Major Johnathan

Bah..., sorry, long pointless rant edited away.

Bitch and moan? I don't recall that. No nation ever absorbed a terrorist attack anywhere near the scale of 9-11. Embassy and cafe bombings, sure. 2 of the tallest buildings on Earth, 1/5 the Penatagon and 4 airliners and 3000 dead, all inside 90 minutes or so? I think that's enough to get a little upset about.

It's a fact Japan was working on the A-bomb, just like Germany. A U-Boat that surrendered to the U.S. ,when Germany was defeated, and BEFORE the dropping of the 2 A-Bombs, had aboard enriched uranium and lots of German research data, it was headed for Japan. The two japanese officers that were aboard commited suicide rather than be captured and interrogated. Hiroshima was both a city and military hubb. If memory serves, the Imperial Navy's 'annapolis' equivalant is there and so were some research and development facilites. I remember something about a Japanese scientist who was close enough to see the white flash and feel the ground shake, after a moment of shock, he thought it had to have been an Atomic explosion. Meaning it wasn't an alien notion to Japan's scientific and military elite. They just got beat to the punch. Anyway, i agree 'Pearl Harbor' was a terrible movie. 'Tora,Tora,Tora' is far better, reasonably accurate and impressively fair to both sides.

I think I could settle for a game where you play as Meryl or Eva, as long as it's able to match the great scenery and ambiance of MGS3. Eva in Vietnam 1970, I could enjoy that. I don't see how they couldn't have Snake in it though, he'd want to resue her when he found out she went missing. (Kind of like the story in Spy Game, I think it's called, with Redford and Pitt.) It'd be nice to face bad guy's other than Spetznaz/Russians for a change. Maybe it could take place in China too because of Eva's history. Also, they imply all over that Snake, any version, is a bad ass veteran. So not EVERY mission has to have a nuclear weapon at it's center. Boss and the cobra's missions included D-day/V-2 hunting and the attempted Cuban insurrection/Bay of Pigs. Idunno. I just want more!

My advice would be to just build it in one form or the other, transforming plastic peices always have loosened joints and constant paint scratchs. I confess to being a model snob, I just think if you want transforming and tons of moving parts, buy a die-cast toy. Models are made for display. That said, I actually prefer the Imai 1/15 Ride Armos. They seem closer to the animation and they make all 4, but of course, they don't transform. The little 1/24 kits are good too, but they only make Stick's(Scott's) Ride Armor.

Well I've finished Snake Eater twice, I'm trying to build up the courage to play on Extreme mode. I wonder if there will be a 4th game? I fear H. Kojima may say a trilogy is enough. Is it just me or are the Metal Gear/Shagohod the least interesting part of this game? I like the setting,ambiance and style, I like the characters and even the twisted story line is engrossing, sort of. I'm hoping because they say Eva went missing in Hanoi in 1970, that might be the basis of a new game. I really liked the whole retro-history thing. I also like the young Ocelot, he's obnoxiously likeable. And I liked how the whole thing took place in one big area instead of jumping from one big city to the next, you really get the feeling the place exists, like you go visit the area. A new game based in Vietnam maybe? Or even possibly they could go back further and set it in WWII with the Boss and the Cobra team... But I think you really need to keep Snake the main character, he is the heart of the game. It would be cool if you could play Eva for a level or have at least the option to play either character. They might also fix the camera angle thing, that seems maybe the most common critique of MGS3. I can live with it, but I do admit it can be frustrating at times. I wonder if Kojima could accept the challenge of a MGS4 AND have no nuclear weapon crisis? There must be some other plot device they could come up with. That angle is being a bit over done all over the place.

Sadly, I don't believe the Navy (or Marines, A.F. or Army) have much say in what they're equipped with. That kind of decision making goes to congress/politicians.(and the corporations that bribe them the best.) If I may stand on my soap box, Congress should determine the budget and leave the details of what weapons system's to buy to some sort of panel of retired military personal and civilian experts who have their finances audited to ensure they aren't being bribed too. Thus, the ACTUAL winner in a weapons competion might stand a chance to win the contract on the merits. The military top brass who say, yes this aged, inferior equipment is just what we need! And please, cut our budget and close down our facilities! And we need fewer troops for more missions!, are just jockeying for another star on their shoulder. Nepotism I think they call it. That's also a severe problem. But what's the military for if not pork barrel projects for greedy politicians?

I hate to admit it, but the French do build some good ships/planes/vehicles. But they're not very succesful till Germans are at the controls... Oh, just read Jeleinen's post... it would HAVE to be something about Japan being menaced by A-bombs... Ya' know, WWII-Pacific theatre, had about a million compelling stories and angles to tell, and when someone in Japan actually does get in to a WWII topic, it MUST be about A-Bombs. This has great propaganda potential...

I've waited over 20 years for Japan to unveil it's GIANT KILLER ROBOTS, and all they have is that Honda-bot. Ironically, it's in the news today that the U.S. is putting 127 billion into unmanned vehicles (ground and air) and yes, robots. The biggest single contract ever apparently.

I did not mean to imply Europe/UN didn't give lives in the Korean War it's self. I do mean to point out peace was never achieved and it's been left soley to S. Korea and the U.S. to deal with it. Europe and the UN picked up their toys and went home a long, long time ago. Anyway, my real complaint with Japan is we shouldn't be wondering wether they buy the F-22 or EF-2000 or Rafale. We should be wondering why, a country with the wealth, industry and highly skilled population that Japan has, why aren't they developing their own original home made designs? For that matter, how about S. Korea? If France and Sweden can make their own planes, why can't Japan and S. Korea? Japan and S. Korea dwarf most of the EU money and industry wise.(on a country to country basis I mean.)

"It certainly isn't"? No planes in existance can best the F-15 over-all, maybe match it. The F-14, the Flanker and the F-22 are it's only serious competion, maybe you Euro's would throw in the EF2000? The Rafale is good, but it's French. Also, why should S. Korea buy Euro designs? (Russian designs go to N. Korea of course) Is the EU or France risking so much as a single pinky toe on the Korean peninsula? Will they come to the rescue if the North invades? And it's always wise to have your main ally share the same machines in case you need parts or mechanics in a pinch.

Well stated post Sundown. What you see in so much of anime is an ever present message that war is evil, period. No other conclusions are really allowed. You see these messages in so many shows, Macross, Patlabor, Trigun etc, or in video games like Metal Gear etc. (I happen to enjoy all of them, without embracing the political/moral conclusions, strangely enough.) It's like some message of war = insanity, or war = futility or violence is wrong is mandatory. BUT, then they get into kick-ass battle scenes , Earth gets pulverized , giant robots armed to the teeth , hero's who resort to violence or killing to win Japan wants it known they are 100% peaceful, and detest war and violence, yet vast portions of the entertainment they make is about war and violence. How many Samurai films/anime have they made over the years, where a Samurai fights for honor or to protect the weak or just plain fight evil. How do they justify revering Samurai, when it always ends in the samurai lobbing off a bad guy's head or splitting his guts open? Doesn't that right there tell you deep down, Japanese don't really buy into that pacifist mind set? My thought is for japan to really be at peace with WWII, they have to face the fact they started a war and for the wrong reasons and behaved very brutally and battered their own sense of honor in the proces. But life does go on, WWII was a very long time ago and reputations and honor can be restored in time. Cloaking it all in the pacifist 'all war is wrong' and indulging in a sense of victimhood only slows Japan's recovery. The 'all war is wrong' philosophy is a convenient way to avoid responsibiltiy, this way America and the allies were equally wrong for engaging in the evil of war, never mind who started it or why either side was fighting, if all war is wrong it doesn't matter. (Of course I would argue war is a good option if your your cause is just. Ghandi and MLK were great men, their peaceful tactics admirable, but they weren't facing for example, Nazi's or Islamic terrorists. People have tried those tactics against them and they've never been heard from again and we'll mostly never know their names. Sometimes, war is truely the best option.)

I'd throw in that Japan actually pioneered the indiscriminate bombing of civilian populations/i.e. trying to wipe out entire cities. That started in the early 30's against China, then Germany demonstrated it's effectiveness against Poland,Russia and tried it out on Great Britain. So, it's hard to work up much outrage when the allies paid the axis back in kind. I do recognise a great many 'innocents' were wiped out in allied bombing, but when you declare total war (and in japan's case, laugh at the Geneva convention, which they did not sign.), you can hardly expect those countries attacked to respond in a freindly manner. Remember, the Japanese and German civilians were just loving WWII, till they started losing. I actually like the handling of the Dresden commemeration. My first thought was, why commemerate anything? But the Germans handled it well, they said the allied bombing of Dresden was a horrible thing, but acknowledged Germany invited such attacks and condemned their Nazi past. The Japanese have yet to show such maturity, they still just consider themselves the hapless victims of WWII, like America just dropped a couple A-bombs out of the blue. People talk about the 'Rape of Nanking', like it was one city and one short period of time, but it was a years long policy that spanned all of occupied China. Nanking stands out because enough foreign media were there to report it, but most places in China had no one to 'observe' what was happening. Take the Doolittle raid for example, the U.S. fliers were sheltered by the Chinese, so Japan 'retaliated' by massacring some 200,000 Chinese civilians. How many Japanese today even know about that little chapter?

I don't feel I'm badmouthing, just criticising. I know about all of Japan's commitments in the war on terror. It equals money and support equipment. The 1000 or so Japanese troops in Iraq have been painstakingly removed from any major risk of attack. America, Britain, Poland, Italy, Spain(formerly), Ukraine and of course Iraqi's themselves have continually paid in lives, not just money. Japan, as in the first Gulf war, only contributes money (admittedly a lot of it) and distant support like air refuelers and sea refuelers. But conciously never risking Japanese lives. I recognise that Japan sending ground troops to Iraq was a big step for them, but to my knowledge, those troops are not doing the tough and dangerous work of policing Iraqi towns or cities for fear of attack. And there's no doubt the terrorists would love to hit those troops, the point is, it's dangerous business and in a war zone, you'll lose some people. The fact is, I haven't heard of a single shot fired by those troops or against them, meaning they are so far from any serious population, one wonders what use those 1000 troops really are. I know this is all really prickly in Japan because of it's history in WWII, but if Germany can send armed peace keepers all over the world, and has for years now, certainly Japan can too. Germans aren't in Iraq, but they did put ground troops, helicopters and fighter/bombers in Afghanistan, I believe even lost a few men, plus they have troops in Kosovo. Sadly, I think the percentage of pacifists in Japan is well over half.

I know, I'm starting to rant... but; Japan's holiest of causes', nuclear proliferation. Well, N. Korea has 'em. Iran will very soon. Once they have them, S. Korea will want 'em. Saudi Arabia and Egypt will want them. If they get them, Libya and Syria will want them. If Libya and Syria get them...etc. etc. etc. My point being, what the hell is Japan proposing to do to stop this spiral of proliferation? Endless talks and negotiations, aid package after aid package. Meanwhile, any two bit dictator just has to threaten to be interested in nukes, and countries like Japan fall for it and wind up sending aid(extortion payments) to keep a dictator in power. Maybe it's not such a bad idea to confront the rogues BEFORE they get nukes. Then hopefully the other rogues will think twice.

Japan really needs to update it's constitution. I read how Japan wants more respect in the world, especially in the UN. They'll never get it if all they contribute is money. Japan's like Rick in Casablanca, Japan sticks it's neck out for no one. It boils down to military participation. Will Japan offer troops/Peace keepers for Sudan? Or Afghanistan? Or Palestine? or 20 other hot spots. Will they confront obvious bad actors like N. Korea or Iran? Or will they continue to write checks to get out of a pinch? Sooner or later money won't solve it, or Japan could even run low on money, then what would they do? If Japan were attacked, there is no doubt America would be at their side from day one. Maybe that's the problem. Japan hasn't exactly bent over backwards to help America out in the war we're in. The troops they put in Iraq are as isolated as can be and hell bent on not firing a shot in anger or defense. That's pretty useless. America should have the same policy. "Japan, we're with you! And if N. Korea or China ever attack, we'll observe! So don't worry."

I must be missing something, but I've never understood why India and the U.S. are so unfreindly? I mean we were never close to war, it was BRITAIN that colonized them not America, yet they seem to love Britain. Where I grew up, there were probably more Indian immigrants than any other group, and they seemed to be enjoying being here, virtually no 'tensions' or any of that crap. Even the older folks spoke great English and on a people to people basis, my experience has been that Americans and Indians get along just fine. But our Govts' sure as hell don't. Of course India is the biggest democracy on Earth, they are pretty tolerant relgiously, obviously a bit freindlier to Hinduism. Plus it seems their bad guys and our bad guys are awful similar, you'd think we'd be VERY close allies. Whatever the bad blood is, it's high time we buried the hatchet. U.S. India Japan= mighty alliance. (not to mention Australia, Singapore, S.Korea and Phillipines) I know America has been close to Pakistan at times, and India close to Russia at times, it seems we're all confused, it should be vica versa.

For some reason, I'd rather not see the Saudi's with F-22's. But as I say, it's just embarrasing for Japan that they have no real aircraft industry of their own. They have the money, the technology, the history the industry and the need. Maybe the realities of N.Korea shooting missles over their heads, announcing they have nukes and that little thing about China on a path of dwarfing Japan militarily and economically might snap them out of their complacency. I like Japan, it's my 2nd favorite country and I worry for them. Pacifist's don't do well in the real world.

Israel has been selling some sensitive technology to China that has upset the U.S., so I doubt they'll get the F-22. Probabbly just a U.S. only release, but it would do wonders for the U.S. aircraft industry to let the F-22 be sold to close allies. I have my doubts about how useful anybody will find the F-35, but it certainly has enough customers. Japan lags behind in aircraft development, and they have no excuse, they have the industry, the history and the motivation, but still they rely on the U.S. for it's equipment. Already, China is building it's own licensed Flankers, essentially what Japan does with the F-15. You'd think that would alarm Japan a bit more, the trends aren't favoring Japan, but they do little to face up to it.

What's been happening with the F-2? How many are actually in service after all this time? (I remember them in the news in the early, early '90's) I remember originally it was supposed to be a big U.S./Japan venture, but I've heard virtually no news of U.S. participation... Besides that, does Japan have any idea what it wants to eventually replace the F-15? If China, N. Korea and Russia were my neighbors, I'd want to stay ahead of the curve. The Flanker family is not to be shrugged off. Maybe they'll buy into the F-35? Not that the F-35 comes close to air superiority, but it's all the rage. Maybe they'd consider the F-22?

Just to be clear, I love the show. But I want to knit pick one thing from the last epsiode. When Starbuck plugged the fist sized bullet hole in the Marauder, surely exiting atmosphere/entering the vacuum of space wouldv'e sucked out whatever she shoved in their? Also, did I miss what she used to paint her name on the Marauder?

Well my pathetic dial-up connection can't handle all the pics, but I've seen enough to say great job Fernandofaria! That is a hard conversion, especially with so little line art to refrence.

Well that's too bad. I generally agree season 3 and 4 (so far) are pretty decent. Though I missed all of season 2, season 1 came off kind of dry and sterile. I wish they'd just stick with a show and work to improve if it isn't bringing in the ratings, especially something as bankable as Star Trek. UPN is just a crappy place to be. Though what network doesn't eventually screw up their shows? So the only Sci-Fi I have to look forward to is Battlestar Galactica, and that show has it's flaws too.

oops, 4th season. still, I remember the premier like it was just a year ago. I missed the whole 2nd season 'cause my satellite wasn't carrying UPN at the time. Anyway, I wish they didn't wrap up the whole augment/geneticly engineered/ Khan story. It would make a pretty promising story line they could return to occaisionally. Heck, how about a whole series from the augments view, that way the pesky Federation morality stuff gets turned on it's ear. I kinda enjoyed mere humans kicking Klingon's butts with ease. A sort of augment pirate ship series.

Actually, I can't believe this is it's 5th season. Time keeps accelerating, this show seems like it's just getting started to me. I agree the writing is just not all it could be, and hasn't been for 15 years or so. Their so afraid to 'jeapordize' the franchise that they won't do anything innovative or drastic. The main cast of Enterprise isn't too bad, I like Archer, and T'Pol is better than I expected considering you know they got her for sex appeal. Trip is ok too. The security guy lacks charisma, the doctor is so-so, the helmsman is milk toast and has no personality, Hoshi is...cute, but I don't know I get how she translates labguages so easy, seems more like magic than science. Still, I hope they keep the show alive, maybe tweek the cast a bit. Make the story a little more tumultuous, I think humans should be a little more at each other's throats, it's too Federation-ized. Lastly, as I said, I like Trip and I like T'Pol, but they never ever seemed like a realistic couple. Maybe Trip and Hoshi but not T'Pol. She's Vulcan, she should be frustratingly unattainable.