Desert Tortoise comments

What does this actually mean?

Anything that causes personnel injury or death and/or material damage or destruction of property

I thought Japan was supposed to be buying a load of these. Does this mean the deal is off?

Japan took delivery of their 17 Ospreys. All are operational.

 Basically, NATO needs Tukey more than Turkey needs NATO.

With Slovenia, Croatia, Albania, Romania and Bulgaria as NATO members NATO's southern flank is well protected. Turkiye has lost much of its strategic value.

Yes, precisely my point. Ankara needs to put its foot down and demand results instead of false promises.

The Turks need to cease the genocide of the Kurds ! The Turkish government has become a detestable Islamic dictatorship that doesn't deserve any respect from democracies. Sultan Erdogan is a small thin skinned man who cannot take the kinds of criticism that is part of being an elected representative of the people. Rather he is an authoritarian thug who's critics have to flee to other nations like Sweden of face arrest for exercising their basic human right of free speech.

I think there is an 'incident' involving an Osprey at least once a year either in Japan or globally, and the reaction from the "Team America" peeps is always "They are safer than helicopters". Hmmm, maybe they should think about either correcting the design flaw or leaving Asia all together.

In 90% of aviation mishaps, the "design flaw" is the human flying it. 90% of aviation mishaps are pilot or maintenance error, mistakes traceable to human shortcomings and often shortcomings in leadership. That is true for pretty much every aircraft operator in the world.

What qualifies as a "mishap"?

That is the official term for pranging and aircraft. Depending on the dollar value of the repairs needed, or if the aircraft is a total loss, there can be a Class A, B, C, D, or E mishap. Here are the current definitions.

https://navalsafetycommand.navy.mil/Resources/Current-Mishap-Definitions/

This aircraft has the worst safety record ever.

Far from it. Among current active aircraft in the Navy/Marine Corps inventory the C-20 Gulfstream IV has far and away the highest mishap rate, more than double that of the V-22. Older F/A-18C and D models also have higher mishap rates. and I believe the old CH-53E does too. They don't crash as frequently because they don't fly as much. They are difficult and hideously costly to maintain, and are down a lot. We used to joke that our Navy CH-53Es were static displays they were broken so often.

Historically there were aircraft like the F-104 that were so difficult to fly that some air forces crashed a quarter of the F-104s they ever bought ( while the JASDF had the best safety record of any F-104 operator ). The USAF crashed 288 B-47 bombers, 203 of which were destroyed out of some 2,000 procured. Ten percent of the fleet crashed. Going back further the USAF managed to crash over 2,400 F-86 Saber Jets, these are non combat mishaps, of these 1,422 were a total loss. The follow on F-100 Super Saber wasn't much safer with 1,161 Class A mishaps and 889 of these written off as a total loss.

Time to boot both Hungary and Turkiye from NATO. Neither nation upholds the values that NATO was formed to protect.

The US Navy started flying Super Hornets on a 50/50 blend of biofuel and regular JP5 way back in 2010 and by 2016 was flying a Growler, the electronic attack version of the Super Hornet on 100% biofuel.

https://www.navaltoday.com/2016/09/19/us-navy-growler-flies-on-100-percent-biofuel/

https://www.navair.navy.mil/node/10611

The US Navy is increasingly using biofuels to power their surface ships.

https://energydigital.com/renewable-energy/us-navy-sails-12000-miles-algae-biofuel

Twenty five years ago when I was still in grad school and driving fuel tank trucks all night to pay my way I was frequently hauling biofuel blends to the Marines at Camp Pendleton for their ground equipment.

You can always tell a Texan but you can't tell them much ...........

Going to take them awhile to find a biology textbook that embraces the bible, too.

I bet you could find one here :

https://www.roadsideamerica.com/story/9416

Still believing they can beat Trump??..

So funny...

They are positioning themselves to take advantage of any convictions handed down to Mr. Trump.

The Russians tried the same stunt with Poland two winters ago on their border with Belarus.

You say bases in the U.S. mainland and territories won't work as deterrence because of the "tyranny of distance." But what does the idea of "tyranny of distance" mean in missile-exchanging future wars?

If you think a war will be confined to an exchange of missiles you are not paying attention to how the PLA, PLAAF and PLAN train. The Chinese have built a large fleet of amphibious assault ships with well decks for hovercraft assault vehicles and 40,000 ton LHAs just like the US Navy operates. They are going to put division sized land forces on Okinawa or Taiwan and take cities with troops and occupy them. They train to conduct large scale landings WWII style. That means you have to have equal or greater land forces there to stop them along with the air power they need to fight off Chinese air power coming from their ships and from bases on mainland China. China has aircraft carriers now which means their naval forces now bring their own air force along with them. If their carriers can get past the First Island Chain and into blue water to the east then they can make it darned difficult to reinforce Okinawa or Taiwan. Keeping Chinese forces inside that First Island Chain is what the US Navy and Marine Corps are training for with the new Marine Littoral Regiments. They have to be ready to operate on day one with their Tilt Rotors from Futenma.

It’s JSDF that has primary responsibility, anyway, to directly deal with such an emergency.

It is a fantasy to believe the JSDF on its own could withstand a Chinese attack. Ten or fifteen years ago the JMSDF was more than a match for the PLAN. Today the PLAN is larger than the US Navy and would crush Japanese forces. Taiwan is in an even more precarious position. The only thing deterring the Chinese from attacking Taiwan and Japan are US forces in the region.

I take what you want to say is that if there is no deterrence, your antagonists would invade your country in no time just as Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo did. Is that the reason why U.S. bases must be in Japan? 

That is the lesson of history.

If your claim is correct, that is, if U.S. forces are here as a show of deterrence, can't they be dispatched from bases in the U.S. mainland or territories to help JSDF?

In the Pacific there is something we call the "tyranny of distance". Guam is some 2,300 km from Okinawa. It takes a little over four days to sail from Guam to Okinawa at the 14 knots cruising speed typical of amphibious transport ships. It take 3 weeks to sail from US west coast ports to Japan or Okinawa. Shanghai is only 823 km from Okinawa, or 36 hours by sea at the same speed. The PLANs East Sea Fleet base in Ningbo is even closer at 727 km, roughly a 32 hour trip at 14 knots. Don't ignore the number of days it would take to muster forces in west coast ports or Guam and load up ships to sail west.

By the time US forces were able to deploy to Okinawa from US bases Okinawa would be conquered and under Chinese control. Now instead of defending positions they control, US forces would be faced with another huge amphibious assault to take back Okinawa against an entrenched defending army and have to do so within easy range of land based Chinese airpower and missiles.

More drunks + more druggies = more job security for me :)

So you’re trying to say that married homosexuals do not have family values??? Do go on….

As citizens homosexual individuals have all the rights of any other citizen. Their rights do not, or at least should not, be dependent upon their sexuality. Anything else is government sanctioned discrimination against a class of people who sexuality is determined by their biology.

In the case of marriage it is more than a moral matter. Married couples have specific legal rights not granted unmarried couples including but not limited to inheritance, spousal confidentiality and specific tax advantages. To deny those to couples only because they are homosexual is likewise government sanctioned discrimination against a class of people.

No government has any right to legislate morality. If can protect the rights to life and liberty of individuals and it can protect property but government has no right to impose morality on the people.

Not at all, just because you focus more on traditional values in the majority, which are not gay, does not make you a bigot,

Absolutely it does. I will quote James Madison from his speech to the Virginia Legislature, "A Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments" where he sums it up succinctly":

"Because experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of Religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."

Bigotry, superstition and persecution is a good description of modern evangelical positions on most social matters today.

No, it does not. If I refuse to bake a cake for a gay couple based on my religion, but I feel empathy and want them to be safe and never harmed,

If you open a business you take whomever comes through the door. You have no right to impose your religion upon others and others in fact have a right not to be burdened by the requirements of someone else's religion.

Seems this doesn't work these days, especially for those who follow Allah. They import their prejudices, bigotry, and paranoia along with their suitcases.

Americans do much the same with their bigotry and paranoia at the point of a gun (or cruise missiles) combined with "sanctions".

We are talking about now and today, now what happens hundreds of years ago before anyone of us were born. Focus.

In the view of most Muslims and in particular Arab Muslims Israel constitutes a European colonial outpost taking the locals land and oppressing the original inhabitants. That is here and now, today.

If you think the U.S. is also being sacrificed with so many soldiers sent and deployed here, let them pack up and go home. But I'm sure they won't so easily, because they are here to defend the U.S. for starters, not necessarily Japan nor Okinawa.

Defending Japan is very much in the US interest. That is the hard lesson learned from bot WWI and WWII that when the US withdraws into isolationism bad actors, the Tojos, Hitlers and Mussolini's of the world start chewing up other nations land like giant Pac-Man characters until a point is reached where the US is compelled to become involved. Better to be forward deployed during peace time and deter the aggressors than withdraw into isolationism until an enemy is literally attacking your land, sinking your ships and killing your people, and you have to fight your way half way across the world at great expense in lives and treasure to stop this enemy. Deterrence is vastly less costly than the wars that occur when there is no deterrence.

These drones are used not only for surveillance but also for attacking enemy targets with missiles, etc. If a future war is fought mostly with drones and such unmanned weaponry, will bases as large as Kadena or Futenma be needed?

In a war with China something like a Reaper is not going to be survivable in contested airspace. They can employ weapons in a permissive environment where there is no or very minor air defense threat. They are not stealthy, fast or particularly high flying. They are easy pickings for any military with modern air defenses. But for peace time surveillance of uncontested areas they do the job, do it cheaply and don't risk aviators lives if there is a mishap.

In a war with China Kadena and Futenma would be front line bases. They are essential to keep the PLAN from getting past the First Island Chain and surrounding Taiwan or Japan from the east. They are irreplaceable for that purpose. Guam and Wake are much too far away.

@Aurelius LMFAO had the US not let Chinese students into their universities to study had not the US allow US companies to expand in China for the thieves to only still trade secretes CHINA and its citizens would still be riding bicycles and wearing gray Khakis. !

China would have still developed but less quickly.

You may not remember the original idea of "engagement" was the belief that by allowing China to trade with the US and host their students in US universities the Chinese would gradually democratize. Western engagement in both South Korea and Taiwan led to those nations people overthrowing their dictators and adopting what are almost model democratic governments. It was widely believed the same thing would happen in China. And you know what? During Hu Jintao's second term as CCP General Secretary and PRC President there was a debated within the People's Congress about allowing individuals and firms to own land, something that has never been legal in China. There were also experiments in some small jurisdictions with competitive elections. Engagement appeared to be bearing fruit.

But Hu was replaced by Xi Jinping and he is a Maoist true believer who has largely reversed previous economic liberalization, imposed rigid party orthodoxy and onerous security laws and who's policies make further reforms impossible. Now the world slowly turns their backs on China looking to more favorable places to do business.

But I am going to make a bet here. Like South Korea and Taiwan, the people there know the truth about the west having studied and traveled there and having family members living in the US, Canada and elsewhere. There may, like South Korea and Taiwan experienced, come a time where the CCP does something truly barbaric and the Chinese rise up and toss them out of power to establish their own democratic government. I really do not think the idea is all that far fetched. Things had to get really bad in Taiwan and South Korea before change occurred, massacres of civilians on both nations by harsh dictators. When that happens in China I suspect it will be the end of the CCP.

Now go vote me down if you wish. I'm the Desert Tortoise with a hard shell and well adapted to heat.

Trade is interdependence. China is just as dependent on the US as the US on China.

Definitely not accurate or correct

China doesn't need USA

Mutual trade with China composes about 2% of the US GDP. The US is emphatically not dependent on China for trade. In fact there are half a dozen nations chomping at the bit to displace Chinese firms from the US market.

However China does very much rely on global export markets to keep its factories producing and its workers employed, and the US is one of their biggest export markets. Their industries also rely on direct foreign investment, much of which in the past has come from the US. Without that investment their firms are starving for cash. China is also dependent on US technologies for their most advanced industries. We already see their microchip industry struggling now that China has lost access to the best US chip technologies. While Taiwan may be the largest producer of advanced microchips, the technology for the forges and associated software has US copyrights and the US is very much restricting access to these high end technologies.

US military out of Japan. To appease China ,Japan will give them all islands south of main Okinawa island to guarantee no war or aggression.

I mean, it worked so well when Czechoslovakia surrendered the Sudetenland to Hitler. PM Chamberlain chortled "peace in our time". But then what happened? Appeasing a dictator by surrendering territory never leads to lasting peace. It is an invitation to further invasions.

Japan has every right to object to absolutely anything it doesn't agree with or to regardless of any agreement with the USA .

What too many here steadfastly refuse to acknowledge is that the government of Japan is not being forced to host US bases. They could kick the US out just as the Philippines did in 1992 and the US would dutifully leave. Rather, the government of Japan chooses to align itself with the US and does so willingly because it offers Japan protection from much larger hostile nations in its immediate region.

You might also notice that the Philippines, absent a continuous US military presence, has become a doormat for the Chinese who steal shoals and islands well inside their EEZ, ignore international rulings against China and as a result you see the Philippines inviting US forces back. There is a lesson here for Japan because like the Philippines there are small Japanese islands that China covets. I would wager that if there weren't US forces on Okinawa there would be Chinese bases on the Senkaku Islands by now, just as the Chinese built bases on Firey Reef and Mischief Reef, both inside the Philippines EEZ.

What is needed is a "coalition of the willing" to protect the Palestinians and put Israel in its place, behind the June 1967 borders.

Sounds great until Israel starts shooting nuclear weapons at Arab capitals. They almost did in 1973. They made a visible show of prepping nuclear weapons in the open where US and Soviet satellites would see them as a warning. The Soviets had two battalions of nuclear Scuds in Egypt and a shipload more in Alexandria harbor. The US went to DEFCON 3 and launched loaded bombers towards the Soviet borders. The Soviets also had an invasion force in the Med and an Airborne division in the air headed to invade Israel while their Foreign Minister made public threats to invade Israel if they didn't retreat back across the Suez Canal (Israeli forces has crossed the Suez, surrounded an Egyptian army and there was nothing between them and Cairo). IDF were also on the outskirts of Damascus. I remember seeing them on TV fighting with Damascus visible on the horizon. It was a very scary week I remember vividly.

There probably is no coalition of Arab military's that could defeat Israel in a high end military conflict. It is and was the inability of Arab armies and air forces to dislodge Israel that led to the formation of so many militant groups. Most Arabs see their governments as hopelessly corrupt and utterly ineffective By contrast, the militant groups are seemingly fearless and get their licks in. Hamas has already won this war but most in the west cannot see it. This is a repeat of the defeat the IDF suffered in 2006 fighting Hezbollah but when this is over I suspect Hamas will be infinitely more dangerous than it was perceived before this war.

Nice try, but it is the Palestinians that no one wants to take in.

Why is any nation somehow obliged to facilitate the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians by the Zionists? The Zionist goal is tantamount to genocide. Any nation that takes the Palestinians from their rightful home is as guilty as the Israelis of ethnic cleansing and genocide. Of course no other nation wants to be part of that !

I am referring to any reference to the suspects nationality, or any relevant information on actions into how such a heinous act could have been prevented. Whether, for instance reports of a history of mental illness went unchallenged.

If such speculation was completely unfounded, then a clear public statement protecting the suspect identity, at the same time dispelling social media speculation, also announcing a full public inquiry into the circumstances surrounding how or if the suspect criminal mental history was known to the courts authorities.

Would telling the public that the suspect was a naturalized Irish citizen who immigrated from Algeria have thus somehow justified the barbarities of the rioters?