AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Movement to Bar US carriers from Japan
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Make my day! Bring them home.


http//apnews.myway.com/article/20050805/D8BPGC0O1.html
Quote: Masahiko Goto simply does not want a nuclear power plant in his backyard. He says it is dangerous and unnecessary, and over the past year he's collected 324,000 signatures of others who feel the same way. He's also pushed the U.S. Navy into a corner.

If the power plant is so dangerous, then perhaps he can point out the accidents that the US Navy has had over the entire life of nuclear ships in the US Navy. Soviet Navy does not count, as their technology AND training is highly suspect.

I suspect Japan has it's share of Kooks as in the US or other countries.
I think he doesn't really care about the safety. He sees nuclear powered ships the way he does nuclear weapons,anathema.

Hey,I'd like nothing better than to withdraw all US forces from Japan,it is dishonorable,IMO,to protect a nation from it's brutal past.

Japan can fend for herself.
Palladin Wrote:I think he doesn't really care about the safety. He sees nuclear powered ships the way he does nuclear weapons,anathema.

Hey,I'd like nothing better than to withdraw all US forces from Japan,it is dishonorable,IMO,to protect a nation from it's brutal past.

Japan can fend for herself.

Yes, I gathered as much, as per your posts for the past several months. Other than that, we are pretty much in alignment.
J,

Yea,I lost the "America is global cop" affinity after the fall of the Berlin wall.

I could care less what does or would occur if we weren't involved abroad. Just keep a strong military at home,except for the Navy of course.
Palladin Wrote:J,

Yea,I lost the "America is global cop" affinity after the fall of the Berlin wall.

I could care less what does or would occur if we weren't involved abroad. Just keep a strong military at home,except for the Navy of course.

Am I watching a contradiction here? Obviously those Navy ships have to stop somewhere in order to resupply and rest. If they do not have a friendly port of call, then their range of movement would be quite small.
Maybe. I don't see stopping to refuel or load up on food as a base though. Andrew stopped in Spain on his way home back in 2003,but it was their base,not ours,they just let us stop,I'm sure we paid for what we got. Cartegena,Spain,good looking babes.

They're free not to allow us to stop by.

We could avoid that,too. We could pay for enhanced supply ships or we could start sea bases,that's already being discussed. Andrew was involved in his own ship's replenishment at sea,we can do without foreign
stops if we have to,just cost more money.

I think the Naval thing is valid,we have the right to protect our ships from predators.
John L Wrote:
Quote: Masahiko Goto simply does not want a nuclear power plant in his backyard. He says it is dangerous and unnecessary, and over the past year he's collected 324,000 signatures of others who feel the same way. He's also pushed the U.S. Navy into a corner.
If the power plant is so dangerous, then perhaps he can point out the accidents that the US Navy has had over the entire life of nuclear ships in the US Navy. Soviet Navy does not count, as their technology AND training is highly suspect.
I suspect Japan has it's share of Kooks as in the US or other countries.
Quite confusing, mixed up with this and that and somewhat crazy....There are always some Japanese activists, coming up with some anti-American issues.

Just to clarify for you some points as we see them here in Japan:

1- Japan has a lot of nuclear power plants everywhere, about 50 percent of all energy is made out of atomic power.
The use of atomic power is out of discussion, we need it.

2- Yokosuka Base is an US-Base, and not considered to be Japanese territory - The Japanese Navy Base is nearby, there is a good co-operation and nobody there wants to kick out the American Navy.

Japan cannot do anything to prevent nuclear-powered ships to enter the base - and nuclear powered submarines are quite frequently seen entering and leaving the navy base. Why not an aircraft-carrier?

3- Japan supports and pays about 50 percent or more of the costs for the US presence in Japan, which is absolut necessary - look at our neighbours: North-Korea, Russia, China.....
-----
Despite various verbal disputes between the USA and Japan (a lot, all and everything between atomic bombs to trade barriers) - the presence of the US-military is out of question for the Japanese government and for most Japanese citizens.

I feel much better living in Japan with the US Army behind me - believe me!
Welcome in Japan!
Yohon,

Well,I for 1 wish we did not have troops in Japan at all. But,I can honestly say this about Europe as well. They belong right here in America,Japan can fight Japan's fights,we'll fight ours. Same with Europe.

I do not understand the desire most Americans have to send our troops to "protect" other peoples.
Palladin Wrote:I do not understand the desire most Americans have to send our troops to "protect" other peoples.

Patrick, come on partner. You can use more complex thought than that one. This is just like Dr Williams' and Adam Smith's points about why people make and sell things to others. While the cattle grower may go wonderful things for his fellow countryman, and the cobbler may help his countrymen by producing nice shoes, he does it out of self interest.

In other words, these help their fellow man by helping themselves. Same thing with the US. We are in Japan and helping with their national security because we are helping ourselves and OUR national security.

Does that make any sense to you, or will I have to spell it out in capital letters? Wink1 S6
I actually agree we are doing it for oursleves. I just think it misguided and we end up inadvertently fighting THEIR fights.

I can make the case in fact that the world would have been safer had Germany won WWI John. I do not accept that all decisions of the United States are correct decisions.

There is no basis for it.

I do not see it as our responsibility to protect Japan,period. Nor Europe. For ANY reason,we were safer in 1900 than we are in 2005 with our robo cop views. IMO. Show me I am wrong.

I don't care what happens,we are safe here so long as we have nuclear deterrence,IMO. The strategic fears of a guy like Hitler or Bin laden unifying and using say 1 billion people and the assets they ahve against us doesn';t concern me at all. Not with nukes it doesn.t
Palladin Wrote:..... I do not understand the desire most Americans have to send our troops to "protect" other peoples.
I think, this is a financial question regarding Japan.

Japan pays the most part of all expenses of the American soldiers in Japan, same with Germany, also Korea and Kuwait and some other countries pay for the US troops which are stationed in their territories.

To make it clear, this is NOT a 'FREE' service to protect people.

From both, commercial and military point of view the best solution.
USA cannot keep all soldiers within the US borders to their own expenses - which would mean necessarily a strong reduction of troops, if they really do so.
This 'surplus of these troops' is stationed in Japan and the Japanese people pay for that.
In return, Japan keeps a rather small military force, depending widely on the USA and their support to protect this region.

The commercial effect is very important, in Japan almost all military equipment is bought from the USA and not from somewhere else.
All is compatible and easy for service, as Japan and USA are using the same weapons and electronic devices etc...
Yohon,

What you just described is a mercenary service. You pay cash and we send our children to defend you.

IMO,this is an indictment of who Americans are that we accept such an arrangement. For the record,I did not have children to sell them to Japanese nor Europeans while you 2 sit on your AS.SES and allow our kids to do your heavylifting.

It is the most disgusting arrangement and it makes me ill to think we've allowed it to occur since 1945.

I actually supported it during the cold war era,but I don't now nor would I have then had I thought about it. The Soviet Empire could have swallowed all of Europe and all of Asia,but so long as we keep our nuclear deterrent REAL,it would never swallow the USA.
Palladin Wrote:Yohan,
What you just described is a mercenary service. You pay cash and we send our children to defend you.

IMO, this is an indictment of who Americans are that we accept such an arrangement. For the record,I did not have children to sell them to Japanese nor Europeans while you 2 sit on your AS.SES and allow our kids to do your heavylifting.
I can speak only about the situation in Japan.

Yes, correct, it is indeed somewhat a mercenary service. On the other side, USA wants to keep some control of the military situation in Japan.

This is a decision of the United States...It is up to them to do what they prefer:

a) To keep US-forces in Japan and get paid for it, keep a certain control over Japan and have some profit out by selling military compatible equipment to the Japanese Army.

b) To move the US Army back to the USA...in this case you have to pay your soldiers yourself or dismiss them - Japan will buy much basic military equipment from somewhere else...most likely from China.

Japan has little to say about that all, because the US-bases in Japan are NOT Japanese territory...they are US territory.
Yohon,

The bases you allude to are ours,but Japan,now soveriegn,can tell us to leave just like Iraq or Britain can and we will.

It just makes me want to puke what we've supported over the years.

It was understandable the US exert influence on Japan in the aftermath of WWII,but we probably should have left around 1955. Same with Europe.

We've developed over here this view and it is VERY widespread and shared by left and right,that America ought have "influence"(ie troops) in Europe and Asia. No one can explain why we are safer and more peaceful by so doing for half a century now.

I think we were better off using our 1880 view of national life,minding OUR business only. Since the early 1900s,Americans came to see our role as global,it has cost us war after war after war.

Beginning with our war with Spain in Cuba,we've paid slowly but surely for the national view that it is our business what others do that doesn't affect our freedoms over here and I for one hate it. You're right though,it's an American decision,you guys don't make us send our kids to do your fighting for you.
Palladin Wrote:Yohan,
The bases you allude to are ours, but Japan, now soveriegn, can tell us to leave just like Iraq or Britain can and we will.
.....
You're right though,it's an American decision,you guys don't make us send our kids to do your fighting for you.
Palladin,
I think, you are not correctly informed.
There is a lot of US military presence here in Japan, most is US territory.

We here in Japan cannot force the US troops to leave from these bases.
Also, in case of any crime, (there is very little problem comparing the huge numbers of US citizens here in Japan, but it happens sometimes) - the bases are off-limits for Japanese Justice, the US-citizen, if able to enter the base, police cannot follow him.

US military has its own immigration at its own airport (Yokota) - own housing compounds (Yokohama Negishi) - own tax free shops, own gas-stations....and so on....

----

As I said, we are interested only in minor adjustments (like Atsugi Airbase relocation, due to extreme noise of fighter planes) or reduction of US soldiers in Okinawa to another island (due to WWII and some tensions with the local population)...etc....

It is up to the US to make a decision, but I think, the US Army has other urgent problems at this time.

Our position here is NOT against the US-military. Just to make this clear to you.
This situation might be different in Germany for example, I can speak only about Japan-US.
Yohon,

I know the rules,they are common and shared in Europe and in South Korea. That does NOT prevent Japan from demanding we exit Japan.

We used to have a huge naval and airbase in the Phillipines until they demanded we leave. If Uzbekistan can tell us to exit and we do and the Phillipines and Thailand before them,I'm confident we'll leave Japan if asked to.

The base is ours only because we had a war with Japan,but the rules are common anywhere our soldiers go,we will not turn them over to the locals unless on a case by case basis we decide to. We did turn over 3 guys about 5 years ago for raping a young Japanese girl,but that was our decision to make. I supported that decision,incidentally.

If the locals don't like the rules,they can order us out,simple as that.

We had a case in Korea a couple of years ago where a tanker accidentally ran over 2 girls. Korea demanded we hand him over,we basically told them to eat sh.it.

They can always make us leave,it would make my day if they did,then I'd laugh my as.s off watching Kim devour South Korea.
Palladin,

Philippines is different, as the Philippine government did not pay for the US soldiers. The base was of no real strategic value, therefore they agreed to shut it down. It is still a guarded complex, for retirement of foreigners, not a bad place.

To be a protected US-soldier cannot be an excuse to commit crimes and accidents in the guest country, outside of the US base - and then ask the US-military (the employer) for protection and extreme lenient punishment.

Reading your postings, I get the impression, that US-Army is somewhat about the law.

Some governments in Europe, like France or Russia, do not accept that argument and making it more difficult for the US in Iraq and other places, by strongly speaking out against US-military actions.

If you tell me stories like:
Quote:We had a case in Korea a couple of years ago where a tanker accidentally ran over 2 girls. Korea demanded we hand him over, we basically told them to eat sh.it.
then you should not be surprised, that many people (not only Muslims) do not like the US and their citizens.
Yohon,

I am not surpised the global community does not like us and I do NOT concern myself with such insignificant things. The people of Korea do not like us,Yohon,but they prefer us to the North Koreans,so they ask us to stay.

If we did not have these rules,then even a tiny minority could cause loss of freedom for our soldiers by making false charges. I think you can readily see how a hater of the US in Japan could accuse of rape when it was an entrapment.

Yohon,it's fairly simple,we're in these nations at their requests,including Japan,if anyone says EXIT,we exit,never is there an example where we refused.

I often ask Brits what their problem is,we have bases there as well. Can't they get along without our Army protecting them? They act like they hate us,but they don't have the integrity to make us leave their own nation.

Germans,Brits,Italians,Koreans and Japanese all have angst at America,but shudder at the thought of us leaving them. What a pitiful commentary on them AND us. I just hate this set up.
Palladin Wrote:....it's fairly simple,we're in these nations at their requests,including Japan,if anyone says EXIT,we exit,never is there an example where we refused.
....
I think, USA will always keep some presence of their military here in Japan and also will continue to operate some other bases, like those in Europe.
Distance is remarkable to the USA West and East Coast and the US Navy need some time to arrive at certain points. To have some combat forces outside of the US, ready to operate, saves a lot of time, fuel, and other costs, like the payment of the military staff....

While I appreciate your idea, to bring US forces back to the USA, and maybe even to reduce them, as there is no need to defend anything else but the USA itself, I see little hope for such a step to be realized in the near future.

To talk about Japan-USA, it benefits both countries. I do not see an disadvantage for the USA or for Japan out of these agreements.
Pages: 1 2