AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-10-22, 11:32   Link #4441
LynnieS
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: China
^^In this argument over the military base in Okinawa, neither side has the upper hand, IMHO. Japan still needs the U.S. for support given its constitutional inability to act on the external military front. The U.S. needs Japan's support in the Asia-Pacific region as well as in purchasing debt. An agreement made by the previous government, given that the Okinawa people do not want the base there, will be hard to follow - certainly a review is in order.

Key U.S. senators may rebuff Obama on health care
Quote:
WASHINGTON – The Democrats' control of a hefty majority in the Senate — plus the House — would suggest that President Barack Obama is within reach of overhauling the nation's health care system this fall.

But the numbers mask a more complicated reality: Obama and Democratic leaders have modest leverage over several pivotal Senate Democrats who are more concerned about their next election or feel they have little to lose by opposing their party's hierarchy.
Unfortunately, the White House's coattails just aren't long enough these days...
__________________
"If ignorance is bliss, then why aren't more people happy?" -- Misc.

Currently listening: Nadda
Currently reading: Procrastination for the win!
Currently playing: "Quest of D", "Border Break" and "Gundam Senjou no Kizuna".
Waiting for: "Shining Force Cross"!
LynnieS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-22, 14:13   Link #4442
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Don't even let relatives know your otaku levels or you'll be betrayed
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-22, 14:27   Link #4443
Kamui4356
Aria Company
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Kira01 View Post
It appears that you don't seem to understand the problem at all. The Okinawans are not happy at the fact that the ones who are responsible for protecting them are wrecking havoc occasionally and to add.. They are also performing noisy military drills causing lots of people to lack sleep everyday. Quite a number of people in Okinawa cannot enjoy their everyday life thanks to the presence of the American military facility and they hope it can be relocated elsewhere, how is this not acceptable?
Oh, I understand the noise issue quite well. That's a major issue where I live too. I live less than 3 miles from an airforce base in one direction and an international airport in the other.

Quote:
I do understand your point of view which is mere selfishness. Yes, if the American soldiers relocate to anywhere else, they will be seen by North Korea or China but so what? There are already tons of Chinese agents within the American government, what makes letting their soldiers and their equipment seen by China so special? In fact, is getting American soldiers and military equipment seen by China more important of an issue than the cries of Okinawans who have their everyday life enjoyment taken away from them? I know the United States is an ally and everything but their importance should not be valued on top of Okinawans. If there should be unfair relations, the new government of Japan should rank the Okinawans above American soldiers; definitely not the other way around.
I don't think you understand what I mean here. I'm not talking about US soldiers or Okinawan civilians. I'm talking on a national scale here. China or North Korea could see that as a sign the US is unable to meet it's treaty obligations in the region and cause them to take a more aggressive approach in dealing with other East Asian nations because they see a power vaccum, even if it's not really there.



Quote:
There is nothing more aggressive on the US part if than dropping explosives on civilian buildings in the Middle East and not relocating their military base in Okinawa threatening that it would harm bilateral ties. China, who is a supporter of the East Asian Community can very well see that the United States is quite aggressive prior to relocating their base anywhere.
Once again you don't get what I mean. That aggression you speak of is not being directed at China. China is currently building it's military to try to gain superority over Taiwan in the unlikely event of a conflict. The US moving an airforce base closer to Taiwan could be taken by the Chinese as representing a direct challange to China and an aggressive act towards China.



Quote:
Oh God...you can't be serious!?

What do you mean by "at this stage"? Something the United States has came up with all by themselves along with the pro-Americans definitely don't mean people have to agree to without reviewing it first? Delaying the relocation is much better than making hasty decisions that causes problem afterwards.
By at this stage I mean when the deal has already been signed and work on moving some of the troops is already underway. Do you think the people in Okinawa would be fine with leaving everything where it is for another 15 years while a new deal is worked out? Under the current agreement some US forces are being moved. Isn't it better to go ahead with that while working out a new deal for the rest which aren't?
__________________
Kamui4356 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-22, 15:14   Link #4444
Xellos-_^
Married
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
Don't even let relatives know your otaku levels or you'll be betrayed
i thought that was obvious
__________________
Xellos-_^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-22, 16:31   Link #4445
Knight Hawk
Lurker
 
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: New York City
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
Don't even let relatives know your otaku levels or you'll be betrayed
Well they had the real deal in thier collection. (90% fiction and the last 10% real child porn) But yeah, log out before leaving your PC!
__________________
--A dream called "Youth". We'll eventually wake up from this dream, but the memories will continue to endure. - Karasuma, School Rumble
--Today you are You, that is truer than true. There is no one alive who is Youer than You. - Dr. Seuss
Knight Hawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-22, 16:51   Link #4446
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knight Hawk View Post
Well they had the real deal in thier collection. (90% fiction and the last 10% real child porn) But yeah, log out before leaving your PC!
its useless without a password
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-22, 18:07   Link #4447
Shadow Kira01
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: PMB Headquarters
US urging China, Japan to buy less oil from Iran

What's this?

The United States are requesting nations to not buy cheap oil and instead buy more expensive ones!? Are they going to pay for the extra expenses? Otherwise, there shouldn't be a nation stupid enough to not purchase cheap oil from Iran.

----
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamui4356 View Post
I don't think you understand what I mean here. I'm not talking about US soldiers or Okinawan civilians. I'm talking on a national scale here. China or North Korea could see that as a sign the US is unable to meet it's treaty obligations in the region and cause them to take a more aggressive approach in dealing with other East Asian nations because they see a power vaccum, even if it's not really there.
What sort of other East Asian nation would there be for China and North Korea to be suddenly aggressive against? South Korea? I don't think so as that relations between the South Koreans and the Chinese were poor to begin with. As for North Korea, it had always been the way it is. Any move by the American military isn't going to affect them at all. If you mean the ASEAN countries, I don't think those even count as East Asian nations so it has nothing to do with it.

More importantly, would China act aggressive against another East Asian nation after agreeing to the plan of building an "East Asian Community" which is sort of like a second European Union? If China does something like that, this plan will obviously deem to be a failure. However, I definitely do not believe that China will turn suddenly aggressive over the relocation of an American military facility over of Okinawa as that is quite irrelevant.

Quote:
Once again you don't get what I mean. That aggression you speak of is not being directed at China. China is currently building it's military to try to gain superority over Taiwan in the unlikely event of a conflict. The US moving an airforce base closer to Taiwan could be taken by the Chinese as representing a direct challange to China and an aggressive act towards China.
What do you mean by China trying to gain superiority over Taiwan when that's their own sovereignty as that their current government is not even an ally of the United States? The idea is very much like protecting the Talibans from the Al-Qaeda, makes little sense. Would the United States suddenly become allies with the Talibans provoking a challenge of rivalry against the Al-Qaeda? This is exactly why I think you don't get it.

Quote:
By at this stage I mean when the deal has already been signed and work on moving some of the troops is already underway. Do you think the people in Okinawa would be fine with leaving everything where it is for another 15 years while a new deal is worked out? Under the current agreement some US forces are being moved. Isn't it better to go ahead with that while working out a new deal for the rest which aren't?
Actually, the idea is that lots of people are hoping that the United States would pack their bags and leave as opposed to relocating somewhere else. I am quite certain the feeling is mutual in any nation that is currently being occupied by foreign soldiers.

Of course, the government would not do something so reckless as that it would appear as though the mutual trust and strong bilateral ties will instantly be broken. Instead, some sort of modifications to the current plan will probably occur in which the United States are reluctant to accept. I am not sure how this will work out in the end but things certainly don't look very good now...
__________________

Last edited by Shadow Kira01; 2009-10-22 at 18:37.
Shadow Kira01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-22, 21:42   Link #4448
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
City attorney Carmen Trutanich: L.A. 'wasted a lot of dough' on Michael Jackson memorial.
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-22, 22:10   Link #4449
Xellos-_^
Married
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 38
Quote:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle6886167.ece

The Horn of Africa is in the grip of the worst drought for 47 years! Some 23 million people are threatened with starvation! When you see children on TV with distended bellies keening over their dying parents, it would be inhuman not to be moved to tears. But do them a favour. Sit on your hands.
interesting article on Africa and its problem and solutions.

Quote:
Just a brief note about practicalities for those who don't have the time and money to investigate deeply. Virtually all aid to improve agriculture, and day-to-day living conditions, such as water pumps, solar heaters for cooking, grinders for milling grain, and so on, are secretly destroyed by African villagers, as they are in all Third World countries, because they reduce the labor force needed to grow food, and render half the people of the village unnecessary and superfluous, making them useless beggars overnight. This reality is not advertised by Western governments and charities, but it still makes virtually all aid to the underdeveloped world useless and worthless. Aid is a completely waste of money and time, that does absolutely no good anywhere in the world.
one of the commenter form the above wrote this, anyone want to verify or dispute it?
__________________
Xellos-_^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-22, 22:12   Link #4450
yezhanquan
Observer/Bookman wannabe
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xellos-_^ View Post
interesting article on Africa and its problem and solutions.
Not the first time we see this, and probably not the last. Cut the population, please.
__________________
Those from the lower levels cannot hope to surpass those from the upper.

RIP, Oba-chan (1935-2008)
yezhanquan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-22, 22:38   Link #4451
LynnieS
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: China
Quote:
Originally Posted by yezhanquan View Post
Not the first time we see this, and probably not the last. Cut the population, please.
Having a decent size population in a low-economic environment can help in developing the area. It would be better, IMHO, to first redirect the aid to add/upgrade the infrastructure of these countries so they become more self-sufficient. In the process, moving them away from becoming a pure export type economy would also be of help, but that isn't likely to happen, but the main thing is to protect the aid from being diverted away from benefiting the people to benefiting/protecting the elites.

The last isn't, again, likely to happen as the governments will scream of "interference" in their affairs. OTOH, if they are asking for aid, then some "interference" is already happening.

Data: Most jobs created by [U.S.] state

I'm a bit confused by the latest information. So, if I'm reading this correctly, Colorado (the state that created the most number of jobs) created 4710.05 (listed in the "States Breakdown" section) jobs after spending US$583,269,816 on contracts, and the least (Rhode Island) created 5.93 from US$6,142,915 in contracts? Either I'm seriously misunderstanding the inputs/outputs, or something is seriously wrong (and wasteful) in the process.
__________________
"If ignorance is bliss, then why aren't more people happy?" -- Misc.

Currently listening: Nadda
Currently reading: Procrastination for the win!
Currently playing: "Quest of D", "Border Break" and "Gundam Senjou no Kizuna".
Waiting for: "Shining Force Cross"!
LynnieS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-22, 23:38   Link #4452
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Hulu to charge fees for access
(and possible takeover by NewsCorp?)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33438370...h_and_gadgets/
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-23, 00:24   Link #4453
Kamui4356
Aria Company
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Kira01 View Post
US urging China, Japan to buy less oil from Iran

What's this?

The United States are requesting nations to not buy cheap oil and instead buy more expensive ones!? Are they going to pay for the extra expenses? Otherwise, there shouldn't be a nation stupid enough to not purchase cheap oil from Iran.

----
No one ever said sanctions didn't have an impact on the nations applying sanctions as well. It's just less of one, hopefully anyway. Sometimes things don't work out that way though.

Quote:
What sort of other East Asian nation would there be for China and North Korea to be suddenly aggressive against? South Korea? I don't think so as that relations between the South Koreans and the Chinese were poor to begin with. As for North Korea, it had always been the way it is. Any move by the American military isn't going to affect them at all. If you mean the ASEAN countries, I don't think those even count as East Asian nations so it has nothing to do with it.
Yes, South Korea, and Taiwan too. If North Korea and China get it in their head that the US won't maintain it's commitments they may take a harder line.

Quote:
More importantly, would China act aggressive against another East Asian nation after agreeing to the plan of building an "East Asian Community" which is sort of like a second European Union? If China does something like that, this plan will obviously deem to be a failure. However, I definitely do not believe that China will turn suddenly aggressive over the relocation of an American military facility over of Okinawa as that is quite irrelevant.
With China the big concern is Taiwan. Also the US airbase in Okinawa is certainly not irrelevent. It's a major base. One of the assumptions is in the event of war breaking out between China and Taiwan, the US will intervene using planes based in Okinawa. Moving the base further away makes that harder operationally, while moving it closer makes it easier operationally.



Quote:
What do you mean by China trying to gain superiority over Taiwan when that's their own sovereignty as that their current government is not even an ally of the United States? The idea is very much like protecting the Talibans from the Al-Qaeda, makes little sense. Would the United States suddenly become allies with the Talibans provoking a challenge of rivalry against the Al-Qaeda? This is exactly why I think you don't get it.
Taiwan is not a part of the People's Republic of China. It's only a part of China if you're speaking in terms of territories populated by people who are ethnically Chinese and has been considered a part of the political entities collectively known as "China". They are an independent government and the PRC has never had control over Taiwan. China considers them a rogue province, and the US doesn't officially recognize Taiwan, but unofficially the US does have relations, and has pledged to defend Taiwan if China attacks.

Further China's military build up has been about gaining air supremacy over the straight and Taiwan itself and the ability to invade or blockade Taiwan. I'm not saying China is eager for a war there, but if one does come, they naturally want to make sure they can win and have been building their forces to that end. The US moving an airbase closer to Taiwan could be interpreted by China as an indication of a shift in the US from an official "One China" policy and a sign of increased US commitment to defend Taiwan, increasing tensions. Moving a major military base like that has a lot of implications in regards to a nation's foriegn policy. Japan of all nations should understand that, given that the US repositioning of it's pacific fleet from San Franciscio to Pearl Harbor was one of the things that factored into the decision to go to war. Moving a major fleet base closer to Japan was seen as an act of aggression against Japan then. Moving a major airbase closer to Taiwan could be seen as an act of aggression against China today. Of course the base would still be in Okinawa prefecture then, just not on the island of Okinawa itself.

Moving the base to say South Korea will be interpreted by North Korea as an act of aggression. Then again North Korea would see increasing food aid as an act of aggression, so that's not saying much.




Quote:
Actually, the idea is that lots of people are hoping that the United States would pack their bags and leave as opposed to relocating somewhere else. I am quite certain the feeling is mutual in any nation that is currently being occupied by foreign soldiers.
Hosting a military base is not the same thing as being occupied. Are there US soldiers on the streets of Japan operating check points, enforceing curfews, or conducting operations against Japanese civilians? Yes, of course there are problems, but it isn't an occupation except in the most expansive defination of the word.

Quote:
Of course, the government would not do something so reckless as that it would appear as though the mutual trust and strong bilateral ties will instantly be broken. Instead, some sort of modifications to the current plan will probably occur in which the United States are reluctant to accept. I am not sure how this will work out in the end but things certainly don't look very good now...
The US did say it would be willing to talk about minor changes, but not major changes. Of course the terms minor and major are vague. You can probably read that as major being anything that increases costs enough that congress needs to authorize more funding though.
__________________
Kamui4356 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-23, 00:26   Link #4454
james0246
Senior Member
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: East Cupcake
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
Don't even let relatives know your otaku levels or you'll be betrayed
Wow, these twins need a case study all to themselves .
james0246 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-23, 03:06   Link #4455
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
I saw this on MSNBC.com

@ 01:00 Oct 23

BREAKING NEWS: Switzerland gets formal U.S. request for Roman Polanskiís extradition
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-23, 06:20   Link #4456
Kusa-San
I'll end it before April.
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Beautiful pictures from the Veolia Environnement Wildlife Photographer of the Year


http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-...words=&x=0&y=0
__________________
Kusa-San is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-23, 11:54   Link #4457
Shadow Kira01
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: PMB Headquarters
U.S. prods Japan anew on Futemma, Okada favors transfer to Kadena

Quote:
''What is important is lessening (base-hosting) burden on Okinawa residents, and I think spending too much time will not ease their burden,'' he said.

Kadena Mayor Tokujitsu Miyagi told Kyodo News on Friday regarding Okada's remarks that he would ''absolutely oppose it (consolidation of the Kadena and Futemma facilities) even if it comes with any condition.''

''Did he make the remarks after thinking about the more than 200,000 residents in the area? That (consolidation option) is no more than an idea that it is cheaper because it wouldn't involve the construction of a new base,'' the mayor said.
Unfortunately, a lot of people don't seem to realize that relocating the current military facility from one place to another is very unacceptable as that it would be like pushing the issue of noise pollution and trouble from one region to another, shifting it onto people residing in a different location. If the ones living around the current military facility agrees, the ones living the current relocation regions will no doubt disagree. Thus, there is not a better location than Guam which is American territory. Choosing any other location aside from Guam will provoke angry locals as that nobody is stupid enough to welcome foreign soldiers that claim hosting the military facility for the sake of preventing North Korean invasion or Chinese military aggression when those scenarios has an extremely low chance of occurring.

----
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamui4356 View Post
With China the big concern is Taiwan. Also the US airbase in Okinawa is certainly not irrelevent. It's a major base. One of the assumptions is in the event of war breaking out between China and Taiwan, the US will intervene using planes based in Okinawa. Moving the base further away makes that harder operationally, while moving it closer makes it easier operationally.
China's concern is never Taiwan or South Korea. Taiwan is pretty much their sovereignty while South Korea, on the other is a different nation that have sour ties with them. Sour ties don't necessary mean China will be invading them out of the blue. There is no catch to it unless you consider damaging bilateral ties and the deterioration of their economy as positive things. Generally, the chances of a military conflict breaking out between China and Taiwan is unrealistic and will not happen while South Korea as the possibility would be even more unrealistic. If you mean Tibet or Xinjiang, I think that is totally irrelevant to Okinawa as that those locations are in the mountainous regions and should have no impact with the relocation of a major base in Okinawa. In fact, nobody wants to intervene on those military conflicts either.

Quote:
Taiwan is not a part of the People's Republic of China. It's only a part of China if you're speaking in terms of territories populated by people who are ethnically Chinese and has been considered a part of the political entities collectively known as "China". They are an independent government and the PRC has never had control over Taiwan. China considers them a rogue province, and the US doesn't officially recognize Taiwan, but unofficially the US does have relations, and has pledged to defend Taiwan if China attacks.
You take too much consideration into official stuff when it actually don't matter. Although the PRC has not taken official control of Taiwan but that rogue province is currently under the control of the KMT whose relation can be compared with the United States and the United Kingdom. If the United Kingdom is asking the world to help them against American imperialism, would you actually buy it? I wouldn't.

Quote:
Further China's military build up has been about gaining air supremacy over the straight and Taiwan itself and the ability to invade or blockade Taiwan. I'm not saying China is eager for a war there, but if one does come, they naturally want to make sure they can win and have been building their forces to that end. The US moving an airbase closer to Taiwan could be interpreted by China as an indication of a shift in the US from an official "One China" policy and a sign of increased US commitment to defend Taiwan, increasing tensions. Moving a major military base like that has a lot of implications in regards to a nation's foriegn policy. Japan of all nations should understand that, given that the US repositioning of it's pacific fleet from San Franciscio to Pearl Harbor was one of the things that factored into the decision to go to war. Moving a major fleet base closer to Japan was seen as an act of aggression against Japan then. Moving a major airbase closer to Taiwan could be seen as an act of aggression against China today. Of course the base would still be in Okinawa prefecture then, just not on the island of Okinawa itself.
You don't really understand how the world functions. The whole idea of tensions in the Taiwan strait is pretty much a typical chess piece that both the United States and China use to their advantage which means it is entirely irrelevant to Okinawa or that particular American military facility. First of all, there is no reason why China would attack Taiwan as that would harm their objectives which is to absorb their economy and also to emigrate their people into that rogue province in order to integrate themselves and control the place more naturally. Secondly, why would the United States help Taiwan from such an occurrence when it does not give them any advantages. There is no sympathy budget and there is no oil, why bother.. Personally, I think the military base would be best to be moved over to Guam which is American sovereignty. There is no need to fight against pre-emptive attacks as that those won't be happening.

Quote:
Moving the base to say South Korea will be interpreted by North Korea as an act of aggression. Then again North Korea would see increasing food aid as an act of aggression, so that's not saying much.
Why would the United States move the Okinawan military facility over to South Korea when there is already one over there!?

Quote:
Hosting a military base is not the same thing as being occupied. Are there US soldiers on the streets of Japan operating check points, enforceing curfews, or conducting operations against Japanese civilians? Yes, of course there are problems, but it isn't an occupation except in the most expansive defination of the word.
How is it any different? Hosting a military base is like legalizing an occupation after receiving some threats. Why do another nation have to host a military base for some random excuse that nobody agrees aside from the pro-American crowd? Its either the North Korean invasion or the China military aggression but in the end, the truth is that those possibilities and scenarios are most likely fabrications. Instead, the real reason why the American soldiers are there is to monitor and prevent Japan from building nukes rather than staying under the nuclear umbrella of the United States. More over, doing something so trivial gets those American soldiers the sympathy budget, as well as the good image to the world that the United States actually care about their allies and would protect them from rogue states. Like the American saying.. One stone, three birds. That military facility in Okinawa only benefits the United States.

Quote:
The US did say it would be willing to talk about minor changes, but not major changes. Of course the terms minor and major are vague. You can probably read that as major being anything that increases costs enough that congress needs to authorize more funding though.
Well.. The idea of moving the Okinawan military facility over to Guam is definitely not a major change but a trivial one yet the United States will not accept it. It is beyond my understanding. I cannot comprehend.
__________________
Shadow Kira01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-23, 12:32   Link #4458
Xellos-_^
Married
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
I saw this on MSNBC.com

@ 01:00 Oct 23

BREAKING NEWS: Switzerland gets formal U.S. request for Roman Polanskiís extradition
i heard that the original judge was only going to sent polanski back to serve out the reminder of his 90 day sentence then have him deported. Now instead spending another 45 days in jail he face the 45day plus whatever the government is going to tack on for unlawful flight.
__________________
Xellos-_^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-23, 18:13   Link #4459
Ledgem
Love Yourself
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Kira01 View Post
You don't really understand how the world functions.
...
How is it any different? Hosting a military base is like legalizing an occupation after receiving some threats.
It seems to me that you don't really understand diplomacy between nations, yourself. You're entitled to your opinions, of course...
__________________
Ledgem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-23, 22:04   Link #4460
LynnieS
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: China
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamui4356 View Post
I don't think you understand what I mean here. I'm not talking about US soldiers or Okinawan civilians. I'm talking on a national scale here. China or North Korea could see that as a sign the US is unable to meet it's treaty obligations in the region and cause them to take a more aggressive approach in dealing with other East Asian nations because they see a power vaccum, even if it's not really there.
Wait... I thought that the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation between the U.S. and Japan only commits both countries to assist in terms of Japan being attacked? There is a clause on the U.S. basing troops on Japanese soil, but treaty-wise and while it likely has to considered in light of the Cold War, it has more to do with how the citizens are to be treated.

The basing of foreign troops on native soil is always a sensitive subject, IMHO, and I think that recently, there had been at least a couple of U.S. bases in Central Asia being forced to close when the countries' leaders said no. The U.S. also still needs help and support for Afghanistan as well, which hasn't been moving in the "Great!" direction. Driving away Japan (a known ally in the region) is not a good way to maintain a global presence.

OTOH, if the U.S. is going to isolate itself again (think post-WWI), this wouldn't be a problem. A move out of Japan would likely cause South Koreans to want U.S. troops out as well, but that is a smaller problem given the fact North Korea isn't the best neighbor to have.

For North Korea, having U.S. troops based on Japan has not stopped it from testing its missiles or selling weapons (excl. the ship boarding bit being allowed now). Anti-missiles use is better placed, IMHO, in South Korea where it is easier to track, on ships where they can be easily moved, or in places like Alaska, Guam, Hawaii or the West Coast when the targets are better known. Having orbital weapons platforms is better, but not too likely to happen.

As for China, I don't see how much having U.S. bases in Japan that will stop it from being aggressive to countries like Russia, Vietnam or India if it wants to. Taiwan is not a huge deal, esp. if China is willing to spend the missiles to allow its marines to land onshore; Taiwan is looked more as a province that has wandered away as well, IMHO; a peaceful reunion is more preferred given they are still seen as being "one of us". South Korea... Kind of hard to say. From day-to-day fiction writings, the tone tends to be derogatory, and there doesn't seem to be much from the central government or its propaganda organs. On the "what does South Korea has to offer" front, there doesn't look to be much that it cannot get by corporate theft or purchases elsewhere? Physical threats to the Chinese mainland can be placed elsewhere, esp. with enough fuel available; having bases close by just means you need less, but then you need to deal with faster counterattacks.

On the plus side for the U.S., sales of weapons like the PAC-3 should go up, esp. when you include training, weapon reloads and maintenance contracts in the bill. A plus for the U.S. arms industry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamui4356 View Post
Once again you don't get what I mean. That aggression you speak of is not being directed at China. China is currently building it's military to try to gain superority over Taiwan in the unlikely event of a conflict. The US moving an airforce base closer to Taiwan could be taken by the Chinese as representing a direct challange to China and an aggressive act towards China.
You actually do not need as big a military presence for China to succeed in taking Taiwan, esp. if you can work out a deal with the U.S. in advance. If I was involved in the Taiwanese government, I would be looking to get as much military tech of my own as well as getting spies into China's military high command and central government. Trusting anyone else for your own safety is just risky.

A move out of Japan by the U.S. could mean a decrease in military spending by China, which the U.S. would like to see; OTOH, continued spending in that case could mean China has bad intentions elsewhere (like Russia and India). Looking like you are sacrificing Taiwan in this case, esp. if you convince the country that you are still helping it, could be worth the gamble.

I'm also not sure how much the U.S. citizens actually care these days about the treaty to protect Taiwan...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamui4356 View Post
By at this stage I mean when the deal has already been signed and work on moving some of the troops is already underway. Do you think the people in Okinawa would be fine with leaving everything where it is for another 15 years while a new deal is worked out? Under the current agreement some US forces are being moved. Isn't it better to go ahead with that while working out a new deal for the rest which aren't?
Didn't the newly elected officials representing the area came into office on the promise that they would review the base move? It would be a shame to go back on that promise now, esp. if that just gets the voters angrier. It increases the chances of a worse hard-liner being placed into office, IMHO.
__________________
"If ignorance is bliss, then why aren't more people happy?" -- Misc.

Currently listening: Nadda
Currently reading: Procrastination for the win!
Currently playing: "Quest of D", "Border Break" and "Gundam Senjou no Kizuna".
Waiting for: "Shining Force Cross"!

Last edited by LynnieS; 2009-10-23 at 22:17.
LynnieS is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
current affairs, discussion, international, news

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:43.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.