politics

U.S. to hold missile drill on Okinawa: report

29 Comments

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

© 2019 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

29 Comments
Login to comment

Really good news. Japan and USA working together to protect freedom of the Ocean and democracy in East Asia.

Experts say China's increasingly active maritime activities are part of a plan to establish control of waters within the so-called "first island chain" that links Okinawa, Taiwan and the Philippines.

This is scary. If PRC gets control of “first island chain”, what is second stage? Okinawa. Communist China want the Okinawa chain of islands, everyone knows this. If they try, be prepared for the fight of their lives. This is another example of why The Constitution MUST be changed, so Japan can defend her territory and come to the aid of USA.

-3 ( +8 / -11 )

Fine, missile drill, but the picture has NOTHING to do with the planned training.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

The picture above, the landfill site in Henoko to build a replacement for Futenma, shows how outdated the new Marine base would be before the changing world situation.. The planned base will be sure to remain half-completed and, if completed fully, will be a white elephant to deal with all these new problems.

-7 ( +4 / -11 )

Yippie Kai’ Yae’;

I’ll come back to Okinawa and charter my friends’ boat to go watch THAT.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

 This is another example of why The Constitution MUST be changed, so Japan can defend her territory and come to the aid of USA.

Incorrect. Japan can already defend itself and go to the aid of the US, which means there is zero reason to change the Japanese constitution.

-1 ( +9 / -10 )

The picture above, the landfill site in Henoko to build a replacement for Futenma, shows how outdated the new Marine base would be before the changing world situation.. The planned base will be sure to remain half-completed and, if completed fully, will be a white elephant to deal with all these new problems.

I suppose you'll be on the beaches repelling China if the US were to pull out of Okinawa.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Incorrect. Japan can already defend itself and go to the aid of the US, which means there is zero reason to change the Japanese constitution.

Incorrect, because there remains ongoing conjecture over whether Japan can pursue technology deemed as offensive, rather than defensive.

Japan cannot adequately defend itself or aid its allies because their is no defense without offense. Its a logical failure.

Fighting with one hand tied behind your back is not a fair fight.

Its like a kickboxer being told he can only use his fists....

7 ( +12 / -5 )

Incorrect, because there remains ongoing conjecture over whether Japan can pursue technology deemed as offensive, rather than defensive.

This doesn't prevent Japan from defending itself or going to the aid of the US.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Japan cannot adequately defend itself or aid its allies because their is no defense without offense. Its a logical failure.

The logic failure is the first sentence. What you're promoting are called preemptive strikes, which are in no way defensive.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

This doesn't prevent Japan from defending itself or going to the aid of the US.

Of course it does. Being able to present an offensive threat to a potential foe is part and parcel of national defense. You cannot divorce the two.

The logic failure is the first sentence. What you're promoting are called preemptive strikes, which are in no way defensive.

I am promoting a credible deterrent through the maintenance of strong offensive capability, rather than this desire to see Japan responding to attacks after the fact. That is an extremely poor national defense policy.

Like I said, its fighting with one hand tied behind your back. Why would you willingly go down that path?

Well in Japans case it wasn't willingly. It was dictated to them by the United States and its time that arrangement changed.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

Fine, missile drill, but the picture has NOTHING to do with the planned training.

The grainy image used in this article says a lot about what emotional response the media outlet producing this story wants to invoke.. The caption for the photo is the icing on the cake.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Of course it does. Being able to present an offensive threat to a potential foe is part and parcel of national defense. You cannot divorce the two.

Yes, you can divorce the two. Japan hasn't been able to present an offensive threat for over 70 years.

I am promoting a credible deterrent through the maintenance of strong offensive capability, rather than this desire to see Japan responding to attacks after the fact. That is an extremely poor national defense policy.

An extremely poor defense strategy that's been effective for over 70 years?

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

Yes, you can divorce the two. Japan hasn't been able to present an offensive threat for over 70 years.

And that is a mistake that now needs to rectified as the geopolitical and military realities surrounding Japan have changed very, VERY significantly since WW2.

Japan is being forced to play by a set of rules that no other country in the region is forced to play by.

It is unfair, unwarranted and now, in 2018, puts Japans security into question given the developments of China, Russia, South Korea etc etc.

And people talk about WW2 and Japans colonial times.

Well I don't see Germany, every major power in Europe, nor Russia and the United States being forced to play by the same set of rules as Japan and they have ALL been an aggressor in the recent past.

So that argument holds no water with me at all. It clearly makes no logical sense to treat Japan any differently to the powers I have mentioned.

Like I said. You cannot divorce offense and defense in defense policy.

Every other country in the world recognizes this fact and Japan is somehow different?

It clearly isn't. Its clearly hypocrisy to say it is.

4 ( +9 / -5 )

Yes, you can divorce the two. Japan hasn't been able to present an offensive threat for over 70 years.

It extremely difficult to agree with you when the US has had a mutual defense treaty with Japan for the last 70 years and provides a very capable offensive threat on behalf of Japan.

We all know that Japan cannot rely on the US forever and needs to be capable of providing their own offensive abilities in order to ensure their national security.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

A waste of time and money. China would never attack its economic partner and ally. America should be practicing for a combined Japanese/Chinese military attack.

-11 ( +2 / -13 )

An extremely poor defense strategy that's been effective for over 70 years?

It was effective, but no longer, due to the military strength and capability of PRC and NK. Japan MUST be able to strike at other nations legally, to defend herself going forward. Constitution change is the only option.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Japan is being forced to play by a set of rules that no other country in the region is forced to play by.

Japan is forcing itself. If can change its constitution if the Japanese people have the will.

It extremely difficult to agree with you when the US has had a mutual defense treaty with Japan for the last 70 years and provides a very capable offensive threat on behalf of Japan.

Disagree all you want, but it won't change the fact that Japan's defense strategy has been extremely effective for over 70 years.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Of course it does. Being able to present an offensive threat to a potential foe is part and parcel of national defense. You cannot divorce the two.

I agree with Matt.

MAD is Mutually assured Destruction. There is the potential for huge offensive strikes but being "mutually assured destruction" makes it defensive as much as offensive. The enemy takes much more notice if you can hit them as hard as they can hit you.

Japan needs to remove the shackles of Article 9 as soon as it can or it will quickly be overwhelmed by China's CURRENT massive military buildup with modern ships and planes rolling off the assembly lines faster than Japan could manufacture the same numbers of units.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

The U.S. military has told its Japanese counterpart it plans to deploy surface-to-ship missiles in the strategically important Okinawa this year for the first such drill by Japan's key ally, the Sankei Shimbun reported, without citing sources.

Recognizing that this is based on reporting from the Sankei Shimbun, I found this very strange.

-- The U.S. is going to to conduct this drill rather than it being a joint drill.

-- The U.S. decided to do this and then informed Japan of its plans.

So, let me get this straight. The U.S. is preparing for a drill for a scenario that involves Okinawa but that has not been planned jointly with Japan?!

Am I missing something?????

2 ( +3 / -1 )

And this is why Russia will not be handing the South Kuril islands.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Why isn't this of more stronger focus on the news here and abroad? China will trigger WW3 from near Okinawa or Taiwan, when is another question, but they've already built many fake islands. Check on Google maps...

0 ( +3 / -3 )

If america leaves Japan, we don't need conflict with our neighbours and we can live in peace. the american provocation will only increase tension and china will react. probably the best resolution is for China to jam the exercise and it is abandoned.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

Not to worry there Kenji, one good bombing mission and those Sand Bars will be just that again.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

If america leaves Japan, we don't need conflict with our neighbours and we can live in peace. the american provocation will only increase tension and china will react. probably the best resolution is for China to jam the exercise and it is abandoned.

China is not going to leave Japan alone if the US leaves. It will simply assert more of it's dominance on the region. It has already claimed parts of Japan for itself. There was an article released a while back by a state run source that asserts a Chinese claim on Okinawa. China will expand it's influence until it meets sufficient resistance. How much are you willing to sacrifice for peace?

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Regrettably, China seems to be tracing the footsteps of the U.S., a role model exemplifying how to rule the world as a hegemon, just as Japan after the Meiji Restoration emulated everything Western but was ultimately crashed to pieces because it resembled the West too much, militarily, imperially and all.

Maybe, China is not imitating the West but simply pursuing a China-first policy, based on traditional Sinocentrism, that has nothing to do with its current political system.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Incorrect. Japan can already defend itself and go to the aid of the US, which means there is zero reason to change the Japanese constitution.

Yes Japan can defend itself, BUT the current constitution does not allow it to aid the US if it was in need of assistance during a war.

Japan can ONLY assist the US in the defense of Japan, nowhere else, and nothing else. If the US were involved in some action in Asia or anywhere for that matter, the current contsitution would not allow Japan to assist in any shape or form, BECAUSE it is not about the defense of Japan.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Wonder if the "This is not a drill"... message will go unheeded this time round - should it be accidentally issued ?

I sort of feel sorry for the Okinawa people, those I know don't seem to have the same line of thinking as those I know on the mainland - hence, presumably, some of the disagreements we're seeing ? I sometimes think they would rather be independent from Japan, and having read the WW2 History - can't blame them for that!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Responding to Chip Star.

Japan is forcing itself. If can change its constitution if the Japanese people have the will.

Opposition parties in Japan. Generally the left-wing parties have blocked any attempt to change the constitution in the Diet sessions. Preventing the holding of a consultative referendum. They did not even want to sit at a negotiating table to reach a basic consensus. The Japanese people have never been able to be officially consulted.

Disagree all you want, but it won't change the fact that Japan's defense strategy has been extremely effective for over 70 years.

Article 9 has been a stability for the region for 70 years. No one doubts that. But unfortunately that article of the constitution is becoming very obsolete. It was created to give a message that Japan would never arm itself again. And it was committed to this, if neighboring countries committed themselves to do the same. And follow their example. But now in 2019 that article is losing its effectiveness. And that's why it needs to be modified. Or at least. Make a passive offspring or even ignore it completely. Until the political parties opposed to the reform and their leaders. Understand that Article 9 must be updated with current security conditions. In addition to recognizing that JSDF is an army except in name.

An example of what I want to explain is that it's too obsolete. Typewriters exist. But they haven't been used for years after the arrival of computers. Or messages in Morse. It is no longer used because everything works with electronic systems of text and voice.

Cordial greetings.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I sort of feel sorry for the Okinawa people, those I know don't seem to have the same line of thinking as those I know on the mainland - hence, presumably, some of the disagreements we're seeing ? I sometimes think they would rather be independent from Japan, and having read the WW2 History - can't blame them for that!

And this is in regards to the training in question how?

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