Japan Today
national

U.S. Army's Pacific commander wants to keep rocket launchers at frontline Japanese base

37 Comments
By Tim Kelly

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Thomson Reuters 2022.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

37 Comments
Login to comment

 It includes two High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS)

Nice! After their stellar performance against Putin's invasion force, HIMARS now strike fear into the hearts of current and reformulated communists equipped with stone-age Soviet weaponry. LOL.

As I write this, the Orcs are fleeing several areas in around Kharkiv, with analysts attributing much of the Ukraine forces' success to HIMARS.

HIMARS should be rebranded to "CIDS" -- communist invasion disincentive system

7 ( +15 / -8 )

Just wait until the US announces the deployment of Intermediate Range Missiles at Iwakuni Japan and watch China go ballistic.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Now just imagine the outcry when China does the same thing. Which they now have every right to do to combat US/JP aggression.

-12 ( +10 / -22 )

Frontline.

Verbal Viagra from flaccid warmongers.

Did the people of Japan sanction this?

-12 ( +8 / -20 )

as tensions with China over Taiwan grow

Constant little phrases like this is every article we read, almost seems that the press are willing WW3 to start

-1 ( +11 / -12 )

HIMARS rockets were used in recent joint military exercises by USFJ and JSDF? And these weapons were temporarily deployed to JSDF's Amami Base?

Now, Gen. Charles Flynn, U.S. Army Pacific Commander, wants HIMARS (no doubt, together with the personnel that handle them) to remain on Amami for a sustainable period of time. Military experts suggest munitions stockpile there be increased more. Are they talking about munition stockpiles also for HIMARS?

What does this all mean? Doesn't it mean USFJ wants to use new JSDF bases now being built on the island chain?

-7 ( +4 / -11 )

More US ratcheting up tensions.

Go ahead keep sending more delegations and sell more weapons to Taiwan, it'll really help 'keep the peace.'

-10 ( +7 / -17 )

Not that being the brother of the traitor Mike Flynn is any indication of his own political inclinations but in these crazy divided times, the only way to really determine is to ask under oath. This guy's actions and recollections on 1/6 are under scrutiny and Japan would be wise to act prudently before kowtowing and agreeing to any shining star that comes their way.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

What Japan needs to do is build up their own artificial islands for some military installations. Watch the Chinese cry foul over that.

9 ( +15 / -6 )

I believe there's a difference between the HIMARS in Japan... full capability ones (500 km), and the ones given to Ukraine.

Aren't the ones in Ukraine modified by the Americans (50km or something), as to prevent Ukraine from striking deep in Russia, and really escalating things.

HIMARS Lite, if you will.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

The only country "ratcheitng up tensions" is China. They are the only country in the region openl;y threatening to invade another one, and contiunuing to expand their territory in defiance of an International Court ruling against them.

All other nations are simply responding to this aggressive behavior.

10 ( +20 / -10 )

Did the people of Japan sanction this?

Well, Camp Amami was created under the Japanese government's recent Midterm Defense Plan that was voted into force in the Diet, whose members are elected by "the people of Japan."

It's a fully Japanese base, mainly to deploy Japan's missiles, medium range surface to air and surface to ship. I'm sure the Japanese rocketeers are extremely keen to gain some HIMARS, after seeing its amazing performance in Ukraine.

More US ratcheting up tensions.

Gimme a break. The US gets its heaviest criticism from Japan and others when it backs off from its Pacific defense commitments, as we saw when Trump was in power.

7 ( +11 / -4 )

"Some of the equipment we are just going to leave here"

Famous last words?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Tit for Tat, now China has the right to do the same, which is no doubt a part of the plan.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

to combat US/JP aggression.

and what aggression would that be ?

building a military base in the middle of international waters ?

having fighter jets fly into other country’s airspace ?

having naval ships enter another country’s waters ?

holding war games right next to a country who they have repeatedly threatened to take by force (if needed) ?

oh that’s right, these were all China 

5 ( +7 / -2 )

The island has World Heritage listing with other islands in the group.

Seems a beautiful tropical paradise.

Just the place to have war games as well .

4 ( +4 / -0 )

It seems that the US has an almost an inexhaustible supply of weapons that it just leaves behind-Japan is just one of many cases…

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Asia has been the most volatile region for many decades.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

In a perfect world, such rocket launchers wouldn’t be necessary, however, China and Russia are both behaving like bullies. The rocket launchers are saying to them in a clear voice, “Back OFF!”

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The U.S. Army's Pacific commander, General Charles Flynn, says he is in no rush to withdraw rocket launchers and other equipment from a Japanese army base at the edge of the East China Sea even after the joint training they were used in ended.

Obviously there is no reason to move those rocket launchers. Japan needs them.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

I believe there's a difference between the HIMARS in Japan... full capability ones (500 km), and the ones given to Ukraine.

Aren't the ones in Ukraine modified by the Americans (50km or something), as to prevent Ukraine from striking deep in Russia, and really escalating things.

Here is where it gets confusing. HIMARS is a rocket launching system placed on a medium capacity military truck chassis. The launcher is half of the launcher used on the heavier tracked M270 MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System). There are two basic ways to use a HIMARS launcher. The launcher takes interchangeable modules that hold rockets or missiles. It can either have a module with six 227 mm tubes or a module with a single tube for this big ballistic rocket called MGM-140 ATACMS (Army TACtical Missile System).

The 227 mm rockets have gone through multiple evolutions since 1983 when the M270 MLRS was first introduced. I am not aware of any current round used in this system with a range of 500 km. I think it is a typo. Most of the 227 mm missiles MLRS or HIMARS fires have a range of 50km. GPS guidance and a new rocket motor has allowed ranges out to 70km. That is what the Ukrainians are using.

Lockheed Martin is trying to push their range out to 150km and has managed in a test to get one out to 135 km. ATACMS has a range of 300km but because it is a ballistic missile it is only useful against stationary targets. Because of its range the US has not sent ATACMS to Ukraine, though some in the US Congress are saying the us should.

MLRS and HIMARS are useful because they can launch multiple rockets each carrying submunitions that can clear out a pretty big area, like a beach being invaded by an enemy. One MLRS or two HIMARS can clear out a square kilometer of enemy troops. You would not want to be an enemy soldier or marine storming a beach where the defenders have something like HIMARS. They could wreck a lot of landing craft as they approached the shore. The program was originally called Ground Support Rocket System, or GSRS. The Brits immediately nicknamed it Grid Square Removal Device because as mentioned above the submunitions deployed by the 12 rockets a single MLRS could fire would clear out one square kilometer, which just happens to be the size of a grid on a European map.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

It seems that the US has an almost an inexhaustible supply of weapons that it just leaves behind-Japan is just one of many cases…

If the need ever arises it is a great deal easier and faster to fly the troops to the islands and have the equipment sitting there in storage but ready to use. If you have to drag all that stuff to the islands from somewhere else you need ships, suitable piers and a lot more time, time you might not have if say China decides it wants to take some of those islands. Pre-positioning is something the US has been doing for a very long time.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Get ‘em boy

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

*The only country "ratcheitng up tensions" is China. *

All other nations are simply responding to this aggressive behavior.

More clueless posturing.

What do you think happens when you place numerous military bases far from your country in the proximity of adversaries, then place weapons in even closer proximity to them?- Get a clue.

What do you think would be the reaction if China placed numerous military bases near the US, and then proceeded to place rocket launchers in even closer locations?

Really not hard to imagine.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

*The only country "ratcheitng up tensions" is China.*

Yeah, and the War mongerer's keep adding the fuel, as they want this conflict at any cost...

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Nice! After their stellar performance against Putin's invasion force, HIMARS now strike fear into the hearts of current and reformulated communists equipped with stone-age Soviet weaponry. LOL.

Standard propaganda and a very pathetic one, Russian weaponry is stone age, right, try to do better than this..

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

What do you think happens when you place numerous military bases far from your country in the proximity of adversaries, then place weapons in even closer proximity to them?- Get a clue.

Like China building islands in other nations EEZ's and then placing weapons, missiles, radars and runways on them? Yes the US is pre positioning weapons systems (into storage). China has it's per-positioned systems manned and fully operational. People can point fingers at the US but then fingers can also be pointed at China.

China is causing trouble, threatening Taiwan with invasion and annexation. The US is not threatening to invade anyone let alone to annex another nation into US territory.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

The United States and China can not be compared as if they are equal. They aren't. The U.S. has bases all over the world but every one of them is by invitation of the host country. Countries are willing to host US troops because the US has no interest in territorial gain.

In contrast, what countries allow China to station their military besides 2 or 3 small piss poor nations that can be bought? The majority of nations in the world do not trust China and it's military.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Now just imagine the outcry when China does the same thing. Which they now have every right to do to combat US/JP aggression.

”aggression”? Stationing troops and weapons on your territory is not aggression.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

China saw the writing on the wall with the US setting up military bases around them/selling tons of weapons to Japan, South Korea and now Taiwan and so built those islands to counter those provocative moves.

Modern Taiwan was established when the US installed Shanghai mafia associate Chiang Kai shek there after Chiang got his butt kicked by Mao in China, this despite the US having supplied Chiang with US tanks and jets.

After Chiang was installed by the US in Taiwan, Taiwan co-financed with the US an invasion into Yunnan province with remnants of Chiang's Nationalist army who had run away to Myanmar after Mao's ascent.

China repelled the incursion into Yunnan, and ever since the US has steadily been using Taiwan and Japan to bait and incite, which is where we are today with sudden visits by Pelosi etc and placing rocket launchers in close proximity.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@OssanAmerica

[ The U.S. has bases all over the world but every one of them is by invitation of the host country. ]

Do you know why Abe's grandfather Kishi Nobusuke (Kishi also is the person who actively aided and enabled the Unification Church to get set up in Japan) was forced to resign as prime minister?- Because he forced through the legislation which allowed the US to retain its military bases in Japan, and the general outcry amongst the Japanese people was so great and the deminstrations so large that Kishi had no choice but to resign in disgrace, and Kishi was even physically attacked and stabbed by an outraged citizen.

And why did Kishi force through such legislation?- Because Kishi was an accused class A war criminal who had overseen the the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Chinese and Koreans via his policy during the war to use them as slave labor, so was interred in Sugamo prison from 1945-1948, but after America's stooge in China Chiang Kai shek ended up losing China to Mao, the US scrambled and decided they would need to use Japan as their base of operations in East Asia, so decided to use Kishi and other accussed war criminals to do their bidding, and thereby dropped the war crime accusations, despite the fact that Kishi was an elite member of the Japanese military government during the war and had personally signed the declaration of war against the US in 1941.

So when you say it is by invitation of the country that the US sets up military bases, it does not reflect the will of the people but it is very often the result of deceptive shenanigans which empower the most corrupt and vile people (remember it is Kishi who helped set up the Moonies in Japan) whose actions have very negative consequences for normal citizens.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Hell yes, keep them there and LOADED too.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The only country "ratcheitng up tensions" is China.*

Yeah, and the War mongerer's keep adding the fuel, as they want this conflict at any cost...

You have it backwards. Sufficient military power and a credible threat to use it if attacked is what prevents wars. The US and Japan do not want to see the horrors we see today in Ukraine repeated in Taiwan or on Japanese soil in the Ryukyus. Leaving them undefended however is an invitation to the Chinese to invade. Only strong military forces in positions to defend Taiwan and Japan are keeping the peace in this region. China will not attack if it believes with a high degree of certainty that any military operation they could mount will be soundly defeated. This is what prevented the Cold War from becoming a shooting war. Deterrence works and is far less costly than the wars that result from a lack of deterrence.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China saw the writing on the wall with the US setting up military bases around them/selling tons of weapons to Japan, South Korea and now Taiwan and so built those islands to counter those provocative moves.

The source of China's aggressive behaviors is energy. China used to be a net energy exporter but that was back in the 1970s. Japan bought quite a bit of the oil it used from PRC back then. The explosive growth of the Chinese economy has so increased energy demand that today China can only produce about 20% of its energy needs. The rest has to come from abroad, and the great majority, both oil and CNG, comes by ship from the Persian Gulf through the Straits of Hormuz and the Straits of Malacca, across the South China Sea to Chinese ports. Likewise imports of iron ore that come around the tip of Africa from Brazil, cross the Indian Ocean and similarly sail through the Straits of Malacca and South China Sea. A large proportion of China's exports make the reverse trip through the SCS and Straits of Malacca on their way to the Red Sea and Suez Canal for destinations in Europe. There are several other narrows in and among the many islands of Indonesia that could conceivably allow China bound ships to avoid the Straits of Malacca but all of these are as easily blocked by allied navies as the Straits of Malacca are. Similarly the so-called Northern Sea Route along the north coast of Russia where there is a huge CNG facility to China involves passing through the Bering Strait, right next to Alaska with Shemya Island guarding the south entrance to that strait and two big Air Force bases in Alaska. Shemya was a major military base and the facilities are still maintained. The old bases at Adak and Kodiak are still active airports with well cared for runways.

China's aggression is driven by a visceral fear that were China to attempt an invasion of Taiwan the navies of the US and her allies will close the aforementioned straits to ships sailing to or from China. China's strategic oil reserves are good for about 90 days of normal demand. Blocking those straits to Chinese shipping could starve China of energy to fight a war and cripple the Chinese economy.

This also explains Chinas ardor to suppress the Uyghurs. Almost all of China's domestic oil and gas fields are in Xinjiang. And while China is involved in building oil and gas pipelines from Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and other nations bordering the energy rich Caspian Sea as well as from Russia, pretty much all of those pipelines cross the Chinese border in Xinjiang.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites