politics

Japan set to meet U.S. request to pay more for hosting troops

142 Comments

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

© KYODO

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

142 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Shouldn't it be the other way around?

-1 ( +20 / -21 )

Parliament, Japan serve no strategy interest, but too baby sit the LDP paper tigers, Zichi would spend his last yen, too see American stay

-13 ( +7 / -20 )

piskianToday  07:22 am JST

Shouldn't it be the other way around?

Why? Is Japan prepared to change it's constitution completely, build a large military and maintain a nuclear arsenal? I think not.

1 ( +23 / -22 )

Donald Trump phrased it entirely the wrong way but he wasn't wrong. Yes, Japan pays but the United States still shoulders the bulk of the cost. What Japan pays is a fraction of the total cost.

-2 ( +20 / -22 )

At least share more advance technology with Japan.

Australia and UK got the black magic secret type of technology while Japan gets the same stuff you sell to anyone else.

Japan should receive everything you got if you want a credible deterrent against Russia and China.

-8 ( +14 / -22 )

Perhaps it would be much cheaper for Japan in the long run to acquire full defense capabilities (including nukes) than to forever remain a US ally. It’s time for Japan to learn to stand on its own feet.

7 ( +18 / -11 )

Japan government tries to negotiate with the USA military.

That is amusing.

Good luck with that one

1 ( +15 / -14 )

Japan government tries to negotiate with the USA military.

That is amusing.

Good luck with that one

yup!

-5 ( +9 / -14 )

OssanAmerica

Why? Is Japan prepared to change it's constitution completely, build a large military and maintain a nuclear arsenal? I think not.

We have the same view on many issues.

You defended Japan before.

This is a friendly response to your comment and question.

Japan was forced into a Pacifist Constitution by USA.

Article 9 was a USA idea.

3.When China got Nuclear Weapons, Japan tried to get them too.... It was USA who told us No. We will protect you with Nuclear Umbrella.

Plaza Accord has crippled Japan for the past 3 decades. Again, USA idea to counter Japan becoming too rich and wealthy. Its ok to be rich.... just not more then America rich. Especially if they defend your country.

If America made it clear early on, Japan is in danger and USA might not come, that Japan needs to make drastic changes to its Defense and Constitution=Japan Would Do it! Take the necessary measures!

USA is sitting on very advance technology that is sharing with UK and Australia but Not Japan!

USA has more of a say then you think on Japan's constitution, defense, military decisions.

-5 ( +11 / -16 )

USA has more of a say then you think on Japan's constitution, defense, military decisions.

Sorry to hear that

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Japan has said it wants the United States to understand that Tokyo cannot massively increase its spending due to its strained finances.

Strained finances? But you can find money to fund all your pet subsidies and stupid "economic stimulus initiatives".

The government can not admit that it can't "massively" increase it's spending because of it's own generation of mismanagement!

5 ( +9 / -4 )

billions lost....save that money and invest in your own and let say a forever good bye to slavery...

-2 ( +9 / -11 )

U.S. troops deployed to Japan are always ready to give their life to defend Japan, wrote a departing USFJ commander in his farewell message contributed to The Japan Times. So, if the U.S. military presence in Japan is genuinely for the defense of Japan, it may be understandable, nay, imperative for Japan to shoulder 201.7 billion yen ($1.76 billion) in so-called host nation support.

But are the U.S. troops stationed here mainly to defend Japan? Isn't their Japan deployment mainly for the defense of the U.S.'s sphere of influence, that is, to secure the U.S.'s interest first?

However, the ultimate reason of their rock-solid military presence seems to perpetuate it, thus not letting the genie out of the bottle. Their insistence of maintaining the function of USMC Air Station Futenma intact or strengthened, even if it's relocated somewhere else, testifies firmly to this.

-6 ( +7 / -13 )

So the US will keep outsourcing its jobless to Japan forever?

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

At least share more advance technology with Japan.

Australia and UK got the black magic secret type of technology while Japan gets the same stuff you sell to anyone else.

The UK got US nuclear submarine tech in 1958 because it asked for it.

Australia is to get US nuclear submarine tech in the coming decade because it specifically asked for it.

Japan like Australia wanted the F-22 but the production lines had already been terminated so it was not possible for either.

What other specific technology has Japan asked for from the US? What weapon system has the US denied access to for Japan? I cant think of anything.

The US is prepared to use all of it's technology to protect Japan in any case. So really Japan misses out on nothing.

5 ( +12 / -7 )

Whatever extra cost that US wants from Japan should be taken from SDF budget, because SDF is totally incapable of defending Japan. They have proven this over and over again, the only time that they are of any use are at the time of disasters to cleanup debre and find the missing or lost. Therefore SDF does not need such a huge budget for subs and missiles that they are unable to put to proper use.

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

But are the U.S. troops stationed here mainly to defend Japan? Isn't their Japan deployment mainly for the defense of the U.S.'s sphere of influence, that is, to secure the U.S.'s interest first?

It is not their main reason for being stationed in Japan but the US is correct in that if anyone attacks Japan, the US forces local, near by and in the region will all come to the aid of Japan. If that is insufficient for some, it can not be any better. Obviously the US troops are in Japan for multiple reasons which includes the US sphere of influence in the region and for US safety as well as other regional allies.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

YES , KISHIDA WILL PRINT MORE MONEY AND INCREASE TAX !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kishida do not forget to give me my monthly paycheck of 500.000yen

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

The U.S. 35th Fighter Wing is still stationed in Japan, is it not? USAF, US Army, US Navy, and essential US civilian support personnel are in Japan, to the extent of over 55,000 individuals. The Japanese share of maintaining that many personnel and their equipment comes out to about $40,000 USD per year. If one assumes that the host nation would pay about half the cost of maintaining the forces based in their country, $40,000 per person is probably less than half the cost.

How much would it cost Japan to maintain a similarly sized force on its soil, with comparable equipment, if the personnel were all Japanese? I think the cost would be much higher.

6 ( +11 / -5 )

The United States is not to be trusted.

Remember Afghanistan!

It's time for Japan to get rid of Article 9 of the constitution and owns its nuclear weapons. Japan is not Cash Dispenser of United States !

-6 ( +8 / -14 )

i am against to pay any "hosting costs" for foreign boots on japanese soil.

no coin from my taxes to be used for it.

if Japan is really sovereign country will do so and will refuse pay any costs for it.

-1 ( +9 / -10 )

if Japan is really sovereign country will do so and will refuse pay any costs for it.

Eh? Japan IS a sovereign nation. And they've been paying for decades.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

Crank up the money printing some more

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Good! About time.

-4 ( +6 / -10 )

The Japan that can't say no.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Well, Japan certainly saves a few yen by not having to make their own military quite so big due to the US presence.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

If most people knew of the vast sums of money the US military wastes everyday, they’d be appalled. Nothing but a bunch of psychotic tyrants running the military that hide their evil crimes against innocent people.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Just imagine if the situation were reversed, would Americans tolerate paying through the nose to host a foreign military on its soil while having no independent military capability of their own? No, of course not and you damn well know it.

The situation is ridiculous and shows you exactly who is in charge of who.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

Hahaha, this is exactly what I said would happen in the first half of this year, when our politicians forcefully said how it was out of the question, that we would not agree to it, that perhaps we would force them to partially pay for their stay here themselves (!!!) and similar heroic talk. Yet the current situation is simply that if we do not subsidise it, then either they will not be here at all or the staff will be substantially reduced. While this is outwardly the dream and wish of some politicians, in reality many people do not want this. This is mainly because of three problem neighbours (or two and one clown neighbour).

Many people here in Japan don't realize the difference between, for example, EU countries that directly border Russia and where there are some US garrisons or similar presence and where there are not. And how it has worked out in some countries (Ukraine for example)

0 ( +4 / -4 )

A hosted occupation of USA military forces because Japan surrendered from a war it started and got defeated.

Japanese constitution was written by USA and enforced along with the new medical and new school education system put in place by the USA government

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

America does not host any foreign military bases.

Four nations have training bases in America.

Netherlands, Singapore, Taiwan and the UK

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_overseas_military_bases

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Kyo wa heiwa dayo neToday  10:58 am JST

A hosted occupation of USA military forces because Japan surrendered from a war it started and got defeated.

Japanese constitution was written by USA and enforced along with the new medical and new school education system put in place by the USA government

So what?

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Peter14 (Today  09:12 am JST),

It is not their main reason for being stationed in Japan but the US is correct in that if anyone attacks Japan, the US forces local, near by and in the region will all come to the aid of Japan.

If there were any contingency ever to occur between the two sides, do you think Chinese or North Korean missiles would attack residential areas in Tokyo, Osaka or Nagoya before anything else? Wouldn't they attack key U.S. bases like Kadena, Yokota, etc.? No doubt, U.S. forces will retaliate against such attacks not because Japan was attacked but because their bases were attacked.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

Much cheaper than Japan developing, constructing and maintaining these capabilities on their own.

5 ( +11 / -6 )

Some troops, yes nice and has a bit of symbolic influence, but more decisive would be to build up a double defense ring , one at sea and the other at the coastline. In other words, investing the few money into capable ships and land based installations , both with air and missile defense systems. Such , no other enemy troops can arrive and therefore not so much own or U.S. troops needed. Don’t buy delicious JSDF curry rice, buy best modern most sophisticated systems in numbers, outnumbering the potential enemies.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

In the old days, some people in the US military spent their entire career in Japan and retired in Japan. The Pentagon finally said they couldn’t serve more than a couple of tours of duty in Japan.

It was, and still is, probably the best duty in the service.

I remember 30 years ago when a 36 year old O-5 with about 15 years of service took home more than $7,000 after all of the tax-exempt allotments. An 0-6 with flight pay could take home more than $10,000 per month. 30 years ago!

In 1992, I had a magnificent house on a hill overlooking the ocean in Hayama. Trust me, the US military does pretty well in Japan… they aren’t struggling to make ends meet.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

Trust me, the US military does pretty well in Japan… they aren’t struggling to make ends meet.

This is what the Japanese taxpayers get in return, a lavish lifestyle of the US service personnel. "Defense" part not included.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

yeah man, you go live on a ship with 300 to 5000 other dudes. 30 to a room with a guy sleeping above and below you in a bed that you cant even sit up in. no alcohol, no girlfriends (or bfs these days) can visit, a small locker for everything you own in life. lavish is not the word to be used here.

You are also dismissing all of the charity work and even the response after Fukushima.

Do they make more money than people their age of their skill level? yes to put up with all of the things they dont have and cant do. And this is not the part Japan is paying for anyway, Japan is paying for facilities and utilities and usage of hardware/ships/planes.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

" Bilateral cost-sharing agreements are usually signed to cover a five-year term. "

Due to current unforeseen China flexing muscle situation and future Taiwan invasion, it is still a good money to pay for security and prevention. High tech facility and ready manpower is situated strategically with Taiwan, South Korea and Japan. Its worth it else Japan has one live only and if US gone due to unpopularity to maintain them, SDF wont be ready once China flex its muscle. Of course it is best to invest in Taiwan in any defense, else if Taiwan fall, the flank of Japan is very vulnerable should China flex and block trade at Japan south if any Japan PM wish to test Yasukini shrine or defend Okinawa island, ( which china will claim theirs openly) and maybe forcing Japan to be under China sphere of influence in unforeseen future.

Trust my words, invest in US security and friendly + helpout with Taiwan and South Korea especially Taiwan.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

American military have to deal with inflation and wage rises, Japan doesn’t have either so of course the bill goes up.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

As a son of a veteran of the US Armed Forces and a veteran myself agree they should pay more. Many veterans have fought for freedom and to protect Japan.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

So, don't you think it is nothing but a caricature, absurd and ludicrous, for Japan to shoulder 201.7 billion yen ($1.76 billion) or more for the maintenance costs of these U.S. bases?

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

I support Japan building up its own military versus "outsourcing" its defence to the USA... at the end of the day, USA (or any country for that matter) will look after its own interest first and Japan second...

Japan needs to build up its own forces to put Japan as first priority!

4 ( +7 / -3 )

yeah man, you go live on a ship with 300 to 5000 other dudes.

I'm sure it's not that cozy, but hey, it's a service, not a draft, i.e. your choice

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

So, don't you think it is nothing but a caricature, absurd and ludicrous, for Japan to shoulder 201.7 billion yen ($1.76 billion) or more for the maintenance costs of these U.S. bases?

no because ONE aircraft carrier just to build (not to staff, operate or maintain) costs $13.3 billion.

getting use of that as a deterrent and for Japan national defense at at a fraction of the cost of building their own.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

How much do the UK, Germany, Italy, Greece, Turkey, South Korea, etc. pay?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

America does not host any foreign military bases.

Why should they?

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

If there were no American bases in Japan, Japan would simply be swallowed up by another Asian nation that is hungry. Japan knows full well what it is doing and will gladly keep the arrangement alive for as long as possible. People always think the U.S. is forcing the Japanese to host their bases, when in fact the Japanese Government will pretty much do everything in their power to keep the Americans here.

5 ( +10 / -5 )

Japan should absolutely pay more. Japan has benefitted in so many ways by having the US provide security for it.

The other countries the US provides security for such as the UK, Korea, Greece, Germany, Italy--they should all pay more too.

-1 ( +8 / -9 )

Japan has no rudder, the country should be so grateful the Americans have allowed the Japanese people to grow and prosper without the headache of war.

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

voiceofokinawaToday 11:39 am JST

If there were any contingency ever to occur between the two sides, do you think Chinese or North Korean missiles would attack residential areas in Tokyo, Osaka or Nagoya before anything else? Wouldn't they attack key U.S. bases like Kadena, Yokota, etc.? No doubt, U.S. forces will retaliate against such attacks not because Japan was attacked but because their bases were attacked.

If American forces are attacked anywhere in the world they will of course defend themselves. Anyone would. Would you expect the US to allow unanswered attacks killing its service people anywhere? It sounds like you do if they get attacked while in Japan. Such a position is unrealistic.

It would not matter if it was Japanese cities or US bases attacked by China or North Korea, the US forces would be mobilized, as would the JSDF. That is what an alliance is for.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

The Kaga isn’t a real aircraft carrier yet. It wasn’t even built as such from the beginning.

Of course money hasn’t been spent yet. Talk to me in 2025 when it’s done. Even then it’s still a “modified” carrier that will be 15+ years old by then

The second phase of modification is planned to start around early 2025 and will involve changing the bow from its current trapezoidal shape to one that is rectangular, as well as changes to the ship's interior.

Kaga is planned to begin its first phase of modification around early 2022, and the work is expected to take 14 month

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

A carrier has 85-90 aircraft up to max of probably 120.

the Kaga in 2025?

It's not clear how many aircraft each ship can deploy with, but the conversion may allow them to carry well over a dozen helicopters and fighter jets.

Wow, “maybe” a dozen. You get what you pay for. Better to lease the US carriers.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Send the American troops back to The US and build your own military! It’s about time for Japan to do so…American military have no business in Asia!

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

Japan has no rudder, the country should be so grateful the Americans have allowed the Japanese people to grow and prosper without the headache of war.

What war?

Name one threat to Japan that is 1) real (not a media made-up one) and 2) the SDF cannot deal with.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

A carrier has 85-90 aircraft up to max of probably 120.

US carriers might carry that many. The UK's new carriers will have about 40 Aircraft while the last Australian aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne was designated as a "light carrier" and had an air wing of up to 27.

Aircraft carriers can come in any size and carry any amount of aircraft.

Thailand's carrier HTMS Chakri Naruebet had space for 10 aircraft.

Japan can put as many aircraft as their modified carriers can handle and they will be used in the same way as their manufacturer intended.

What matters is this. A force of ships that has no air cover is treated as less of a threat than one that includes fixed wing aircraft flying from a mobile platform within the fleet.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Japanese aircraft carrier Kaga cost ¥53 million ($36.45 million) and is already at sea.

Construction began at the Yokohama plant of Japan Marine United on 7 October 2013, and the ship was launched on 27 August 2015, with the commissioning on 22 March 2017.[4] Construction of the ship cost ¥115 billion (US$1.05 billion).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JS_Kaga

You got the estimated cost of construction for the WWII Kaga.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Fundamentally speaking, U.S. bases in Japan would be the natural targets of hostile missile attacks, not Japanese cities per se. In other words, U.S. bases could be desirable decoys for hostile nations to launch such missile attacks. If it were not for U.S. bases, would Chinese or North Korean missiles be trained against Japan?

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Yeah I mean if you could build an aircraft carrier for $36 million every rich guy would have a fleet of them.

 If it were not for U.S. bases, would Chinese or North Korean missiles be trained against Japan?

absolutely they would. China and Korea are "mad at" Japan, not the USA. Thats why Japan has to pay the USA to protect them from...China and Korea.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

There officially needs to be a revolution. The capitalist class is making the working class, the creator of all wealth, pay for the occupation. It's really quite pitiful.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

 If it were not for U.S. bases, would Chinese or North Korean missiles be trained against Japan?

The only reason there is any such possibility is due to the presence of the occupation forces.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

ReasonandWisdomNipponToday  07:56 am JST

Article 9 was a USA idea.

Yes Article 9 was a US idea. Other WWII allied victor nations wanted to prosecute your Emperor Hirohito as a war criminal and completely eliminate the Imperial Throne. Notably the USSR (out of political strategy) and Australia (out if vindictiveness). It was the view of the US that removing the Emperor would result in a social breakdown and likely a civil war within Japan, which would allow the USSR to come in and turn Japan into a communist state. Same game they played with Germany and Eastern Europe. Article 9 is what kept Japan free of communist control and made it the most powerful and succesful democracy in Asia.

3.When China got Nuclear Weapons, Japan tried to get them too.... It was USA who told us No. We will protect you with Nuclear Umbrella.

Japan never had any true desire to acquire a nuclear arsenal. How could they without removing the first paragraph of Article 9? The reason is the same as why Article 9 never seems to get amended, despite US efforts to get it done since 1950. Namely, Japan has no desire to be involved in international poltics with a backdrop of nuclear capability. Japan is not the only country protected by the US nuclear umbrella. South Korea and Australia are as well.

Plaza Accord has crippled Japan for the past 3 decades. Again, USA idea to counter Japan becoming too rich and wealthy. Its ok to be rich.... just not more then America rich. Especially if they defend your country.

The Plaza Accord was indeed protectionist but it was aimed not just at Japan, but France, West Germany, UK as well. The US defends all of those countries either through Bilateral or Collective defense agreements.

If America made it clear early on, Japan is in danger and USA might not come, that Japan needs to make drastic changes to its Defense and Constitution=Japan Would Do it! Take the necessary measures!

The US has made it clear that it will defend Japan since WWII ended. Officially since 1960. The fear then was the USSR. Today is is the PRC. At no time ever has the US waivered in this commitment. So where are you getting this "the US might not come" story? Do you honestly believe that 50,000 US troops are in Japan for show?

USA is sitting on very advance technology that is sharing with UK and Australia but Not Japan!

That's up to your government.

USA has more of a say then you think on Japan's constitution, defense, military decisions.

You have no idea what I think or know. If you have complaints about the US, please take it up with someone else. I'm really not interested.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

voiceofokinawaToday  03:25 pm JST

If it were not for U.S. bases, would Chinese or North Korean missiles be trained against Japan?

Of course they would. If there were no US bases in Japan they would all be JSDF bases and they would be targeted. No difference. Do you actually believe that without US bases Japan would have no enemies?

1 ( +7 / -6 )

voiceofokinawa

If it were not for U.S. bases, would Chinese or North Korean missiles be trained against Japan?

Of course there would! Are you suggesting that appeasing dictators works? It has never done in history. In the event, NK is not an issue, they are just Xis noisy lap dog. China is the real issue, and Japan will have to decide to stand up to the CCP or not.

The request for more support of US troops seems reasonable. The alternative would have to be to increase Japans defense budget and change the constitution.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Blacklabel,

absolutely they would. China and Korea are "mad at" Japan, not the USA. Thats why Japan has to pay the USA to protect them from...China and Korea.

China and North Korea are so "mad at" Japan that they will launch missile attacks on Japanese cities anytime soon, leaving U.S. bases intact and ready to attack them? That's a fantastic speculation on your part. You cannot pay the U.S. such an exorbitant amount of money, thinking attacks may be imminent.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

well only if China was a democratic country who valued freedom US would not b needed nor their weapon for peace Asia has everything biggest countries pupation n market n disunity among Asian Nations gives fartin Joe his place to stand

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Japan has been milking the USA and other allies for years. Japan has had it's cake and eat it for years, I think Japan should contribute more.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

@Johansawada

I support Japan building up its own military versus "outsourcing" its defence to the USA... at the end of the day, USA (or any country for that matter) will look after its own interest first and Japan second...Japan needs to build up its own forces to put Japan as first priority!

Exactly. If you want somethinh done right, do it yourself. If Japan wants to be defended it should defend itself, and SDF are capable to do it. For the U.S. the protection of Japan is a secondary mission, the first one is serving U.S. global interests, and why Japan should pay for that? Better to invest in its own defensive capabilities.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Alan Harrison,

Japan has been milking the USA and other allies for years.

That's a mindboggling statement of yours indeed. The U.S. is forcing us to suffer under so many military bases, causing so much pollution: noise, environmental, social pollution and all. And you say we've been milking the U.S.A., having cake and eating it, too, for years?

Reduce your military presence in Okinawa to a reasonable size, and you will have no misunderstanding about our suffering. Don’t demand a replacement for Futenma be built at another site in exchange of its return.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Wasn't a fan but Trump got this one right.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Alan Harrison,

Japan has been milking the USA and other allies for years.

That's a mindboggling statement of yours indeed. The U.S. is forcing us to suffer under so many military bases, causing so much pollution: noise, environmental, social pollution and all. And you say we've been milking the U.S.A., having cake and eating it, too, for years?

Reduce your military presence in Okinawa to a reasonable size, and you will have no misunderstanding about our suffering. Don’t demand a replacement for Futenma be built at another site in exchange of its return.

So Japan is a victim once again, this time a victim of American noise. Quite honestly, I sometimes wonder, when I read comments like this, why the USA even bothers defending a bunch of spoilt 12 year olds.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

From what I understand, Japan pays for most of the costs. Korea pays less than half for the privilege. And the EU pays nothing to 'host' the Americans. I don't know who to criticize. And I don't know who the suckers are.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

USA is sitting on very advance technology that is sharing with UK and Australia but Not Japan!

Japan is clearly excluded because they need the market for the old clunky donkey designs and put them out to pasture. Japan and Taiwan are the pastures. Rustication exportation.

“He turnde hir out at doores to grasse on the playne.”

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why???.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

voiceofokinawaNov. 18  07:04 pm JST

That's a mindboggling statement of yours indeed. The U.S. is forcing us to suffer under so many military bases, causing so much pollution: noise, environmental, social pollution and all. And you say we've been milking the U.S.A., having cake and eating it, too, for years?

Reduce your military presence in Okinawa to a reasonable size, and you will have no misunderstanding about our suffering. Don’t demand a replacement for Futenma be built at another site in exchange of its return.

Forcing us? I live in Okinawa part fo the year. The US isn't forcing "me".

Pollution, noise, etc.---that's Japan. Take a ride through Naha anyday.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

This policy is fundamentally wrong.

A massive drain on the economy.

WW 2 ended a long time ago, This policy needs to end now!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The only reason there is any such possibility is due to the presence of the occupation forces.

If US forces left Japan you would immediately be occupied by hostile Chinese forces. Don't kid yourself otherwise. They consider Okinawa to be a Chinese tributary state occupied by Japan. It would be the first piece of Japanese soil they "liberated". The CCP burns for revenge for Japan's barbarities in WWII and before. Japan's cities would be leveled by China in revenge. Now if Japan had never attacked her Asian neighbors and started a big war there might not be a rationale for having US forces in Japan. But that is history now so deal with the reality of today.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Forcing us? I live in Okinawa part fo the year. The US isn't forcing "me".

Pollution, noise, etc.---that's Japan. Take a ride through Naha anyday.

If Japan hadn't colonized Korea and a big chunk of China the world would be a very different place today. Chiang Kai-shek was maybe months from crushing Mao and forever ending the possibility of a communist China, but had to divert forces from fighting Mao to fighting Japan. Xi Jinping and his threats to his neighbors including Japan are Japan's wonderful postwar legacy. If not for Japan's colonization of Korea and their attack on the US, the Korean peninsula would not be divided today and there would be no reason for the US to have to help guard that country from a second attack by the communist north. All of you complaining about the US presence in Japan need to examine the history of why the US is in Asia in the first place. You attacked us. You made war on us for no reason other than to take over all of Asia and take the US out of the picture. Well you lost but unfortunately you let Mao and Stalin win. Now Japan, South Korea and the US have enemies in Asia. Your expectation that if somehow the US left all would be well is naive in the extreme. Japan caused the whole mess. Now they have some obligations to help make it right.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Alan Harrison (Nov. 18 09:29 pm JST),

Quite honestly, I sometimes wonder, when I read comments like this, why the USA even bothers defending a bunch of spoilt 12 year olds.

You sound like the boss of a crime syndicate resenting the townspeople on the turf don't thank them for the protection they say they provide despite the fact that they have encroached upon the land and are handsomely collecting "protection money".

"12 year olds"!? A deja-vu phrase. Ah, yes, it was Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces and absolute ruler of post-war Japan, who used the phrase to describe the Japanese mentality under his dictatorial rule during the occupation.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

"12 year olds"!? A deja-vu phrase. Ah, yes, it was Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces and absolute ruler of post-war Japan, who used the phrase to describe the Japanese mentality under his dictatorial rule during the occupation.

Thank your wonderful ancestors for brutalizing all of Asia and attacking the US. The US was isolationist and didn't want any part of WWII but there was this attack on Pearl Harbor that sort of forced the matter. Hard to ignore eight sunk battleships and all those aircraft lost, or the invasions of Guam, Wake Island and the Philippines that came right after that. Japan got what it deserved and has never to this day fully atoned for the barbarities it inflicted on the world. You have a lot of nerve to complain.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

To all you nay-sayers, Russia and China wouldn't charge Japan a single yen to host troops ...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Japan is clearly excluded because they need the market for the old clunky donkey designs and put them out to pasture. Japan and Taiwan are the pastures. Rustication exportation.

Sigh. Japan doesn't need nuclear submarines. At least when I was active duty we considered a Japanese sub to be the next best thing after an American nuclear sub. The subs and their crews were uniformly superb and as far as I know that remains true. Japan doesn't need her submarines to be able to cross the Pacific Ocean from the US or Australia to the coast of China submerged at 30 knots. For Japanese subs, the action is right there. No long range high speed transit to get to the action. Their DE boats are perfectly suited to their operating environment. Japan can afford more subs by not adopting nuclear power. For the operating environment the JMSDF is in, more subs are more important than the ability to deploy half way across the world submerged. For Australia and the US there isn't a DE sub made that can go from San Diego or Sydney to Okinawa without refueling on the way and a DE boat is going to advertise itself pretty loudly on that long trans Pacific deployment. It is not like the Japanese situation where a DE boat can sneak out of port quietly at low speed and only need a day or two transit to get to the operating area.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Desert Tortoise (Today  08:51 am JST),

You constantly bring up the case of brutality of IJA in occupied Asian countries as well as its attack on Pearl Harbor. Imperial Japan was retaliated against to the nail for that and crushed into pieces. It doesn't exist any more, even though, ironically, the U.S. is encouraging Japan to rearm and fight its global wars along with it.

There's no denying that Japan started the Pacific War by attacking Pearl Harbor, but Japan may have been trapped into doing so. U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt was intent on entering the war to help Great Britain, seeking a casus belli. But, first, he had to repel the antiwar mood of the U.S. public at the time.

A film footage of him after he delivered the declaration of war against Japan on radio attests to this. He was all smiles and relaxed with his legs thrown on a table in the Oval Office, surrounded by a throng of serious looking subordinates.

I repeat. You cannot justify the U.S. occupation army's illegal action of confiscating private land, saying it pales compared with IJA's brutality and surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

I repeat. You cannot justify the U.S. occupation army's illegal action of confiscating private land, saying it pales compared with IJA's brutality and surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.

And I will repeat Japan should not have colonized Korea, much of China and waged war on the rest of Asia. That is the source of much of Asia's current problems. You want to talk occupation? Look in the mirror. That is your heritage, the one your schools and government refuse to teach. They teach victimhood to you when it was China, the US and Japan's other neighbors in Asia that are the victims of the Japanese.

And I will repeat if Japan had not attacked the US there probably would be no Marines on Okinawa (and what is the fixation with the Marine when Kadena is a vastly larger base?). That China is communist today and Korea divided is the direct fault of Japan. Own it. Now the US and Japan has a problem with communist enemies intent on our eventual destruction thanks to the barbarities of your ancestors. None of this had to be but Japan was intent on conquering Asia. The current situation is the direct result of Japanese imperial conquests.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Like I said, living somewhere doesn’t make you the “Voice” of the place, just another Gai’ji

1 ( +1 / -0 )

voiceofokinawaToday  11:44 am JST

I repeat. You cannot justify the U.S. occupation army's illegal action of confiscating private land, saying it pales compared with IJA's brutality and surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.

There is no illegal action. Japan wants the US here, and has agreements with the US to do so.

zichiToday  12:43 pm JST

the war and Japanese imperialism ended 75 years ago. If the US Military remains here at the request of the Japanese then ok but if a time comes they want them to leave then that should happen.

Won't happen in our lifetime. US service members will be eating Blue Seal ice cream for years to come.

Bilateral cost-sharing agreements are usually signed to cover a five-year term.

Can't wait for Trump to negotiate a better deal!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Desert Tortoise (Today  12:31 pm JST),

And I will repeat Japan should not have colonized Korea, much of China and waged war on the rest of Asia. That is the source of much of Asia's current problems.

So, you want to say all this U.S. military presence with so many bases is the end result of the war Japan started. And the U.S. had every right to confiscate as much land as it wanted in Okinawa. If you say so, then what's the use and meaning of these bilateral agreements?

Are they nonsense, a farce, shenanigans to simply save appearances?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

voiceofokinawaToday  03:30 pm JST

And the U.S. had every right to confiscate as much land as it wanted in Okinawa. If you say so, then what's the use and meaning of these bilateral agreements?

Because the land was not confiscated. The land belongs to Japan. There is no disputing that.

Zichi will even agree.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Regbilk,

Because the land was not confiscated. The land belongs to Japan. There is no disputing that.

But right to use of the land was confiscated. So, Futenma's illegality remains unchanged.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

To the rogue state of the USA, go away.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

To the rogue state of the USA, go away.

Haha, like anyone will listen to that. Although it is comedy gold.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

voiceofokinawaNov. 19 11:44 am JST

Desert Tortoise (Today  08:51 am JST),

You constantly bring up the case of brutality of IJA in occupied Asian countries as well as its attack on Pearl Harbor. Imperial Japan was retaliated against to the nail for that and crushed into pieces. It doesn't exist any more, even though, ironically, the U.S. is encouraging Japan to rearm and fight its global wars along with it.

How about the brutality of the IJA to the Okinawans? This also gets forgotten, conveniently, to argue that the US is bad and should have never stayed in Okinawa. Granted, this time has passed, but the GOJ has agreed to the use of the US military to defend Japan, not he JSDF.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Apologize for the above, the second paragraph is not a quote but my words.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Korean invasion did not happen because of Japan and would have happened by both the Communism Chinese and Soviets who both share borders.

The Chinese Communist take over was not because of Japan

Incorrect on both counts. Japan's colonization of Korea led to the Allies occupying it at the conclusion of WWII, leading to its partition and subsequent invasion of the south by the north. Had Korea remained an independent nation not occupied by Japan there would have been no reason for either US or Soviet forces to enter than country and none of what occurred since would have happened. Korea would be a unified nation.

In China, by 1937 Chiang Kai-shek had Mao on the ropes and was prepared to utterly crush his forces. But Japanese forces weren't satisfied colonizing Manchukuo and invaded south. Chiang was forced to disengage from fighting Mao's communists to fight the Japanese instead. This allowed Mao to escape in what they call the Long March, really the long retreat. Mao spent the rest of WWII in northern China resting his forces while telling the IJA where KMT forces were so the Japanese could wear down his enemy the KMT. Mao expected the Soviets to eject Japanese forces from China, and to arm and train his forces so when the Japanese were gone Mao could resume his own war on Chiang and the KMT. That if fact is how it worked out. The KMT carried the ground war in China against Japan and by 1945 they were tired. Mao used this to his advantage. His forces were rested, equipped with new Soviet supplied weapons and moved out smartly against his old enemy. Again, absent the interference of Japan, Mao would not have won the Chinese civil war and we would have a very different looking Asia today. Imagine a China and Korea that had not been invaded by Japan. No need for WWII in the Pacific. The Soviets would never have entered either China or Korea and we would not be faced with the aggressive communist monster we face today. Thank you Japan. Thank you very much. You Japanese need to understand your history fully and understand the consequences we still face today from what Japan did early in the last century.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

So, you want to say all this U.S. military presence with so many bases is the end result of the war Japan started. And the U.S. had every right to confiscate as much land as it wanted in Okinawa. If you say so, then what's the use and meaning of these bilateral agreements?

The map of Asia today is the direct result of Japanese invasions of their neighbors from the late 1800s through 1945. The success of Mao and the division of Korea are the direct result of Japanese invasions of Korea and China. Own those facts. They are Japan's legacy to Asia.

And now because of that we are faced with a military stalemate in Korea and an aggressive Chinese police state intent on claiming its neighbors territory and international waters and airspace as their own while committing genocides on its own people. Nice job Japan. That leaves the US stuck keeping troops in Asia to prevent more warfare from breaking out. The reason North Korea invaded the south was because a US that was tired of war had maybe 500 troops there primarily to advise the South Koreans (not an occupation by then as the Koreans were not our enemy, they were Japan's victim). The US had already mothballed a big chunk of its Navy, shut down dozens of bases in the US and discharged vast numbers of soldiers and other service members drafted for WWII. It was a much smaller military by then. South Korea had no armor or combat air force because the US didn't see a need and thus they both were a push over for the well armed North Korean forces. The US never saw that attack coming but you can darn well bet they are not going to get caught out again. That is part of why the US keeps forces in Asia. We learned a hard lesson that the Russians/Soviets and Chinese will exploit any perceived weakness. The other reason is none of Japans neighbors trusted Japan and never wanted to see them rearm, fearing a repeat of the horrors leading to WWII. Having US forces protecting Japan relieved the Japanese of the need to build a big military force. A lot of Asians slept well at night with US forces in Japan. Nobody except maybe the Chinese, North Koreans and Soviets wanted to see US forces out of Japan. Every other nation was more than happy to see Japan unable to threaten them again.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

voiceofokinawaNov. 19  04:56 pm JST

But right to use of the land was confiscated. So, Futenma's illegality remains unchanged.

Can you provide a cite to a court case, international, or Japanese, that holds that the US confiscated Futenma's land illegally? Or is it your opinion?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

RegBilk,

If I encroached on your land and used it freely, do you have to wait for court ruling that determined it was lawful or unlawful?

Anyone who can read English can tell the U.S. occupation forces' requisition of private land violated the "Convention Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land", Article 46 of which states: "Family honour and rights, the lives of persons, and private property, as well as religious convictions and practice, must be respected. Private property cannot be confiscated." 

In later years (in the 1950s), the U.S. army further requisitioned private land by force, with houses, farms and all included, before protesting farmers and wailing wives to expand existing bases. The so-called "land requisition at bayonet point".

Do you have to wait for court ruling to determine the legitimacy of such action by the U.S. army?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The so-called "land requisition at bayonet point and by bulldozer".

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Can you provide a cite to a court case, international, or Japanese, that holds that the US confiscated Futenma's land illegally? Or is it your opinion?

The aggressor crying victim after losing the war they started. Japan left Asia in a shambles that allowed communists to make inroads into Asia and threaten democracy there. The Japanese have some obligations for the outcome but they need to teach the truth in their schools, which they do not, and they need to atone for their manifold barbarities.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

voiceofokinawaToday  06:45 am JST

Anyone who can read English can tell the U.S. occupation forces' requisition of private land violated the "Convention Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land", Article 46 of which states: 

I can read the English language, and I see nothing that says illegal. So, it's your opinion.

Do you have to wait for court ruling to determine the legitimacy of such action by the U.S. army?

I guess you've been waiting more than 70 years.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Desert Tortoise (Today  02:55 am JST),

You seem to say Japan is potentially a dangerous country, a principal cause of the turmoil in Asia today. Such country must be contained and prevented from becoming militaristic and imperial again. That's the reason why the U.S. must keep as many bases here as possible. Thanks to this, other Asians can sleep well at night. 

In other words, the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty and other bilateral agreements are nothing but gimmicks to not let the genie out of the bottle.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You seem to say Japan is potentially a dangerous country,

Your neighbors in Asia until very recently feared Japan and worried about the potential for a return of the sort of militarism that caused their nations so much grief. That is a fact you must understand. Today China has eclipsed Japan as the greatest threat to regional peace but before Xi Jinping became General Secretary of the CCP and President of PRC, Japan was the nation most Asian nations feared most.

That's the reason why the U.S. must keep as many bases here as possible. Thanks to this, other Asians can sleep well at night. 

That is part of it. Having US forces defending Japan was very much supported by nations in the region because they still feared Japan and feared that left undefended by the US Japan would re-arm and terrorize its neighbors again. Right or wrong, that was the fear I heard in my travels around the region.

In other words, the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty and other bilateral agreements are nothing but gimmicks to not let the genie out of the bottle.

Do you want to face Russia and China on your own? Japan left Asia a big mess. Now enemies of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the US are right there, just across the water from Japan and China in particular is spoiling for a fight. If the US walks away your Okinawa will find out what a real occupation looks like. But hey, I hear the Chinese airplanes make no noise and their soldiers are all eunuchs.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

An excerpt from the September 1951 San Francisco Treaty that settled WWII in the Pacific:

Article 3

Japan will concur in any proposal of the

United States to the United Nations to place under its trusteeship system, with

the United States as the sole administering authority, Nansei Shoto south of

*29deg. north latitude (including the Ryukyu Islands and the Daito Islands),*

Nanpo Shoto south of Sofu Gan (including the Bonin Islands, Rosario Island and the Volcano Islands) and Parece Vela and Marcus Island. Pending the making of such a proposal and affirmative action thereon, the United States will have the right to exercise all and any powers of administration, legislation and

jurisdiction over the territory and inhabitants of these islands, including

their territorial waters.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The map of Asia today is the direct result of Japanese invasions of their neighbors from the late 1800s through 1945. The success of Mao and the division of Korea are the direct result of Japanese invasions of Korea and China. Own those facts. They are Japan's legacy to Asia.

Nope. The map of Asia today is the direct result of Western colonialism. Look at old maps how entire Asia was like. And what your highly questionable, almost ridiculous assertion on the direct result of Japanese invasion was the direct result of US having forced Japan to open the country and to cope with an unequal treaty.

Ask Perry.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Desert Tortoise (Today  09:31 am JST),

When territorial matters are described and stipulated in international treaties and agreements, names must be crystal clear for anyone on both sides to understand what they mean. No Japanese will understand what Rosario Island, the Volcanic Islands, Parece Vela and Marcus Island refer to, that appear in the San Francisco Peace Treaty. 

The Volcanic Islands may be Izu Shoto (Izu Islands) in Japanese; Perece Vela may be what the Japanese call Okinotorishima; and Marcus Island Minamitorishima. But what is Rosario Island? Can international documents be so soppy as this?

At any rate, the U.S. occupation army’s free-wheeling encroachment on private land in occupied Okinawa cannot be sanctioned and exonerated even in light of the San Francisco Peace Treaty.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

At any rate, the U.S. occupation army’s free-wheeling encroachment on private land in occupied Okinawa cannot be sanctioned and exonerated even in light of the San Francisco Peace Treaty.

Under the terms of the San Francisco Treaty the US was not obliged to return any of the Ryukyus to Japan. Much as they did with the Federated States of Micronesia the US could have turned the Ryukyus into an independent nation if it chose.

The Volcanic Islands may be Izu Shoto (Izu Islands) in Japanese; Perece Vela may be what the Japanese call Okinotorishima; and Marcus Island Minamitorishima. But what is Rosario Island? Can international documents be so sloppy as this?

They are part of the Ogasawara Islands. Rosario Island is also called Nishinoshima. They were British colonies inhabited by expat Brits and Polynesians before the Tokugawa Shogunate took them, lost them and later the Mieji came back and claimed them again. Hence the double English and Japanese names for them. Nothing sloppy at all.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@Tortoise

The map of Asia today is the direct result of Japanese invasions of their neighbors from the late 1800s through 1945. The success of Mao and the division of Korea are the direct result of Japanese invasions of Korea and China. Own those facts. They are Japan's legacy to Asia.

OR the map of Asia today is the direct result of Japanese resistance to Western Colonialism.

Japan did not invade but annexed Korea based on treaty after short-while of protectorate status which such Western Powers, Brits, US, France, even Russia, and even the biggest political organization in Korea had all agreed for regional stability.

The division of Korea was the direct result of nothing but both Soviet and US, especially the greed for territorial expansion of Soviet. No more or no less. Otherwise, the Allies should have followed what had been agreed in the 1st place at Yalta conference

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OR the map of Asia today is the direct result of Japanese resistance to Western Colonialism.

And as a result of Japan's resistance, it made the way to independence of the entire Asian nations from Western Powers.

Current unstable world conditions are direct result of power games among Allies = permanent members of UN insecurity council

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Desert Tortoise,

Rosario Island is also called Nishinoshima.

True, but Nishinoshima is a small volcanic island. The volcano is erupting actively even now, ejecting cinders and gas, hence inhabitable. So, your assertion that Brits and Polynesians inhabited there is not correct. Maybe, you're mixing it up with the whole Bonin (Ogasawara) Islands.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The volcano is erupting actively even now, ejecting cinders and gas, hence uninhabitable.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan should agree to pay the US whatever it asks for the ‘privilege’ of ‘hosting’ US forces.

Then charge them double that in land rent.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@Tortoise

Your skewed self-asserted view about Asia today and it's modern history is just appalling, like many other posters here who need THE big scapegoat to justify their ancestors , as if the humane history had once ceased it's continuity and been completely reset between before and after the beginning of WW2.

Read and think more.

Those idiotic permanent members of UN-UNITED Nations INSECURITY council are causing problems despite

they have such huge lands and territories, natural resources enough to feed their people

0 ( +0 / -0 )

zichi

Reduce the number of troops and bases by 50% so like double your money.

The CCP and president for life XiJiPing completely support your suggestion! Of course, the Senkakus should also be ceded to China immediately, and forget any support for Taiwan during the coming blockade.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The CCP and president for life XiJiPing completely support your suggestion! Of course, the Senkakus should also be ceded to China immediately, and forget any support for Taiwan during the coming blockade.

No complaints from me.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

And as a result of Japan's resistance, it made the way to independence of the entire Asian nations from Western Powers.

That is exactly the excuse Tojo used to justify the barbarities committed by the IJA across the length and breadth of Asia. That was the whole party line behind he so-called Co-Prosperity Sphere, ending European colonialism by establishing Japanese colonialism; at the point of a gun. The European powers never flattened Chinese cities from the air with bombers or raped and killed their way through Chinese cities like Japanese armies did. That was the tender merciful Japanese "freeing" those poor Chinese from the Europeans. And when the US wasn't having any part of that and cut oil exports to Japan they attacked the US. That was the reason I had family members in combat in the Pacific and a mother working on the Manhattan Project. Stop trying to re-write history to make Japan look like some sort of a victim. It was not. It was the aggressor.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Maybe, you're mixing it up with the whole Bonin (Ogasawara) Islands.Bonins as a whole.

Correct. Nishinoshima is uninhabited. It was originally named Rosario Island after name of the Spanish ship who's Captain first discovered it. The Japanese renamed it after the Tokugawa Shogunate first ran the Brits out of the Bonins.

The Bonins had a Polynesian population. When UK took it as a colony the Brits added some of their own to the population. The Japanese under the Meiji removed all the English speakers and Polynesians and replaced them with Japanese settlers. After WWII the US brought back some of the English and Polynesian settlers previously expelled by Japan. In 1968 Japan regained control and brought back some Japanese to the islands.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Reduce the number of troops and bases by 50% so like double your money.

Sounds so simple and easy until you wargame it. Then you discover how short you are of resources to repel the kinds of attacks nations like North Korea, China and Russia can mount with the forces they have in the region or could quickly bring to bear from other regions. Those scenarios are tested with incredibly detailed simulations and it is those simulations that inform how many of what forces you need where. It is not done in an information vacuum. If the dookie hits the fan and you need to transport all those people and equipment back into the theater you might find you have lost the fight before you can get the forces you need to protect Japan.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

That is exactly the excuse Tojo used to justify the barbarities committed by the IJA across the length and breadth of Asia. That was the whole party line behind he so-called Co-Prosperity Sphere, ending European colonialism by establishing Japanese colonialism; at the point of a gun. The European powers never flattened Chinese cities from the air with bombers or raped and killed their way through Chinese cities like Japanese armies did. That was the tender merciful Japanese "freeing" those poor Chinese from the Europeans. And when the US wasn't having any part of that and cut oil exports to Japan they attacked the US. That was the reason I had family members in combat in the Pacific and a mother working on the Manhattan Project. Stop trying to re-write history to make Japan look like some sort of a victim. It was not. It was the aggressor.

I don’t even assume European Powers did have such capabilities to flatten cities in Asian countries from the air with bombers when they invaded each one of those nations. However historical study is once again suggested to check number of and name of each barbaric war that happened and see how barbaric Europeans were when raped and killed their way through entire Asia except Thailand. US is not an exception when you know what it had done to Phillipines after beating Spanish. Listen to or try to take a look at historical statements left by those leaders of each Asian nations how they thought of Japan when it finally stood on it's foot against whites, if you cannot convince yourself.

You stop trying to press your own narratives only and call everything else revisionism to justify yourself and your ancestors unless you believe Asia should have been under Europeans and Americans with obscurantist policy like they were up to 1930's

Perhaps you may want to read "freedom betrayed" once again with the statement made post-war by Gen. MacArthur about Japan.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

A large part of the CCP's moral support is directly linked to their exploitation of historical facts regarding the course that the Japanese imperial forces embarked on over eighty years ago when millions of Chinese were butchered, enslaved and oppressed by them. Article 9 is a visible and very crucial display of penitence to her neighbours that this will never happen again. The so called US Pacific umbrella is also a significant apparatus placed to ensure that the Pacific Ocean is not militarized and save the vast number of small island nations therein the huge bourdon of maintenance towards a defence force any more than taking on border control, counter insurgencies and policing responsibilities.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica (and Zaphod)

To my questioning whether Chinese or North Korean missiles would be launched against Japan were it not for U.S. bases, you retorted:

Of course they would. If there were no US bases in Japan they would all be JSDF bases and they would be targeted. No difference. Do you actually believe that without US bases Japan would have no enemies? 

Are you sure they would attack Japan even if Japan were neutral and didn't take a hostile stance against any country including China and North Korea?

?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

A large part of the CCP's moral support is directly linked to their exploitation of historical facts regarding the course that the Japanese imperial forces embarked on over eighty years ago when millions of Chinese were butchered, enslaved and oppressed by them.

This is a highly questionable assertion. CCP did not actually fight against Japan, it hid itself and waited and rather exploited the situation to overwhelm KMT, on and after the days. What were moral supports to kill each people after invader is gone? Similarly, how come North Korea started to massacre its fellow Koreans in the South?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

They should make Japan pay for most of the cost of hosting. They’re already hired guns and too cheap at the cost. If Japan baulks, the Yanks should pack up and go, leaving them to their fate. Follow that up by allowing the yen to appreciate to its true value, around 60〜70 to the $.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Desert Tortoise & Zaphod,

Why do you think omnidirectional diplomacy is no good?

I think Switzerland represents a good example of omnidirectional diplomacy. Why do you think their regime is wrong?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

voiceofokinawaToday  07:47 am JST

Desert Tortoise & Zaphod,

Why do you think omnidirectional diplomacy is no good?

I think Switzerland represents a good example of omnidirectional diplomacy. Why do you think their regime is wrong?

Their diplomacy is right for that country.

They don't have the role that the US does on the global stage.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

When Masayoshi Ohira, former Minister of Foreign Affairs and later Prime Minister of Japan, brought up the topic of Japan's omnidirectional diplomacy in a monthly Bungeishunju-sponsored conference, then U.S. Ambassador Edwin Reischauer reacted very negatively, retorting that if Japan parted from the U.S., the U.S. would take no time to invade Japan and occupy it again. Since then, no one seems dare not to bring up the topic.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

So, RegBilk, why do you think omnidirectional diplomacy is good only for Switzerland and not for other countries including Japan?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

RegBilk,

Your statement that "t(T)hey don't have the role that the US does on the global stage" seems to tell because there aren't any U.S. bases planted in the country. If so, that's an absurd statement on your part because bases can be eliminated or reduced.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Japan should consider holding a nuclear weapon by itself would be one of the options from now on.

othewise it will continuouly have to follow the requests from the US for the future.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The Japanese government "will pay" more to host USA troops and the use of USA weapons and funding new infrastructure on remote islands with the USA military as an alliance and the agreement includes the ongoing hosted occupation since ww2.

The Japanese government cannot tell the USA military to leave or just change their constitution if they choose.

That will never happen.

Japan better cooperate with the USA as much as possible.

USA military has nuclear weapons in Japan and has since the war.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

China is waiting in the wings, and N. Korea are a fox watching the hen house as soon as the door is left open the fox will invade and their goes the hens. Japan wants the hen house protected.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites