then hope for the demise of china?
ergo, china is just as bad as the US, albiet on a worse scale because you cant speak up against the government in china without repercussions.
Why would I hope for the demise of China? EU will never let internet censorship or limitations for freedom of speech to take place. Democracy and freedom were invented in Europe, they'll never die here.
However, those things have never belonged to Chinese culture. As their culture is different than European culture, it might be hard for them to adjust into European ideologies. But then again...communism is an European ideology so...
@OnlyLifeMatters Same thing as México, we have tried to copy the Anglosaxon ideology and their republic with no succes, México has been always ruled by kings, in pre-colonial times, durig the colonial period, and after the independence we had an emperor, but the US did not want to have a king in his continent, so that's why is always bitching about democracy, an ideology far from the mexican idiosincracy. A monarchy is closer to comunism, like China and it's goverment.
@tenga3wa10 i think the point was that japan also committed human rights violations in Korea. Despite some of the good Japan brought, you cant not refute that japan ruled Korea harshly. The Japanese who immigrated to Korea were greatly favored over the Korean populous and a huge number of Koreans were forced in to slave labor. Your point about japan bring some good to Korea is also true. To sum it up, Dont just glorify the good, look at the both sides of the issue.
@tenga3wa10 all of that was part and parsal of war then ,even if war is waged between north and south korea girls will get raped .......usa has rape casses in irak ,and afgan to....
Well, the people of Japan must be happy to see their navy growing, perhaps it will return to it's former glory with good intentions of course.
jarhead1145 1 day ago
国土と海域を他国に侵略されないように、公海での各国商船の安全のために、最低４艦は航空母艦が必要かと。環太平洋各国共通の利益のために。
type92katoh 1 week ago
did i drop a coin i coulda swore i herd a cinq
truckanator 1 week ago
究極の潜水艦駆逐艦なのだっ！（`･ω･´）
Nassy881 2 weeks ago
Japan need to buy couple squandron F-35B
xsf908 3 weeks ago
@xsf908 They bought 45 for the 2011 fiscal year
CaptainAmericaWI 2 weeks ago
Nice Footage, had only seen Pictures of her till today, good looking ship, she's like the far eastern cousin HMS Ocean didn't know she had
(compliment).
Seperately: Does anyone know what the name of the larger 19500ton+ "22DDH helicopter carrier" will be?
(i've heard the two ship class might be named Shirane & Kurama, after the two ship class of 1970's era Destroyer which it is supposed to replace).
TSR1989RN 3 weeks ago
そういえば、空母の生みの親は日本だったっけ・・・
なんかこの動画見てると、日本に生まれてよかったと思う。
hmd1995713 3 weeks ago
何で尾にLCACを載せる仕様にしなかったんだろう。
誰か教えてください。
nebosuke6969 3 weeks ago
@nebosuke6969
多目的ホールや医療施設、作戦指揮所等の様々な施設を内包し、動く基地のような役目を果たすべくして作られたからです。つまり余りのスペースがなかったというわけです。
22DDHはさらに巨大な物となるので、ウェルデッキのスペースもあるかもしれませんが、自衛隊の保有するLCACは数も少なく老朽化も著しいという事なのでわざわざ作る事もないかもしれません。
22DDHはそもそも戦闘を考慮に入れてないので自衛用のバルカンファランクスなども搭載しません。
アメリカの次期強襲揚陸艦もLCAC用のウェルデッキを廃止しています。
航空戦力と空輸は強襲揚陸艦、揚陸はそれ用にドッグ型揚陸艦を使った方が運用効率が良いからだそうです。
器用貧乏になるよりも目的に特化した物を揃えたほうが良いという理論ですね。
1MuTa1cHo 3 weeks ago
@1MuTa1cHo
失礼、自衛用のCIWSは搭載しています。さらにRAMも積んでいます。
なくなったのは攻撃用途に使われる事の多いVLSです。
1MuTa1cHo 3 weeks ago
@1MuTa1cHo 丁寧な説明ありがとうございますヽ(^o^)丿
nebosuke6969 3 weeks ago
This must be the biggest destroyer ever built in the world!
これは史上最大の駆逐艦に違いない。
xidazoon 1 month ago
Comment removed
69penetrator69 1 month ago
united front against china japan US Asean Korea South
araullo 1 month ago
When will Japan invade China again?
ngocquang19877 1 month ago
@ngocquang19877 It will NEVER happen again.
yuzotasaki 1 month ago
@yuzotasaki it should happen again. We hate Chinese.
ngocquang19877 1 month ago
@ngocquang19877 lol filthy vietnamese monkey here admiring ur former slave lord?
TelpPov 1 month ago
I think if you would give Japan military freedom, I'm 100% sure they would build an army out of machines just like in cartoons. I mean these guys are so smart they can build a freaking H-Bomb out of sand and water. Imagen what those guys can build if they had absolute military freedom from the rest (US) of the world. GO JAPAN!!!!
Emil1787 2 months ago
日本は90年以上前に世界で初めて航空母艦を完成させた国。
moridukurimoridukuri 2 months ago 15
@moridukurimoridukuri それはイギリスです
goldpenta1 3 weeks ago
@goldpenta1 正確には、「最初から航空母艦として計画されたものとしては」ということでした。商船として起工されたものを改造して世界初の航空母艦として竣工させたのはイギリスです。
moridukurimoridukuri 2 weeks ago
@moridukurimoridukuri そうなんですか？！
voje12345 1 week ago
@voje12345 鳳翔という航空母艦です。
moridukurimoridukuri 1 week ago
@moridukurimoridukuri さん
その日本に今、空母がないなんておかし過ぎます。
takeo4jp 1 week ago
@takeo4jp
よそに行って戦争しないから
攻撃型空母は必要性が薄いもん…
むちゃくちゃカネも人も要るし
Nassy881 1 week ago
cool
TheSuperhalofish 2 months ago
なに？、空母作っちゃったの？。良いんじゃない？、別に。もっと作れよ。
pocat11 2 months ago
HOLY COW! Next stop...Full Deck carrier I bet.
lst1195 2 months ago
should not use for Heli-carrier , Use as STOL jet fighter-carier
drgentlewolf 2 months ago
@maxinpains Tell that to toyota, my friend. this is like the 6th time they've had to do a massive recall. poor quality automobiles.
MegaJizzem 2 months ago
いい加減中国にびびるのやめろってなー
fighterzero00000 2 months ago
@fighterzero00000
日本は、元々、韓国、北朝鮮、中国を征服し、植民地とした大日本帝國であります。
maxinpains 2 months ago
支那がカタパルトもない原始的な空母を建造してるみたいだね～
帝国海軍は９０年前に造ってるんだが・・・
空母はその周囲を20～30隻の潜水艦・駆逐艦などと立体的に連携を組む。
高速鉄道さえ満足にコントロール出来ないレベルではなぁ～
まぁ、インドやタイ・ブラジルも空母をお飾りとして保有してるから・・・当面はそのレベルね
no1kiyoko 2 months ago
Japan needs to buy harriers instead of only using those helicopters.
MegaJizzem 3 months ago
@MegaJizzem lol they are a step ahead of you actually. These are made for future vertical take off versions of F35s. So yes they can and will be used as an actual aircraft carrier in a real conflict.
TelpPov 2 months ago
@TelpPov
yeah...but not big enough. for little conflict? Yes. but not full blown wars. We need ICBM's. NUKE SUBS. MORE AIR CRAFTs & BOMBERs, DROIDs.
maxinpains 2 months ago
@TelpPov
The Hyuga class is not F35 capable. In orderer to become so it would need a complete reconstruction of the aircraft handling facilities.
chrthiel 1 month ago
@MegaJizzem
No. WE NEED TO MAKE DRONES & WE ARE THE BEST in top industry.
maxinpains 2 months ago
wow....i remember those little shits flying there planes into other countries aircraft carriers.
mia2113mark 3 months ago
wat music is it?
3a146 3 months ago
Now dont go and blow up pearl harbor again....
what? to soon?
PS2viciado 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i dont think japan should still be banned from having carriers
701shep 4 months ago
@HarryTruthman i think they don't need a supercarrier, a simple carrier (like the french one but not nuclear) will be enought for japan ;o)
bingofioul 4 months ago
As far as the JMSDF building an actual carrier, and calling it as such, I'd say they might design one similair to maybe the HMS Invincible-class (wiki "Falklands War" for the article on the ship) or the HMS Queen Elizabeth, possibly even the russian carriers. I'm not too sure if the JMSDF would want to go the USS Forrestal route, though. Either way, I do believe it is time for the Japanese people, not just the government, to reconsider Article 9 of their constitution.
cabbievonbump 4 months ago
japan should be nuked again...they breaking the treaty
nicktk 4 months ago
@nicktk Yes, we should really fire nuclear missiles and kill millions of people and plunge the fragile world economy even further into the shit over someone building a warship shouldn't we?
Idiot.
theredraven 4 months ago 2
@nicktk
what treaty?
mylittleemperor 3 months ago
@mylittleemperor the one that was signed at the end of ww2...and says that is forbiden for japan to use CV class ship "carriers".
nicktk 3 months ago
@nicktk Nah. WHY YOU LIE?
maxinpains 2 months ago
@nicktk
oh thank you :D
i didn't know that.
mylittleemperor 2 months ago
@nicktk
It says nothing of the kind, and besides the peace treaty went out of effect several decades ago. (Around the same time the US started selling them weapons by the boatload funnily enough)
chrthiel 1 month ago
@chrthiel so this means everyone can trust japan ? and who cares what US sell to Japan anyway this doesnt mean the treaty is off same as germany they will commit same murder again one day.
nicktk 1 month ago
@nicktk
Actually it does.The "Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan" from 1960 voided the original "Treaty of San Francisco", so they're not breaking any treaties.
You might be thinking of the Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, but it doesn't mentions carriers at all. It does have a lot to say about what you can use it for, but it doesn't say it's illegal to built and operate them. Besides, the JSDF was created by MacArthur himself.
chrthiel 1 month ago
japan really should fuck the US treaty and build its own carrier !
bingofioul 4 months ago
@bingofioul
There's nothing in the "Security Treaty Between the United States and Japan" or the later "Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan" that prevents Japan from building carriers. In fact, the latter actively encourages them to built a strong military.
chrthiel 1 month ago
Too small I think it is going to be useless. I guess the Japanese navy wants more big one like 翔鶴. Than that Japanese peolpe needs it.
yasus14 4 months ago
GO HYUGA!!!
truespence 4 months ago
go japan beat russina
iphopad 4 months ago
やっぱりひゅうがはかっこいいな
yamaitachi8848 4 months ago
Oh congrats on the new carrier but I thought you couldnt build any due to the treaty
xTanGOkiLleRx 4 months ago
@xTanGOkiLleRx that's why they call it a destroyer. There are always ways to get around stupid treaties. Japan doesn't want revenge against the US now, they should be allowed to have a military, but most people in Japan are against it because they want world peace. However, Japan has one of the largest defense budgets on earth. Kind of ironic isn't it?
kazzemg 4 months ago
@kazzemg Well unfortunatly the Us still doesnt trust you and personally i would like to see what cool ships the japanese could come up with
xTanGOkiLleRx 4 months ago
so,we need F35 on it.
drgentlewolf 4 months ago
日本には軽空母は必要
fighterzero00000 4 months ago
They should have named it the "Akagi".
DandAinTac 5 months ago
岩手県立〜盛岡第一高等学校〜校歌〜斉唱〜♪
schunns 5 months ago
Looks like a piece of shit easily blown out of the water, not different than their asian counterparts, all they do is copy.
tiberianexcalibur 5 months ago
@tiberianexcalibur Japan buys a majority of their military equipment from the US and they are strong allies. The US doesn't have anything like this so it is not a copy. Stop saying bullshit.
kazzemg 5 months ago
@kazzemg Your a bullshit
tiberianexcalibur 5 months ago
@kazzemg Actucally Yes the US does operate several amphib carriers for the marine corps. That said its a warship saying it is a copy is ludacris. Japan uses its HD for Anti sub activities mostly. Though if they decide to build Real fleet carriers i would be interested to see if they go the British route with queen elisabeths or the American route with something like the forrestal class.
Japan doesnt really need nuke carriers though they would could operate them quite well i figure,
valcan321 4 months ago
Germany should buy one of these. Looks impressive. Nice work guys.
FrancisJoa 5 months ago in playlist weapons23
F35は着陸できまつか( ﾟдﾟ)
2267mcj 6 months ago
Keeeeen. Go Japan!
kwmkc13 6 months ago
Still to be painted on the side: FUCK YOU DOLPHIN AND FUCK YOU WHALE !!!!
marcusjack 6 months ago
右上ｗ
確かここに「朝日」という文字は入ってたはずなんだがｗ
zclass37 6 months ago 12
Only if they get Harriers on their deck, then tremble at those bad thoughts of the older generation who can't forgive.
Mythteller 7 months ago
When Talking about WW2...
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were 2 cities with most orthodox christian Japanese. I'm starting to think that Americans didn't choose which one to bomb by the number of people that lived there..... but in fear of orthodox Russians that were able to consider Japanese as better allies after war.. They might have been "allies" in war- but USA hated Russia more than Japan I guess.
Btw, if you want to reply a stupid post to this- first read few books about it and don't be idiot.
ShomiTheGreat 7 months ago
Comment removed
gargoloso 6 months ago
@ShomiTheGreat Actually Japan and Russia were enemies long before wwII started. They choose those cities due to the industrial facilities that were there. Hiroshima had the mitsubishi shipyards, many ammunition and weapons industries...They were by far strategic objectives.
gargoloso 6 months ago
@gargoloso They were enemies but it's impressive how sometimes great enemies become even greater allies. War often brings religion to different countries so I doubt they would be for too long.
ShomiTheGreat 6 months ago
@ShomiTheGreat Yes you are right, is impressive. But what I have learnt from history is that almost ever, religion is the excuse but not the real cause to make wars or alliances.
gargoloso 6 months ago
@gargoloso Agreed but only if nation hasn't got it's real religion that is well shaped. Then religion does not have to be the cause but just another ingredient to unintentional alliance :)
ShomiTheGreat 6 months ago
攻撃型空母の保有は憲法で禁じられています
0227903aa 7 months ago
can anyone tell me the role of a heli carrier to me?! besides search and rescue.... like in a battle...
kathen111 7 months ago
@kathen111 ASW, ASuW, recon, put troops ashore and so on. I´m sure it is capable to operate Harrier or F-35, if needed.
swertinge07 6 months ago
japan is an island it needs no carriers to express its might in the region. japan is unsinkable
datzfast 7 months ago
Helicopter just a target for shooting. Japan needs a real aircraft carrier
abcwill41 7 months ago
That ship would be perfect for Harrier Jump Jets.
hankkemp 7 months ago
please japaan whatever u do dont do a kamakazie with this ship!!! ahaha
aziqbal 7 months ago
@aziqbal ...I'm Japanese and I find your comment very offensive to my country's past. -_- I also presume you don't know the actual meaning of Kamikaze unless you "google" it or check on whatever source. So I won't believe you if you reply the actual meaning NOTE: It means "Divine Wind".
KookiePuffz 7 months ago
UN disarmed Japan after the WW2, and forbid rearminf by consititute. The amendment of the constitution is also written hard and almost impossible.
hashimotomd 8 months ago
@hashimotomd North Korea can nuke Japan. Japan has to rebuild its military. world is changing but Japan still the same last 50 years.
abcwill41 7 months ago
@abcwill41 Why the fuck do you think Japan has aegis ships huh? They are anti NK missile. They also have many other anti ballistic missile equipment
kazzemg 5 months ago
@abcwill41 Japan's national security is most modern in world.
hiashiro1 3 months ago 10
Comment removed
maxinpains 2 months ago
Why would you say that? C,mon man...why you tring to buy hates from other countries? U Crazy ? Or You like Japan to be hated ,Huh? that's why you posted this stupid comment on here. get lost.
maxinpains 2 months ago
@ascendead1 Accually no one here cares if Japan rearms it would benefit us greatly if they did. Japans ONE obstacle to rearming is themselves. THEY can change there own constitution. Not our place.
Hell the Japanese are one of the Very ,Very feel confident that they would keep american military tech secret and secure.
valcan321 8 months ago
@ascendead1 LOL first off Japan has a great navy its mostly turning into BMD destroyers similar to the Arleigh Burke class (they basicly are the same ships just slightly modified). Its forces are very proffesional and very well trained. It Needs to rearm and as a American i welcome it. Most of our allies in the world have such over bloated social systems they are disarmed.
And the ships are helicopter destroyers because they are good at hunting subs and such.
valcan321 8 months ago
@ascendead1 F-35B isn't even in the cards.
stalkingalizee 8 months ago
All it does is carry helicopters. Waste of a ship not to give it an amphib capability like Mistral.
stalkingalizee 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SIMPLY;',COPY:;'&:'.PASTE:,'
ＷＷＷ.ＷＡＴＣＨＦＵＬＬＭＯＶＩＥ.ＴＫ
SIMPLY;;.COPY,:'&;''PASTE;'`
CyrusEastman 8 months ago
...This is extremely random but.... (lmfao) did anyone get reminded of pokemon during the music?
Kirkzzy 8 months ago
The JMSDF calls it a destroyer because Japan is prohibited by treaty from having carriers in the fleet, result of WW2.
cabbievonbump 8 months ago 14
@cabbievonbump Governments not being able to abide by their treaties... Imagine that. LOL ;-)
stockingcpl 7 months ago
@cabbievonbump Italy has same problem due to WW2 treaty in the 80s , when we built our first aircraft carrier "Garibaldi" ...well ...we also called it "helicopter carrier" but we did a last minute change, adding a "sky jump" on the deck. Therefore, few years later when restrictions ceased, ship was fitted to carry Harrier MKII planes too :-D
goodyears73 6 months ago
@cabbievonbump What is the name of treaty which you persist that Japan is prohibited from
having the aircraft carrier ?? I have never heard it before.
sendaiueno 4 months ago
@sendaiueno I was going by memory of an article I read several years ago. The closest article or treaty I've found on the subject is Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, see the wikipedia article on it. Technically, it prohibits "offensive" weapons but not "defensive" weapons. Carriers are considered offensive weapon systems, whereas a destroyer is a defensive weapon system. Comments and healty debates, please.
cabbievonbump 4 months ago
@cabbievonbump OK .In the first place, the Japanese Constitution is not the treaty .
Treaty is agreements which is concluded between one country and another.
You are confusing the constitution with the treaty.
And in Japanese Constitution , there is no description about the definition of distinction between defensive weapon and offensive"weapon in Japanese Constitution .
sendaiueno 4 months ago
Did someone mention ship ? Nice looking, but "Destroyer", hardly.
treasureis1 8 months ago
pffff sux.
1SFODdelta 9 months ago
why dont people ever think about preventing a war...? its the 21st century and people are still behaving the way they did thousands of years ago...is this the best we can do??
ShinandJoeHrsh 9 months ago
@ShinandJoeHrsh I think you're going to have to take that up with Kim Jong il.
comanchio1976 9 months ago
@comanchio1976 lol yea but a lot of folks on youtube are the same too
ShinandJoeHrsh 9 months ago
@sailingforde04 Yeah I too think Japan should build true carrier. Just like Germany, Japan is no longer any restriction. They CAN build if they want to. But the problem is Japanese people won't allow their governement to change Constitution so easily. Looks like it is going to take some more time to change its Article 9.
Sitti2300 9 months ago
@Sitti2300 From what I've gathered, that may be the way things are heading. Growing opposition to the U.S. bases in Japan, opposition within the U.S. to having so many bases world wide. If things do head in that direction, and the perceived threat from China/North Korea grows..then I could see Japan greatly expanding its military, even building nukes would be relatively easy for them to do. And as negative as all that may sound..who could blame them?
comanchio1976 9 months ago
I fail to understand why Japan are still not allowed to build true aircraft carriers. World War II is long over, and now Japan is a key ally of the west and a bulwark against Chinese expansionism in the Eastern Pacific. I say the JMSDF should be allowed to generate true carrier battlegroups and put some stick about with the chinese!
sailingforde04 9 months ago
わろた
Geromichi0125 10 months ago
右上に朝日新聞て汚い文字があったでしょう？ｗうまいこと隠しましたねｗ
kojis4792 10 months ago
why?
SanctumStudios 10 months ago
very nice ship
Madmax1945XXX 10 months ago
please japs whatever u do dont do a kamakazi attack with his ship
aziqbal 10 months ago
@aziqbal
kamakazi←false
kamikaze←true
kamikaze=神風特別攻撃隊
dentosen 10 months ago
and this isnt an aircraft carrier, how???? i just wish everyone would stop doing this kabuki dance and call it a carrier, not a destroyer. this is a destroyer like a cabin cruiser is a rowboat. plop down a few v/stol fighters and viola! aircraft carrier. i think its time to reword that peace treaty. they are, a freaking army a freaking navy and a freaking airforce.
nomadnametab 10 months ago
@nomadnametab I'm glad you asked why this isn't an aircraft carrier. The answer is, because aircraft carriers...ummm...well, as the name implies....yeah. Does that clear it up for you? :) All joking aside the reason is because aircraft carriers carry jets for offensive operations. Jets being the operational difference, and offensive being the selling point. Destroyers carry helicopters for defense of freedom of the seas. Agreed about the Kabuki dance.
navyreviewer 10 months ago
Is Japan allowed to have army and navy?
ShitFromTransASS 10 months ago
@ShitFromTransASS Its a "defense force"
navyreviewer 10 months ago
@ShitFromTransASS Yes, as independent nation, Japan is free to have military forces just like any country. It is just their constitution that doesn't allow Japan to have offensive forces. And most japanese people don't agree to change it. Even though Japanese military forces are among top 10 in the world, this is why they call themselves "Self Defense Force". Since carrier is "offensive" force, they don't classify Hyuga as carrier. Its kind of stupid isn't it? Change the constitution Japan!!!!
Sitti2300 10 months ago
@Sitti2300 independent nation occupied with american bases
ShitFromTransASS 9 months ago
@ShitFromTransASS Japan is ALLOWING us to stay. US no longer occupying Japan. We don't even own the property. We are RENTING the property for our bases in Japan. Rent is being paid to property owners. If Japan wants us to leave, they'll give us 1 year notice, then we HAVE TO LEAVE whether we like it or not.
Sitti2300 9 months ago
@Sitti2300 You have no idea how far from truth that is.
adobo777 8 months ago
@ShitFromTransASS The American Bases are useful. With a big expansionist neighbor like china, I'd want a couple of US bases as well.
vk45de 9 months ago
They are going to build some bigger "Helicopter Carriers". They are called "22DDH" and have the following specifications:
Length: 248m/813ft
Displacement: 19.500 Tons (27.000-28.000 tons full)
Aircraft: 13-17 F35B STVOL - or Helicopters
Source: globalsecurity
Nukexdevil 11 months ago
I think what a lot of you guys are missing is that the days of war between world superpowers is long gone; death tolls on both sides would simply be too high for war to be favorable for either side. If anything were to happen, it would be far more likely that the world would feel another "Cold War" than another World War.
Buhler528 11 months ago
Ah now I see why the Russians are buying the much bigger French built Mistral ships.
MrScotia 11 months ago
so ya wanna remilitarize, huh? ya COCKROACHES JAPS. go ahead, but ya still are COCKROACHES.
1greatdude 11 months ago
Why are we talking about china?
IakFox 11 months ago
Cool
knt717 11 months ago
its clean and uncluttered, just like my Japanese Stationary holders! :D
Ahamster1 11 months ago
@tenga3wa10 you're kinda right in a way, but they did do a lot of evil things too
Ahamster1 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
実は空母にも転用できるとか？
新日本軍は平和維持軍の筆頭になって欲しい＾＾
2009kew 1 year ago
実は空母にも転用できるとか？
新日本軍は平和維持軍の筆頭になって欲しい＾＾
2009kew 1 year ago
@tenga3wa10 .....Good response..I dont know why these people still dwell in THE PAST!!!
v49624430 1 year ago
Fuck you kangaroo!
nararing3 1 year ago
Japan empire very evil !
8888kama 1 year ago
@8888kama No, actually it's not. With 7 carriers, 30 frigates, 20 submarines, 8 destroyers and more Japan is perhaps the strongest ally of South Korea in case of North Korean sudden invasion.
OnlyLifeMatters 1 year ago
@OnlyLifeMatters
wo Japs coming back . WWIII
8888kama 1 year ago
@8888kama How the hell do you suppose that the lovely japanese people would start WW3? When WW3 starts, it pits China against USA. Hopefully China wins.
OnlyLifeMatters 1 year ago
@OnlyLifeMatters china wins ww3..keep dreaming,you do know u.s have a larger n more advance navy n air force than china,u.s also have more modern tanks than china..u.s have 5000 abrams tank n china only have 500-800 Type 99 tanks,u.s also have more special forces,marines than china..lets not forget u.s soldiers are far more well trained n well equip than china..china also is under u.s n europe arms embargo..so china military will not be that advance,china have numbers,but numbers dont win wars.
fmoa 11 months ago
@fmoa You don't get it, don't you? China isn't like western powers. They don't plan to go and invade other countries. They follow defensive doctrine and use naval deterrent to retain peace on their soil. In WW3 China wouldn't be the aggressor against the US, but it would be the other way around. Thanks to China's DF21 defense system, submarine and surface fleet, no navy could invade China. It's purely a myth that China relies on numbers.
OnlyLifeMatters 11 months ago
@OnlyLifeMatters last..china doesnt have the capability to conduct expeditionary warfare anywhere in world in under 2 wks..only france n u.k have force projection capability like the u.s..china doesnt,china will have a hard time invading u.s,they will have to cross the pacific ocean..good luck china,while the u.s can strike n invade china from phillipines,s.korea,japan or australia..u.s also can blockade china n starve the chinese economy..so if ww3 starts,u.s have all the means to win.
fmoa 11 months ago
@fmoa China is building 4 LHDs and 3 carriers - possibly to reclaim Taiwan - so soon they'll have as good or better capability to project power abroad. USA couldn't invade China even if it concentrated all of it's LHDs and CVNs to do it. Why? Because the Chinese have an ballistic missile system that can destroy any given surface ship large enough, and it cannot really be countered with any defensive anti-missile system.
And obviously you don't know ANYTHING about present global economy.
OnlyLifeMatters 11 months ago
@OnlyLifeMatters Correct, the Chinese have missiles that are designed purely for taking out USA carrier fleets and even the US has said they have no defence against them. China is a great power just now but soon she will become a super power. Her economy is now the second largest in the world and in 10 years will be the largest. The world needs China, not the USA anymore. Russia and China together could take on NATO and win.
MrScotia 11 months ago
@MrScotia That's the cold hard truth. And what's more, China also possesses anti-satellite missile systems capable of taking out US satellites from the orbit. In addition to that, China makes up 98% of the global rare-earth trade. Rare-earth is used to make high-tech equipment, such as missiles and if China decided to close it's rare-earth exports before war, the West couldn't manufacture ANYTHING high-end equipment on neither civilian nor military side. China is rising, fast and firmly.
OnlyLifeMatters 11 months ago
@MrScotia China has only claimed to have "anti-carrier" ballistic missiles. They've never demonstrated this capability and military analysts have said it sounds very far-fetched. The U.S. has not said they have "no defense" against such missiles, they've said they don't know if theirr fleet air defense missiles could take they out. But, that's only because China's anti-carrier missile capability has never been demonstrated, only claimed.
bwana31 11 months ago
@fmoa The UK can no longer project power around the globe, we don't have a carrier anymore. You missed out Russia, she could wipe out 90% of the USA population with 6 subs, 3 from her northern fleet and 3 from her pacific fleet. Also, what use is all they ships that the USA has against China we she has the power to sink them with supersonic missiles designed to sink carriers? China at a whim could take out 40 million Americans, and they know this!!
MrScotia 11 months ago
@MrScotia Russia would only be able to fire its sub-launched missiles provided their missile subs weren't sunk first by our attack subs (or somebody else's attack subs) - not a likely possibility. Besides, I don't think Russia would want to do this even if it could. As for China, even if they took out 40 million Americans, that would leave 250 million alive. America could take out all of China with its missiles and they certainly know this.
bwana31 11 months ago
@OnlyLifeMatters "Hopefully China wins."
yeah, cause communism is the best ideology in the world and is way better than capitalism.
HERP, forget about things like tianamen square, just focus on the great prosperity communism brings into our daily lives! DERP.
virtuousmission 8 months ago
@virtuousmission Why do you bring up an event that took place over 20 years ago? China has changed radically since then with all sorts of economical and society reforms. It's like comparing today's Russia to Soviet Union, it just isn't comparable. Btw, even today's Russia is more like Soviet Union than modern PRC is like the PRC of the 80s.
I don't hope China's victory because of communism, but rather because it would mean the demise of the US.
OnlyLifeMatters 8 months ago
@OnlyLifeMatters i brought it up because the same thing essentially is still happening in tibet.
china becomes the domineering superpower and begins spreading its foreign policy throughout the world. with it, comes internet censorship, centralised markets, no freedom of speech etc.
what happens then? are you going to then hope for the demise of china?
ergo, china is just as bad as the US, albiet on a worse scale because you cant speak up against the government in china without repercussions.
virtuousmission 8 months ago
@virtuousmission Tibet belongs to China. End of story.
Why would I hope for the demise of China? EU will never let internet censorship or limitations for freedom of speech to take place. Democracy and freedom were invented in Europe, they'll never die here.
However, those things have never belonged to Chinese culture. As their culture is different than European culture, it might be hard for them to adjust into European ideologies. But then again...communism is an European ideology so...
OnlyLifeMatters 8 months ago
@OnlyLifeMatters Same thing as México, we have tried to copy the Anglosaxon ideology and their republic with no succes, México has been always ruled by kings, in pre-colonial times, durig the colonial period, and after the independence we had an emperor, but the US did not want to have a king in his continent, so that's why is always bitching about democracy, an ideology far from the mexican idiosincracy. A monarchy is closer to comunism, like China and it's goverment.
osmodivs 8 months ago
@osmodivs It's funny how USA bitches about freedom but won't let others have autocracy or imperial monarchies -.-'
OnlyLifeMatters 8 months ago
FUCK YOU DOLPHIN AND WHALE!
TheCaeronRoberts 1 year ago
@tenga3wa10 Something tells me Japan not only did good things over there.......
mu5ic1 1 year ago
誇り高き日本の造船技術の結晶ですね！
自衛隊万歳！！
hmd1995713 1 year ago
@tenga3wa10 i think the point was that japan also committed human rights violations in Korea. Despite some of the good Japan brought, you cant not refute that japan ruled Korea harshly. The Japanese who immigrated to Korea were greatly favored over the Korean populous and a huge number of Koreans were forced in to slave labor. Your point about japan bring some good to Korea is also true. To sum it up, Dont just glorify the good, look at the both sides of the issue.
rex1KILLER 1 year ago
Fuck Moskow terrorism!
Free Siberia! Free Ural Republic! Free Karelija > Finland! Free Pomorland!
Free Ingermanland!
stranniiy 1 year ago
A great ship of two .... following an old tradition, beginning in 1922 with the "Hosho" resp. in 1914 with the "Wakamiya Maru". :o)
Basilisk195 1 year ago
Great ship .... following an old tradition, beginning in 1922.
Basilisk195 1 year ago
There's one thing missing: Kamikaze fighters.
conscarcdr 1 year ago
@tenga3wa10 all of that was part and parsal of war then ,even if war is waged between north and south korea girls will get raped .......usa has rape casses in irak ,and afgan to....
pakifucker999999999 1 year ago
@tenga3wa10
本当だ
mitaka1007 1 year ago
正規攻撃型空母を建造してもらいたい。支那畜から領土を守るためです
原潜も５隻ほど
nebutadehoi 1 year ago 9
@nebutadehoi
bla bla bla, you FUCKING LITTLE JAP COCKROACH. japs like yourself = DIRTY COCKROACHES!
1greatdude 11 months ago