I think it's more about the US military being pissed that the Japanese are talking back to its "masters". Why else would they be so adamant on not not listening to the indigenous people that want them off. I mean its only 8,000 troops. What difference does it make if they move the base outside of Okinawa, or on some tiny rock outside of Japan, or not at all. Are they talking about ALL troops leaving Japan? Don't they still have another 30-40,000 troops defending Japan? Plus it's not like Japan doesn't have any military of their own (granted its not the same military since its hey day). Will Japan wilt to an attacking NKorea or China if those 8,000 troops are not in Nago(or in the vicinity)? That's what I want to know. Will a NKorea or China even attack? If not then throw the Okinawans a bone for crissakes. Let them move the base somewhere where there are no screaming Okinawans saying "get the hell out". And make the Japanese gov't pay for it (moving expenses) - like how they usually do.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
I'm confused - is Okinawa a part of the United States or Japan? As far as I know the island was handed back to the Japanese some 30 years ago. Don't the Japanese have any say as to how to use their own land? What is even more curious is having the Japanese fit the relocation bill????
Sometimes I don't know if this is more about protecting the stability of the region or more about projecting power. Go figure.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Posted in: Lower house passes fiscal 2024 budget