What would America do if China attacked Japan?
102987
well it is a tricky one. does Japan has enough oil ? America did not do anything for Tibet.
372142
That my friend is probably true.  How many Japanese civilians were killed when Curtis Lamey ordered the firebombing of Japan.  Think about the two atom bombs dropped as well.  Justified in my opinion because of the casualties the Americans would have suffered if they had been forced to invade.  Had we lost most top leaders would have been beheaded.
482259
The US had put an oil embargo on Japan for invading China. Without oil, Japan could not keep its war machine in operation - planes, ships and tanks use a lot of oil. \n\nI don't think you could really say attacking Pearl Harbor solved that problem, and of course it was not going to win the war, but it was the only way the Japanese military felt they could prolong the inevitable defeat. (They never believed that could actually beat the US in the end. But by attacking Pearl Harbor they thought they could gain 6 more months to advance into Southeast Asia).
574613
one of those asian countries either china or japan
742073
No one right on its mind will use first Nukes.   You will be the paria of the whole world and loose all allies.   Nukes will be used when one party is completly lost.\nA ground war with China would look as the war in Russia.   Very long distance to conquer (even worse since you must bring everything by sea).\nAll Chinese have a minimum military training.   When fully mobilising they have more soldiers than the entire population of the US.\nIn Korea, Us had a lot of trouble with the Chinese which were badly underarmed.  The modern Chinese army has very good material and even more troops than in 1950.\nCarpet bombing has someone suggested : China is even larger than the US.   Do you think the Chinese army and factories will stay in the towns ?  Think again.\n\nSo how would look a war with China really ?\nSimply : a lot of naval raids on the Chinese coast, Taiwan taken by the Chinese after a heavy sea battle (with a lot of combats between Chinese airforce versus US navy carriers).\nAn invasion of China is very unlikely because no way you can stop the millions of Chinese (well trained and motivated).\nAt the other hand China can not do much to arm the US and will be cut off from the world for trade so no more export (and so no more currency coming in).\nChina will fall back on it own (like in 1960), the US will be seriously crippled after the first months of battle and can not affort to have a second front somewhere.\n\nAll depends what other countries will do especially Russia, India.\n\nConclusion : both countries have no interest to start a war with each other.   Military it would make the US vulnerable, China would loose a lot economical.
78345
Sadly, there is a pretty good chance that there will be a WWIII.  If you haven't noticed yet, China is building up its military and investing heavily on technology, not for defense purposes in my opinion.  They're preparing for an invasion of Taiwan.  They have said numerous time that if Taiwan declares itself independent from China then it would attack the country of Taiwan.  They cannot attack now because they know if it attacks Taiwan, the U.S. will intervene on behalf of Taiwan.  China in return is preparing itself for a war with the U.S and Taiwan.
131838
At the current time we do not have enough troops to attack anyone else.  North Korea has one of the largest armies in the world, never mind that if we attacked them China might get involved and join the war against us.  And if you think the war in Iraq is bad a war with North Korea could easily cost us 1000 soldiers every 2 weeks or so instead of every year
806967
Nuke 'em till they glow. If we don't, they will. Sadly, because of the criticism of Iraq, I think Bush has lost his ability to fight. If we do not attack now, it will cost us a major American city and millions of lives.\n\nThink I'm wrong? Look at history. There is no doubt that Japan would have used a nuke on Pearl Harbor if they had the technology available. It would have destroyed our entire fleet and given Japan free reign in the Pacific (which was their intention with the attack). Now our enemies do have nukes, and when they launch a sneak attack it will be infinitely worse than Pearl Harbor or 9/11.\n\nAll that is necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing.
532549
I assume you meant if the attack had not of happened.\n\nThe answer is Yes. Japan was coaxed into attacking Pearl Harbor by the US. We had been blockading Japanese trade routes with  Navy ships prior to the attack. It could be argued that the attack on Pearl Harbor was justified, given the circumstances (though the reasons for the blockade and Japanese aggression in Asia should also be mentioned).\n\nThe War in the Pacific against Japan and the War in Europe against Germany were two separate wars. Japan and Germany were loose allies, primarily because of their common enemy. They did have some similar policies - namely, belief in their own racial superiority and the desire to expand their empires - but they would've eventually been enemies if the outcome of WWII was different.\n\n---------------\n\nOne additional point: The US Government WANTED war with Japan because they were adversely affecting our interests in Asia. However, the US was just recovering from the Great Depression, and World War I was still fresh in the public's mind. There was no public support to go to war in either Europe or the Pacific. The attack on Pearl Harbor changed that very quickly.\n\nDoes that sound similar to, say, 9/11 and WMD's in Iraq? Figure that out for yourself!
1152302
That's a scary thought. I don't fear china, but it would be prudent to treat them with as much respect as possible. I believe it would be very costly in lives.
504525
China.  They have an ongoing problem with Japan, and they could invade Taiwan.  This would be a BIG problem.
1064351
The question:\n\nWould we have joined World War Two if Japan hadn't attacked Pearl Harbor?\n\nThe answer:\n\nCheck it out here; it's really interesting: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/;_ylt=Ai6fsEgESenbEPC2ThudBXEjzKIX?qid=1006041013039
171059
What is the point of invading Japan? All war nowadays is fought for economic gain - to destroy the infrastructure in Japan is to obtain a piece of infertile land, with not much strategic value, full of mountains, earthquakes and with very little natural resources. \n\nJapan is also rumoured to be able to build nuclear weapons within one day as they have almost completed the process (something like 99%) of enriching uranium. invading Japan may not be the best idea for China......l
220027
Japan Invaded Shanghai, which was formerly held by the int'l concession (USA and UK) and the french concession. Japan used Chinese citizens as tests for biochemical activities, and at one time planned to bild a zepplin with gas to poison target californian cities. Oh, and Japan had a mutual war pact with the nazis. Other than pearl harbor and the previous reasons stated..., I see no reason to be alarmed.
348833
Nope, America won't tackle North Korea because they're scared of China and Russia.  I think either or both of those two countries will get involved if the USA decided to attack North Korea.\n\nWhose not scared of China?  They're going to be the biggest economy in the world soon!  And they've alway had a huge army.\n\nThen if you did attack North Korea and did win, whose saying you won't make a mistake like you did with Iraq and Afganistan, putting a government in place which is just as bad or worse than the previous communist government.  People have very short memories!  You have to remember that the US put Sadam and the Taliban in power in Iraq and Afganistan.  The only reason you knew that Sadam had weapons of mass destruction is because you gave them to him to use against Iran.  Why can't you just let countries sort their own problems out?  Or if your going to police the world, why don't you help sort out some of the African countries that need your help?\n\nAnyway, America doesn't play big brother, they play little brother with all the hi-tech toys, wanting to be like one of their big brothers (i.e. France, Spain and Britain).\n\nAnd before anyone says, I'm not anti-america, I thought Bill Clinton was a superb president, but he was partly educated in England!
1173114
No, the US will not "attack" Korea, but your lame@ss bullshit comments only show you don't know sh*t from Shinola, sonny boy, so sit down, shut your f**king piehole and stuff your hands up your worthless @ss while I clue you in on the facts of life.\n\nWe, the US, will not attack NK, but if Kim Jong Il starts up a whole ruckus, then we'll by God lay a world of hurt on his fat butt.  And I'll tell you another thing, junior, old Kim is probably going to get the rudest surprise in his pathetic life when he finds out the Chinese aren't going to just sit on their hands while Kim does his best to get NK converted to a large cloud of radioactive dust to blow over on China. No sir. China will come down from the north while we drive up from the south, and we'll just do us a little piggie-in-the-middle with old Kim.  \n\nNow you are effing dismissed, maggot! God, shitheads like you really boil my piss!
383035
Holy cow, some really horrible answers so far........\n\nThe US had imposed economic sanctions on Japan because of their invasion and occupation of Manchuria, and their invasion and occupation of most of Western China.  We wanted them to withdraw from China, and imposed increasingly stringent sanctions that were hurting the Japanese economy, which not only prevented them from supporting their military activities but also hurt civilian production and consumption.\n\nThe Japanese decided that the best way to get the resources they needed (primarily tin, rubber, oil and other natural resources)  was to invaded the resource rich Dutch East Indies.  They also felt they needed to invade US possessions in the Phillipines and the Central Pacific in order to provide an outlying perimeter to protect their conquests.  The Japanese were well aware that such actions would cause the US, Enland, and the Dutch to declare war on them.  Since the English and Dutch were heavily involved in the war in Europe against Germany and Italy, the only real threat the Japanese faced was the US, primarily the US Pacific Fleet which was based at Pearl Harbor.  \n\nTherefor the Japanese devised a plan whereby they would launch a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, crippling the US Pacific Fleet to the point where it couldn't interfere with their plans for quite some time.  By the time it could, the Japanese would have built up their outlying perimeter making it extremely difficult for any US fleet to interfere.  They also hoped that the attack would so horrify the US civilian population that the US government would sign a peace treaty and accept the status qou.  Admiral Yamamoto and other high level militarly leaders warned that if the US decided to go to war, it was a war that Japan could never win because of the industrial and economic might of the US.\n\nSo, the attack was in response to US sanctions, sanctions which crippled the ability of the Japanese to conduct their war in China.  Since they were unwilling to give up their conquests there, and any further invasion would bring about war against the US, they decided on launching a surprise attack.\n\nHerbmueller99 gave a very short, essentially correct answer. Bobmarley and karatekaty are pretty much dead wrong, and everybody else besides nywrek are almost dead wrong. Nywrek is generally correct, although it was no secret that Germany, Japan, and Italy had signed the Tripartite Pact, and the entire USN wasn't based at Pearl Harbor, just a majority of the Pacific Fleet.\n\nHigh school and college history teachers must be doing a lousy job nowadays, or people simply don't read anymore.