politics

Nago mayor pleads against U.S. air base

170 Comments

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

© 2014 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

170 Comments
Login to comment

I wish him luck. But history shows its going to take more than pleading. It might take a revolution.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

Good luck Inamine San.

4 ( +10 / -5 )

Inamine was elected by a wide margin on the anti-base platform. This was in spite of dirty tricks and attempted bribery by the LDP who wanted to install their puppet. Recent surveys reveal that 71% of Okinawans do not want US military bases on their island. Not in Futenma, not in Kadena and certainly not in Henoko.

There has been plenty of attempted dialogue with the GOJ, but they only listen to their American handlers and have no ear for Okinawans. However, recently this has become an international issue. There is pressure now from the international community to move these anachronistic bases off the island altogether.

They are not here to protect Japan. They are here because it's low rent.

But this has gone on too long.

The US bases hold down the economy by occupying 20% of the island's prime real estate and by creating an atmosphere of danger. Apart from the acts of violence, rape, drunken rampages and general misbehaviour, the very presence of the bases makes Okinawa a primary target. This wouldn't ordinarily be anything to worry about but with Abe doing everything he can to needle China and NK, this becomes a possibility.

It's time the US military left.

WWII ended in 1945.

http://www.japanfocus.org/-Gavan-McCormack/4056

http://www.japanfocus.org/-Gavan-McCormack/4068

5 ( +16 / -11 )

Inamine said he had discussed his opposition to the move during a meeting with new U.S. Ambassador Caroline Kennedy on the island.

“I did most of the talking and explained to her the issue related to nature, the environment, accidents and crimes. She seemed to be particularly interested in the environmental issues,” Inamine said.

Kennedy met also with Okinawan Gov Hirokazu Nakaima but reportedly avoided discussing details of the base realignment

Sounds she was serious with Nago Mayor but ignored Governor. Did she study situation before she came?

3 ( +6 / -2 )

Bertie: "It's time the US military left."

Yeah, if you want to bow to a Chinese flag.

There's been enough of this, "Well, the US needs to get out of Japan, but they need to defend us from a distance" rubbish. This relocation has been agreed upon THREE TIMES, by both the federal government and the US, as well as your pal Nakaima recently. More will benefit from the bases, including Susumu, than those who lose from it. They will build around the base, as they did at Futenma, and profit from its presence.

Sorry, Susumu... it's been decided.

-2 ( +12 / -14 )

Think how poor Okinawa was before. Could Okinawa be as good as today without the special financial support of the Japanese government which pays them in return for U.S. Forces on the islands?

-4 ( +6 / -11 )

I find it amusing that he gets Okinawa is a frontline prefecture but still squawks.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

I've done two tours in Okinawa (4 years), 5 ears in mainland Japan and I've seen first hand what first the Japanese occupiers did and now what almost 70 years of USofA occupation has done, it is past time to get our troops out. By and large the average American there cares nothing for the people of Okinawa.

First we stayed to fight communism in a pretty much bogus Cold War and now the military industrial complex's excuse is the Chinese "threat"! It's bunk and propaganda to protect the "complex!"

9 ( +17 / -7 )

Comment to Schopenhauer

. Could Okinawa be as good as today without the special financial support of the Japanese government which pays them in return for U.S. Forces on the islands?

Absolutely and better - there are some great alternatives that will not require subsidies - especially focused on sustainability.

4 ( +7 / -2 )

Send the bases to the disputed islands....they will be more useful there.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

Chinese threat? Not when China and USA are very friendly''

China and Boeing are cozy.'' Latest one is following. The aerospace giant said it would consider a final assembly plant in China for single-aisle planes, according to a report by Bloomberg. The world's most populous nation is expected to need 5,589 new planes through '32, according to the report. Boeing (BA) announced a deal with Thailand's Nok Airlines for 15 737s jets with a list price of $1.45 bil. CFM International, a joint venture between General Electric (GE)and France's Safran, said it signed a deal with budget airline VietJetAir for engines for 21 Airbus A320 jets. The deal is valued at over $800 mil. Boeing shares fell 1% to 128.13. GE shares fell 0.2% to 25.39.

Just like that, China and Japan are very friendly, Economically and tchnologically.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Comment to "SmithinJapan". Sorry, Susumu... it's been decided.

Perhaps by the foreign invaders, but Okinawans do have a point that the land has been owned by their ancestors for generations and they have the first responsibility to decide how to use their land.

7 ( +12 / -5 )

Power politics at its worst. This chap was elected on an anti-bases platform, thus the views he has represent the majority of his electorate. Despite that reality, however, the central government still sees fit to basically ignore local feelings and ram this development through. Issues of the US Japan Treaty aside, why not reduce the burden on Okinawa by relocating some of these US facilities to the first electoral district of Yamaguchi Prefecture or perhaps Tottori Prefecture? Surely the local politicians wouldn't mind?

6 ( +8 / -2 )

@bertie

Inamine was elected by a wide margin on the anti-base platform. This was in spite of dirty tricks and attempted bribery by the LDP who wanted to install their puppet. Recent surveys reveal that 71% of Okinawans do not want US military bases on their island. Not in Futenma, not in Kadena and certainly not in Henoko.

Beating the same old drum beat? So about let's say roughly 30% are for it. That's still not that bad and I seriously doubt the bases would be entirely moved from Okinawa, it wouldn't make sense to do such a move.

There has been plenty of attempted dialogue with the GOJ, but they only listen to their American handlers and have no ear for Okinawans.

The majority always have the final say.

However, recently this has become an international issue. There is pressure now from the international community to move these anachronistic bases off the island altogether.

Bertie, there is international pressure for Japan to stop Whaling, how has that worked so far?

They are not here to protect Japan. They are here because it's low rent.

You don't know that for a fact, if you can say that unequivocally, then show us some documented evidence to back that up, if you can't, you are just throwing out accusations.

But this has gone on too long.

And as long as China is saber rattling and the tensions between Japan and China are never completely resolved, it might go on longer.

The US bases hold down the economy by occupying 20% of the island's prime real estate and by creating an atmosphere of danger. Apart from the acts of violence, rape, drunken rampages and general misbehaviour, the very presence of the bases makes Okinawa a primary target. This wouldn't ordinarily be anything to worry about but with Abe doing everything he can to needle China and NK, this becomes a possibility.

Your taking it all way out of proportion. The US brings a lot of money to the Islands.

It's time the US military left.

Not leave, but there needs to be more dialogue, conversation and assurances from the military and from the hosts.

WWII ended in 1945.

Yes, it did.

@toshiko

As if Kennedy knows what she is talking about or have clout of influence on anything.

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

As much as I'm against the "anti base/everything american is evil" crowd I can't help but agree with this guy. Okinawa did get the short stick when it comes to bearing the burden of the US military presence in Japan. Should some of the burden be lifted? Yes, but asking for all US military to leave Okinawa is unacceptable and unfortunately this move was agreed upon years ago. That being said, the Henoko move will happen, despite all the pleading and imaginary dugong.

Also, Bertie, I'd like to see some facts backing up your "20% of the land is base land" claims. Seen you make it on here before. IIRC, the number is closer to 13% and I believe I proved those numbers to you at one point.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

smithinjapan Feb. 14, 2014 - 09:15AM JST

Yeah, if you want to bow to a Chinese flag.

It should be decided by residents. Not the outsiders. You may be surprise to know that Okinawa natives love to eat pork instead of Sashimi. Many natives have blood link with Fujian or Hokkien ancestors like Taiwan.

It is their ancestor land. It is their decison for which flag they want to bow. It is their business.

-5 ( +6 / -11 )

Okinawa return was realized in an agreement with U.S. that U.S. Forces will remain there.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

I stand corrected, it's 18% according to the wikipeida. However, who knows if those numbers are correct. Either way, not 20%.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The Nago mayor should have a talk with the Ginowan mayor.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Oh my gosh, I agree.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Japan always has the option to do what the Philippines had done... say GTFO and they go. But that wont happen, even if Abe does revise Japan's rule about a military, they still need protection. It sucks that the US military causes issues, but it also prevents China from being more bold.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

this is a classic example of NIMBY. most japanese want a strong military alliance with the US, but they just don't want it in their backyard. they don't want the "crime," accidents and noise associated with holding a base, but they still want protection. so in the end, okinawa will be forced to keep practically all the bases.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

The US should apologize.. and leave the island for Guam or back here in Hawaii. In Hawaii Pearl Harbor and 10 other military facilities are important part of economy.. and government funding. Maybe some feel that Okinawa should be its own country...instead of just the Hawaii of Japan.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Perhaps by the foreign invaders

Do you refer to the Japanese who invaded the Ryukyu kingdom and nearly eradicated its culture and language? or perhaps you just don't know what the word 'invade' means

7 ( +10 / -3 )

If US becomes more flexible in changing SOFA, then it may be easier for other prefectures to accept US bases, I think.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Smith if all of the American bases left the Peoples Republic of China would not invade Okinawa. After all they would still be protected by the alliance. An attack on Okinawa would be considered an attack on the United States. So they would be in no danger and there is always the Self Defense Force. An independent Ryukyu Kingdom would also end the US bases. They would be too expensive for the Americans to operate. As for the Chinese "threat" they would be delighted at the prospect of an independent Ryukyu Kingdom. Again you write very strangely for a Commonwealth subject. Come on tell us the truth.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

so in the end, okinawa will be forced to keep practically all the bases

Time has changed! US will become like UK for surrendering Okinawa like Northern Ireland. UK will host the referendum for Scotland soon.

US is too broke for stationing the bases world wide. Sooner or later, US congress have to raise the debt ceiling limit for paying the wages of base and buying the fuel for base. At the end, money talk! Not the force with brawn!

It is impossible to foot the bill endlessly for the base who were just fans enjoying the rocket show and drinking at the bars. Can the base intercept and destory missiles? Israel does not employ the meaningless base. Instead they have deployed anti missile system at the border. It is making Israel safer and more efficient combat system.

http://japandailypress.com/north-korean-missile-fired-passes-over-okinawa-before-crashing-near-philippines-1219711/

The base is not deterrence for DPRK or PRC. The base is free loaders who are enjoying picnic, fair weather and bullying locals.

Kicking out the base from Ryuku is unstoppable momentum. It is the same as liberty, equality and freedom for Ryukyuans which were founding fathers of US have dreamed.

Statue of liberty will smile when the US base has become the history in Okinawa.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Inamine San,

If the American base leaves, the money goes with it.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Ahhh its fun to watch the masses squable and whine and cry about something they will never have full grasp of understanding or any capability to change. keep at it guys, more pipe dreams and wishes and what not to keep me entertained :D

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Americans actually receives money (roughly $4 billion a year?) from Japan just by stationing the bases in Okinawa. America doesn't get a better deal than that. And you wonder why people think that Japan is America's vassal state...

0 ( +4 / -4 )

@Bertie, The War did not end in 1945. In fact, the United States didn't even want to be apart of WWII, we ignored Britain and other European countries saying we'd stay out of that war, but, guess who came on over? The awesome Empire of Japan.

Now I don't know the history of the Ryukyuu Kingdom, but, if you all want to be your own country, then do something.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Strychnine, so what? The bases will be redeveloped in the bests interests of the people of Okinawa. Anyhow you do not know what it is like to have armed foreign troops in your country. So even it was the choice of being paid to "host" the bases or no bases and no money. It would be hands down to no bases. To be free oh to be free!

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Eiji: Are you referring Omoiyari more than $2 billion Japan pay for letting US Occupied Fprce stay in Japan? i t must be more than $4billion now. US can not afford to lose these if they leave their military force out of Japan right now. However, Korea agreed to pay multiple 100 million dollars a year now.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Osaka_Doug: "Perhaps by the foreign invaders, but Okinawans do have a point that the land has been owned by their ancestors for generations and they have the first responsibility to decide how to use their land."

And many of their ancestors were people who built literally around the bases to profit from them. They decided then that that is how they should use the land, and the same will happen in Nago when the base is relocated.

This whole notion of "sharing the burden" is ridiculous because it puts the combined forces at a disadvantage. And the idea of having them all off in Guam is even stupider if Japan needed a quick response.

Yuri: "An independent Ryukyu Kingdom would also end the US bases. They would be too expensive for the Americans to operate. As for the Chinese "threat" they would be delighted at the prospect of an independent Ryukyu Kingdom."

I think you really need to understand that there is no 'independent Ryukyu Kingdom' anymore, and it will never be returned to the people as such. But let's say for fun that they did -- of COURSE China would be happy because they could take it over a whole lot easier, especially with the bases gone. You'd go home to visit and have to get a Chinese visa, Yuri!

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

Listening the right way was good. Smart.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Smith the Peoples Republic of China could easily take out many of the other Asian countries but do not, why? Anyhow I do not expect an independent Ryukyu Kingdom. However once the Americans are gone so will most of the nationals governments attention. When the bases leave so will the mainland companies. Most of the bad things can be traced to the American bases. After they are gone it will be up to the people of Okinawa to make it as there will be no more excuses.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Like Russia, the U.S. should had just kept the islands. A lot less headaches for both sides.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Yuri: "An independent Ryukyu Kingdom would also end the US bases. They would be too expensive for the Americans to operate. As for the Chinese "threat" they would be delighted at the prospect of an independent Ryukyu Kingdom."

When the Singapore separated from Malaysia back in 1965, many doom Sayers like you predicted it will be end of the world. When British troop left from Singapore, many doom sayers like you predicted Sky will fall and flood will rise.

In 2014, Singapore is more prosperous, successful with own modernized Arm force. Malaysia is just the water supplier for them. If you still alive after seven decades, You will be amazed to see that Okinawa has transformed as independent, prosperous and successful nation like Singapore.

When you go to Nagaski, Yokohama and some parts of Japan, there are truck load of ethnic Chinese of J citizens are busily making money instead of heated debate. The slogan of Chinese is money. It is good for Okinawa which has been the poorest prefecture of Japan for a long time. If Ryukyuans want to prosperous, they have to follow the way of Hong Kong and Singapore model. Not from the negative and hopeless posts of forum.

Whether you like it or not, Ryuku has been tribunal state of ancient China in history. They have been forced to pay the ransom to ancient Japan too. It does not mind about repeating the same history again. It is the internal business of residents.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

On February 12, 2008, the National Police Agency (of Japan) or NPA, released its annual criminal statistics that included activity within the Okinawan prefecture. These findings held American soldiers responsible for 53 crimes per 10,000 U.S. male servicemen, while Okinawan males held a crime rate of 366 crimes per 10,000. The crime rate found a U.S. servicemen in Okinawa to be 86% less likely to commit a crime than that of an Okinawan male

1 ( +2 / -1 )

It seems there are some among us who do not wish to face facts:

74% of Okinawans view the concentration of U.S. military bases in Okinawa as discrimination

http://english.ryukyushimpo.jp/2014/02/05/13036/

Okinawans want the US bases OFF their island.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Criminal? US Military Court give verdict of not guilty usually, So, their conviction rate is low.

if `53 per 10,000 crime by US Servicemen in Okinawa, when bye bye yankees are completed, at least 53 per 10,000 criminals will be gone out of Okinawa. After war, B52 fire bombed dities and Hiroshima Nagasaki were nothing but are they still poor? ASurely Okinawa will not be same as current situation.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

bass4funkFeb. 14, 2014 - 10:06AM JST

How dare you say the US (military) brings a lot of money to the Islands? This is another example of Bizarro's irresponsible mumbo jumbo. Read my posting on another thread, part of which I re-post here:

According to the Okinawa Prefectural Government's official documents, Okinawa's gross domestic income in 2009 was about 4 billion dollars ($3,977,000,000; conversion based on $1 = 99), of which the military base revenue accounted for about 20 million dollars ($20,682,000). Percentage-wise, the base revenue was 5.2 percent of the gross domestic income of that year, quite a drop from 1972 when the ratio was 15.5 percent.

Of 5.2 percent of the base revenue, 1.5 percent was the direct contribution by U.S. service members and their dependents for their patronizing of local bars, restaurants, souvenir shops and what not. The rest (3.7 %), mainly base workers' salaries and land rents, was, and still is, borne by Japanese taxpayers (Okinawans included, of course) in the name of "host nation support".

3 ( +7 / -4 )

toshiko

Criminal? US Military Court give verdict of not guilty usually, So, their conviction rate is low.

Nope. These are figures of the National Police Agency (Japanese) which don't include only convictions but count all reported/committed crimes. In other words they count all reported crimes, even ones that were ultimately not prosecuted (either by the Japanese Prosecutors or the UCMJ) or settled out of court, in their numbers. This goes for both crimes committed by Japanese citizens as well as foreign nationals (including U.S. SOFA personnel). The inflammatory claim that U.S military personnel are responsible for a disproportionate percentage of crimes, particularly violent crimes, on Okinawa has been debunked many many times. It's simply not true.

After war, B52 fire bombed dities (sic) and Hiroshima Nagasaki were nothing...

Fact check: B52 bombers didn't exist during WWII and were only introduced in the late 1950's. Though I didn't major in history, I've studied enough of it to be preeetty certain that President Eisenhower didn't bomb Hiroshima or Nagasaki with B52s...

1 ( +2 / -1 )

All the numbers that Okinawa media uses is from a Prefecture that has a charter to always show negative numbers against anyone pro-base. The people that use these numbers are so naive...give pro-base Okinawans an oppurtunity to voice there opinions on the same media as anti-base Okinawans use.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

this is a classic example of NIMBY. most japanese want a strong military alliance with the US, but they just don't want it in their backyard. they don't want the "crime," accidents and noise associated with holding a base, but they still want protection. so in the end, okinawa will be forced to keep practically all the bases.

Excellent point, very, very true indeed.

The US should apologize.. and leave the island for Guam or back here in Hawaii. In Hawaii Pearl Harbor and 10 other military facilities are important part of economy.. and government funding. Maybe some feel that Okinawa should be its own country...instead of just the Hawaii of Japan.

What the heck for???

@eiji

Americans actually receives money (roughly $4 billion a year?) from Japan just by stationing the bases in Okinawa. America doesn't get a better deal than that. And you wonder why people think that Japan is America's vassal state...

If it bothers you that bad, do something about it, but I just have a feeling knowing J-politics, no matter what, the US is not leaving. But it does make for a good night TV drama.

@bertie

It seems there are some among us who do not wish to face facts:

Facts goes both ways, Bertie. Or reality, putting it more bluntly.

74% of Okinawans view the concentration of U.S. military bases in Okinawa as discrimination.

Okinawans want the US bases OFF their island.

But that's not going to happen.

Bertie, we get it, we get it, you want the US military gone, so I will say this, why don't you lead the charge as one of the foreigners living in Okinawa that is advocating for a removal of all US bases, write letters, get on TV, so you can reach a wider audience, same goes for radio, print, online, get on the bully pulpit, maybe as a foreigner, you might even more publicity and if you can speak Japanese, that's an added bonus and let's see where that gets you. Personally, I don't think you have a chance, given the climate of how politicians govern, it's worth a shot, but if you truly believe in something, if you want to be part of the solution, then you need to become pro-active.

@voiceofokinawa

How dare you say the US (military) brings a lot of money to the Islands? This is another example of Bizarro's irresponsible mumbo jumbo.

Let's say for hypothetical arguments sake, that the US would do a complete withdrawal. How would Okinawa bring in MUCH needed revenue and I mean to the point where the country would shine like a star! And please don't say, tourism! Let's hear some real mumbo jumbo.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

bass4funk (Feb. 14, 2014 - 04:36PM JST)

You post:

Let's say for hypothetical arguments sake, that the US would do a complete withdrawal. How would Okinawa bring in MUCH needed revenue and I mean to the point where the country would shine like a star! And please don't say, tourism! Let's hear some real mumbo jumbo.

Mobsters of a crime syndicate could ask people in their turf what would happen if they moved out from the area, leaving the town without due revenues and protection from possible atttacks by rival syndicates? "Don't you understand this simple logic, stupid?" they may say.

Well, don't you see your logic is nothing different from mobsters'? It's none of the mobsters' business how to deal with local economy after they left the town.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

SmithinJapan:

They decided then that that is how they should use the land, and the same will happen in Nago when the base is relocated.<

Disagree - Times are different

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Now I don't know the history of the Ryukyuu Kingdom, but, if you all want to be your own country, then do something

If you read the articles from J media regularly, the residents have been doing non violent movement for something for sometimes. They do not want the violent action at the moment. Provoking them to be violent like Russian Roulette for people with uniforms. According the ancient bible of the Art of War, if the enemy is invisible, it will control the rival fate.

Former President Bush infamous phrase of "Bring them on". After many years, he said he was so regret about making that provocative and inflammable speech because it have increased the volume of road side bombs and body bags.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

If the US Bases would leave then the Chinese or North Korean Bases would definitely replaced them..........the Japanese would then rebuild the Imperial Army then WW3 would start....NATO or the US Bases are Neutralizers. In Germany, the US Military gradually exits because USSR do not exist anymore, if there are threats then NATO which is EU lead Military would then support....

As long as China and North Korea are there it is not wise that US Bases would leave Japan. If Japan, China and North Korea would join forces like an Asian version of NATO then most likely US Bases is not required.

Think again Okinawa people because you are for sure the first to be targeted bacause you far away and scattered.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

US is the one that is starting illegal wars left and right since the bush administration. US is the one with the world domination plan.

Big bad china and the good, glorious and heroic America! Yeah, right. This American narcissistic need for heroism need to end.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

most of the foreigners who are squatters seems to be bickering and posting about things here they dont know. What if native Japanese said its the same posters who live in Japan and not those who moved here and want to bring their political views here. Most Japanese dont get involved in politics its the foreigners from the outside just like the military that cause problems. Its ok for foreigners to voice opinion but just as you say the military should leave most Japanese would rather see ALL foreigners leave and then culture and way of life would be better for people of Japan dont think we dont think this we just dont tell you just smile.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Fact check: B52 bombers didn't exist during WWII and were only introduced in the late 1950's. Though I didn't major in history, I've studied enough of it to be preeetty certain that President Eisenhower didn't bomb Hiroshima or Nagasaki with B52s...

Pretty lame to do a song and dance over getting a war plane's number's confused. Yeah, I am going to guess that toshiko does not get all hot and sweaty at the sight of flying death toys and therefore cannot tell them apart. Hardly changes the fact that America bombed the hell out of Japanese civilian cities, does it? Hardly changes the fact that Okinawans don't want these boys and their war toys around anymore either. And it also hardly changes the fact that Hiroshima and Nagasaki rose from devastation to riches without the U.S. bases that are dragging Okinawa down. That is probably because, in part, they don't have U.S. bases dragging them down! Whodathunkit?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I first started taking part in anti-base protests in 1967 when I was 20 years old. I have stood toe to toe against a U.S. Army MP with a rifle and a sheathed bayonet and I was beaten on several occasions by MP's using Night Sticks. I am 66 years old now and have never known an Okinawa without a U.S. base and I probably never will. We fought very hard for reversion because we thought and were led to believe that the Japanese Govt. was going to remove the bases. We were betrayed by the Japanese Govt. because not only didn't they remove the bases but they started using our tax money to keep them here.

Unless you are Okinawan, it is hard to understand our feelings but please try to understand and put yourselves in our position of being the poorest prefecture in Japan, treated as 2nd class citizens in our own country, and having our best land occupied by massive U.S. bases and only being able to look through the fences.

If some bases are needed for defense I can live with that but please don't try to say that these U.S. Military Resorts that are currently on Okinawa are absolutely necessary because they are not and please don't say that MCAS Futenma has to be relocated to Henoko because it doesn't.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

USN: my goofing B 29, BTW, Truman ordered A Bomb. B29 scared us daily in Boku-go. When B 29 was coming, schools made us go back to home and stay in Bokugo. Mot as bad as Okinawa, though. A Bombs were ordered by Truman, not FDR.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

ostrune2 what would of the Americans done with the Okinawa people? Ethic cleansing?

Bass 4 Funk, So you feel proud as an American when they are occupying Okinawa by force? You know as well as myself if the people of Okinawa had a choice all of the bases would be closed. America who spouts freedom but denies it to others. Doublethink Orwellian thinking at its best!

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Edmund Fitzgerald

Pretty lame to do a song and dance over getting a war plane's number's confused.

It wasn't a song and dance, merely a correcting of erroneous information in someone's post. Toshiko is normally very particular with facts in her posts so I was merely keeping her honest.

Yeah, I am going to guess that toshiko does not get all hot and sweaty at the sight of flying death toys and therefore cannot tell them apart.

Actually, I do expect her to know the difference having grown up during WWII and because of the historical significance the aircraft gained after the war for its two A-Bomb missions. The B-29 was common knowledge in Japan throughout the populace because of the fear it invoked, having been the single aircraft responsible for the bombing of Japanese mainland cities and the only face of the enemy that Japanese civilians "saw". My mother, who like Toshiko lived through those air raids, knew only too well what a B-29 was, unfortunately.

Hardly changes the fact that America bombed the hell out of Japanese civilian cities, does it?

Carpet bombing of civilian cities was a widespread and morally acceptable (and legal per international law at the time) method of warfare up to and during WWII. The issue of whether any importance should be placed on the protection of civilian non-combatants wasn't considered until AFTER WWII; that's why it wasn't taken up until in the fourth treaty of the Geneva Convention in 1949. Both the Allies as well as the Axis Powers, particularly Japan, conducted widespread bombing of cities, so really, it isn't very reasonable or rational for you to condemn WWII tactics, which were the norm then, based on your 21st century morals.

Hardly changes the fact that Okinawans don't want these boys and their war toys around anymore either.

Some Okinawans don't want the US military on their island, not all as you imply. To the contrary, it's nowhere near a majority either.

And it also hardly changes the fact that Hiroshima and Nagasaki rose from devastation to riches without the U.S. bases that are dragging Okinawa down. That is probably because, in part, they don't have U.S. bases dragging them down! Whodathunkit?

Talk about a false premise leading to a false conclusion. You're not seriously suggesting that pre-war Okinawa was comparable to or even remotely resembled pre-war Nagasaki and Hiroshima are you? On second thought, you probably are... RME

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

@voiceofokinawa

Mobsters of a crime syndicate could ask people in their turf what would happen if they moved out from the area, leaving the town without due revenues and protection from possible atttacks by rival syndicates? "Don't you understand this simple logic, stupid?" they may say.

I'm from Long Beach, CA. I survived it, so what's your analogy?

Well, don't you see your logic is nothing different from mobsters'? It's none of the mobsters' business how to deal with local economy after they left the town.

So you're referring to the US as mobsters? And just when you thought, the conversation couldn't stoop any lower....

@eiji

US is the one that is starting illegal wars left and right since the bush administration. US is the one with the world domination plan.

Well, you're wrong on that, but that's for a different thread. And dominate? Seriously now.....

Big bad china and the good, glorious and heroic America! Yeah, right. This American narcissistic need for heroism need to end.

No one said that. Those were your words. Either your angry at China or your jealous of the US, which is it?

@yuriotani

So you feel proud as an American when they are occupying Okinawa by force?

Has NOTHING to do with feeling proud, or want, it has everything to do with facts and reality. That's all I go by.

You know as well as myself if the people of Okinawa had a choice all of the bases would be closed. America who spouts freedom but denies it to others. Doublethink Orwellian thinking at its best!

Yes, but you also know full well as I do, all the screaming, protests, temper tantrums, the Kennedy dog and pony show will NOT change one iota of the situation and the US military will stay in Japan, most likely continue to stay in Okinawa until further notice. The Okinawans have freedom, they are not in chains, they can go outside, leave the island, leave their homes, please don't even try to make that weak argument.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

I feel that US Forces overstayed on Okinawa and when I see China and Japan are not going to war, US Military member should be back to their home country. Don't you feel sorry for youngsters stuck in unfriendly foreign country while they could attend colleges to attend part time in USA? And can visit their family? If they are assigned in Camp Pendleton, they can go to Orange County and watch baseball games, go Disneyland, Knot;s Burry Farm, beacjes. They enlisted but I am very sure they get scared to be sent to middle east. Send them back to USA. Let Okinawan people decide their area by themselves. Hopefully Japan Inc will create industries in Okinawa instead of Indonesia, Malayasia, etc. At least Okinawan people have no language problem. Japanese automakers pulled out Austraalia. Last remained Toyota is pulling out entirely. Aussie Govt stated it didn't mattert Aussie will not have auto industry. Gradually Japan Inc, can come to Okinawa? They even created factories in Mexico.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Okinawa, as the frontline prefecture of the Japan-U.S. alliance, has been forced” to bear the bulk of responsibility, including the accidents and crimes that come with having the bases

I agree. The US should to ahead and leave. And when the time comes the Mayor can complain about being forced to bear the responsibility of hosting the Chinese military for the next 68 years - including the accidents and crimes that come along with them. By the looks of it, the Japanese are going to have to get used to being under the Chinese thumb in the near future anyway. Why not just get on with it. Then the Americans can go home and tend to their own problems.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The truth of the matter is that due to the strategic importance of Okinawa is that even if the US military did completely leave the JSDF would simply take their place.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

USNinJapan2Feb. 14, 2014 - 03:32PM JST The inflammatory claim that U.S military personnel are responsible for a disproportionate percentage of crimes, particularly violent crimes, on Okinawa has been debunked many many times. It's simply not true.

Okinawans cite a high number of crimes committed by U.S. military, dependent and civilian personnel. However, a U.S. State Department in the country said the per capita crime rate for U.S. personnel in Okinawa is lower than that of the local populace.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

bass4funk (Feb. 15, 2014 - 01:53AM JST):

U.S. service members stationed in Okinawa may be heroes for people back home. They are deployed far from home to defend the nation's interests -- its freedom, democracy and way of life. The irony is that in order to accomplish this mission, they have to occupy large swaths of foreign land and be guaranteed the free use of land, sea and airspace there.

If you looked at Okinawa from the sky, you would never fail to see the hard fact that Okinawans were merely allowed to live in congested land areas unused by the U.S. military. Some critiques aptly describe the situation by saying, "It's not the U.S. bases that are in Okinawa but it's Okinawa that is in the U.S. bases."

Apparently, you don't know how these bases came into being. Study it. Don't simply imagine the WW II-victorious U.S. armed forces have every right to using these islands as if occupation was still going.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

voiceofokinawaFeb. 15, 2014 - 07:06AM JST The irony is that in order to accomplish this mission, they have to occupy large swaths of foreign land and be guaranteed the free use of land, sea and airspace there.

That is the decision your Japanese goverment made by having more than half of the U.S. bases in Okinawa. The Japanese goverment had choices to lessen the burden by distributing the responsibilites to other prefectures in Honshu, but they didn't.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@toshiko

Sorry, I couldn't get where you were going with that last comment.

@voiceofokinawa

U.S. service members stationed in Okinawa may be heroes for people back home. They are deployed far from home to defend the nation's interests -- its freedom, democracy and way of life. The irony is that in order to accomplish this mission, they have to occupy large swaths of foreign land and be guaranteed the free use of land, sea and airspace there.

Yes, they do and?

Apparently, you don't know how these bases came into being. Study it. Don't simply imagine the WW II-victorious U.S. armed forces have every right to using these islands as if occupation was still going.

I did and I know the history, but as sfjp330 correctly pointed out, he was faster than me, he's exactly right. This is where I don't get the animosity from. It wasn't that the US alone decided on building and expanding the bases in their. But it seems like people here with their obvious bias, rose-colored, anti-Americanism, cannot see this....or wish not to. If you want to protest about the military's behavior and conduct, I don't have a problem with that, if it's legit, but to throw anger at The military for occupying so much land is not done without the allowance of the Japanese government and on that point, that's where you need to take your grievance at.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

@USNinJapan2 "Carpet bombings of civilian cities was a widespread and morally acceptable(and legal per international law at the time) method of warfare up to and during WW II"

Widespread only among american and british pilots, perhaps.By comparison, Soviet bombers attacked military facilities i.e. plants and factories in NAZI Germany during WW II. There is neither glory nor courage to bomb innocent civilians on cities and towns. Only dirty cowards can do it.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

That is the decision your Japanese goverment made

Both the government and U.S. military are to blame. Both made conscious and unreasonable decisions in this deal. It has taken two to tango, therefore both are fairly condemned and protested.

I have stood toe to toe against a U.S. Army MP with a rifle and a sheathed bayonet

Another one in a literal army who claim to care about Japan, but only care about themselves and their power trips and power paraphernalia. The soldiers are all just as guilty as the governments and military leaders for being the legs propping this situation up.

Carpet bombing of civilian cities was a widespread and morally acceptable (and legal per international law at the time)

If you think morals and laws are one in the same, you know nothing about morals obviously. And I doubt you care to know.

But in fact, bombardment of cities was illegal as per conventions America signed. The immorality is so beyond question and beyond the pale its ridiculous that you would attempt to question it. But what can we expect from someone who makes such a big deal over an war plane's numerical designation?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

bass 4 funk, I am not "anti-American" unless that is the definition of people who disagree with the American military. America is for freedom for themselves only. The American bases have cut the island in 2 at spots. Often people on one side in need of emergency treatment die because the roads are too congested at the places where they can go from one side to another. A Okinawan male died on Kadena AFB of choking because the Americans refused to help him. The American military had no excuse and it took too long for the Okinawa rescue vehicle to get on site. Am sure it was searched at the gate.

The American military occupies Okinawa today as they have since 1945. They still control our airspace and sea around our home. They still go out and take charge of any place in Okinawa for "security" reasons. The American military does not respect the people of Okinawa. I grew up under the worse of conditions. I was punished by the censored for speaking our native language. English is my 3rd language. Everything had to be approved by the American military. It is better today but the base people still try and force the people of Okinawa to do there will. Go there and see how they act, they are unbelievable!

The only way the USA will get their new base is by force. Will the marines use force to dislodge protestors? Will history repeat itself?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@YuriOtani

"They still go out and take charge of any place in Okinawa for "security" reasons".

When Americans keep singing rather old and boring songs about ultimate role of Okinawa bases for protection of Japanese soil say, in case of a possible aggression from Chinese or Russian sides, it's a cheap lie. In case of a full-scale military conflict between regional powers, Okinawa bases, as primary target zones, will be annihilated in a few minutes by massive strike of ballistic and cruise missiles. Such kind of military operations are supposed to apply both in Russia and China since Cold War times. The real purpose of those bases is to support various military operations of US Military and Naval Forces in remote regions. For instance, refueling of airplanes, transit of troops and military hardware etc. So, bases on Okinawa serve interests of the USA only, not people of Japan or Okinawans. Further, any soldier who wastes his time by drinking and dating local girls, often committing infamous crimes, is not a combatant by definition. He has neither proper skills of a warrior, nor high moral background. Just a useless piece of trash.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

All of the posters saying that the Japanese Govt. is mainly to blame for the amount and size of the U.S. bases that are currently here are correct and our most of our anger should be directed at the anti-Okinawan bureaucrats in Tokyo and their political lackeys. The Japanese Govt. have built really nice Centrally Air Conditioned homes for Military Families. How many Okinawan families do you think live in Centrally Air Conditioned homes? The Japanese Govt. have built better schools for Military Dependent Children than they have for the Okinawan children. The Japanese Govt. have built Golf Courses, on base Gyms, Base Clubs and other leisure facilities that have nothing to do with military capabilities.

The bases should be attacked not because they are Military Bases but because most of the land is used for facilities that have nothing to do with providing a capable defense of Japan.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Ms Kennedy is not known as a puppet. So, I do hope she will figure out some kind of solution to satisfy a majority of Okinawan and also figure out the controversial Military court system in Japan. Just hoping. BTW. One of News in our area showed a new F something pretty Jet rotating on air. No noise, it said.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

sfjp330; bass4funk:

When they discuss the U.S. military presence in Japan in general and in Okinawa in particular, many people do so with the taken-for-granted premise that the function of U.S. bases or the U.S. military presence, which I call pseudo-occupation, must be maintained as constantly and invariably as it was during the Occupation era.

So when there were violent anti-U.S. base movements storming in mainland Japan in the late 1950's, Washington reluctantly moved some Marine bases from Gifu and Yamanashi Prefectures to still-U.S.-occupied Okinawa, thus maintaining the status quo as it had been. Naturally, Tokyo lent a hand to Washington in this whole arrangement. U.S. bases in Okinawa increased their overall size almost twofold at this time.

Both bass4funk,and sfjp330 blame Tokyo, saying that the U.S. military forces occupying so much land in Okinawa is Tokyo's fault. Very much so, but they disregard the fact that it was Washington, for starters, that coerced Japan to provide as many bases as the U.S. military needed. This U.S. stance as gaining unrestrained rights to having bases anywhere in Japan for as long as and to the extent the U.S. military desired harks back to John Foster Dulles.

What one may call the Dulles doctrine is still alive and effective, 63 years after the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty was signed, dictating every nook and cranny of the Japan-U.S. military relations today. The Dulles doctrine is taken for granted when negotiators from both countries negotiate matters concerning U.S. military realignment in Japan, the validity of which nobody questions but which I think is very, very absurd and harmful for future bilateral relations.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

If Ozawa and Hatoyama weren't shot down by Washington, then there would have been a complete reform of Japanese politics and the bases would probably have been driven out. And we would not have had the current LDP. A missed opportunity!

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@toshiko

Ms Kennedy is not known as a puppet. So, I do hope she will figure out some kind of solution to satisfy a majority of Okinawan and also figure out the controversial Military court system in Japan.

Kennedy?? Seriously, really? Good luck with that.

@voiceofokinawa

Both bass4funk,and sfjp330 blame Tokyo, saying that the U.S. military forces occupying so much land in Okinawa is Tokyo's fault. Very much so, but they disregard the fact that it was Washington, for starters, that coerced Japan to provide as many bases as the U.S. military needed.

Sorry, you can try and put the sole blame on the US, but it just makes you look silly. As was pointed out, the problem belongs to both sides and even if Japan WERE coerced, Japan gave the go ahead. Remember, it takes two to tango.

This U.S. stance as gaining unrestrained rights to having bases anywhere in Japan for as long as and to the extent the U.S. military desired harks back to John Foster Dulles.

Again, Japan would not be in this mess, had it not been the aggressor 70 years ago, we wouldn't be having this conversation now. Handle it.

@yuriotani

I am not "anti-American" unless that is the definition of people who disagree with the American military. America is for freedom for themselves only.

After all these years, I could have sworn you were, what a surprise.

The American bases have cut the island in 2 at spots. Often people on one side in need of emergency treatment die because the roads are too congested at the places where they can go from one side to another. A Okinawan male died on Kadena AFB of choking because the Americans refused to help him. The American military had no excuse and it took too long for the Okinawa rescue vehicle to get on site. Am sure it was searched at the gate.

That situation could have happened if the person were Okinawan, you're just making accusations that ONLY Americans refused to help this man. That could have happened with anyone of any race or nationality.

The American military occupies Okinawa today as they have since 1945.

And why is that?

They still control our airspace and sea around our home. They still go out and take charge of any place in Okinawa for "security" reasons. The American military does not respect the people of Okinawa.

And vice versa. This is a problem BOTH sides need to seriously work on.

I grew up under the worse of conditions. I was punished by the censored for speaking our native language. English is my 3rd language. Everything had to be approved by the American military. It is better today but the base people still try and force the people of Okinawa to do there will. Go there and see how they act, they are unbelievable!

Been there many times. I have met a few rude guys in the military and also Okinawans, bottom-line, both sides can be a serious headache and that's serious NO SPIN!

The only way the USA will get their new base is by force.

Trust me, that won't happen. if it happens, it happens,the protesters won't be in any position to block anything.

Will the marines use force to dislodge protestors? Will history repeat itself?

If it's within the law or a reason to do so, perhaps.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

@bass4fumk: Instead of crowding comment areas with your picking on other comment writers, how about write your thesis on contents of article for change. Just thesis, I hope you will show us your concrete thesis. .

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@ toshiko

You lead the way first, please.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Bertie said:

It seems there are some among us who do not wish to face facts:

You say facts but then you quote the most anti-base news outlet on the island? Again, hardly a very trusting "fact" source.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

But it's also a fact that the bases are going nowhere, some of you don't want to face reality. You complain and complain and nothing changes. The harsh reality is, unless, BOTH sides completely agree to relocate or move the bases entirely off the islands, it will NOT happen and getting angry or sniping sly ad Homs or Caroline Kennedy won't change that fact, but when I or other point that out, we're the bad people. It's serious time to grow up and deal with the situation. The ONLY thing you can do is go to the source Tokyo and Washington to the actual leaders in charge and make a complaint, follow all the proper procedures and just see where the chips may fall. If they don't respond or listen or just give you a boring speech, just let it go. It's been 70 years, if both sides were really serious, this headache would've been resolved a long, long time ago. That's a cold wake up fact.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

bass4funk (Feb. 16, 2014 - 12:08AM JST),

Sorry, you can try and put the sole blame on the US, but it just makes you look silly. As was pointed out, the problem belongs to both sides and even if Japan WERE coerced, Japan gave the go ahead. Remember, it takes two to tango.

You suggest it's not only the U.S. but also Japan that are to blame for the messy situation in Okinawa, saying it takes two to tango. True, it takes two dancers to tango. But, mind you, it was always the U.S. side that took the initiative to dance and conspire. Post-war Japan could do nothing but follow what was dictated to it by the master.

Again, Japan would not be in this mess, had it not been the aggressor 70 years ago, we wouldn't be having this conversation now. Handle it.

So, in your view, retaliation against Imperial Japan is still going on and Okinawa is taking the full brunt of it?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@voiceofokinawa

it was always the U.S. side that took the initiative to dance and conspire. Post-war Japan could do nothing but follow what was dictated to it by the master.

Again, Japan only has itself to blame. Had it not done what it did. We wouldn't be on JT discussing this.

So, in your view, retaliation against Imperial Japan is still going on and Okinawa is taking the full brunt of it?

Hey, if you see it like that, you have the right to feel so.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

"Okinawa, as the frontline prefecture of the Japan-U.S. alliance, has been forced” to bear the bulk of responsibility, including the accidents and crimes that come with having the bases"

As if there weren't any accidents or crimes not related to the bases.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

bass4funk (Feb. 16, 2014 - 08:39AM JST):

On another thread ("Hundreds rally against Okinawa base move ..."), you positively confirmed it when I wrote, "the U.S. military presence is ascribed to the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, a provision of which stipulates U.S. bases are planted here for the defense of Japan."

Now, concerning the U.S. military presence in Okinawa, you say: "Japan only has itself to blame. Had it not done what it did, we wouldn't be on JT discussing this." To paraphrase what you write here, it goes like this. Had Japan not started war against the U.S. by attacking Pearl Harbor, this messy problem involving Okinawa wouldn't have occurred. Japan is solely to blame. All responsibility rests with Japan.

If what you say is truly a good reason for this excessive U.S. military presence in Okinawa, then what is stated in the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty would become sheer nonsense -- a make-believe and nothing but hocus-pocus.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Japan only has itself to blame

In what way are the people living now in Okinawa, or in Japan, to blame for what happened over 70 years ago?

1 ( +3 / -3 )

The Okinawans are to blame because they were a part of Japan and lost the war. The Okinawans are to blame because they wanted to remain close to the land they were forced of off and built too close to the base. The Okinawans are to blame because they got married and had children and increased the population and now they need more land. The Okinawans are to blame because they bought so many cars and trucks that it causes the poor Americans to be stuck in traffic. The Okinawans are to blame because if they weren't so many of them the U.S. Military could have 5 or 6 Golf Courses instead of only 4.

The U.S. Military and the Japanese Govt. especially the LDP are to blame for the current situation in Okinawa. How can you blame the poorest people in Japan and a people who have no power whatsoever when it comes to Japan politics for their situation. The Okinawan people instead of being blamed should be thanked for enduring this situation for almost 70 years and for allowing the U.S. Military to enjoy one of the best duty stations especially for families in the world and allowing the Mainland Japanese to be protected by the U.S. bases without having to host them and that goes for deadbeat countries like the Philippines who kicked the U.S out but want the Okinawan people to bear the burden of the bases to protect their sorry ass.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Eiji Takano-san,

If Ozawa and Hatoyama weren't shot down by Washington, then there would have been a complete reform of Japanese politics and the bases would probably have been driven out. And we would not have had the current LDP. A missed opportunity!

Exactly!

We had the chance and we blew it!

I'm so pleased that among all the US government propaganda in this discussion, someone cuts through the crap and writes the truth.

Thank you for your post!

Hatoyama was not the greatest, but Ozawa was very bright. Too bright. He got framed and pushed out!

As it is, we are left with an American puppet government.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Voiceofokinawa

Had Japan not started war against the U.S. by attacking Pearl Harbor, this messy problem involving Okinawa wouldn't have occurred. Japan is solely to blame. All responsibility rests with Japan.

Especially back then. Yes, with the exception, that I do believe that the US military should behave in an responsible manner because they are on foreign soil, but make no bones about it, Japan is to blame for the sole reason of the US being here in the first place. Fast forward, the politicians on both sides need to sit down and have a rational discussion as to how to deal with these alledged instances.

If what you say is truly a good reason for this excessive U.S. military presence in Okinawa, then what is stated in the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty would become sheer nonsense -- a make-believe and nothing but hocus-pocus.

If you want to believe that. You have the right to that opinion.

@cleo

In what way are the people living now in Okinawa, or in Japan, to blame for what happened over 70 years ago?

I suggest you "Check" with you history books.

The U.S. Military and the Japanese Govt. especially the LDP are to blame for the current situation in Okinawa.

I completely agree.

@bertie

I'm so pleased that among all the US government propaganda in this discussion, someone cuts through the crap and writes the truth.

Flattery will get you nowhere.

As it is, we are left with an American puppet government.

You believe that?? Come on now....

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

It's true that the responsibility lies with Japan. But it doesn't help that the Washington shot down the very people that tried to put Japan on the equal grounds with the US and have a discussion. That was Ozawa and Hatoyama of DJP. You had two incompetent PMs later because they didn't want to follow the same fate as those two. I mean Hilary has basically said, "we don't care that your leader has changed! you are still going to do what we tell you to do! And that is having bases in Okinawa!".

So now you have a broken LDP that is very confused and still dependent on the US. The Japanese people are even more confused because they didn't quite get the change and the break from the LDP that they were hoping for. People were sick and tired of the LDP, but DJP couldn't get them what they wanted due to US obstructions.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@eiji

"we don't care that your leader has changed! you are still going to do what we tell you to do! And that is having bases in Okinawa!".

Where and which article did Hilary say that exact quote you were referring to?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Wasn't Hilary quiet nice first lady American sympathized for her husband's infidelity affair? Hilary began politicking after she delcared to oppose Obama. Carolyn opposed Hilary. A long time ago. Wasn't she very busy with Middle East situations after she was recruited to Secretary of State?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Here it is:

Secretary Clinton spoke with satisfaction of the deal: "I think that a responsible nation follows the agreements that have been entered into, and the agreement that I signed today with Foreign Minister Nakasone is one between our two nations, regardless of who's in power." What she meant was this: You in the DPJ had better learn which side your bread is buttered on.

http://www.japanfocus.org/-Gavan-McCormack/3250

Btw, this is a very good analysis of the whole Henoko base nonsense, in 2009:

The Battle of Okinawa 2009: Obama vs Hatoyama

The making of an unequal, unconstitutional, illegal, colonial and deceitful US-Japan agreement.

Yes We Can – But You Can’t

Elections at the end of August gave Japan a new government, headed by Hatoyama Yukio. In electing him and his Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), the Japanese people, like the American people less than a year earlier, were opting for change – a new relationship with both Asia and the US, including a much more equal one with the latter. Remarkably, however, what followed on the part of the Obama administration has been a campaign of unrelenting pressure to block any such change.

So the whole thing is pretty much illegal, unconstitutional and unequal, and the US is being dictatorial by making Japan pay $6 billion (WTF?) just to transfer some bases from Hawaii to Henoko.

It is time to end this unequal US-Japan relation.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@eiji

Secretary Clinton spoke with satisfaction of the deal: "I think that a responsible nation follows the agreements that have been entered into, and the agreement that I signed today with Foreign Minister Nakasone is one between our two nations, regardless of who's in power." What she meant was this: You in the DPJ had better learn which side your bread is buttered on.

Ok, then she didn't say that quote verbatim. You were just over exaggerating and trying to embellish your interpretation of what she said, that significantly clarifies everything.

So the whole thing is pretty much illegal, unconstitutional and unequal, and the US is being dictatorial by making Japan pay $6 billion (WTF?) just to transfer some bases from Hawaii to Henoko.

It is time to end this unequal US-Japan relation.

Ok, so please enlighten us as to how you will do this. If you don't have a viable solution and a plan of action that will be immediately implemented and the masses, not a small minority protesters, come together, you might have something, if not, then you need to reevaluate your point of view.

@voiceofokinawa

On the contrary, it just means, that you have a right to believe as you do and NO ONE can or has the right to change that opinion, even of you are factually wrong, because having an opinion is NOT a wrong thing. Has nothing to do with cowardice or a person NOT winning. A NO WIN would be an individual that cannot or will NOT engage in the debate and rather NOT comment or hide, rather than to say something or something wrong.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

bass4funk

Ok, then she didn't say that quote verbatim. You were just over exaggerating and trying to embellish your interpretation of what she said, that significantly clarifies everything.

It's not an over-exaggeration, you simply don't understand the context in the way she said it. She is basically saying that "We don't care that the ruling party of your country has changed, you are still going to do what LDP has agreed to do". That is quite unbelievable. She's saying that the demands of the new ruling party is irrelevant, even though that's the entire reason why DJP was elected in the first place.

bass4funk

Ok, so please enlighten us as to how you will do this. If you don't have a viable solution and a plan of action that will be immediately implemented and the masses, not a small minority protesters, come together, you might have something, if not, then you need to reevaluate your point of view.

Are you freaking kidding me? The people of Nago have unanimously opposed to the building of the base in Henoko, but Washington is saying no, and the Tokyo government is complying to Washington.

If the people say "no", then any democratic nation would respect the wishes of the people.

More proof that Japan is NOT a democratic nation, and the US is not helping:

It seems that the Abe government intended to ignore the electoral outcome, and that it was fundamentally shifting its approach to Nago. Till January 19, it had insisted that it would engage in patient and “sincere” explanation to secure the consent of local representative institutions and officials. Afterwards, it declared that the base would be built even if it meant trampling on the wishes of the surrounding communities, moving without delay towards the imposition of a massive new military complex by the same means as the original network of US bases had been built during the 1950s – by bayonet and bulldozer. As the Ryukyu shimpo’s editorial writer put it,

“However much one may search, it seems likely that there is no democratic state in the world that so blatantly tramples on the will of the people.”

http://www.japanfocus.org/-Gavan-McCormack/4068

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I was wrong. Hillary was the first female Senator of NY after first lady, She was more concerned of child welfare and protecting her husband. There is no indication she neglecting her pushing middle east situation and talked about Japan. I guess she was not familiar with Japan then, Or was she?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Eiji Takano-san,

The Japan Focus site is an excellent source for anyone wanting to find out what is really going on in Okinawa.

Of course, if anyone prefers to go with the official propaganda, there is that too.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@eiji

It's not an over-exaggeration, you simply don't understand the context in the way she said it. She is basically saying that "We don't care that the ruling party of your country has changed, you are still going to do what LDP has agreed to do". That is quite unbelievable. She's saying that the demands of the new ruling party is irrelevant, even though that's the entire reason why DJP was elected in the first place.

You keep saying that, but show me proof that Clinton actually meant those words and was trying to convey that message unequivocally. If not. Then you just throwing out pure speculations and false accusations based on a hunch more or less.

Are you freaking kidding me? The people of Nago have unanimously opposed to the building of the base in Henoko, but Washington is saying no, and the Tokyo government is complying to Washington.

So then BOTH sides agreed to it.

If the people say "no", then any democratic nation would respect the wishes of the people.

People nowadays throw that word so loosely.

More proof that Japan is NOT a democratic nation, and the US is not helping:

If Japan were not a democratic nation you wouldn't see people protesting whenever they want, there'd be no Facebook, Twitter etc. of course it's a Democratic country, maybe NOT the way YOU want it to be, but it's Democratic nevertheless.

“However much one may search, it seems likely that there is no democratic state in the world that so blatantly tramples on the will of the people.”

You can't speak for everyone, that is one persons opinion on the situation. You can make that kind of argument everywhere.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

I think the "(Japan) follows the agreements that have been entered into... regardless of who's in power.", might be a dead giveaway. She is saying that it doesn't matter who is in charge. Japan should do what the LDP had agreed to in the past, even though the ruling power and its demands have been changed.

If Japan were not a democratic nation you wouldn't see people protesting whenever they want, there'd be no Facebook, Twitter etc. of course it's a Democratic country, maybe NOT the way YOU want it to be, but it's Democratic nevertheless.

One of the basic democratic principles is popular sovereignty and self-government. If Japan does not even respect the self-governing principle of Okinawa and Nago, then one can't possibly call that democratic.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

BertieWoosterFEB. 16, 2014 - 11:36PM JST Eiji Takano-san, The Japan Focus site is an excellent source for anyone wanting to find out what is really going on in Okinawa. Of course, if anyone prefers to go with the official propaganda, there is that too.

Dewspite of his JT Pen name. Eiji seems unfamiliar of Japan and Okinawa or democracy. Bertie, Good advice.

Back to article. Nago mayor is talking his and his constituent wish. Mayor is not demanding self-governing.

eiji: follow Bertie's advice. to learn about Japan issuse, then learn what is democracy.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

LOL, suddenly I'm unfamiliar with Japan or Okinawa or democracy? Sorry, but why do Japanese people on here get pissed when I say that Japan is not democratic? Of course, there are plenty of Japanese people who would agree that Japan is hardly democratic.

Explain to me how is Japan democratic when it ignores the self-governing principle of Okinawa?

Back to article. Nago mayor is talking his and his constituent wish. Mayor is not demanding self-governing.

The mayor is opposed to building the base in Henoko. But the Tokyo government is ignoring that and continuing with building the base.

How is this democratic?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Eiji, you wrote One of the basic democratic principles is popular sovereignty and self-government. If Japan does not even respect the self-governing principle of Okinawa and Nago, then one can't possibly call that democratic.

No one wrote Japan is a democratic country in your definition. May be you visit USA. go to Jr college and take PS 100?h Anyway, Nago Mayor does not want US Base in Nago and this is issue and commenters are discussing, Not promoting your definition of democracy.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

...And what exactly is your point?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

I praise Nago Mayor for not forgetting his consituents.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

bass4funk (Feb. 16, 2014 - 10:43PM JST):

Well, then, let me recapitulate my argument.

The official reason as to why the U.S. is allowed to keep bases and troops in Japan (and in Okinawa in particular) is stipulated in Article 6 of the 1960 Ampo Joyaku (Security Treaty). The U.S. is allowed to maintain its military presence (facilities and troops) to the extent that it desires in order to defend Japan.

As a result, Okinawa is forced to shoulder an exorbitant amount of burden for hosting the U.S. military presence in Japan, which I call pseudo-occupation.

Now, bass4funk contends that, had Japan not started war against the U.S. by attacking Pearl Harbor, this messy problem involving Okinawa would never have occurred. He insinuates Japan is solely to blame;all responsibility rests with Japan

He could say this in 1945, but certainly not in 2014, 69 years after WW II ended. Why should Okinawa take all the brunt of Japan's defeat of 69 years ago? And how does he explain a contradiction between what the Security Treaty stipulates about the purpose of the U.S. military presence in Japan (Okinawa) and what he says about the reason of it.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@voiceofokinawa

Now, bass4funk contends that, had Japan not started war against the U.S. by attacking Pearl Harbor, this messy problem involving Okinawa would never have occurred. He insinuates Japan is solely to blame;all responsibility rests with Japan He could say this in 1945, but certainly not in 2014, 69 years after WW II ended.

Yes, and what's your point? I don't see Tokyo and Washington doing anything to rectify the situation.

Why should Okinawa take all the brunt of Japan's defeat of 69 years ago?

Seems like you have to. For many reasons, not to mention from a strategical strike point.

And how does he explain a contradiction between what the Security Treaty stipulates about the purpose of the U.S. military presence in Japan (Okinawa) and what he says about the reason of it.

I have one question, So what do YOU plan to do and HOW do you plan to change the current situation?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Originally, GHQ came and bases were established in Japan to ensure Japan will not begin trying to conqueor Asia and USA. GHQ made then Japanese Govt to modernize Japan. Like trying to make men;s colleges accept female students. In 1951, finally enforced so each public university accepted a woman in nomale type major. One and she had to look like a man. GHQ gave up. Things are different but females then stopped to call Sneryogun and Called Shinchugun. It also made Japanese Government to make illegal to sell Northern area poor farmers to sell their daughters to girll traders from Southern Japan. Well, girls became brats but that was not GHQ fault. It did a lot better things in mainland Japan. BTW, maybe Osprey will be replaced by new noiseless F somethig ? On the air, it looks like cute toy plane rotating, I only wathcd on USA news.Oh, I must stop to write that time. This is Okinawa story. .

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

In what way are the people living now in Okinawa, or in Japan, to blame for what happened over 70 years ago?

I suggest you "Check" with you history books.

The history books say it all happened over 70 years ago, simple arithmetic says most of the people living now in Okinawa or Japan were either children or not yet born. People cannot realistically be held responsible for things that other people did before they were even born. So, in what way are the people living now in Okinawa, or in Japan, to blame for what happened over 70 years ago? You don't answer because you can't. They aren't to blame for what happened 70 years ago.

Maybe the UK should be demanding compensation from Italy to punish Caesar for the Roman occupation of Britain, or building bases in France to make sure they don't rekindle the Hundred Years' War. Where do you draw the line?

A NO WIN would be an individual that cannot or will NOT engage in the debate

lol

As in, (And how does he explain a contradiction between what the Security Treaty stipulates about the purpose of the U.S. military presence in Japan (Okinawa) and what he says about the reason of it.)

I have one question, So what do YOU plan to do and HOW do you plan to change the current situation? That's how you engage in the debate? Or how you try to avoid answering a simple yet awkward question?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

bass4funk (Feb. 17, 2014 - 08:48AM JST):

Moving one base to another location in the same area as narrow as Okinawa whereby the function and capabilities of bases are strengthened and fixed indefinitely in Okinawa isn't the solution at all to "rectify the situation" as you say. The U.S. side threatens us by saying that, unless the Henoko relocation is realized, Futenma and the hazards it may bring will remain fixed at the present site forever. Is this what you think Tokyo and Washington are doing "to rectify the situation"?

To the question why Okinawa should take all the brunt of Japan's defeat of 69 years ago, you say:

"Seems like you have to. For many reasons, not to mention from a strategical strike point."

What are the "many reasons" in the sentence which you didn't specify? Don't they include the greed on the part of the U.S. to exercise perpetual hegemony in the region and defend the U.S.'s military, economic and cultural interests?

You didn't answer the last most important question I posed, "And how does he explain a contradiction between what the Security Treaty stipulates about the purpose of the U.S. military presence in Japan (Okinawa) and what he says about the reason of it?"

Instead, you threw your own question at me. I'll answer you after you gave me a satisfactory response.

cleo (Feb. 17, 2014 - 10:38AM JST):

Thanks.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The history books say it all happened over 70 years ago, simple arithmetic says most of the people living now in Okinawa or Japan were either children or not yet born. People cannot realistically be held responsible for things that other people did before they were even born.

I agree. However, I don't make the policies.

So, in what way are the people living now in Okinawa, or in Japan, to blame for what happened over 70 years ago? You don't answer because you can't.

I just did. They did nothing, but Tokyo and Washington at this time does NOT see the situation the same way as you do, the bases will remain.

Maybe the UK should be demanding compensation from Italy to punish Caesar for the Roman occupation of Britain, or building bases in France to make sure they don't rekindle the Hundred Years' War. Where do you draw the line?

You can make that argument about anything, but we are talking about Okinawa and as the situation stands! the military stays, so how do YOU think you can contribute to get these bases off the Islands?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I just did.

No, you answered a different question, on the lines of 'Why is Okinawa riddled with US military bases?' That's not the same as 'How are they to blame?' It takes you getting a verbal (written?) slap up the back side of the head before you eventually come out with 'They did nothing'. So, you and I are agreed, they did nothing wrong, they are not to blame for history. What a pity you cannot make that extra, obvious step, that if they are not to blame, they should not have to bear the brunt.

And your gleeful, triumphalist crowing (and I paraphrase, because I don't think you really appreciate the impression you're putting out there), Nuthin's gonna change, wot u gonna do about it, you an' oo's army? belongs in an elementary schoolyard, not in a serious discussion.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

My personal belief is that the base opponents should stop referring to the U.S. bases on Okinawa as Military bases and call them what they are Military resorts. They should make documentaries showing the U.S. military lifestyle on Okinawa versus the Okinawan people themselves. They should show the Military Dependent children with their nice big areas to play in and show the Okinawan children playing in cramped spaces and in the streets. They should show the Military Dependent children in their Air Conditioned schools and show the Okinawan children in their Non A/C schools in the middle of summer. They should show the private beaches, golf courses, tennis courts, softball fields, bowling centers, fitness gyms, Clubs and other leisure facilities on the bases.

Instead of emphasizing crimes committed by service people, they should emphasize how the Military people enjoy a better quality of life than most Okinawan people themselves. I think most pro base people support the bases simply because they are Military bases and are not aware that the bases on Okinawa are much more than that. They are American cities located on Okinawa and while they provide Military people with a great quality of life the Okinawan people's quality of life suffers because of the size of the bases.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The Okinawan diet consist of low-fat, low-salt foods, such as fish, tofu, and seaweed. Okinawans are known for their longevity. Individuals live longer on this Japanese island than anywhere else in the world. Five times as many Okinawans live to be 100 as in the rest of Japan, and the Japanese are already the longest-lived ethnic group of them all. There are 34.7 centenarians for every 100,000 inhabitants, which is the highest ratio worldwide. The possible explanations to this fact is the diet, low-stress lifestyle, caring community, activity, and spirituality of the inhabitants of the island

17% of okinawans are male older than 80 and 38% are female older than 80. Total of Okinawan people older than 80 are 55 % census data. This means more than 1/2 of Okinawan people were alive during WW Ii. Average temp is 28 degrees C.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

it takes you getting a verbal (written?) slap up the back side of the head before you eventually come out with 'They did nothing'.

My, my, I do love the emotional outrage you constantly show in your objectionable bias you keep showing.

So, you and I are agreed, they did nothing wrong,

I never said,the people themselves did anything wrong, that was NEVER the issue. I was just saying, the few people that are protesting won't make a bean of difference as to the what Tokyo and Washington will decide when it comes down to the fate of the bases. That's a fact.

they are not to blame for history. What a pity you cannot make that extra, obvious step, that if they are not to blame, they should not have to bear the brunt.

No, what IS a pity is that once again, you cannot accept that people like you are powerless and cannot change the outcome of the plight of the bases, but you do show a lot of anger towards anything that has the Stars and Stripes attached to it.

And your gleeful, triumphalist crowing (and I paraphrase, because I don't think you really appreciate the impression you're putting out there), Nuthin's gonna change, wot u gonna do about it, you an' oo's army? belongs in an elementary schoolyard, not in a serious discussion.

First of all, I'm NOT crowing, im NOT glee anything! I'm just a realist. Second, I think your attempt at making a mockery of Americans is completely rude, insensitive ( Not to mention slang wise terrible) and you want to talk about guttersnipe and childish. I think you are totally misguided when you talk about me belonging in an elementary schoolyard discussion, seriously??? Lol

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I never said,the people themselves did anything wrong, that was NEVER the issue

The 'issue' was a simple question that you could not bring yourself to answer.

what IS a pity is that once again, you cannot accept that people like you are powerless

Can you not stay on topic for two sentences together?

I think your attempt at making a mockery of Americans is completely rude, insensitive ( Not to mention slang wise terrible)

lol It was an attempt at mimicking the schoolboy tripe I used to hear as a kid in the north of England (that being the only schoolyard I have any direct experience of), nothing to do with Americans as a group or even you as an individual. But if it's your opinion that you have been subjected to completely rude, insensitive mockery then of course You have the right to that opinion, in fact you have a right to believe as you do and NO ONE can or has the right to change that opinion, even of you are factually wrong. But it's just one persons opinion :-)

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

I never said,the people themselves did anything wrong, that was NEVER the issue

The 'issue' was a simple question that you could not bring yourself to answer.

Or because, I chose not to answer at that particular moment, do I have to answer at the time of your choosing? I don't think so.

Can you not stay on topic for two sentences together?

Can you stop being emotional and try not use ad hom attacks, for once?

lol It was an attempt at mimicking the schoolboy tripe I used to hear as a kid in the north of England (that being the only schoolyard I have any direct experience of), nothing to do with Americans as a group or even you as an individual.

Could've fooled me.

But if it's your opinion that you have been subjected to completely rude, insensitive mockery then of course You have the right to that opinion, in fact you have a right to believe as you do and NO ONE can or has the right to change that opinion, even of you are factually wrong. But it's just one persons opinion :-)

You know and I know by the slang, you were attempting to make a mockery of Americans, say what you want, just please don't try deny it. When I make fun of you Brits, you have the right to call me out, but I wouldn't go that far

0 ( +0 / -0 )

My personal belief is that the base opponents should stop referring to the U.S. bases on Okinawa as Military bases and call them what they are Military resorts. They should make documentaries showing the U.S. military lifestyle on Okinawa versus the Okinawan people themselves. They should show the Military Dependent children with their nice big areas to play in and show the Okinawan children playing in cramped spaces and in the streets. They should show the Military Dependent children in their Air Conditioned schools and show the Okinawan children in their Non A/C schools in the middle of summer. They should show the private beaches, golf courses, tennis courts, softball fields, bowling centers, fitness gyms, Clubs and other leisure facilities on the bases. Instead of emphasizing crimes committed by service people, they should emphasize how the Military people enjoy a better quality of life than most Okinawan people themselves. I think most pro base people support the bases simply because they are Military bases and are not aware that the bases on Okinawa are much more than that. They are American cities located on Okinawa and while they provide Military people with a great quality of life the Okinawan people's quality of life suffers because of the size of the bases.

Atrueokinawan – based on your previous posts, you seem like a reasonable person with an open mind (much different from some of the reflexively anti-us posters here), so please allow me to offer a different view for your consideration.

You seem to believe that US bases provide a quality of life to base residents higher than perhaps what they deserve. I can assure you that the bases are hardly resorts, they mirror most other US bases worldwide. Housing size for most junior and mid-grade enlisted personnel is not extravagant – and is actually only about 1000 square feet. http://www.okinawamfh.com/pdf/2%20Bed%20Duplex%201.pdf

But irrespective of whether you believe they “live life easy”, I would ask to consider this – most service members in Okinawa are fairly young – they, and their families, have been asked by their government to uproot themselves and leave their homes and extended families in the US, to serve in a foreign country, and if a conflict occurs, to be prepared to give their life, in the defense of that country. I, for one, believe that entitles them to at least a semblance of the lifestyle they could expect back in their home country – nothing extravagant, but at least similar.

But I do agree with you – anything we can do to reduce the US military footprint, and give valuable land back to the local government should be pursued – that’s why I fully support implementing the 2006 ATARA agreement – it’s not perfect, but it closes and returns MCAS Futenma and Camp Kinser, along with major portions of Camps Foster and Lester and – all along the key Route 58 corridor – and moves approximately half of the USMC personnel and their families to Guam. As someone from Okinawa, you know what a major impact this would have – all this land returned for the local government to use as they see fit; more housing, more industry, more recreational or resort areas……

And don’t believe the radicals who claim that the agreement requires a replacement in kind for those facilities being closed – as I have proved in other threads with verbiage from the actual agreement, that’s a complete fabrication.

As someone who lived on Okinawa for three years, who enjoyed and admired the local culture, and made many long lasting friendships with the local people, there’s nothing I’d like to see more that some movement in reducing the US military footprint – rather than the “all or nothing” argument offered by those who real intentions are questionable.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@incolnman: I dispute one statement of yours. They were not asked. they were ordered (meaning they had no choice). If they were ordered to Camp Pendleton in nice spacy Southern Calif., they could have life of visiting Disneyland, Angels baseball games, Knots Bury Farm,, Huntington Beach, Newport Beach, even Hollywood area. Beside that, they can attend Orange Coast College and Cal State U Fullerton, and USC, UCLA in their spare time. Not in Okinawa. They maybe scared to death thinking when they might be ordered to move to war zone. I think moving bases in Okinawa to somewhere else than Okinawa, will be mutually beneficial to young military members and Okinawa. I don;t like young men are used for any country;s war cause.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I chose not to answer at that particular moment

A NO WIN would be an individual that cannot or will NOT engage in the debate and rather NOT comment or hide :-)

You know and I know by the slang

slang? You can't tell the difference between accent and slang?

you were attempting to make a mockery of Americans

Hey, if you see it like that, you have the right to feel so. :-)

It's you I'm addressing here, bass, not 'Americans'. The Americans I have met in real life have mostly been very nice people, I wouldn't dream of making a mockery of them.

try not use ad hom attacks

'Try to stay on topic' is not an ad hom attack. 'You are being emotional / you are showing objectionable bias' is an ad hom attack.

For someone who claims to have been in journalism, your language/vocab skills are pretty basic. Perhaps that's why you used to be in journalism. (Now, that's an ad hom attack. Get as emotional as you like over it) :-)

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@lincolman: Thanks for your response and nice to hear from you again. Maybe the use of resorts was a little strong but when you look at 5 private beaches, 4 golf courses, a boat marina and more tennis courts than you can count plus all of the other leisure facilities the bases contain you have to admit that the U.S. Military has a good life on Okinawa. I did not mean to imply that Military people do not deserve a good quality of life but my point is that Okinawa is a small island and in order to provide the U.S. Military with the quality of life that they demand a lot of land is required and that means less land for the Okinawan people to live and raise families on. I have been inside all of the U.S. bases on Okinawa and have been in a lot of the housing and talked to a lot of Service members and their families and am aware of the sacrifices that they make but the Okinawan people also have made and continue to make sacrifices so that the bases remain and I would like to see them appreciated a little more.

I am not a member of the all of the bases must go crowd and realize the necessity of some bases being here. My problem with the 2006 ATARA agreement is the relocation to Henoko. I just don't see the necessity of ruining that beautiful ocean spot. My personal belief is that MCAS Futenma is not that vital of a base that it needs to remain in Okinawa but if it has to be on Okinawa I would prefer putting it in Kadena which has 2 runways and 1 of them is used by the U.S. Navy and they even have their own control tower and there are Marine Barracks on Kadena anyway or they could put it at Camp Hansen which is more than big enough to handle it.

I believe the reason Henoko was selected is because it means bigger construction contracts for the Mainland Japanese Companies whereas putting it on Kadena or at Camp Hansen would only cost a fraction of the money.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

A NO WIN would be an individual that cannot or will NOT engage in the debate and rather NOT comment or hide :-)

Hide? Sorry, may not be what you want to hear, but I do comment, nice try though.

slang? You can't tell the difference between accent and slang?

Slang as in the way, you were making a mockery of the person, accent, I never heard what you sound like.

Hey, if you see it like that, you have the right to feel so. :-)

Of course, it wasn't directed at a British person, come on now dear, keep up.

It's you I'm addressing here, bass, not 'Americans'. The Americans I have met in real life have mostly been very nice people, I wouldn't dream of making a mockery of them.

If I struck a nerve, then maybe you are just too thin-skinned. :-) But usually people will say things like that when they run out of things to say, noteworthy wise.

'Try to stay on topic' is not an ad hom attack.

I am on topic. We're talking about the bases, you attacking and gutter sniping me is not on topic.

For someone who claims to have been in journalism, your language/vocab skills are pretty basic.

Has nothing to do with anything, please try again.

Perhaps that's why you used to be in journalism. (Now, that's an ad hom attack. Get as emotional as you like over it) :-)

No, not at all, but nice try. I found it a bit more financially rewarding to be self-employed. :-)

0 ( +1 / -1 )

When they fish bonitos, fishermen first sprinkle live minnows where a school of the fish are supposed to be. If the fish come near the fishing boat and begin biting the baits, all the fishermen do is just sprinkle water and nothing but water. The fish get excited and frantic about biting anything in sight, whether it's live baits or bare hooks. That's the way bonitos are caught.

The U.S. promise of base returns reminds me of bonito fishing. They dangle baits (carrots) by drawing a nice picture of how Okinawans will benefit if they accepted the Futenma-to-Henoko relocation plan. MCAS Futenma, Camp Kinser and portions of Camp Kinser/Camp Lester will be returned; Naha Military Port Facilities will also be returned.

But will these bases be returned unconditionally? Never. Their return is all string-attached. Futenma will be returned only when its replacement is built at Henoko in northern Okinawa with two 1,800-meter runways furnished and cutting-edge port facilities attached. Ammunition deports are already there in Camp Schwab and Camp Hansen and Northern Training Area are in the vicinity.

Washington intimidates us by saying that if Okinawans oppose the relocation plan, Futenma and the hazards its aircraft cause may remain fixed forever at the present site. Note, however, that even if it were moved to Henoko, Futenma's function and the hazards it may bring would remain fixed in Okinawa -- forever. Okinawa's status as a U.S. military colony will remain unchanged and Okinawa's suffering derived from the unduly hosting of bases will continue.

It's the same with the Naha Military Port Facilities. The U.S. promises the TOTAL return of the port but its replacement must be built at the coastal area in Urasoe, just one block from Camp Kinser, which is probably a very important logistics base for the USF Okinawa. The base houses such facilities as a bakery and a mortuary. Facilities such as these may be moved to other bases already in existence but can other bases take in the logistics function of Camp Foster?

And why does Washington demand that a replacement for Naha Military Port be built at Urasoe as if the new port were to be integrated with Camp Kinser? Isn't Camp Kinser listed in a total return category?

Probably, lincolnman can explain and answer these naive questions of mine.

Oh, before I forget, let me add another candid advice. Please don't call those critical of Washington policy-makers "anti-U.S." The word smacks of the same derogatory nuances as carried by words like "red" and "communist". These words were in fashion during the Cold War and McCarthy era to slander other people.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@lincolman: Thanks for your response and nice to hear from you again. Maybe the use of resorts was a little strong but when you look at 5 private beaches, 4 golf courses, a boat marina and more tennis courts than you can count plus all of the other leisure facilities the bases contain you have to admit that the U.S. Military has a good life on Okinawa. I did not mean to imply that Military people do not deserve a good quality of life but my point is that Okinawa is a small island and in order to provide the U.S. Military with the quality of life that they demand a lot of land is required and that means less land for the Okinawan people to live and raise families on. I have been inside all of the U.S. bases on Okinawa and have been in a lot of the housing and talked to a lot of Service members and their families and am aware of the sacrifices that they make but the Okinawan people also have made and continue to make sacrifices so that the bases remain and I would like to see them appreciated a little more.

Yes, I agree, Okinawa is a very enjoyable place for US military personnel to be stationed – but not only for the support facilities and recreational opportunities, more for the ability to meet and enjoy the local Okinawa people and wonderful culture – in my view, that’s at the “top of the list”…..

I am not a member of the all of the bases must go crowd and realize the necessity of some bases being here. My problem with the 2006 ATARA agreement is the relocation to Henoko. I just don't see the necessity of ruining that beautiful ocean spot. My personal belief is that MCAS Futenma is not that vital of a base that it needs to remain in Okinawa but if it has to be on Okinawa I would prefer putting it in Kadena which has 2 runways and 1 of them is used by the U.S. Navy and they even have their own control tower and there are Marine Barracks on Kadena anyway or they could put it at Camp Hansen which is more than big enough to handle it.

That’s a very perceptive view – and reminds me again how poorly both the US and Japanese governments have failed to explain fully to the local Okinawa people all the reasons for the FRF. Let me summarize quickly – Kadena was extensively looked at – and while there may be room now, during any major crisis or contingency, Kadena would gain large amounts of additional aircraft from the US that literally “maxes out” all the space on the airfield. As for Hansen, I understand it would have cost significantly more and had more of an impact (noise, etc.) on surrounding communities than Schwab.

I believe the reason Henoko was selected is because it means bigger construction contracts for the Mainland . Japanese Companies whereas putting it on Kadena or at Camp Hansen would only cost a fraction of the money.

I don’t know that but agree, it could have been a factor. My sense is that Schwab was chosen because from a flight operations perspective, it offered the least impact on local communities compared to any other location. The reason I say that is because there was significant disagreement between the US and GOJ on whether to have one single runway or the current “V” proposal – the GOJ wanted the V design since it kept almost all approach and departure zones over water and not over any land areas.

Another quick area I wanted to address is the reason the FRF facility is needed – why don’t just close Futenma and not open another airfield? Again, this is an area that the US/GOJ have communicated poorly. Safe flight operations always require at least two airfields, a primary and an alternate, so if problems develop at one, and your aircraft has a mechanical issue or low fuel, you have an alternate location to land and continue to operate and fly missions. With the large scale of flight operations at Kadena, an alternate runway is required – that is one of the primary reasons Futenma has remained open for so long. You could say that Kadena has two runways and that should be sufficient, but a problem at Kadena with power, etc. would take both runways down. You could also say that Naha could be considered but with all the commercial and JSDF aircraft, it’s just too busy and can’t be counted on in an emergency. In addition to other valid operational reasons, this is one of the main factors that drives the need for the FRF.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@lincolnman: Thank you as always for your informative posts. I agree with the failure of both the U.S. and GOJ to be able to explain why these bases are here and what their purposes are.

The reason I brought up the reason that Henoko was chosen is that a report came out in the news several weeks ago that the Hatoyama administration proposed the idea of Camp Hansen in order to avoid damaging the Ocean and the U.S. agreed to it but the bureaucrats in Tokyo insisted on staying with Henoko because it would cost more and in their words benefit local companies more.

My understanding is that the current runways at KAB are 12,100-foot (3,690-meter). Will the new runways to replace Futenma be enough to accommodate planes from KAB that might have to use it? I believe the current runway at Futenma is 8,990 ft. (2,740-meter).

Are you familiar with the base on the small island of IE-SHIMA which is located near Motobu? It has a runway and was used by the Harriers but I don't know if it still is. Also it has been used for parachute jumps. I wonder if it was ever considered as a replacement for Futenma?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The reason I brought up the reason that Henoko was chosen is that a report came out in the news several weeks ago that the Hatoyama administration proposed the idea of Camp Hansen in order to avoid damaging the Ocean and the U.S. agreed to it but the bureaucrats in Tokyo insisted on staying with Henoko because it would cost more and in their words benefit local companies more.

That's certainly a possibility, though I have not heard it within the circles I travel.

My understanding is that the current runways at KAB are 12,100-foot (3,690-meter). Will the new runways to replace Futenma be enough to accommodate planes from KAB that might have to use it? I believe the current runway at Futenma is 8,990 ft. (2,740-meter).

Yes, you are correct - those are the runway lengths at Kadena and Futenma - and no, the 5,000 ft (1600 meters) runways at the FRF will not accommodate all aircraft, but it will allow for use by most to include the fighters, C130 and C17 airlifters, and the P3/P8 ASW aircraft.

Are you familiar with the base on the small island of IE-SHIMA which is located near Motobu? It has a runway and was used by the Harriers but I don't know if it still is. Also it has been used for parachute jumps. I wonder if it was ever considered as a replacement for Futenma?

Yes, I'm familiar with Ie Shima - in fact I took the ferry out there and spent the night at a hotel many years ago. Ie Shima was also reviewed extensively as there are several old runways still there - but as you know, it has no "foot bridge" or connection to the main island - so everything would have to be brought in/out by ship. On and off-loading all the equipment that would come in to Ie Shima if Kadena was closed, then transferring that to ships to take back to the main island (and vice versa) was deemed too logistically difficult, and that's why it was not selected as an option.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm for the opinion that all U.S. bases in Okinawa must go someday. I don't know when that will happen but that is the stance the majority of Okinawans take. A country cannot keep its bases and troops on foreign soil forever. So any sign of going against this direction must be checked In this sense, the Henoko relocation plan or any plan to relocate Futenma's function within Okinawa Prefecture must be opposed and prevented by all means.

And that's what demonstrators at Henoko, Takae and elsewhere are appealing. Their number may be small, as some posters here deride, but they have a full moral support from the majority of Okinawans.

It was Shiro Nukaga, Director General of Defense Agency under the Koizumi administration, who came up with the idea of V-shaped runways to be built on reclaimed land at Henoko. The motivation behind was to prevent U.S. military aircraft from flying over residential areas around Henoko.

A good thing about this design, according to Nukaga, was that a taking-off aircraft will use the runway in the direction toward the sea and an incoming aircraft will use the other runway approaching from the sea. Looks like a nice idea. But is it?

Take a look at how C-130 Hercules transport aircraft are training at Futenma. Their routine training includes touch-and-go landings day and night. Now, my question is how they would exercise this routine training on V-shaped runways and avoid flying over residential areas. The training aircraft must touch down on one runway and the next moment u-turn and take off from the other runway. How could it be possible?

Even if touch-and-go landings are not practiced at Henoko, under some wind conditions pilots will have to use one specific runway for takeoff and touchdown in regular flights disregarding an agreement not to fly over residential areas. The new air base with V-shaped runways is thus nothing but a sham.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

17% of okinawans are male older than 80 and 38% are female older than 80. Total of Okinawan people older than 80 are 55 % census data. This means more than 1/2 of Okinawan people were alive during WW II. This means more than a half half Okinawan people remember when first American force came to Okinawa. Okinawan people wejnt to welcome them, Then, USA mistook as Japanese went to attack them and killed them that included school children, Yankee Go Home feelings, they must havwe been keeping all those years.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass4funk (Feb. 19, 2014 - 04:07PM JST):

You say "that (i.e., the return of all bases or end of the pseudo-occupation of Okinawa) probably will never happen in our lifetime" and suggest that both sides learn to live together. You are like a bully telling the bullied, "I'll never return the spoils I've got to you. There's no reason except that I like things as they are. Just learn to live with it."

Oh, incidentally, you haven't answered the question I posed in my posting dated Feb. 17, 2014 - 08:16AM JST. I'm still waiting.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@bass4funk: Why are you using my on-line name for soemthing I did not write???????? If you want to bash me, use my comment. Did you create the text under my name to bash me??????

@toshiko

Researchers of the 1945 Battle of Okinawa agree that the Imperial army “forced and steered” civilians to commit mass suicide during the only full-scale ground battle in Japan during World War II, an authority on modern Japanese history said Tuesday.

Hirofumi Hayashi, a professor at Kanto Gakuin University in Yokohama, said he conveyed the view in a statement handed to the government’s textbook-screening panel, which is considering requests by publishers to reinstate references about the military’s role in forcing civilians to commit suicide, in some cases involving children, invalids and the elderly.

But you so carelessly and purposely gloss over this. This is why I think the debate is one-sided and completely bias. So then that means,there are many people still alive and remember what the Japanese have done. Where is your outrage?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@voiceofokinawa

You say "that (i.e., the return of all bases or end of the pseudo-occupation of Okinawa) probably will never happen in our lifetime" and suggest that both sides learn to live together. You are like a bully telling the bullied, "I'll never return the spoils I've got to you. There's no reason except that I like things as they are. Just learn to live with it."

If you take it for bullying, then you must be implying that you are weak and a pushover, if you want to use that analogy. Maybe you deserved it, or perhaps you were all along the instigator to bring the bully out. Lol That's not what I was saying at all, but the realist that I am, I'll say it once again. You are sadly mistaken if you think the military is going to leave Okinawa. Unless Tokyo and Washington say otherwise, the only thing you can do is deal with it or move out. You're attaching emotion to the argument, you're never going to make a cohesive debate, it convolutes your message.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

bass4funk (Feb. 20, 2014 - 01:40AM JST):

If you don't like the bully vs. bullied analogy, I will use another one. How about the analogy of a crime syndicate vs. area residents.

Mobsters intimidate people in the turf, "We will never leave the area. We like it here. That's all there is to it.

You haven't answered the question I posed in my posting dated Feb. 17, 2014 - 08:16AM JST. Instead, you are trying to distract my attention to something else.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@voiceofokinawa

How about the analogy of a crime syndicate vs. area residents.

I'm sorry, but what do these analogies have to do with anything? But if you want to make the ludicrous analogy of comparing the US military to a crime syndicate, then you are taking yourself out of the conversation as a debater.

You haven't answered the question I posed in my posting dated Feb. 17, 2014 - 08:16AM JST. Instead, you are trying to distract my attention to something else.

I'm not trying to distract you from anything you don't want to be distracted from.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Keep the discussion civil, please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass4funk (Feb. 20, 2014 - 09:57AM JST):

An analogy is a rhetorical device to help people understand a difficult problem, isn't it? If you ask in what way these analogies have to do with USF Okinawa, you are like a child asking the teacher who draws an analogy between the human heart and a pump, "What does the human heart have to do with a pump? The human heart isn't a man-made machine."

Why do I draw an analogy between the U.S. military stationed in Okinawa and a crime syndicate squatting in the town? Study the history of how the U.S. forces came to station here.

They invaded and occupied the islands with force unparalleled to anything Okinawa had known in its long history. Their post-war control of Okinawa was as harsh as a tyranny. The irony was that they described themselves as the vanguard of freedom and democracy. To expand bases they took private lands freely from farmers, bulldozing houses and farms altogether in front of them, to develop, e.g., golf courses or spacious housing areas for service members and their dependents to enjoy life as comfortable as in U.S. mainland.

A harsh, direct occupation by the U.S. military may be a thing of the past. But virtual occupation is still continuing only with name and form changed. Washington has a faithful agent in Tokyo acting for it in matters as may foul its own hands.

Again, I ask you to answer the question I posed above (Feb. 17, 2014 - 08:16AM JST

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@voiceofokinawa

Why do I draw an analogy between the U.S. military stationed in Okinawa and a crime syndicate squatting in the town? Study the history of how the U.S. forces came to station here.

I already know.

They invaded and occupied the islands with force unparalleled to anything Okinawa had known in its long history.

And why was that? Because they were bored to death? They had nothing better else to do with their time? Come on now...

Their post-war control of Okinawa was as harsh as a tyranny. The irony was that they described themselves as the vanguard of freedom and democracy.

Once they are gone and China rolls in, you would see what losing freedom really means.

To expand bases they took private lands freely from farmers, bulldozing houses and farms altogether in front of them, to develop, e.g., golf courses or spacious housing areas for service members and their dependents to enjoy life as comfortable as in U.S. mainland.

That happens everywhere in the world, nothing unique about that, even in my hometown. So what's your grievance?

Funny, it's ironic, you make no reference as to the atrocities that were inflicted on the Okinawans by the Japanese during WWII. I see you also want to conviently gloss over that as well. Still trying to make the US military the boogeyman?

A harsh, direct occupation by the U.S. military may be a thing of the past. But virtual occupation is still continuing only with name and form changed. Washington has a faithful agent in Tokyo acting for it in matters as may foul its own hands.

And you are entitled to feel that way, there is nothing wrong with that.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

bass4funk (Feb. 20, 2014 - 02:52PM JST):

To the question why I draw an analogy between the U.S. military stationed in Okinawa and a crime syndicate squatting in the town, you respond:

And why was that? Because they were bored to death? They had nothing better else to do with their time? Come on now...

You come around to your old theme. Japan started the war by attacking Pearl Harbor but was defeated. Okinawa's tragedy is the end-result of this. Grin and bear it. Is that what you want to say?

That (land requisition) happens everywhere in the world, nothing unique about that, even in my hometown. So what's your grievance?

Do you mean, in your hometown in Southern California, an unwelcome foreign army takes private lands from the town's people and farmers with impunity, bulldozing houses and farms to expand their base, i.e., to develop golf courses and spacious housing areas?

Funny, it's ironic, you make no reference as to the atrocities that were inflicted on the Okinawans by the Japanese during WWII. I see you also want to conveniently gloss over that as well. Still trying to make the US military the boogeyman?

Atrocities were done by the Imperial Japanese Army under an extreme situation -- a death-or-life retreat situation in the war where routed army units and a flood of refugees were mingled cornered by an advancing enemy. Of course, the Japanese army must be held responsible for what happened. Their actions must be condemned to the nail. Imperialism must be terminated by all means

Bass4funk, you cannot use the Imperial Japanese Army's atrocities to justify your military's injustice done in post-war Okinawa. If you do, then the Imperial Japanese Army and the U.S. Armed Forces must be all part of the same gang -- the imperialist gang, that is. Both must be condemned to the nail

I'm still waiting for you to answer my question posted Feb. 17, 2014 - 08:16AM JST.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Okinawa's tragedy began in 1609 when the Shimazu Clan a damiyo of the Satsuma han conquered the Ryukyu kingdom. And our problems got worse when Japan annexed the kingdom in 1868 and named us Ryukyu han. We were officially made Okinawa Prefecture in 1879 and since then all the Okinawan people have known is hard times. Sacrificed by Tokyo in the Battle of Okinawa and continuing to be sacrificed in 2014. The Okinawan people had very high hopes for reversion but there is a growing feeling that Okinawans just exchanged one colonial master in Washington for another one in Tokyo.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@voiceofokinawa

You come around to your old theme. Japan started the war by attacking Pearl Harbor but was defeated. Okinawa's tragedy is the end-result of this. Grin and bear it. Is that what you want to say?

You griping about the US military, how is that helping your plight. You think they will relocate, but you have a deep seated bent up frustration towards the military. So how is all this anger helping you so far?

Do you mean, in your hometown in Southern California, an unwelcome foreign army takes private lands from the town's people and farmers with impunity, bulldozing houses and farms to expand their base, i.e., to develop golf courses and spacious housing areas?

We already did, the Democrats and the illegals from Mexico. Sure I get frustrated and angry, but I left, moved from there and live in a now Red State. I knew I wouldn't be able to change California, so I made THE change.

Atrocities were done by the Imperial Japanese Army under an extreme situation -- a death-or-life retreat situation in the war where routed army units and a flood of refugees were mingled cornered by an advancing enemy. Of course, the Japanese army must be held responsible for what happened. Their actions must be condemned to the nail. Imperialism must be terminated by all means

Good, now that we see a little eye to eye, I do hope you'll be fair and not one-sided.

you cannot use the Imperial Japanese Army's atrocities to justify your military's injustice done in post-war Okinawa.

And why Not? I thought injustice is injustice. So now we want to cherry pick?

If you do, then the Imperial Japanese Army and the U.S. Armed Forces must be all part of the same gang -- the imperialist gang, that is. Both must be condemned to the nail

"Imperialist", not quite, but nice try.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

atrueokinawanFEB. 20, 2014 - 08:37PM JST Okinawa's tragedy began in 1609 when the Shimazu Clan a damiyo of the Satsuma han conquered the Ryukyu kingdom. And our problems got worse when Japan annexed the kingdom in 1868 and named us Ryukyu han. We were officially made Okinawa Prefecture in 1879 and since then all the Okinawan people have known is hard times. Sacrificed by Tokyo in the Battle of Okinawa and continuing to be sacrificed in 2014. The Okinawan people had very high hopes for reversion but there is a growing feeling that Okinawans just exchanged one colonial master in Washington for another one in Tokyo.

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

;You forgot to mention 1/4 of Okinawan died as the result of the Battle of Okinawa.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The Okinawan people had very high hopes for reversion but there is a growing feeling that Okinawans just exchanged one colonial master in Washington for another one in Tokyo.

Agree - It's not just the base issue. Okinawans need to feel they can manage their own land. Governments around the world are recognizing the rights of the land belong to those who were there first --and need to consider the requests of the local residents.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Chiba farmers pleaded against Narita Airport, but it got built anyway.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, Inamine san.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass4funk (Feb. 20, 2014 - 10:31PM JST) :

You post:

You griping about the US military, how is that helping your plight. You think they will relocate, but you have a deep seated bent up frustration towards the military. So how is all this anger helping you so far?

To say it more concretely, you are simply saying, "Our great military will never end the occupation of Okinawa. There's no reason. We simply like it that way. So there's no use complaining about it on your part."

Washington must be full of egoistic, unreasonable-minded people like you. Talking to you is like beating the air.

I asked: "Do you mean, in your hometown in Southern California, an unwelcome foreign army takes private lands from the town's people and farmers with impunity, bulldozing houses and farms to expand their base, i.e., to develop golf courses and spacious housing areas?"

To this you answer: We already did, the Democrats and the illegals from Mexico. Sure I get frustrated and angry, but I left, moved from there and live in a now Red State. I knew I wouldn't be able to change California, so I made THE change.

Will you clarify this? You're saying you don't like the Democrats and illegal immigrants from Mexico. You got frustrated and angry with them and so you left California. You now live in a state where the majority are Republicans.

Good for you. But what's that to do with the injustice inflicted upon post-war Okinawa by this exorbitant U.S. military presence?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I remember going to school in Okinawa. Enjoyed listening and showing affection to the Okinawa people. Learnt a lot. The atmosphere was wonderful.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Serrano (Feb. 21, 2014 - 07:13AM JST):

The Chiba farmers pleaded against Narita Airport, but it got built anyway.

You can't say such a thing unless you think Japan is a U.S. vassal and Okinawa a U.S. colony. You are mixing up Japan's domestic problem with an international one. But, for you, there may be no difference between the two problems because you are inclined to think there's no national border between the U.S. and Japan (Okinawa) as far as the U.S. military is concerned.

Article 9 of the Japan-U.S. Status of Forces Agreement stipulates that U.S. service members do not have to carry passports when they enter/exit Japan. They are required to carry I.D.s but they don't have to show them to Japanese authorities. The difference between them and their dependents is that the latter must show their I.D.s only when requested by the Japanese authorities while they are in Japan. I think, though, that such occasions are rare unless a criminal case is involved.

Serrano, or anyone who knows about it, are there any Japanese immigration officers stationed at Kadena Air Base's terminal building? Yokota Air Base's in Metropolitan Tokyo and USMCAS Futenma's?

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, Inamine san.

Of course the U.S. has a larger population than Japan (Okinawa). So your sentence can be re-written as: "The needs of the U.S. outweighs the needs of Japan (Okinawa)."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@voiceofokinawa

To say it more concretely, you are simply saying, "Our great military will never end the occupation of Okinawa. There's no reason. We simply like it that way. So there's no use complaining about it on your part."

No, those are your words and how you perceive the situation. As far as the complaining part, if you can show some concrete results that your voices are heard and they will make all the military forces leave, then you got my attention.

Washington must be full of egoistic, unreasonable-minded people like you. Talking to you is like beating the air.

Talking goes both ways. My exact sentiments.

Good for you. But what's that to do with the injustice inflicted upon post-war Okinawa by this exorbitant U.S. military presence?

If you don't like the current situation, you can always move. That's my point.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass4funk (Feb. 21, 2014 - 07:54PM JST):

You say: "No, those are your words and how you perceive the situation. As far as the complaining part, if you can show some concrete results that your voices are heard and they will make all the military forces leave, then you got my attention."

Surely, these are my words, but I paraphrased what you had said.

Talking goes both ways. My exact sentiments.  

I agree. But you don't deny my allegation that "Washington must be full of egoistic, unreasonable-minded people like you."

If you don't like the current situation, you can always move. That's my point.

You said in your previous posting (Feb. 20, 2014 - 10:31PM JST) you didn't like California and so you moved to a Red State because you knew you couldn't change it. You then suggest us to do the same. If we don't like U.S. bases, move. That means Okinawans must move in a mass exodus to a new world. Can you recommend a nice place for us to emigrate to?

Bass4funk, don't you see an absurdity in what you are saying?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@voiceofokinawa

Talking goes both ways. My exact sentiments. 

Seems like you were out voted. 

But you don't deny my allegation that "Washington must be full of egoistic, unreasonable-minded people like you."

I'm just a realist.

If you don't like the current situation, you can always move. That's my point.

If we don't like U.S. bases, move. That means Okinawans must move in a mass exodus to a new world. Can you recommend a nice place for us to emigrate to?

I have no idea, but the people that complain and are not happy are not a collective, every person can go wherever they feel like or they can stay and deal with the situation.

don't you see an absurdity in what you are saying?

No, as I said, I'm a realist and make no illusions about what's going on. I'm just not griping about something I know will not change in the foreseeable future. So either deal with it or move. Washington and Tokyo are not going to give in on this issue. So I would just move on.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

bass4funk (Feb. 22, 2014 - 02:19PM JST):

"Talking goes both ways. My exact sentiments." Please don't forget that these are your own words, not mine, which I quoted.

If you don't like the current situation, you can always move. That's my point.

So your point is: "Say nothing, do nothing even if a foreign military inflicts injustice upon you and your area." Then you demand: "Accept the reality with no complaints." Only mobsters can say intimidating words such as these. There's no rationality or common-sense logic here.

I have no idea, but the people that complain and are not happy are not a collective, every person can go wherever they feel like or they can stay and deal with the situation.

Look, Okinawans all have complaints about this excessive U.S. military presence one way or the other. In this sense, their complaints are collective not individual as you say. Therefore, your suggestion that any person who has complaints about this aberrant reality move out from Okinawa applies to them all as a mass.

To my my question, "Don't you see an absurdity in what you are saying?", you answer:

No, as I said, I'm a realist and make no illusions about what's going on. I'm just not griping about something I know will not change in the foreseeable future. So either deal with it or move. Washington and Tokyo are not going to give in on this issue. So I would just move on.

You don't see any absurdity in what you are saying? That's because you see no difference in nature between the illegal immigrants issue in California and the Futenma-to-Henoko relocation issue, which is an international issue the U.S. is proactively involved and coercing foreign nationals into accepting.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@voiceofokinawa

So your point is: "Say nothing, do nothing even if a foreign military inflicts injustice upon you and your area." Then you demand: "Accept the reality with no complaints." Only mobsters can say intimidating words such as these. There's no rationality or common-sense logic here.

I didn't say, do nothing. I said, it doesn't matter what you do, you're not going to influence or change the status quo. YOU feel that there is NO common sense and once again, you trying to make the equivalency between the US military and a mobster shows me, that you don't know the first thing about the mafia. But if you think you are able to turn the tide, please do so. I will be by the sidelines watching, not intimidating, just the harsh reality.

Look, Okinawans all have complaints about this excessive U.S. military presence one way or the other. In this sense, their complaints are collective not individual as you say. Therefore, your suggestion that any person who has complaints about this aberrant reality move out from Okinawa applies to them all as a mass.

Prove it. So now you speak for ALL Okinawans?

You don't see any absurdity in what you are saying? That's because you see no difference in nature between the illegal immigrants issue in California and the Futenma-to-Henoko relocation issue, which is an international issue the U.S. is proactively involved and coercing foreign nationals into accepting.

The absurdity is that, you have deep rooted anger and instead of seeing that the last almost 70 years not much has changed between Washington and Tokyo and most likely will not for some time to come. The issue is having a group of people that you feel shouldn't be there for one reason or another. It is the exact same analogy. For me, it's illegals, for you, the military. We both object and yet, it seems like all the complaints, protests have led to Zero changes. I chose to leave. You choose not to, but that means, you have to take the good with the bad. If you don't like it and see no change or anyone else, then relocate or keep trying,

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass4funk Feb. 23, 2014 - 04:43AM JST

I didn't say, do nothing. I said, it doesn't matter what you do, you're not going to influence or change the status quo. YOU feel that there is NO common sense and once again, you trying to make the equivalency between the US military and a mobster shows me, that you don't know the first thing about the mafia.

So your stance is it's no use fighting city hall, so move. Right? Illegal immigrants are your own internal political issue. Or is the Mexican government deeply involved in it, encouraging people to cross the border illegally? If that's the case, do you still say you can't fight city hall?

A mobster or not, if you brandish the logic of mobsters, you are like a mobster.

Prove it. So now you speak for ALL Okinawans?

I'm speaking for the majority of Okinawans.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@voiceofokinawa

So your stance is it's no use fighting city hall, so move. Right?

If I can't get the result I want, I would.

Illegal immigrants are your own internal political issue. Or is the Mexican government deeply involved in it, encouraging people to cross the border illegally?

They do encourage it, that is a part of the bigger issue.

If that's the case, do you still say you can't fight city hall?

Both political parties in the US have been derelict in their duties when it comes to shutting down the border. Again, after over 25 years of No results, I decided, it's time to pack up and leave.

A mobster or not, if you brandish the logic of mobsters, you are like a mobster.

If you want to use that analogy, then you need to go to the Don ( Tokyo, Washington ) and see if they'll take a bribe or make them an offer they can't refuse.

I'm speaking for the majority of Okinawans.

But NOT ALL.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

bass4funk (Feb. 23, 2014 - 03:44PM JST):

If I can't get the result I want, I would.

How could you get the result in your favor if your stance is Don't fight city hall?

They do encourage it, that is a part of the bigger issue.

The Mexican government encourages its people to cross the border illegally, sometimes by digging tunnels? Unbelievable. Can you show me the evidence? Will the Mexican government acknowledge your allegation?

Both political parties in the US have been derelict in their duties when it comes to shutting down the border. Again, after over 25 years of No results, I decided, it's time to pack up and leave.

The illegal immigrants issue is not a local problem confined to California but, as I understand from your posting, a national problem. If so, why did you leave California and not the United States?

But NOT ALL.

The majority is not all, of course. There's always a fringe group in any society who act for money and for their own benefits. Okinawa is no exception. I'm not speaking for such people.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@voiceofokinawa

How could you get the result in your favor if your stance is Don't fight city hall?

Because I knew the effort would be futile.

The Mexican government encourages its people to cross the border illegally, sometimes by digging tunnels? Unbelievable. Can you show me the evidence? Will the Mexican government acknowledge your allegation?

Sure thing.

http://www.examiner.com/article/mexico-actually-produces-an-official-guidebook-to-entering-the-u-s-illegally

As far as acknowledgement, the Mexican government hasn't been doing enough to DIScourage illegal entry into the US for more than 100 years, but the Mexican government NEVER really did enough to stop the flow of illegals. I'm from a border state, been numerous times to Mexico, everyone knows it. Anyway, back on track.

The illegal immigrants issue is not a local problem confined to California but, as I understand from your posting, a national problem. If so, why did you leave California and not the United States?

I have a residence in the US and also in Japan.

The majority is not all, of course. There's always a fringe group in any society who act for money and for their own benefits. Okinawa is no exception. I'm not speaking for such people.

A fringe group that acts for money and their own benefit, really? So then why is it that whenever you see these protesters in Okinawa, they aren't in the hundreds of thousands instead of a few hundred or less, if that were true what you say?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

bass4funk ( Feb. 23, 2014 - 10:30PM JST):

Because I knew the effort would be futile.

Instead of suggesting we do the same, that is, leave Okinawa if we don't like U.S. bases, you should take that suggestion to your own compatriots engaged in campaigns trying to oust illegal immigrants. Have you done that?

I asked, "Will the Mexican government acknowledge your allegation that it encourages its nationals to cross the border illegally?" you answered, "Sure thing" and referred me to one source.

I read your source, "Mexican actually produces ..." A surprising content, indeed! But then I thought, is this a real McCoy? The reasons: (1) Why don't major U.S. media report this sensational fact? Are they accomplice, too? (2) One cannot deny the possibility that the pamphlet was prepared by an underground syndicate of profiteers.

I have a residence in the US and also in Japan.

You say you left California because no solution is in sight regarding the illegal immigrants issue. But you also suggested it was a national issue, not simply a local one that is confined to California. If so, you should have left not only California but also the U.S. entirely Why do you still have a residence in the U.S.?

A fringe group that acts for money and their own benefit, really? So then why is it that whenever you see these protesters in Okinawa, they aren't in the hundreds of thousands instead of a few hundred or less, if that were true what you say?

Mass protests with "the hundreds of thousands" of participants are held frequently. In ordinary days, you may see not very many people protesting at Henoko, the projected relocation site of Futenma, or at Takae, where 6 Osprey pads are being constructed surrounding the village. Their number may be small but they have a full moral support of the majority of Okinawans. We really thank them for their self-sacrificing efforts.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Instead of suggesting we do the same, that is, leave Okinawa if we don't like U.S. bases, you should take that suggestion to your own compatriots engaged in campaigns trying to oust illegal immigrants. Have you done that?

I did, after 25 years, I decided to leave.

I read your source, "Mexican actually produces ..." A surprising content, indeed! But then I thought, is this a real McCoy? The reasons: (1) Why don't major U.S. media report this sensational fact? Are they accomplice, too? (2) One cannot deny the possibility that the pamphlet was prepared by an underground syndicate of profiteers.

They did a few years ago, more than 14 years ago. As a matter of fact, our news station was one out of 4 that covered the story. You might have some tidbits of fraction that are maybe if you want to call light accomplices, but overall, No. To your third point, Yes, in Mexico without a doubt.

You say you left California because no solution is in sight regarding the illegal immigrants issue. But you also suggested it was a national issue, not simply a local one that is confined to California. If so, you should have left not only California but also the U.S. entirely Why do you still have a residence in the U.S.?

Business and family. I DID leave the US and going back and forth for business and family doesn't mean I live there, even if I go there a couple of times a year.

Mass protests with "the hundreds of thousands" of participants are held frequently. In ordinary days, you may see not very many people protesting at Henoko, the projected relocation site of Futenma, or at Takae, where 6 Osprey pads are being constructed surrounding the village. Their number may be small but they have a full moral support of the majority of Okinawans. We really thank them for their self-sacrificing efforts.

Ok, fine, I don't have a problem with that, but look at the reality of the situation, you just admitted the numbers are small, you know everyone is climbing up a hill, I respect that, but in all honesty, you really think that the Island of Okinawa will kick out US forces? I would say the probability of that would stand at you guys have a 2% chance of that happening and that is by conservative judgments.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass4funk Feb. 24, 2014 - 09:25AM JST

I did, after 25 years, I decided to leave.

It's become clear that the illegal immigrants issue is your internal problem. No foreign country is involved in it. So don't equate this with the U.S. base issue in Okinawa.

They did a few years ago, more than 14 years ago. As a matter of fact, our news station was one out of 4 that covered the story. You might have some tidbits of fraction that are maybe if you want to call light accomplices, but overall, No. To your third point, Yes, in Mexico without a doubt.

If the Mexican government is deeply involved in this matter, instigating its nationals to migrate to the other side of the border with whatever means available, then the "pamphlet" episode must not be taken short shrift of. It's a serious challenge against U.S. sovereignty if they were really involved.

You say since there was no solution in sight, you left California. Whether you should leave California or not, it's completely up to you to decide. It's a personal matter per se.

I DID leave the US and going back and forth for business and family doesn't mean I live there, even if I go there a couple of times a year.

You say business and family are the reasons why you have two residences in both the U.S. and Japan. Since your family accompanied you when you moved from California to a Red state, they must also hate the situation in the U.S.. In other words, they would be glad to forsake U.S. citizenship and come to Japan with you. So your business and family reasons are no reasons at all to explain why you have two residences both in the U.S. and Japan.

... in all honesty, you really think that the Island of Okinawa will kick out US forces? I would say the probability of that would stand at you guys have a 2% chance of that happening and that is by conservative judgments.

So now you are on the side of illegal immigrants, flouting, "Do you guys think you can kick us out? The chance of that happening is 2% or less. It's a nonstarter, a futile attempt. You can't fight city hall. Never."

Whatever, we will keep appealing. The world is beginning to symphathize with our cause. And, thankfully, many Americans, too.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@voiceofokinawa

It's become clear that the illegal immigrants issue is your internal problem. No foreign country is involved in it. So don't equate this with the U.S. base issue in Okinawa.

Sorry, but you CAN use the same principle analogy and apply it.

If the Mexican government is deeply involved in this matter, instigating its nationals to migrate to the other side of the border with whatever means available, then the "pamphlet" episode must not be taken short shrift of. It's a serious challenge against U.S. sovereignty if they were really involved.

They are.

You say since there was no solution in sight, you left California. Whether you should leave California or not, it's completely up to you to decide. It's a personal matter per se.

It was and in hindsight, it was the right thing to do. Therefore, you can do the same if you can't achieve your goals. There is always light at the end of a tunnel.

You say business and family are the reasons why you have two residences in both the U.S. and Japan. Since your family accompanied you when you moved from California to a Red state, they must also hate the situation in the U.S.. In other words, they would be glad to forsake U.S. citizenship and come to Japan with you. So your business and family reasons are no reasons at all to explain why you have two residences both in the U.S. and Japan.

That would be a personal matter. Needless to say, we do business in both countries and mostly live in Japan though.

So now you are on the side of illegal immigrants, flouting, "Do you guys think you can kick us out? The chance of that happening is 2% or less. It's a nonstarter, a futile attempt. You can't fight city hall. Never."

Whatever, we will keep appealing. The world is beginning to symphathize with our cause. And, thankfully, many Americans, too.

You do that. Sympathizing is one thing, getting rid of the bases is an entirely different basket of eggs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass4funk,

We know this is a long uphill struggle. Obtaining understanding of the world , especially, the U.S. citizens, is an important first step to fight and win this struggle.

You are free to think it's a futile effort, but you can't keep telling us, "You can't fight a juggernaut. So pack up and leave Okinawa if you don't like the situation."

I'm beginning to suspect why you keep saying so constantly as if to attempt to crush our cause. You are not an ordinary U.S. citizen, are you?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@voiceofoikinawa

We know this is a long uphill struggle. Obtaining understanding of the world , especially, the U.S. citizens, is an important first step to fight and win this struggle.

I do amire your resilience, I'll give you credit for that.

You are free to think it's a futile effort, but you can't keep telling us, "You can't fight a juggernaut. So pack up and leave Okinawa if you don't like the situation."

It was my own personal opinion, just playing devil's advocate.

I'm beginning to suspect why you keep saying so constantly as if to attempt to crush our cause. You are not an ordinary U.S. citizen, are you?

I am an ordinary person, Personally, I am for the bases remaining in Okinawa, but NOT for the reasons you think, more for greater protection as a stratigic point of ANY attack be it either from China or N. Korea and I do sincerely want a solution to this serious and highly sensitive issue and think both sides, leaders from Okinawa, Washington and Tokyo come together to resolve this conflict, but I personally don't believe getting rid of the bases is the way to go, but that's how I personally feel about it. But the main thing is that people ARE talking about this whether they are for or against, the topic is out there.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass4funk,

You say:

"Personally, I am for the bases remaining in Okinawa, but NOT for the reasons you think, more for greater protection as a strategic point of ANY attack be it either from China or N. Korea and I do sincerely want a solution to this serious and highly sensitive issue and think both sides, leaders from Okinawa, Washington and Tokyo come together to resolve this conflict, but I personally don't believe getting rid of the bases is the way to go, but that's how I personally feel about it. But the main thing is that people ARE talking about this whether they are for or against, the topic is out there."

U.S. bases have been in Okinawa for the past 69 years. Since the original purpose of having these bases was for the attacks and invasion of mainland Japan, they should have been returned when the hostilities ended and their raison d'etre dissipated on August 15, 1945. But they have remained. That means, Okinawa has remained as a U.S. military colony ever since, which may continue into infinity unless something is done to check it.

If you say you are for the bases, it means you think the status quo, the resultt of U.S. egoism, must be maintained indefinitely -- that is, Okinawa must a U.S. military colony forever. The Henoko relocation plan betrays this long-term scheme and intention of the U.S. The relocation plan has nothing to do with "the China threat" or "the North Korea threat" as Washington and a sycophantic Tokyo are busy to ballyhoo.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But they have remained. That means, Okinawa has remained as a U.S. military colony ever since, which may continue into infinity unless something is done to check it.

Show me proof where it says that Okinawa is a legitimate or documented colony of the US, if you don't, then you are speculating your own personal POV.

If you say you are for the bases, it means you think the status quo, the resultt of U.S. egoism, must be maintained indefinitely -- that is, Okinawa must a U.S. military colony forever. The Henoko relocation plan betrays this long-term scheme and intention of the U.S. The relocation plan has nothing to do with "the China threat" or "the North Korea threat" as Washington and a sycophantic Tokyo are busy to ballyhoo.

I already explained to you why I believe and feel, the bases should stay, but NOT by what you outlined. Again, you are injecting from your viewpoint how you feel and that Okinawa would be better off without the bases. Obviously, the military, Tokyo and Washington have a different take and I think they know more than either of us what is more in the long run best interest for the Island. Again, this is more paranoia at its absolute worst.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

bass4funk Feb. 26, 2014 - 10:52AM JST

You ask me:

Show me proof where it says that Okinawa is a legitimate or documented colony of the US, if you don't, then you are speculating your own personal POV

.

Any casual observer of Okinawa can tell Okinawa is none other than a U.S. military colony. There is no doubt that the mindset of the U.S. military personnel stationed in Okinawa, or Washington policy makers' in that regard, is that Okinawa as a whole is a U.S. fortress where Okinawans live in land unused by the military. In their perception, Okinawa is indeed nothing but their military colony.

They and their dependents enter/exit Okinawa (or Japan) freely without showing passports or I.D.s to the Japanese authorities as I pointed out in my posting dated Feb. 21, 2014 - 06:51PM JST. They are also guaranteed extraterritorial rights that are beyond Japanese law and live in highly comfortable and exclusive community environments as if bases were U.S. towns with every accommodation furnished, as one poster here described (Cf. atrueokinawan Feb. 17, 2014 - 12:43PM JST).

And I'm not the only one who thinks Okinawa is a U.S. military colony. Read articles dealing with the Okinawa issue in Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus. Doug Bandow, formerly the Reagan administration's political adviser and now a senior researcher with the Cato Institute, is more blunt and direct. Read his "Okinawa: Liberating Washington’s East Asian Military Colony" (Cato Institute: Policy Analysis No. 314)

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Any casual observer of Okinawa can tell Okinawa is none other than a U.S. military colony. There is no doubt that the mindset of the U.S. military personnel stationed in Okinawa, or Washington policy makers' in that regard, is that Okinawa as a whole is a U.S. fortress where Okinawans live in land unused by the military. In their perception, Okinawa is indeed nothing but their military colony.

No one thinks that! As I said, where are the Carl's Jr.? Okinawa is seen nothing more than a vital staging ground for a military assault were we to engage China in the likely hood there would be conflict. Nothing more.

They and their dependents enter/exit Okinawa (or Japan) freely without showing passports or I.D.s to the Japanese authorities as I pointed out in my posting dated Feb. 21, 2014 - 06:51PM JST. They are also guaranteed extraterritorial rights that are beyond Japanese law and live in highly comfortable and exclusive community environments as if bases were U.S. towns with every accommodation furnished, as one poster here described (Cf. atrueokinawan Feb. 17, 2014 - 12:43PM JST).

Those are some of the perks and privileges you get when you are in the military, they also carry guns whereas regular civilians can't come on now, of course, it's NOT the same. I always see cops breaking the speed limit, but woe on you, if you do it.

And I'm not the only one who thinks Okinawa is a U.S. military colony. Read articles dealing with the Okinawa issue in Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus. Doug Bandow, formerly the Reagan administration's political adviser and now a senior researcher with the Cato Institute, is more blunt and direct. Read his "Okinawa: Liberating Washington’s East Asian Military Colony" (Cato Institute: Policy Analysis No. 314)

It really doesn't matter if some people in the US or Japan think that Okinawa is a territory of the US it is not and thinking so is ludicrous.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

bass4funk (Mar. 03, 2014 - 09:48AM JST):

You say:

Okinawa is seen nothing more than a vital staging ground for a military assault were we to engage China in the likely hood there would be conflict. Nothing more

You've perfectly proved my allegation that Okinawa is a U.S. military colony by saying that Okinawa would be a vital staging ground for a possible military assault against China if a conflict were to occur. In the past, Okinawa was a "vital staging ground" for attacks anywhere on Korean Peninsula and in Vietnam, and in recent years a "vital" staging post for troop deployment abroad such as in Iraq and Afghanistan. Such military action clearly violates what is stipulated in the Japan-U.S. Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security. The fact that the U.S. can use Okinawa bases for whatever purposes it considers useful for its global military strategy betrays that Okinawa is none other than a U.S. military colony.

There are many prominent opinion leaders the world over who share this view with me. They say the projected plan to relocate Futenma to Henoko would be carried out only "to deepen and extend the military COLONIZATION of Okinawa at the expense of the people and the environment." Please read the "International Petition for Okinawa" signed by those luminaries (http://chn.ge/1ecQPUJ), that will be sent to U.S. President Barack Obama very soon.

Those are some of the perks and privileges you get when you are in the military, they also carry guns whereas regular civilians can't come on now, of course, it's NOT the same. I always see cops breaking the speed limit, but woe on you, if you do it.

I know police officers have such special perks as you mention but, mind you, these perks are given to them only when they are on duty. Can they break the speed limit while they are off duty? Are these perks given to their dependents, too?

It really doesn't matter if some people in the US or Japan think that Okinawa is a territory of the US it is not and thinking so is ludicrous.

Explain why the opinion of those luminaries who think that Okinawa is a U.S. military colony is ludicrous.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You've perfectly proved my allegation that Okinawa is a U.S. military colony by saying that Okinawa would be a vital staging ground for a possible military assault against China if a conflict were to occur.

No, I did not. I said, that militarily and stratigically it would be of course better for US forces to be in Okinawa. You just wanted to embellish that point. This is exactly how words and quotes get out of context.

Explain why the opinion of those luminaries who think that Okinawa is a U.S. military colony is ludicrous.

What people think and the actual wording and what is written in stone are two completely different scenarios. I canst worry about opinions from other people, I only care about what was written and what is important for the entire country and to have the troops withdraw from Okinawa is a huge mistake.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass4funk (Mar. 03, 2014 - 07:08PM JST):

No, I did not. I said, that militarily and strategically it would be of course better for US forces to be in Okinawa. You just wanted to embellish that point. This is exactly how words and quotes get out of context.

Only the privileged people of a colonial power or an empire can say that, disregarding the suffering of people it dominates and colonizes. Have you forgotten about the early history of the U.S.A.?

What people think and the actual wording and what is written in stone are two completely different scenarios. I canst worry about opinions from other people, I only care about what was written and what is important for the entire country and to have the troops withdraw from Okinawa is a huge mistake.

Do you mean to say what they think and what they write down are completely two different things? If so, these people must be all schizophrenic. But are they? And is this the reason why you think their thinking about the Futenma relocation issue is ludicrous?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Only the privileged people of a colonial power or an empire can say that, disregarding the suffering of people it dominates and colonizes. Have you forgotten about the early history of the U.S.A.?

You're calling the US an Empire? So what was Japan once called? And what did it do with that empire. Okinawa is a part of Japan because it willingly asked to be part of it?

Do you mean to say what they think and what they write down are completely two different things? If so, these people must be all schizophrenic. But are they? And is this the reason why you think their thinking about the Futenma relocation issue is ludicrous?

Given the current tragic events that are NOW taking place in the Ukraine, reinforces my point and gives even more reason as to why troops should remain in Okinawa at all cost. That is why moving it, would be a suicide move, it would embolden China who's watching these events unfold and we can't let that happen! Simple as that.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

bass4funk (Mar. 05, 2014 - 07:17AM JST):

You're calling the US an Empire? So what was Japan once called? And what did it do with that empire. Okinawa is a part of Japan because it willingly asked to be part of it?

Japan called itself "Empire of Greater Japan" until that empire was crushed into non-existence in 1945. If imperialism or expansionism is what characterizes an empire, Japan was certainly an empire whether it called itself by that name or not. In that sense, the U.S. is also categorized as an empire because its history has been a history of territorial expansion.

Imperialism today doesn't take the form of overt occupation and colonization of foreign land as was the case in 19th and 29th centuries. Instead, today's empire dominates and controls foreign countries by planting and maintaining military bases there through facades of agreements. Today, the U.S. keeps more than 700 bases all over the world, the scale and scope unknown to world history. Compared with today's U.S., empires such as Roman Empire, Mongolian Empire or Ottoman Empire pales.

It is certainly because of this that scholars like Andrew J. Bacevich and Chalmers Johnson called the U.S. "American Empire". By the way, do you know why New York is also known by the alias "Empire State"?

Given the current tragic events that are NOW taking place in the Ukraine, reinforces my point and gives even more reason as to why troops should remain in Okinawa at all cost. That is why moving it, would be a suicide move, it would embolden China who's watching these events unfold and we can't let that happen! Simple as that.

The Futenma-to-Henoko relocation plan is part of the overall U.S. military's realignment in this region. It has nothing to do with the Ukraine issue nor with the territorial row between Japan and China. Isn't the U.S. stance that it does not take a position on the territorial dispute, thus urging both Japan and China to resolve the problem through negotiations?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan called itself "Empire of Greater Japan" until that empire was crushed into non-existence in 1945. If imperialism or expansionism is what characterizes an empire, Japan was certainly an empire whether it called itself by that name or not. In that sense, the U.S. is also categorized as an empire because its history has been a history of territorial expansion.

Utter nonsense, there are no lands that we comphiscated, we don't have a dozen colonies. Not even close, a super power, Yes, but an empire, not in the least. Never were, never wanted to be.

Imperialism today doesn't take the form of overt occupation and colonization of foreign land as was the case in 19th and 29th centuries. Instead, today's empire dominates and controls foreign countries by planting and maintaining military bases there through facades of agreements.

Today, the U.S. keeps more than 700 bases all over the world, the scale and scope unknown to world history. Compared with today's U.S., empires such as Roman Empire, Mongolian Empire or Ottoman Empire pales.

That's not imperialism, that's national security and protecting our natural interests meaning, the safety and freedom of all Americans as well as our allies. It's a good thing, Obama cutting the military budget is the absolute worst thing, this guy could have done. 3 more years until the nightmare is over.

It is certainly because of this that scholars like Andrew J. Bacevich and Chalmers Johnson called the U.S. "American Empire". By the way, do you know why New York is also known by the alias "Empire State"?

Again, you want to call the US something that it's not, but if it makes you feel better, then please use that euphanism, but I vehemitely disagree with that analogy, but for arguments sake in lue of what's going in in the Ukraine. I think now more than ever it is pertinent that the US stays right where it's at. Even more so now, it is evident that leaving Okinawa would be a monumental mistake.

The Futenma-to-Henoko relocation plan is part of the overall U.S. military's realignment in this region. It has nothing to do with the Ukraine issue nor with the territorial row between Japan and China. Isn't the U.S. stance that it does not take a position on the territorial dispute, thus urging both Japan and China to resolve the problem through negotiations?

Yes, that is true but China is increasingly becoming more embolden by what's going on in the Ukraine, of course they are, thinking they are not is completely naive. And the slow postering of China is making many in Japan and Washington cautious and a bit uneasy. If China is to wage any type of aggression militarily, it would have to do that within the window of the next 3 years. They know Obama is weak and doesn't have the stomach for this long term.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass4funk:(Mar. 09, 2014 - 07:11PM JST )

Actually, I am in appreciation to you for your insistence to keep this thread to go on and on. It gives me rare chances to keep appealing to the world for Okinawa's harsh plight as a U.S. military colony.

For starters, you said that if we didn't like U.S. bases we should leave Okinawa. LOL. Mind you, yours is exactly the mindset an imperialist-minded person holds. The law of the jungle is his code of conduct.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Actually, I am in appreciation to you for your insistence to keep this thread to go on and on. It gives me rare chances to keep appealing to the world for Okinawa's harsh plight as a U.S. military colony.

If you pay attention to recent geopolitical events, now would NOT be the time for the US to leave, NOT at all. With all that is going on, it's better the troops stay where they are.

For starters, you said that if we didn't like U.S. bases we should leave Okinawa. LOL. Mind you, yours is exactly the mindset an imperialist-minded person holds. The law of the jungle is his code of conduct.

Realist would be more of a more accurate term.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass4funk (Mar. 16, 2014 - 04:22PM JST):

Is there any possibility for a potential enemy to launch an attack on Japanese cities before they attack U.S. bases in Japan? A full scale attack on Japan thus means a full scale attack on U.S. bases in Japan, such as Kadena, Yokota and Misawa Air Bases.

This will boil down to: What is the meaning of us Okinawans hosting the bulk of U.S. bases in Japan? As one poster on another thread correctly pointed out, Okinawa has suffered all these 69 years way too much for too little or for nothing.

A self-righteous realist like you says this state of affairs must go on indefinitely just as it has been that way for the past 69 years.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Okinawa has suffered all these 69 years way too much for too little or for nothing."

Heck, Okinawa suffered a lot more during the Japanese occupation up til 1945.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Serrano:

Historically, Okinawa was incorporated into the Chinse tributary system just like other East Asian countries. But the Chinese court treated Okinawa, the Ryukyu Kingdom, most respectfully and humanely among all tributary countries. Trade was almost unilateral, overwhelmingly in favor of Okinawa

The Satsuma Clan of Kyushu, Japan, invaded Ryukyu in 1609 and made Ryukyu its tributary, but it didn't occupy Ryukyu. In 1871, Imperial Japan forcefully incorporated Ryukyu into Japan, renaming it as Okinawa Prefecture. The King was raised to the peerage.

Okinawa was an economically and politically neglected area from 1871 up until 1945, the poorest prefecture of all prefectures. The Meiji government poured its money and resources to Taiwan and Korea so that they could be shown to the world as a proof that Japan could operate and administer colonies just like Western powers.

In June 1945, the U.S. forces invaded and occupied Okinawa, professing themselves as liberators of Okinawa from Japanese imperialism. But it soon turned out that they were not liberators at all but literal oppressors. Private lands were encroached upon with impunity and turned into huge bases. Political oppression was beyond description. Human rights were tramped on unsparingly if anyone were opposed to the occupation policy.

It was under such conditions that people began to yarn for Japan, now reborn a democracy with the ideal peace constitution. Okinawans naively thought that if Okinawa was returned to Japan, they could also enjoy peace and human dignity guaranteed by new Japan's peace constitution. U.S. bases would be eliminated or at lease reduced significantly.

But what did we find? Japan was a U.S. vassal after all and does as its master dictates. Okinawa remains a U.S. military colony with sycophantic Tokyo's full support.

Serrano, you say, "Okinawa suffered a lot more during the Japanese occupation up till 1945." LOL. You still believe so?

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