Would love to see the source and statistics for this (underlined). I know that they reproduced them, but I don't know the details.
Hard statistics? Haven't touched one in years, but a quick look through
wikipedia has a few details.
In the space of a few decades the various Daimyo of Japan went from importing a few hundred arquebus and reproducing them in small quantities to arming one quarter of a force of 160,000 with the firearms during the invasion of Korea. Such required massive expansion of the production of firearms which dwarfed several European nations, and "
possibly overtook every European country in absolute numbers produced."
Google books might be a useful tool to look up further information if you want the exact statistics.
Speaking for myself, I define the Middle East as more related to the Eurosphere than "Asia", and more to the point the Middle East's divisions are rather different than Europe's.
Different? Sure. However there were multiple competing and interacting polities in the region. The difference is that the Ottomans took over most of them, pioneered the drive of progress only to enter into a state of slowed progress and even regression while Europe continued to march forward. While geo-politics and some cultural differences should be keenly marked, there is very little to suggest that similar instances such as with Europe could not have occurred. Especially since we know Oman was a minor Arab power that was able to expand in and compete readily with Europeans even after they had arrived in India and dominated three continents.
The steppe doesn't have organized nations, and southeast asia is far from an area I'm familiar with , so I bow to the knowledge of those who have studied it.
organized nations? Depends on how you define organized or nations. They certainly were not sedentary civilizations at the time but they existed in a state of constant contact and warfare with sedentary civilizations around them, and in some notable cases founding great cities where they took the advancements of the world and adapted them for their own purposes. The Mongols were geniuses in warfare mainly because they took the genius of other peoples and adapted them to service their war machine. Arab Catapults brought Chinese cities to their knees using the infantry armies of sedentary civilization rather than the horses of the steppe. You can't underestimate them, especially since some of the most notable areas of steppe are in positions that can be readily adapted for agriculture or mining and refineries once the knowledge is attained (though it would be a pain adapting the people more so than the land).
But if you can point to the kingdoms there being in the kind of crude arms race of early modern Europe, or something like that, I'd be all ears
early modern Europe? We're not talking about that. I believe we're referring to the time during the Byzantine Empire preventing Europe from getting to the point where it would have arms races to conquer the rest of the world.
However, you're wish can be granted. Champa and what would become Vietnam were in fierce rivalries with one another, constantly competing for the favor of China in support for invasions or defense against invasions of the other.
Burma-Thailand also had their own rivalries and warfare.
Multiple polities competing and interacting with one another, Southeast Asia is a very diverse place and is the meeting place between the Chinese influence of the far east and the various Indian influences of the sub-continent. The introduction of Buddhism, Hinduism, and Islam sparked a hundred wars (yes, Buddhists were big military factions in the southeast). The Khmer are famous for a few great temples and innovations, such as the Angkor Wat.
And the Tokugawa Shogunate being able and willing to stop that is extremely telling about Japan's competitive spirit actually leading anywhere useful here outside the Age of the Country At War.
Extremely telling? Not even remotely.
If you look at Japanese History the notion that the Japanese Competitive Spirit died with the Edo Era, or the Edo Era marking the true extent of the competitive spirit, seems pretty silly. Once the Edo Era stops we see one of the most aggressively competitive nations outside of Europe and as time would go on they would become the second largest industrial power in the world for a time and remaining one of the great economic powers of the age.
I'm not saying Japan was poor and backward - far from it - but it was not (OTL) anywhere near something like OTL Spain in terms of empire-building, even if it had the population and technology.
I don't think anyone has made the supposition that Japan colonized most of two continents, and having dotted three others while being safely positioned as a major power in its own continent only neglecting the great frozen one to the south that wasn't fully discovered until its economic prominence had waned.
Japan, however, had potential. A potential that is as limited as the times and the collective actions of mankind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanegashima_(Japanese_matchlock)#cite_note-Perrin_p.25-9