First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Post Reply Your opinion of the large U.S. military presence in Japan?
4733 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Chicago, Illinois
Offline
Posted 12/4/15
Title says it all... A good 40% of the island of Okinawa is a USMC base, with tons of marine camps in the mainland, naval installations, even army cryptologic linguists get stationed there lol. My step-sister's bf was in the Marines for 4 years, and after his tour in Afghanistan he was stationed at camp Smedley D. Butler on Okinawa, and he said all of the townspeople there really don't like the presence of Americans there... he got kicked out of a club because he was an American. So what do you all think, should we keep a lot of troops there, or start planning for the JSDF to take the reins? I personally can go either way; our bases in Japan are more or less strategic, but I'm not sure the US should be there forever...
Posted 12/4/15
Second takeover.
Banned
17503 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / B.C, Canada
Offline
Posted 12/4/15
The burdens ya pay for being on the losing side of a war your country started. Honestly though if the Japanese people are that offended they could petition the Diet to renegotiate the terms of the peace treaty Japan signed at the end of World War 2. The fact they haven't in nearly what 65 years says a lot more then all the here-say.

And frankly anyone who thinks the US should give up what is the prefect staging ground for an invasion into China is insane. The Chinese have no love for anyone not Chinese and in the last decade the Chinese government has done a lot of posturing and beefing up it's already impressive military. Combine that with their less then friendly relationships with pretty much the entire world and I think those bases are far more then strategical.

And it will be years or even decades before the JSDF is any sort of shape to act as Japan's sole military force. They are by treaty forbidden from being able to project their power and the training a JSDF trooper receives isn't the same as a soldier of a NATO country does. Two or three generations of Japanese military have grown up under a system that turned them into little more then glorified police. A combat ready army is not made of police trained units.
17761 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / outer wall, level...
Offline
Posted 12/4/15 , edited 12/4/15
if push came to shove, japan would lose without the US bases. no carriers, no nukes. there oretty much defencless against china.
tho since ICBM are basicly just for show, you might consider them defence weapons. japan has the techinical know how to build them anyways.
31133 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 12/4/15 , edited 12/5/15
From what I recall it's primarily just the people living on Okinawa that don't want the U.S. base there. Japan in general is more favorable (so long as the base is not in their own backyard) as the U.S. presence in the region acts as a deterrent for N. Korea and China.

As for why locals don't want the base there, I believe it's a mix of xenophobia, older generations seeing it as a reminder of losing WW2, and some bored soldiers having a tendency to behave badly.
6638 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / USA
Offline
Posted 12/4/15
Part of the treaty was the US would essentially be responsible for the defense of Japan. Japan is happy with that. The US is happy as it gives us a forward staging area in Asia (North Korea, Russia, and China are all in the area). There may be some grumbling from time to time but neither party is really interested in seeing the situation change.

The JSDF is a glorified police force for the most part. The naval elements are probably the best though with very advanced ships and now some not-aircraft carriers that are definitely aircraft carriers. The ground forces are untested, but have some state of the art equipment. The new Type 10 MBTs are very agile and pack the same gun as the M1A2.
Posted 12/4/15
My curriculum never included the phrase "Japan is just another nickname for Adolf Hitler. "
36990 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Bellingham WA, USA
Offline
Posted 12/4/15 , edited 12/4/15
By the rules of the treaty, we have to be gone within a year if Japan wishes it.

So I don't care either way, the ball's in the Japanese governments court and has been all along. I do, however think that with China continuing to flex its muscles in those waters it would be a poorly timed decision to reduce US presence in that area right now.
3060 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/4/15
that military presence is what allowed me to live in japan for 3 years when my parents were stationed there, so...
Posted 12/4/15
Well considering china has the world larges army, I think we should keep them there. Unless Japan feel like playing with fire.
27257 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Offline
Posted 12/4/15 , edited 12/5/15
Yes they should be there until Japan gets the giant robots
10831 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
13 / F / California
Offline
Posted 12/4/15 , edited 12/5/15


We pull out, we takin' the Rootbeer with us
48255 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / dawsonville GA,
Offline
Posted 12/5/15 , edited 12/5/15
Well as being i just got done with my second MEU deployment based out of japan. I gotta say marines are either hated or loved over there. I've seen protesters yelling and throwing stuff at us or the vehicles along with seeing other Japanese people protesting the protesters and showing support of the union between the U.S. and the Japanese governments. It is a good place to be for peace keeping over there. Multiple times we were setup in a a fashion to kinda tell other countries hey were here quit you bullshit when they were doing something stupid. (Including the whole North Korea and South Korea exchanging artillery rounds earlier this year. Plus china is doing false claims on territory in the area of the ocean between them and Japan. U.S. presence is a pretty large part of the peace keeping over their with multiple countries having multiple problems. So our military power keeps a good reminder why they should stay peaceful over their. Along with all that we can go and commence training with other countries so it helps keeping peace and having multiple countries work together. I've personally worked with Japanese, South Korean, Canadian, New Zealand, Australian, and Filipino forces. That kinda of thing makes countries more comfortable and more willing to work together for the goal of peace.
23 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/5/15 , edited 12/5/15
I'd say we need to do a reduction.

Close the bases in Korea, reduce the ones in Japan; Save a bunch of money from the pit known as DoD/Military Spending.

I mean do we really need soldiers within sight/range of N. Korean artillery? Moving them to Japan would just mean letting S. Korea deal with N. Korean aggression for a few hours on their own while a carrier or three makes its way over the Sea of Japan. Air superiority takes over from there.


And while we're at it, stop funneling military weapons and money to anti-Assad rebels. Literally Iraq 2.0 (which liberals have no problem feigning ignorance at because 'derp Obama in charge, can't say anything bad or else you a waycist')
37319 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 12/5/15
We're there because of a treaty we signed with Japan at the end of WWII. We are occupying Japan for 100 years. After that, we leave. We may work out some new treaties that will keep U.S. presence in Japan, because of the Russians and the Chinese. But, we're there because of the treaty.
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.