Japan to continue paying $2 billion for U.S. troops

Does Japan wants to continue this 'Hire a soldier' for $2b? The Germans offer a very good example of a westerner approach. Germany regrets the War, apologized and they hate to be reminded of the Nazi time. To them the past war feelings are all over. Ex Nazi are destined to be tried. Whereas J is different. Perhaps a misguided pride of its culture. The PMs still visiting the controversial shrine to the anger of its neighbors. Japan not building good neighboring relationships e.g. the Koreans comfort women issue cannot just go off, when the last comfort woman died. Whereas G build good neighbor relationship and can amass 27 countries joining the EU or the eurodollars. G does not have nuclear weapons but could have access as a leader for EU. Whereas J is just like an eagle living with mother hen beginning to lose its ability to fly to soaring heights. J continue to suckle the military nipples of US. It is cheaper in the $2b rent a soldier scheme but is it what the nation wants, losing its ability to dictate the future? J should best strive for regional peace and security and demonstrate its leadership with great sincerity rather to regard itself as a superclass of mankind akin to western. Now, J can behave like a spoilt kid and tell Uncle Sam that N Korea has to return a few of J as a condition of peace talk. If N Korea attacks J, Uncle Sam has no problem to douse of the N Korean fire. Imagine this scenario, Uncle Sam needs 3 aircraft carriers (for illustrations only) to defend its own country in case of war. When WW3 broke out, Uncle Sam has 5 aircraft carriers at its disposal. One was down, and another not as reliable. So the not so reliable unit goes to J. Can J afford to risk its life as a nation by way of dependence on others?

As if 'apologising' for something that occurred 70 years ago will improve Japan's security situation. But JT is no stranger to cheap shots who will use any opportunity for J-bashing.

Do not really know how to define the key conditions to be a called a sovereign country -- when foreign policy ( big issues ) & defense matters are all under the US control, then Japan to the US sounds like that between Hongkong to the PRC albeit with one difference : Hongkong does not need to pay China for troops stationed in the territory. Indeed, While Japan defense issues are obvious when It relies on the US for military presence & almost the unique source of weapons, as for foreign policy, just check FM Mr. Maehara's travel itinerary since a few months in office, quite a big bill went to reporting to Ms. Clinton. Suggestion : to be next star on the US flag ( half joking ) as it will save majority of our kids from attending American language tuition classes after school..

By the way, $2 billion is a huge amount when the gov't budget shortfalls resort to raising income taxes & cutting foreign aids.. Could one save the 'escort' money ( or granting us 50% discount ) ? As more than ample protection can be obtained from the future largely reinforced Guam base just a few hours away..neither the Chinese nor the NK possessed troops transfer capabilities by air ( by sea, our radars could spot them right at their seaports before departure.) & new purchase of large number of PAC-3 batteries will protect us from eventual missiles. How long are we supposed to pay such protection fee in the name of security against basically no immediate threats ? Understood that national security is sacred ( no argument is acceptable ), how long the people ( especially the poor ones ) will have to suffer amid impacts of economic downturns ?