politics

New Okinawan governor takes office

52 Comments

New Okinawan Gov Takeshi Onaga took office on Wednesday, determined to block the proposed plan to relocate a U.S. military base from Futenma to Henoko.

Last month, Onaga, 64, ousted incumbent Hirokazu Nakaima by 360,820 votes to 261,076.

Nakaima, who had approved Tokyo's plan to relocate the base within Okinawa, cautioned Onaga in his farewell speech on Tuesday. Nakima urged Onaga to move ahead with the plan instead of just saying no, which wouldn't settle anything, he said. He reiterated that the current plan was the only viable solution.

Onaga has promised to veto the landfill work needed for a new base to be built.

Any veto would leave Prime Minister Shinzo Abe having either to overrule locally-elected officials -- risking charges of authoritarianism -- or reverting to the cajoling and persuading of recent years, which would not be popular with Japan's close ally the United States.

Years of deadlock on the planned base relocation have frustrated the Americans and been a thorn in the side of successive Japanese governments.

Okinawa is home to more than half of the 47,000 U.S. service personnel stationed in Japan, and strategically key to the US-Japan security alliance at a time of simmering tensions in East Asia.

But there is widespread local hostility to the military presence, with complaints over noise, the risk of accidents and a perception that the presence of so many young servicemen is a source of crime.

There have been plans for years to move the Futenma air base from a crowded urban area to a sparsely populated coastal district elsewhere on Okinawa -- some 50 kilometers to the north of the current location.

But opponents like Onaga say Okinawa already hosts a disproportionate share of the U.S. military presence in Japan, and the U.S. base should be moved outside the islands altogether.

After his election, Onaga said: "I'd like to convey the message to the governments of Japan and the United States... that the wishes of the people here are different from the administrative action in December last year," referring to his predecessor's about-face.

Onaga said he would "act with determination" toward retracting approval for the landfill work.

© Japan Today/AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

52 Comments
Login to comment

Any veto would leave Prime Minister Shinzo Abe having either to overrule locally-elected officials—

Like Abe really cares?

or reverting to the cajoling and persuading of recent years, which would not be popular with Japan’s close ally the United States.

This is what Abe really does care about.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Onaga represents the majority of Okinawan people.

That's why he is governor of Okinawa.

Abe represents the right wing rich.

That's why he is PM.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Guess Futenma is staying where it is.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Okinawa now has a communist governor who favors China and Russia. He does not represent a majority of the Okinawa people only the bias ones who work for the autocratic group who controls the media.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

Just a totally unloaded question straight out of curiosity from a Canadian to the Americans of JT.

If you could call the shots would you keep them here or take them home? And why?

Again, just curious, for those of you who bother to give me an answer thank you for your time.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@scipantheistDEC. 11, 2014 - 09:16AM JST Guess Futenma is staying where it is.

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

I hope new governor will promote Okinawa becoming tourist haven, Many tourist prefer no snow area in winter. Better than visiting Hong Kong.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@F4HA604 I would keep them in Okinawa. No territory is as good for keeping China where it belongs except possibly Kyushu. Guam is too far away to be effective for holding troops or refueling ships. Japan can go it alone and throw the US out if they want, but they haven't had the courage (or stupidity) to do so.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

"a perception that the presence of so many young servicemen is a source of crime." With all due respect to the writer, I live here, and there is NO perception of crime by the military. There are a plethora of incidents of crime, many of which of unreported.

true okinawa: Do you even know what the word "communist" means?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

The American military should imagine how Americans would react if the shoe was on the other foot and the Japanese military was stationed in the US If they feel that would be unacceptable then that is the dictionary definition of hypocrisy

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Im sure hell be overrule.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@True Okinawa: wow so wow.... firstly, I doubt the new governor wants to nationalize the means of production or abolish the banking system (although your hyperbole is always good for the clichéd laugh). Secondly, Russia and China are communist? really? Workers rule the country?? Thirdly, so what if that is what Okinawans want: if they wanted to be communist who is anybody to tell them not to... Please look up these words in the dictionary: communism, democracy, laughably wrong

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Good luck /governor ! Please make Okinawa tourist mecca of Japan for people who can;t stand cold places. I prefer Olinawa to Hong Kong, Singapore or Macao.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Onaga represents the majority of Okinawan people.

This is not an accurate statement...Onaga represents 360,820, out of a population of over 1.4 million people not to mention that he had well over 300,000 votes AGAINST him, and only 64% or so of eligible voters actually voted in the election.

Onaga does not have the backing of the majority of people here, he has the backing of the old folks, just like the one's who vote for Abe and the LDP. They really are apathetic about the issues and vote based upon their image of what someone their own age can do for them.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@YubaruL As usually you have numbers correct to let us know real percent, etc. I hope Onaga will work for more on Okinawa than concentrate on base situation

1 ( +1 / -0 )

http://www.pref.okinawa.jp/site/senkan_i/event/tijisen/documents/tikaisaisyuu.xls

That is a link to the actual election results, it's a heck of a lot closer than people think when looking at the individual cities, towns and village results.

Onaga won, yes, but he does not have an overwhelming mandate and needs to consider the effects of what will happen to ALL of Okinawa if he chooses to fight Tokyo on this ONE issue.

Okinawa's tourist income has exploded this year, (upwards) and the total number of foreign tourists in the first six months of this fiscal year has already come close ( 20,000 people) to passing last years record total of close to 650,000 people, or roughly 10% of the total number of tourists that visit Okinawa yearly.

The International terminal at Naha AP is close to capacity already, running at roughly 80% to 90% and it was just opened up earlier this year. With the addition of a new runway (currently under construction) Okinawa will funding for infrastructure improvements to continue to grow the tourist industry here.

THAT is a bigger problem in many ways than Henoko and the base move, and Nakaima had his eyes open to the bigger picture than Onaga and his one issue stance.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Johnken6: The American military should imagine how Americans would react if the shoe was on the other foot and the Japanese military was stationed in the US If they feel that would be unacceptable then that is the dictionary definition of hypocrisy

If the shoe was on the other foot I don't see how Americans could see it as unacceptable.

USA being harsh would be moving all the Okinawan population to the Japanese mainland and turning Ryukyu into their private islands, as with Diego Garcia.

There are at least a couple of US states that complain about the high percentage of federal lands in their domains. Never heard that much was done about it.

And someone's post on another JT thread about Okinawa mentioned crimes by US military there are less per capita than those by the local populace, maybe should import more US people than less.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Yubaru, turnout has no effect on the election. It is the majority of the votes cast. Our new Governor is opposed to the new American base and destruction of the Okinawa ecosystem. So Americans only believe in "democracy" when it goes along with their plans? If a vote was permitted the majority of the Okinawa people would vote to close ALL of the American bases.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

I wish him luck blocking the transfer to Henoko

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Our new Governor is opposed to the new American base and destruction of the Okinawa ecosystem.

You only learned about the ecosystem because of the proposed base move, before that NO ONE cared. Plus when did Onaga become the Governor of Oklahoma?

If a vote was permitted the majority of the Okinawa people would vote to close ALL of the American bases.

Geez...permitted? If you really knew what was going on here you would know that ONE of the candidates proposed a referendum (binding) on the issue, but neither Onaga nor Nakaima want that...every wonder why?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Onaga does not have the backing of the majority of people here

Onaga has the backing of the majority of those who voted. The ones who couldn't be bothered to vote have no grounds to complain.

I expect Onaga will soon be visiting Tokyo, returning with his pockets stuffed with cash and having had a change of mind about his anti-base stance. Just like Nakaima.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

"Just a totally unloaded question straight out of curiosity from a Canadian to the Americans of JT."

Of course they should be brought home. Should have happened in 1952. Nor should they remain in Germany or any of these (international) locations:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases

1 ( +2 / -1 )

So Americans only believe in "democracy" when it goes along with their plans?

Following this logic, Okinawa should declare independence from Japan and see what Tokyo has to say about it. There will inevitably be a minority that don't get their way, even in a democracy, even if they are all located in one spot.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

F4HA604DEC. 11, 2014 - 09:46AM JST Just a totally unloaded question straight out of curiosity from a Canadian to the Americans of JT.

If you could call the shots would you keep them here or take them home? And why?

Again, just curious, for those of you who bother to give me an answer thank you for your time.

I'd back taking them home. Japan seems to be moving towards standing on it's own 2 feet, the locals seem to do nothing but b!tch about it, and really the majority of Americans are tired of our government trying to be the worlds cop(to put it kindly). This doesn't begin to touch upon the fact that for all of the "talk" about allies, most Americans could give a rats ass about Japan, or many of our other so called allies. The people of the US don't "want" Japan, if they did we would have taken it during WW2, so we don't really care if China wants it or not.

I apologize if this seems rude or blunt, but the majority think of Japan as ninjas and sushi, otherwise they just don't care, and all of this BS is at the behest of the politicians and their handlers.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I am sorry to see such rude posts about what Americans Think about Japan. Intelilgent and caring Americans respect and honour Japan and admire a fine country that has done amazing things in all of its history, not just in the past 40 years. Japan has been a nation and a vibrant culture for hundreds and hundreds of years, and has stood up to the united attacks of China before and won, not be invading china but by defending itself. That is what it is doing now, and tho the American presence is a help, and the bases part of that, it is important for such bases to be placed with respect, and Okinawa is NOT the best place for them. It is a precious cultural resource for both Okinawans and for the people from the mainland. It is a decision that should be made by Japan not by the US. And we in the US who admire Japan do so for much much more than a few cliche images of superfical media.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Well... where do I go from here? I do admire some things about Japan. However... The question didn't ask me to consult you about your feelings. I'll post it again in case you missed it.

"If you could call the shots would you keep them here or take them home? And why?"

Looked at in the simplest of terms I'd have to be some sort of politico to have the power to call the shots, and attempted to answer accordingly. As I stated before... The majority of Americans are tired of policing the world. But thanks for insulting their intelligence and compassion. So as a politico, you would have me ignore the wishes of the majority of the populace, in favor of what exactly? Or which vocal minority?

While you yourself may love Japan and it's history, and it's cultural contributions to the world, and maybe it's manga and plush toys... Should you assume/demand that all intelligent caring Americans feel the same way about Japan? What about intelligent caring Americans who hold French culture dear? Or possibly even Greek? Italian? Or Irish culture? Because they don't share your interests in Japan does this make them stupid and uncaring?

Japan does have a lot of history, and some really admirable things going on, but that doesn't change the reality that most Americans could care less, nor does it make them stupid. If anything most of them are more concerned with the things going on in their own country right now, and working towards/wondering if, there is a way to clean up their own backyard.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@ubaru Nakaima had his eyes open to the bigger picture than Onaga and his one issue stance.

This could be the reason Nakaima lost election? He did not concentrate on only base problem. /wait Onaga goes to Tokyo and faces sly mainland politicians who never visited Okinawa.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Amazing how a local prefectural government can block carrying out an agreement made years ago by the national government.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Move the base to one of the de-populated areas on the Mainland. It'll stimulate the local economy and alleviate some of the burden on the people of Okinawa. They have been incredibly patient all these years and Governor Onaga is saying enough is enough. I wish him all the best.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@scipantheist, jcapan, ramses68

Thanks for taking the time to give me your 2 cents.

As expected you guys are pretty split on the issue. IMO, taking into account both the tennets of the treaty between Japan and the USA, the geopolitical/powerbalance circumstances, and the various conflicting interests (money) that play a factor in not just Okinawa but the rest of Japan, I think any sort of "resolution" to this will have to come from the US people "putting down their foot" in whichway or the other (maybe by voting in Ron Paul XD).

One factor that seems to be forgotten in this debate is the rather silent but influential voice of wealthy Okinawan landowners who make massive amounts of money off renting out land for the base in Futenma. Behind the scenes these people contribute just as much to the confusion as do the retired Japanese mainlander activists who move to Okinawa to join in on the brou-haha posing as Okinawan natives. Hidden agendas....

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Yubaru,

Historians estimate that only 40 to 45 percent of colonists in the 13 colonies supported the American revolutionary war. The Patriots' cause was thus not fully supported by all American colonists. The majority were neutrals. And yet the Patriots' cause was right and righteous, I think.

Do you think 360,820 votes Onaga won out of 650,362 votes as against Nakaima's 261,076 were a minuscule win for Onaga? And that despite the central government's frantic support of Nakaima?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

nd that despite the central government's frantic support of Nakaima?

I am surprised the monitors here allowed the beginning portion of your post..meaningless to the issue to say the least.

And this little part here is dead wrong. There was no frantic support, if you lived here you would know that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

First of all the only reason MCAS Futenma is being closed is because of the brutal rape of a 12 year old child by 3 Marines. Before that incident, there was never an American or Japanese official who said that Futenma was dangerous and should be closed. They only started saying that when they wanted to try and get the Okinawan people to approve of the Henoko Relocation. All Air Bases are dangerous including the JSDF Air Base that shares Naha Airport.

MCAS Futenma could have easily been added to Kadena Air Base where there are 2 runways one of which is already used by the U.S. Navy and they even have their own control tower. Both the U.S. Navy and Marines have troops stationed and living on Kadena Air Base already. It could also have been put at Camp Hansen which is a Marine Base and has so much available land. By building on that beautiful ocean spot, the U.S. and Japan are only adding insult to injury to the people of Okinawa. But that is the most expensive option and that is what the Japanese Govt. wants, to give a lot of money to their LDP construction company buddies. Big Mainland Construction Companies will make the bulk of the money. Just think of the Henoko Project as a massive pork barrel spending project disguised as necessary for the defense of Japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Before that incident, there was never an American or Japanese official who said that Futenma was dangerous and should be closed.

Actually yes there were complaints, just not published in the national or world press. The concerns about Futenma go back a lot longer than the 96' rape incident.

They only started saying that when they wanted to try and get the Okinawan people to approve of the Henoko Relocation

Actually the US wanted to move Futenma to Henoko in 1968 but were turned down (funding) by the Japanese government as Okinawa was not a part of Japan back then.

All Air Bases are dangerous including the JSDF Air Base that shares Naha Airport.

Just as much as LAX is to LA but you don't hear people clamoring for it to be closed. The danger is relative to the location and type of aircraft being flown out of Futenma. It IS dangerous and should be closed.

MCAS Futenma could have easily been added to Kadena Air Base where there are 2 runways one of which is already used by the U.S. Navy and they even have their own control tower. Both the U.S. Navy and Marines have troops stationed and living on Kadena Air Base already.

Navy yes, but no Marines permanently stationed there, and it still could be moved, BUT the problem here is with the US military and NOT the Japanese government. Intra-service rivalries come into play on this one. Stupid BS in reality.

But that is the most expensive option and that is what the Japanese Govt. wants, to give a lot of money to their LDP construction company buddies. Big Mainland Construction Companies will make the bulk of the money. Just think of the Henoko Project as a massive pork barrel spending project disguised as necessary for the defense of Japan.

Not even close here, the most expensive option would have been to move it to one of the islands north of Okinawa which have no installations at all, but the plans were shut down. Henoko is actually one of the less expensive options on the table. Because it connects with an existing facility.

The reason for Henoko is the US just brushing off old plans that it wanted in the first place. Oh and the people who actually live in Henoko are split 50-50 (literally) on the base being relocated there. There was an election for the leader of the district and it was an exact 50 votes for/against with the FOR winning in the end.

Nice try at obfuscating the issues.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yubaru (Dec. 11, 2014 - 11:46AM JST; Dec. 12, 2014 - 01:45PM JST)

You say Onaga doesn't represent the majority of Okinawan people but only represents 360,820 people "out of a population of 1.4 million." With this figures you seem to want to say Onaga represents a mere 24 percent of the whole population.

Note, however, the voter turnout was 650,362, with the voting rate of about 61 percent. Onaga won 360,820 out of 650,362 or 55 percent as against Nakaima's 261,076 or 40 percent. Which percentage is more impressive, Onaga's 55 percent or Nakaima's 40 percent? I call this margin an overwhelming victory for Onaga.

My reference to the American Revolutionary War must be considered in this context. It's not totally unrelated.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@yubaru: I was stationed in Okinawa from '67 to '68 and have lived here as a civilian since '71 and before that rape incident I have never heard a High-Level U.S. Military, U.S. Govt. or Japanese Govt. person say that MCAS Futenma was a dangerous base and must be closed. There have always been local complaints but they always fell on deaf ears. My point is there was no real concern for the safety of the people of Futenma by the U.S. or Japan before the rape incident.

I have never heard that the U.S asked Japan in '68 to fund that move but it is possible they did. I always heard that the U.S. Senate kept turning down their request because they were spending so much money on the Vietnam War. My belief is that MCAS Futenma was decided to be closed not because of safety concerns but because of the outrage shown by the Okinawan people after that rape incident. As far as I know, there were no concrete plans being discussed to re-locate MCAS Futenma before that incident took place. It appears to me that someone saw the opportunity to use a tragic event to get the Japanese Taxpayers to build a facility that they could not afford to build.

There used to be 3 multi-storied buildings and a single story building in Kadena Air Base near the Housing Office where single Marines lived but I do not know if they still do.

I stick by my contention that the Henoko option is more expensive than any of the options that were seriously considered. The land reclamation work alone is a massive amount. The J-bureaucrats have said that they wanted the Henoko plan because it would cost more money and give local companies more. But the truth is most of that money will go big mainland companies who have retired bureaucrats from the Defense Agency working for them. Just like the GOJ money that is used to build facilities inside the bases, the cake goes to Mainland Japan and the crumbs stay in Okinawa.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I wish the new governor all the best. He's thumbing his nose at Abe, so that alone deserves some respect in these trouble times

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Americans say the bases are needed to keep Mainland China from Invading Okinawa. I say BULLFROG! There are so many places they could invade without opposition. Like the Philippines which is defenseless against an assault by any real military. Their navy is a sad joke and a single frigate of the SDF could sink their main fleet in minutes. They have no fighters to defend their airspace. While Japan is the #3 Navy and Mainland China is #6. True they have a large Navy but how will they get to Japan? Swim?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

YuriOtani: Americans say the bases are needed to keep Mainland China from Invading Okinawa.

Why should Americans worry about China invading a few islands?

Fishing rights?

Forces on Okinawa provide a deterrence for monkey business in all of East Asia.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Onaga represents the majority of Okinawan people.

That's why he is governor of Okinawa.

Abe represents the right wing rich.

That's why he is PM.

Onaga doesn't have to worry about the security of his island because he demands that the Japanese government do it for him. Onaga only has to worry about how to increase tourism. That's why he's irresponsible.

Abe has to worry about the security of the entire nation of Japan - including a whiny prefecture to the south that refuses to accept their part in maintaining the country's security.

I've often said that if the Okinawans really are so fed up with the situation that they should secede. They should move the Americans and the JSDF off the island and defend the rock themselves. Yeah. how's that worked for Okinawans in the past? They won't do it. They CAN'T do it. They don't have the determination to make that sort of expenditure to fund 100% of their defense. After all, money spent on defense takes away from money spent on tourism, right? So no, they won't do that. Instead, they'll fall under the "umbrella" of some other nearby nation's military protection and... gee... they need the airfields that were recently vacated by the Americans and the JSDF. To quote The Who:

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.
1 ( +1 / -0 )

Fadamor, et al.:

There's no Okinawan, conservative or progressive, who doesn't think however vaguely that U.S. bases must go someday somehow. They cannot be planted here forever.

But the recent gubernatorial election's point at issue was not about this. It was about whether USMC Futenma Air Station, one among 33 U.S. bases, should be closed unconditionally or with the condition that its replacement should be built at Henoko in northern Okinawa.

So, please posters, stick your argument only to this topic.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Onaga doesn't have to worry about the security of his island because he demands that the Japanese government do it for him. Onaga only has to worry about how to increase tourism. That's why he's irresponsible.

In a nutshell this is what it comes down to, but without the assistance of funding from the national government Okinawa can not afford the infrastructure improvements needed to keep pace with the increase in tourists that are flooding the island. Okinawa will within the next few years have more tourists here than Hawaii. Hawaii gets a little over 8 million tourists per year. Okinawa's tourist "goal" is 10,000,000 by the 2020 Olympic year.

Onaga is walking a fine line by campaigning basically on one issue, he gave little in the way he plans to improve or assist the economy, and if he shuts down, what he can, with regards to moving Futenma to Henoko, he runs the risk of having Okinawa's economy being run into the ground (again) like when Ota Masahide was Gov.

There's no Okinawan, conservative or progressive, who doesn't think however vaguely that U.S. bases must go someday somehow.

This is not an accurate statement and just an opinion of yours here and do us all a favor and follow your own advice.

So, please posters, stick your argument only to this topic.

Lol! PKB

0 ( +0 / -0 )

F4HA60 4Dec. 11, 2014 - 09:46AM JST: Just a totally unloaded question straight out of curiosity from a Canadian to the Americans of JT. If you could call the shots would you keep them here or take them home? And why?

In the old days, before satellites, hurricanes would hit land without warning and entire towns' populations washed away.

China, Japan, Russia were all beaten pretty badly by WWII. But it didn't take Russia long to get nukes after USA did. Japan was lucky Russia didn't eat them up.

Okinawa is like a fortress overseeing the entire East Asian seaboard (sans Sakhalin, etc.), with Guam for backup.

It didn't stop China and Russia from stirring things up on land during the Cold War. But they've never had much in the way of a naval threat, so you can see the US Pacific bases as something like the Iron Curtain in Europe but on the Pacific.

There is probably a lot of feeling that US needs bases in Europe and Asia to avoid having to go over there again in force.

Also, government in US at all levels (fed, state, local) is a terrible waster of money. It needs really inefficient things to waste money on, and military is one of the easiest ways to waste money. (If you are on the other side of the fence, it is not wasting, but gleaning.)

All these disparate things. But my feeling is US could drop all the bases it doesn't own and all the military aid to foreign states. That was basically the status before WWI, except for some adventures like the Phillipines. If things heat up, US could still come in afterward and clean up, and with modern tech wouldn't have the large tolls of US soldiers fallen in the World Wars. As long as things stayed conventional.

Not to forget that any war between major powers in modern era would have economic warfare much accelerated by modern computer management of economic systems.

Suppose Russia invaded Canada? That is a bit too close for comfort, but if it happened it would be a good excuse for Canada to become USA's Tibet.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Yubaru,

Never yield one square inch of spoils of land you seized in the war -- whatsoever. That's what you insist. Get over that victor's complex mentality and hubris. When did the war end?

Explain why the closing of one base hampers the overall U.S. military presence in the region.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Never yield one square inch of spoils of land you seized in the war -- whatsoever. That's what you insist. Get over that victor's complex mentality and hubris. When did the war end?

When you learn to comprehend what I write here I will answer your rather ignorant questions. I have clearly stated my positions regarding Futenma and base consolidation here in Okinawa on numerous occasions.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yubaru,

I can't skim your many posts on numerous threads all over again. So please write the gist of what you have written or think as regards why Futenma's function must be relocated within Okinawa.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I can't skim your many posts on numerous threads all over again. So please write the gist of what you have written or think as regards why Futenma's function must be relocated within Okinawa.

Reread my previous post.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yubaru unless you are a Japanese national, you have no say if the US bases stay or leave. As for the problems after the closing of all US bases, well Japan will be just fine. The Chinese Army can not swim to Japan and it will be a turkey shoot in the South China sea. Just think of all of those Chinese made artificial reefs. The SDF will harpoon the Chinese navy. We do not need Americans to defend Japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yubaru,

I reread your previous post dated Dec. 13, 2014 - 11:21AM JST and nowhere did I find an answer to my question why Futenma's function must be relocated within Okinawa.

You mention that, if Futenma was to move to Henoko, Onaga would run "the risk of having Okinawa's economy being run into the ground ... ." Wow, is that your answer? First time to have heard that as the reason why Futenma should be relocated to Henoko. Anyway, there's no military reason, you want to say. LOL.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Yubaru unless you are a Japanese national, you have no say if the US bases stay or leave.

Really? How so? You sitting across the Pacific Ocean in the US and spouting garbage has more of a right to have a say in what goes on here than someone who is a naturalized Japanese citizen?

@ Voice....

You really are lost...LOL!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yubaru unless you are a Japanese national, you have no say if the US bases stay or leave.

Well then I guess I have a say, and you really are out of touch with the reality here.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yubaru, again:

I reread your previous post dated Dec. 13, 2014 - 11:21AM JST and nowhere did I find an answer to my question why Futenma's function must be relocated within Okinawa.

You mention that, unless Futenma were to move to Henoko, Onaga would run "the risk of having Okinawa's economy being run into the ground ... ." Wow, is that your answer? First time to have heard that as the reason why Futenma should be relocated to Henoko. Anyway, there's no military reason for Futenma to have to be relocated within Okinawa.

LOL.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I reread your previous post dated Dec. 13, 2014 - 11:21AM JST and nowhere did I find an answer to my question why Futenma's function must be relocated within Okinawa.

To refresh your memory....

I have clearly stated my positions regarding Futenma and base consolidation here in Okinawa on numerous occasions.

The rest of what ever you ask me to reply to is well, tedious at best, I'll be ignoring you and your ignorance.

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