Article Title: "Facing Threats, Japan Bulks Up " Author: Section: Issues & Insights Date: 11/16/2006 Defense: Nations around the Pacific braced Wednesday for a tidal wave after a massive earthquake shook Japan. But a much bigger tsunami may be on the way. Asia, get ready: Japan wants to rearm.
Japan has officially been pacifist since World War II, but on Tuesday it took the first step away from that position. New Prime Minister Shinzo Abe formed a defense task force to deal with emerging threats and announced plans to create a group akin to our National Security Council.
This will no doubt rattle others in the region - China, Malaysia, Korea, the Philippines among them - who remember Japan at its imperialist worst, when it invaded and occupied much of Asia during World War II.
But Japan is different now - democratic, capitalist, rich and, like other major industrial powers, growing old. For 60 years, the Japanese have relied on the U.S. for their defense. But now, facing outside threats to their security, they want to do more on their own. We should encourage them.
North Korea's test of a nuclear device in October pushed Japan to do now what it would eventually have to do anyway - bulk up its military.
Besides, it is a little-known fact that Japan's self-defense force - organized somewhat like the U.S. Army National Guard - is quite formidable as it is.
In addition, the $42 billion Japan spends annually on defense is exceeded by only five other countries (U.S., China, Britain, France and Russia), according to data from the Stockholm Institute for Peace Research. Japan has nearly 300,000 full-time and reserve forces under arms, about the same as Britain or France.
Even so, Japan hasn't had the kind of offensive military power that make it a serious threat to potential enemies in the region - including its greatest enemy, North Korea.
As the chart shows, military spending hasn't risen much in 16 years, and represents just 1% of GDP. In the U.S., defense takes up more than 4% of GDP.
Japan's big defense makeover faces one big obstacle: Article 9 of the postwar constitution, which essentially rejects arms and the right to wage war. That should be amended to let Japan build a 21st-century military.
We would take it a step further: Not only should Japan rearm, but also it should consider going nuclear, and fast. As it stands, Japan has no credible counterthreat to rogue states like North Korea in the event of a nuclear attack.
A militarily formidable Japan is in America's interest. Since WWII, Japan has been a strong ally. Our economies, of course, are deeply intertwined. At least since 1982, when President Reagan and Yasuhiro Nakasone forged a U.S.-Japan strategic alliance, the U.S. has been encouraging Japan to take a more assertive role in the Pacific.
With North Korea threatening Japan and other neighbors, and with China asserting its might (as indicated by the recent tailing of the USS Kitty Hawk by an armed Chinese submarine), the time for Japan to rearm is now.
Prime Minister Abe, moreover, is just the leader to do it. As the first Japanese leader born after World War II, he doesn't bear the deep scars that earlier generations did.
To help, the U.S. should make Japan a full partner in creating a missile defense shield. Japan already has begun to deploy U.S.-built PAC-3 surface-to-air missiles as part of its air defense. And it's placing SM-3 missiles on one of its four Aegis destroyers.
Japan may also need a real nuclear deterrent. It wouldn't take long, since the nation has plenty of know-how through its commercial nuclear industry. That might make North Korea and China think twice about taking advantage of Japan's official pacifism.
As a democracy, they don't come much more solid than Japan. As an ally of the U.S., few have been as strong. But the sad fact is we may not always be able to provide Japan with the protection it needs. In time, it will have to do the job itself. The time is now.
Article Title: "Atomic Warming " Author: Section: Issues & Insights Date: 11/16/2006 Click Me! Climate Change: The secretary-general of the United Nations gets around to making a serious statement on the state of the planet, but the statement turns out to be just plain silly. But he's not the only one making it.
Addressing the U.N.'s annual climate change conference in Nairobi, Kenya, on Wednesday, Kofi Annan said global warming is as much of a threat as weapons of mass destruction.
We suppose we could dismiss the silly statement as that of a world figure playing to an audience on his way out of office. But we've heard the same statement too often from other supposedly rational leaders to brush it off.
Hans Blix, for example. In 2003, the former U.N. chief weapons inspector told MTV: "I'm more worried about global warming than I am of any major military conflict." Sure, it was a frivolous comment intended for a frivolous audience, but . . .
Bill Clinton, supposedly one of our brightest presidents, insisted in May at the University of Texas that "climate change is more remote than terror, but a more profound threat to the future of the children and the grandchildren and the great-grandchildren I hope all of you have."
Then there's Al Gore. "I don't want to diminish the threat of terrorism at all; it is extremely serious," the former vice president told Australia's newspaper the Age last year. "But on a long-term global basis, global warming is the most serious problem we are facing."
Maybe these men just haven't thought about what's going on around them.
On Tuesday, the day before Annan declared climate change as much of a threat as "conflict, poverty, the proliferation of deadly weapons," President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran said his country will go nuclear in just a few months. Some weapons experts say Ahmadinejad's regime could have an atomic weapon in a mere five years. Some say it's more like two.
Meanwhile, global warming, even if it proves to be real, will not begin to have an impact for generations. The U.N.'s own Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has projected that the earth's temperature will rise 1.4 degrees to 5.8 degrees Celsius by the end of the century. That works out to 0.14 degree to 0.58 degree a decade - small changes over a lengthy span.
The sort of climate change that concerns us is the warming from cities incinerated by nuclear weapons launched by Ahmadinejad or the equally crazed Kim Jong Il of North Korea, or by a terrorist group sponsored and supplied by those two.
Global warming remains nothing more than a theory. If it turns out to be real, there is still time to act - if we want to act.
We say "if" because there's evidence a warmer earth might be of great benefit to mankind: longer growing seasons (increased food production); warmer winters, with warmth occurring primarily at night (cutting heating bills and energy use); less disease; more rain (decreasing famine); and fewer cold-related deaths.
"From a purely evolutionary point of view, warm periods have been exceptionally good to us," Benny Peiser, a social anthropologist at Liverpool John Moores University, told Wired magazine last year. "Cold periods have been the troublesome ages."
Far more troublesome would be a nuclear age in which rogue regimes and terrorists have access to atomic weapons.
i read about this site.....i think it is one of the greatest ideas in a long time......check it out. (there is an article on it in Money magazine this month...its created by founder of eloan.com)......essentially its like being your own banker
Success is a State of Mind - - Tommy Bahama Profits always take care of themselves but losses never do. The speculator has to insure himself against considerable losses by taking their first small loss. - - Jesse Livermore The game of speculation is the most uniformly fascinating game in the world. But it is not a game for the stupid, the mentally lazy, the man of inferior emotional balance, nor for the get-rich-quick adventurer. They will die poor. - - Jesse Livermore
U.S. Stock Volatility Closes Below 10 for 1st Time Since 1994
By Michael Tsang
Nov. 20 (Bloomberg) -- The Chicago Board Options Exchange SPX Volatility Index closed below 10 for the first time since 1994, suggesting investors have more confidence stocks will rise.
The so-called VIX fell 0.08 points to 9.97 as of 4:15 p.m. New York time, closing below 10 for the first time since Jan. 28, 1994, when it fell to 9.94.
Lower readings on the VIX, which is based on prices paid for S&P 500 options, indicate investors are less concerned about the market's prospects. The drop in the VIX, which peaked this year at 23.81 on June 13, has coincided with a rally in U.S. stocks. From its 2006 low on the same day, the S&P 500 has rallied 14 percent and closed at a six-year high last week.
Share gains have been propelled by third-quarter earnings expansion that has been the fastest in seven quarters and a view the Federal Reserve can moderate growth and cool inflation in the world's largest economy without tipping it into recession.
``Folks are in a pretty optimistic mood,'' said Alfred Goldman, chief market strategist at A.G. Edwards in St. Louis. ``When they see some negative economic data, they say, `Ho-hum,' and when they see something positive, they say, `Oh-boy.'''
Earnings growth for companies in the S&P 500 are averaging 18.9 percent in the third quarter. That would be the fastest rate since the fourth quarter of 2004, according to figures compiled by Thomson Financial.
Logged
Male
