What do you think?
I think that China’s gonna use a whole lotta influence to keep them away from that.
Links to news posts?
I would allow them a seat only if the representative from Japan gave me 5 boxes of original 1992 Squaresoft FF5 trading cards.After all, you have to pay a fee to get a seat on the NY stock exchange.-----
…Dragon, please keep the topic relevant. -.-
I’m not sure whether China has that much influence. Regarding that Japan is, after the US, the second most-paying member of the United Nations, and amongst the most populous members, granting a permenant seat to Japan should be seriously considered. The same goes for Germany. Of course when the security council was established it would have been ridiculous to grant a seat to Germany, but I think we are ready for that now. Germany as one of the primary pillars of the EU should as well as Brazil, the most powerful Latin American nation, be admitted to an enlarged security council.
why don’t you post a thread about it
China has more than enough influence: It can veto any decisions made in the Security Council. And hell no, not as long as it would give Japan a veto. The Security Council needs less members with vetos, not more.
Yeah, in fact had it not been an Axis power it’s logical to think Japan would have gained the Security Council seat for the Asian region instead of China.
I’m ignorant. What does holding the council seat constitute? What is this about? Lack of link hurts the ignorant.
THe Security Conucil can basiaclly shoot down any proposal they don’t like. That is, if all the members of the council don’t agree, your proposal’s dirt again.
http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/
This is the charter. Chapter V concerns the Security Council. Chapter XVIII concerns ammendments, which is what would have to happen in order for Japan to have a permenant seat.
To add to that, there are currently five permanent members of the Security Council: The US, Britain, France, Russia, and China. It has ten rotating members.
The Security Council is the part of the UN that keeps peace between all members. Thus, its pretty much the important body of the UN. There are 5 permanent members, who stay on the council forever. These members can veto any proposal brought before them. There are 10 other countries on the council, who rotate on and off. These countries can’t veto. They’re just there to appease the world, and make it seem like the 5 permanent members can’t just do whatever they want. Really, they’re useless. Since the real power lies with the permanent members, its a desired position.
Also, only countries on the permanent council can have nuclear ordinance under NNPT. Thats another reason why its a desired position (though NNPT has no power anyway, because you’re permitted to have them UNLESS you sign the treaty, in which case you can’t. So countries that want them, but can’t get on the council just don’t sign).
<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_Council”>supwikipedia</a>
So wait, does this mean that Japan will be allowed to have a full military (not the stripped-down defensive army they have now) again?
No. Japan cannot have an army unless she ammends her constitution.
I think its just so that they can shoot down anything that china tries to do in asia. I think they worry that china might be able to sway the US onto it’s side if they ever try anything drastic in Asia, and they want to be able to be safe, even if that occurs.
Though i really doubt a veto would stop china. 
I’m not saying they’re going to succeed, I’m saying they’re going to use influence to keep them away from a permanant seat. Even if Japan is the second-most paying member of the UN, influence can be toted outside the UN to make sure they don’t get enough votes for them to make the seat.
Germany, I can understand, however, granting a seat to Brazil is like spitting in the face of the rest of South America.
Well, the reform is calling for a permanent seat for at least one member of each region (North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa (Australia gets screwed lozl)). So, Brazil would probably get the SA seat, and the African nation typically being thrown around is Nigeria (It could’ve been Zaire had Mobutu not screwed that nation over for 30 years 
).
There is some opposition to Germany getting it though. Something about how instead of a German seat it should be a general European Seat that rotates based on what the EU wants. Germany even likes that idea, but Schröder said that as long as UK and France have a seat, Germany deserves one too.
However, if they’re gonna increase the number of permanent members, they really need to redo the way vetoes work. I don’t mind the idea of a veto, but giving… 10 or so permanent members veto power would be a little absurd.
just fyi, japan is the fifth highest military spender in the world.