Anger simmers over Okinawa base burden

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheTrueCentrist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Since I am not well versed in the strategic importance of Okinawa as a base, I have to be careful in commenting on this. That said, I have to wonder why some of the bases can’t be relocated to a larger island in Japan. I think its up to Japan to decide what bases they will host and where. Any reduction in U.S. presence in Japan would probably force the Japanese to increase their own size and scope of their military and perhaps they are reluctant to do so given their history. I was talking to a Japanese man during a politica rally in the town where I lived and he said he wants America to be “seikai no keisatsu”. The world’s policeman. I think it is high time we rethink America’s role as the world’s policeman. If that implies that we will close some of our bases around the world, then so be it. While I’m not an isolationist, maybe its time for Japan and Europe to take on more responsibility for their own security, and allow us to concentrate on the problems we face at home.

Ishii
 
America in it’s current state does not deserve to be the world’s policeman. Especially not after we went to war with Iraq.
 
ishii said:
Since I am not well versed in the strategic importance of Okinawa as a base, I have to be careful in commenting on this. That said, I have to wonder why some of the bases can’t be relocated to a larger island in Japan. I think its up to Japan to decide what bases they will host and where.
Click to expand...
I think WWII answered that question.

Before one talks about the US in Okinawa, the subject of the Russians on Sakhalin Island needs to be explored. How are the talks to return that island to Japan going?
 
Beau_Ouiville said:
I think WWII answered that question.
Click to expand...
Would you really hold this grave mistake against a nation that wasn’t even born when this happened? Most people in Japan weren’t born when WWII happened, and most had no control over what their ancestors did.

Japan’s punishment has already been dealt. It can’t have an offensive military, but only it’s Self-Defense Force (which in reality is a joke compared to the nations that would attack Japan). The US has the responsibility to defend Japan as per the WWII treaty. I think the least that could be done for a nation that had no part in the errors of the past is to allow them to choose where the US places its bases in THEIR country.
 
I was stationed at Iwakuni on the main island of Honshu in Japan. Farmable land and construction is at a commodity and military bases surrounding air strips take up a lot of land.

If Japan wished to be capable of resisting aggression from Korea and China, then it would be time to say sayonara. U.S. occupation has served them well monetarily. Japan has a very small, ill equiped military force.
 
Barbkw said:
Japan has a very small, ill equiped military force.
Click to expand...
True, but it’s not their fault. The WWII treaty forbade them from having a military past a certain size and capable of attacking anything.
 
Okinawa is “the keystone of the Pacific.” I’m not entirely sure exactly, with today’s technology and all, if the Ryukyu Islands are as strategically important as they one were, but as late as the Cold War, American strategists considered Okinawa crucial to maintaining America’s control of the Pacific. Before that, Sec. of State Acheson made a fateful speech at the Washington Press Club outlining American’s “defensive perimeter” that ran from the Aleutians, down through the Japanese home islands and Ryukyus, to the Philippines (omitting both Korea and Taiwan in the process, months before the Korean invasion).

I do know today that the waters off Mainland China are relatively very shallow, making submarines easier to detect as they pass by the chain of islands from Kyushu to Taiwan. Some experts believe that China is paranoid about being boxed in by the US and is seeking a larger and more modern Pacific fleet.
 
MarianD said:
Would you really hold this grave mistake against a nation that wasn’t even born when this happened? Most people in Japan weren’t born when WWII happened, and most had no control over what their ancestors did.

Japan’s punishment has already been dealt. It can’t have an offensive military, but only it’s Self-Defense Force (which in reality is a joke compared to the nations that would attack Japan). The US has the responsibility to defend Japan as per the WWII treaty. I think the least that could be done for a nation that had no part in the errors of the past is to allow them to choose where the US places its bases in THEIR country.
Click to expand...
That sounds reasonable to me. Given the stretegic location of Japan and the ascendancy of China, I am sure that there will be a demand for U.S. bases there for the foreseeable future as a kind of counter weight. If I was living in Japan, I would much rather live under the U.S. security umbrella (and deal with U.S. military bases) than be effectively a vassal state for China.

Ishii
 
ishii said:
That sounds reasonable to me. Given the stretegic location of Japan and the ascendancy of China, I am sure that there will be a demand for U.S. bases there for the foreseeable future as a kind of counter weight. If I was living in Japan, I would much rather live under the U.S. security umbrella (and deal with U.S. military bases) than be effectively a vassal state for China.

Ishii
Click to expand...
Off the top of my head, from what I know and having not looked into it more, I believe that you will probably find a large spectrum of opinion on the bases and the US military presence in general, although the opponents of the bases were strong enough to effect the government in power. Especially as the memories of actual war fades more and more, I think, there is a greater desire by many to just get rid of the bases. Also I’m sure, unless one is directly benefiting from the bases, I’m sure many have a “not in my backyard” feeling. I’m also sure than many also would just like for the country to be concerned about its own affairs, and not have the US military looming.

On the other hand, I don’t think they want to get in a situation where in the absence of the US, arms races begin. The region has memories of Japanese rule, and they also understand the power China can control when it has its act together. The shipping lanes in the region around East and Southeast Asia are very important to the development of each country. There may be some loss of facing having the US in the middle of the situation, but I’m sure its far superior to the possible loss of face to its actual neighbors. Having the US present at least presents some stability to the region rather than having to run the risk of resorting to arms to sort things out.
 
MarianD said:
Japan’s punishment has already been dealt. It can’t have an offensive military, but only it’s Self-Defense Force (which in reality is a joke compared to the nations that would attack Japan). The US has the responsibility to defend Japan as per the WWII treaty. I think the least that could be done for a nation that had no part in the errors of the past is to allow them to choose where the US places its bases in THEIR country.
Click to expand...
I see your point, but I don’t think the rest of the country is going to agree with the Okinawans and want the bases moved to other parts of Japan.
 
MarianD said:
Japan’s punishment has already been dealt. It can’t have an offensive military, but only it’s Self-Defense Force (which in reality is a joke compared to the nations that would attack Japan). The US has the responsibility to defend Japan as per the WWII treaty. I think the least that could be done for a nation that had no part in the errors of the past is to allow them to choose where the US places its bases in THEIR country.
Click to expand...
Actually that treaty expired in 1960. The current treaty is a mutual defense force with the US. Other than nuclear weapons (as agreed in several other international treaties) there are no limits on the size of the defense force that Japan can build, but they have chosen to rely upon the security of the US.
 
They might as well make the most of it. The unconditional surrender they signed settled the issue.
 
TheTrueCentrist said:
And we all know that might makes right.
Click to expand...
That’s a very simplistic point of view. The Japanese I know are happy with the Americans being there and want them to stay. People in Eastern Europe actually want American bases as the only means of protection against Russia. The Japanese know that only America can protect them from China, Russia and South Korea.

People in Okinawa may not want these bases there, not everyone wants a base in his own backyard but that’s a separate issue. They don’t want these bases there but they still want America to protect Japan, I’m sure they’d be happy if these bases moved to different Japanese islands. Oh and the day the Japanese no longer want US troops the Poles, Czechs, Georgians, Slovaks, Hungarians and residents of the Baltic States will gladly accept them.
 
The thing is Hatoyama won a landslide election victory promising to remove the US military base in Okinawa, only for the Americans to make veiled threats forcing him to backtrack creating a political crisis and eventually bringing down the government. The whole incident illustrates that Japan is still US vassal state not allowed to make its own decisions.
 
Kadaveri said:
The whole incident illustrates that Japan is still US vassal state not allowed to make its own decisions.
Click to expand...
Coming from the worlds greatest colonizer we should take that with a grain of salt.

Aren’t you glad you didn’t have to type that in Japanese? Your welcome for that too.😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top