The k-30 biho and the k-sam are two units from south korea that would give a japanese/ south korea tree a more rounded tree. And before the comment of south korea doesnt like japan. The two nations are actually allies with a treaty as opposed to china and taiwan.
You can also add much need second line of tanks the k2 and then a ifvs
The k-3o biho is a pretty much the gepard 1a2 with stingers. Not the best spaa but at least one that can detect an enemy and has a small chance of killing it. The type 81 C NEEDS A RADAR TO Function or it is just blind luck with eyeballing a thermal on a small pixelated speck.
It is approaching insane levels of just abuse of Japanese and Italian and Israel mains or just neglect. Like how can you defend against f-14 15 16s and 111s and apaches and ka50/52s. If gaijin REFSUES to fix a problem IT CREATED. Then it shouldnt penalize those three nations players leaving after one death.
How many more people would play JAPAN IF YOU GAVE THEM SOUTH KOREA AS WE ARE SORRY WE F OVER your top tier FOR YEARS
It is a sin to use the word “Korea-Japan alliance” in Korea
they’re literally synonyms. “alliance” and “security cooperation” mean the exact same thing
If the two words had the same contextual meaning, the opposing politician would not have apologized
Ok, first off thats not how politics works. If politics were as easy and clear cut as “if is bad, will apologize” or “if and are different the opinions will reflect such” politics wouldn’t be the mess it is today.
Second off, its literally a move to get more political cout. There are 2 types of people in South Korea who care about the whole Korea-Japan schism: Nationalist (internet) Koreans, and the politicians that seek to earn their support. This move appeases said nationalists, but most South Koreans (who don’t particularly care about the history with Japan, or even would rather a cooperative alliance) don’t really care about the difference in terminology as long as they get to work together with the Japanese.
My point is that there is no alliance treaty between Korea and Japan.
And I guarantee that as a Korean, “most Koreans” are against military cooperation with Japan.
So you fall cleanly into my definition of “nationalist (online) Korean”
Well if thats the card you pull I won’t really contest it, theres no way for me to counteract that in any satisfactory manner
That being said, for the purposes of this post, S.Korea and Japan are more than enough working together militarily. They held co-op military exercises this past June/July, and likely will hold more in the future. They both recognize China as a common enemy, and have pleged to work together to better defend themselves and each other.
Very different from how China and Taiwan are actively at odds with each other and yet they’re together in the same tree.
It is you who are in confirmation bias
Only 28 percent of Koreans said Japan was “good” and “good in general” in the survey
Come back to War Thunder,
Rather, Italy’s subtree makes more logical sense, whether it is possible or not, rather than making South Korea Japan’s subtree
South Korea had more military relations with Italy than with Japan.
South Korea and Japan never used each other’s military equipment, but South Korea licensed more than 400 Italian fiat CM6614
Wait, so allow me to get this straight - You say that S.Korea buying a couple hundred APCs from italy warrants closer military ties than a joint defence and security treaty?
At least some of yall have SPAA… (cries in Israeli Imp. Chaparral)
A joint defense and security treaty between South Korea and Japan has never been signed with the consent of the National Assembly
If the military relationship between Korea and Italy is the same as the military relationship between Korea and Japan, the country that licensed and used the other’s equipment has a closer military relationship
There’s certainly no alliance between Communist Hungary and NATO aligned Italy but they’re the same tree, same with the PRC and Taiwan.
So basically, due to that they both were executive decisions not explicitly voted on by the National Assembly, a trilateral military sercurity and defense agreement is worth less in terms of military ties than an equipment shipment?
I personally find that a liiiiittle strange but you do you.
Hungary is a part of NATO as well