Preview Mode Links will not work in preview mode

Samurai Archives Japanese History Podcast


 

Sep 15, 2014

This episode, Nate talks about the history of Japan's self defense force, the JSDF.  Nate, who worked directly with the JSDF in Japan, addresses questions about how the JSDF has evolved over the past 60 years, what its stated purpose and objectives are today, and in what specific situations and to what extent and capacity the JSDF is allowed to participate in military and wartime situations. Part one of two.

Shopping on Amazon.com?  Use our link: http://www.amazon.com/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=samurai-20

Samurai Archives Podcast on iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/samurai-archives-japanese/id430277324

Samurai Archives Podcast on Stitcher: http://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=41397&refid=stpr

Support this podcast:

Shop Amazon.com, suport the podcast: http://www.amazon.com/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=samurai-20

Samurai Archives Bookstore: http://astore.amazon.com/samurai-20

Samurai Archives Shop (T-Shirts, etc) http://www.cafepress.com/samuraiarchives

Contact Us:

Twitter @SamuraiArchives https://twitter.com/#!/samuraiarchives

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Samurai-Archives/104533213984

Samurai Archives podcast blog: http://www.samuraipodcast.com


Bethetsu
two and a half years ago

Thank you for the podcast, Nate. I am afraid I have not been keeping up with the issue as I should. I am glad to get some overall view.

You said outside Japan the SDF could defend a Tai ship against pirates, but not a US naval ship attacked by a ship of XXXX in a war. What is the legal difference? The attacker--an illegal group vs. a nation? The attackee--civilian vs. military? Non-war situation (or UN operation?) vs. war situation?

The prime minister says he wants to change the long-established interpretation of the constitution by cabinet decree. (Some of your comments in the next podcast about method could apply here.) Would the new interpretation do away with that legal difference? Or what would it do?