PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues The Japanese want U.S. out of Japan.


wazu
01-30-2010, 08:24 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1247281/Thousands-protest-Tokyo-U-S-military-presence-Japan.html

Thousands protest in Tokyo against U.S. military presence in Japan
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 4:09 PM on 30th January 2010

Thousands of protesters from across Japan marched today in Tokyo to protest against U.S. military presence on Okinawa, while a Cabinet minister said she would fight to get rid of a marine base Washington considers crucial.

Some 47,000 U.S. troops are stationed in Japan, with more than half on the southern island of Okinawa.

Residents have complained for years about noise, pollution and crime around the bases.

Japan and the U.S. signed a pact in 2006 that called for the realignment of American troops in the country and for a Marine base on the island to be moved to a less populated area.
Enlarge Tokyo protest

Protest: Some 6,000 people gathered at a rally in Tokyo calling for the withdrawal of U.S. Marine base stationed on the Japanese island of Okinawa

But the new Tokyo government is re-examining the deal, caught between public opposition to American troops and its crucial military alliance with Washington.

On Saturday, labor unionists, pacifists, environmentalists and students marched through central Tokyo, yelling slogans and calling for an end to the U.S. troop presence.

They gathered for a rally at a park - under a banner that read 'Change! Japan-U.S. Relations' - for speeches by civil leaders and politicians.

Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has repeatedly postponed his decision on the pact, with members of his own government divided on how to proceed.

Last week he pledged to resolve the conundrum by May, just before national elections.

'The Cabinet is saying that it will announce its conclusion in May.

For this reason, over the next few months we must put all of our energy into achieving victory,' Cabinet minister Mizuho Fukushima said at the rally, to shouts of approval from the crowd.
Enlarge Tokyo protest

Angry: The slogans written in Japanese read 'We don't need Futenma base', in red, and 'We refuse new Henoko base', in blue

Fukushima - who has a minor post in the Cabinet and heads a small political party - wants the base moved out of Japan entirely.

Hatoyama's government must appease such political allies to maintain its majority coalition in parliament, and the public are increasingly vociferous on the U.S. military issue, even outside of Okinawa.

'I'm against having troops here. I'm not sure we can get them all out, but at least some of them should leave,' said Seiichiro Terada, 31, a government tax collector who attended the rally.

Terada said he traveled from his home in the central prefecture of Shizuoka, which hosts a Marine base at the foot of Mt. Fuji.

The deal with Washington calls for the Marine base in a crowded part of Okinawa to be moved to a smaller city called Nago.

But last week residents of Nago elected a new mayor who opposes the move, ousting the incumbent that supported a U.S. military presence.

On the other side of the debate, a steady stream of U.S. officials have petitioned Tokyo to follow the agreement and maintain American troop levels in Japan, with U.S.

Ambassador John Roos on Friday calling them 'front-line forces' in case of emergencies or security threats.

Brock
01-30-2010, 08:26 PM
shrug okay

Frazod
01-30-2010, 08:29 PM
Whatever. When the Chinese start lopping their heads off for kicks, they'll probably want them back.

wazu
01-30-2010, 08:31 PM
Not sure why we waste our resources on it anyway. Japan has over 127 million people, and the world's second largest economy. Time to stand on their own.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-30-2010, 08:34 PM
Whatever. When the Chinese start lopping their heads off for kicks, they'll probably want them back.

As long as we have nukes surreptitiously placed in South Korea, that's not happening.

|Zach|
01-30-2010, 08:58 PM
Why would there be a lot of crime around a military base?

Hydrae
01-30-2010, 10:40 PM
I know I wouldn't be keen to have a Japanese base in my town.

BucEyedPea
01-30-2010, 11:10 PM
I love it! Saves us money!

KILLER_CLOWN
01-30-2010, 11:12 PM
This doesn't look good for our global conquest.

BucEyedPea
01-30-2010, 11:53 PM
This doesn't look good for our global conquest.

Well, China's becoming the next superpower. Already there's talk of them looking for overseas bases for their new found trade. They already have us.

Bowser
01-30-2010, 11:57 PM
This is nothing new. I was stationed in Okinawa in '90-'91, and they were holding the same rallies then.

Why would there be a lot of crime around a military base?

Soldiers go out, get piss pounded drunk, then do some seriously stupid shit. Back in the day, a Marine got into some deep shit for getting hammered, jumping on his motorcycle, then driving through neighborhoods near his base and lobbing tear gas cannisters into houses.

Pushead2
01-31-2010, 12:07 AM
This is nothing new. I was stationed in Okinawa in '90-'91, and they were holding the same rallies then.



Soldiers go out, get piss pounded drunk, then do some seriously stupid shit. Back in the day, a Marine got into some deep shit for getting hammered, jumping on his motorcycle, then driving through neighborhoods near his base and lobbing tear gas cannisters into houses.

I wonder why they want us out :spock:

WoodDraw
01-31-2010, 12:25 AM
Not sure why we waste our resources on it anyway. Japan has over 127 million people, and the world's second largest economy. Time to stand on their own.

We're not there for their security; we are there because we really want the base.

They want us out because we have an unfortunate habit of committing crimes.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-31-2010, 12:39 AM
This is nothing new. I was stationed in Okinawa in '90-'91, and they were holding the same rallies then.



Soldiers go out, get piss pounded drunk, then do some seriously stupid shit. Back in the day, a Marine got into some deep shit for getting hammered, jumping on his motorcycle, then driving through neighborhoods near his base and lobbing tear gas cannisters into houses.

You would have been there right around the time of that very well publicized rape, yes?

|Zach|
01-31-2010, 12:41 AM
This is nothing new. I was stationed in Okinawa in '90-'91, and they were holding the same rallies then.



Soldiers go out, get piss pounded drunk, then do some seriously stupid shit. Back in the day, a Marine got into some deep shit for getting hammered, jumping on his motorcycle, then driving through neighborhoods near his base and lobbing tear gas cannisters into houses.

Oh wow!

Chocolate Hog
01-31-2010, 12:42 AM
I'm all for it. Infact we should close all the bases overseas.

WoodDraw
01-31-2010, 12:43 AM
I'm all for it. Infact we should close all the bases overseas.

ROFL

Chocolate Hog
01-31-2010, 12:46 AM
ROFL

Are you a "conservative". You neo-cons differ on spending with Obama expect when it comes to military, social security, medicare and education.

I'm glad we can protect our own borders.... Oh wait ROFL

WoodDraw
01-31-2010, 12:53 AM
Are you a "conservative". You neo-cons differ on spending with Obama expect when it comes to military, social security, medicare and education.

I'm glad we can protect our own borders.... Oh wait ROFL

I'm one of the more liberal posters you'll find on this board. I rarely post in DC anymore because I can barely handle it, but so it goes.


The base in Japan provides a HUGE military asset to the United States. Even if it didn't, to close all bases overseas? Seriously? That doesn't even deserve a response it's so idiotic and detached from any reason.

I sympathize with the locals for having to deal with a persistent and apparently uncontrollable ability of the base to deal with American personal, but American forward bases are a complete necessity, as proved every time we deal with attacks and disasters in a matter of days if not hours while the rest of the world tries to mobilize.

Chocolate Hog
01-31-2010, 12:55 AM
I'm one of the more liberal posters you'll find on this board. I rarely post in DC anymore because I can barely handle it, but so it goes.


The base in Japan provides a HUGE military asset to the United States. Even if it didn't, to close all bases overseas? Seriously? That doesn't even deserve a response it's so idiotic and detached from any reason.

I sympathize with the locals for having to deal with a persistent and apparently uncontrollable ability of the base to deal with American personal, but American forward bases are a complete necessity, as proved every time we deal with attacks and disasters in a matter of days if not hours while the rest of the world tries to mobilize.


Why should America have military bases in other countries? If China setup a base in America how would Americans feel about it? World WWII was over years ago, the cold war was over years ago. It's funny how even Liberals and Neo-cons are the same on foreign policy.

WoodDraw
01-31-2010, 01:02 AM
Why should America have military bases in other countries? If China setup a base in America how would Americans feel about it?

You understand there are countries that love having American bases there, right? Last time the US tried to draw down forces in Germany, there were huge protests from local interests.


I wouldn't be too happy if China set up an air base here, but Canada has joint operated air bases here that I don't mind. Your straw man argument fails across the line. Other countries don't need bases in the United States because we guarantee safe travel and operation to everyone here. In Europe and Asia, that's quite different. There are legitimate threats that the United States has to have an operating force within distance of in order to guarantee security. The countries have a choice of either increasing there own military spending x-fold or allowing the US to continue to operate. For the most part, they've picked the latter.

Chocolate Hog
01-31-2010, 01:04 AM
You understand there are countries that love having American bases there, right? Last time the US tried to draw down forces in Germany, there were huge protests from local interests.


I wouldn't be too happy if China set up an air base here, but Canada has joint operated air bases here that I don't mind. Your straw man argument fails across the line. Other countries don't need bases in the United States because we guarantee safe travel and operation to all of our allies here. In Europe and Asia, that's quite different. There are legitimate threats that the United States has to have an operating force within distance of in order to guarantee security. The countries have a choice of either increasing there own military spending x-fold or allowing the US to continue to operate. For the most part, they've picked the latter.

Without using ad hominems please tell me what the threats are to Europe & Asia.

BigMeatballDave
01-31-2010, 01:14 AM
I agree. We have no reason to be there. While were at it, can we remove our troops out of Germany and other friendly nations?

WoodDraw
01-31-2010, 01:16 AM
Without using ad hominems please tell me what the threats are to Europe & Asia.

There was nothing ad hominem there...

The United States has bases in Bulgaria, Columbia, Germany, Greenland, Guam, Israel, Italy, Iraq, Japan, Kosovo, Kuwait, South Korea, Kyrgyzstan, The Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. Among others...

For the most part, those bases operate without controversy. The United States has an extended force capable of reacting quickly to any threat against us, but also any threat against allies or national disaster. And for the most part, other countries like that.

So when piracy gets crazy in Africa, we are able to send ships. When tensions build in between China and Taiwan, we have carrier groups near by. When NK launches missiles, we have ships stationed there to respond.

And so on and so on... It's the doctrine of "Pax Americana", where the widespread presence of the American forces has allowed every other Western country to spend significantly less on defense than they normally would.

Chocolate Hog
01-31-2010, 01:23 AM
So every country spends less and we pick up the bill?

WoodDraw
01-31-2010, 01:25 AM
I should add too that there is widespread agreement in the forces for drawing down our troop positions overseas. So as opposed to having thousands of troops stationed in one place, you'd have support groups in place to allow immediate deployment of troops to certain areas if needed while keeping troops stationed in central areas. But the idea that we should give up all foreign bases is ludicrous in so many way.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-31-2010, 01:34 AM
I am in no way in favor of Pax Americana, as that was always a horrible malapropism that is predicated upon continued imperial expansion that leaves the imperialist country wobbling like a poorly dissembled Jenga stack.

L.A. Chieffan
01-31-2010, 01:35 AM
fuck other countries. unless they got shit that we want for free than pull our asses out.

WoodDraw
01-31-2010, 01:46 AM
I am in no way in favor of Pax Americana, as that was always a horrible malapropism that is predicated upon continued imperial expansion that leaves the imperialist country wobbling like a poorly dissembled Jenga stack.

You can use what word you want. The truth remains though that having one true Western super power with wide spread allies has led to a widespread peace that won't soon be broken. You can move away from the "Pax Americana" word, as most people are. But the fundamental meaning remains the same.

KILLER_CLOWN
01-31-2010, 02:06 AM
You can use what word you want. The truth remains though that having one true Western super power with wide spread allies has led to a widespread peace that won't soon be broken. You can move away from the "Pax Americana" word, as most people are. But the fundamental meaning remains the same.

ROFL Is that the term for it?

Norman Einstein
01-31-2010, 07:14 AM
I agree. We have no reason to be there. While were at it, can we remove our troops out of Germany and other friendly nations?

So you want us to be isolationists?

If we are going to leave all of the places you refer to, should we also stop all foreign aid at the same time?

Should we stop trade with them?

Should we secure our borders to complete the isolationism?

Do we kick out any foreign military in the U.S.?

Bowser
01-31-2010, 07:28 AM
You would have been there right around the time of that very well publicized rape, yes?Yes I was. Things got very dicey for awhile after that. That may have been when the Japaneese started in earnest trying to get us out of there. We were locked down on base for two weeks at least, maybe more. I think the Marines were locked down longer than us "Air Force pussies".

I'm a pretty firm believer in karma and what comes around goes around, but I'm hoping karma doled our a double helping for all those miserable cocksuckers that pulled that shit on that little girl. Horrific.

wazu
01-31-2010, 03:50 PM
We're not there for their security; we are there because we really want the base.

"We"? I don't.

banyon
01-31-2010, 05:13 PM
Not sure why we waste our resources on it anyway. Japan has over 127 million people, and the world's second largest economy. Time to stand on their own.

I agree it's time.

Chocolate Hog
01-31-2010, 05:21 PM
So you want us to be isolationists?

If we are going to leave all of the places you refer to, should we also stop all foreign aid at the same time?

Should we stop trade with them?

Should we secure our borders to complete the isolationism?

Do we kick out any foreign military in the U.S.?

I think we should invade other countries and leave our southern border open.

Norman Einstein
01-31-2010, 05:31 PM
Not sure why we waste our resources on it anyway. Japan has over 127 million people, and the world's second largest economy. Time to stand on their own.

I agree it's time.

It may be time and Japan may be self sufficient, but what would you have the U.S. do with the forces that we have there? I don't know if they are part of the rapid deployment group, but if they are where would we re-deploy them? What expense would there be to relocate them? What would be the impact on National Security if that group is no longer available for a quick response?

Norman Einstein
01-31-2010, 05:32 PM
I think we should invade other countries and leave our southern border open.

Well, we are half way there now. All we have to do is find a country to invade.

Chocolate Hog
01-31-2010, 05:33 PM
Well, we are half way there now. All we have to do is find a country to invade.

We didn't invade Iraq?

wazu
01-31-2010, 05:44 PM
What expense would there be to relocate them? What would be the impact on National Security if that group is no longer available for a quick response?

What do you think? Does China end up with boots on the ground invading Hawaii because we don't have a base in Japan? I just don't see it.

Norman Einstein
01-31-2010, 05:55 PM
What do you think? Does China end up with boots on the ground invading Hawaii because we don't have a base in Japan? I just don't see it.

I guess you only see part of the story. Where do you think some of the first responders came from when the sunami hit a while back? Ships (aircraft carrier mainly) were homeported there and was able to respond more quickly than sending one from California, Washington or the East Coast.

The business of war is not the only reason we have forces around the world.

Norman Einstein
01-31-2010, 05:56 PM
We didn't invade Iraq?

Did we do so in the attempt to take the country over and steal their oil? From what I read when the war started it was justified in the war on terror.

Saul Good
01-31-2010, 06:23 PM
It may be time and Japan may be self sufficient, but what would you have the U.S. do with the forces that we have there? I don't know if they are part of the rapid deployment group, but if they are where would we re-deploy them? What expense would there be to relocate them? What would be the impact on National Security if that group is no longer available for a quick response?

Deploy them to the Rio Grande.

Taco John
01-31-2010, 06:27 PM
I guess you only see part of the story. Where do you think some of the first responders came from when the sunami hit a while back? Ships (aircraft carrier mainly) were homeported there and was able to respond more quickly than sending one from California, Washington or the East Coast.

The business of war is not the only reason we have forces around the world.

Business is right.

bevischief
01-31-2010, 06:29 PM
I'm all for it. Infact we should close all the bases overseas.

In all countries that can take care of themselves like Japan, Europe...etc.

Norman Einstein
01-31-2010, 07:14 PM
In all countries that can take care of themselves like Japan, Europe...etc.

Europe is a country?

banyon
02-01-2010, 10:54 AM
It may be time and Japan may be self sufficient, but what would you have the U.S. do with the forces that we have there? I don't know if they are part of the rapid deployment group, but if they are where would we re-deploy them? What expense would there be to relocate them? What would be the impact on National Security if that group is no longer available for a quick response?

I don't know why they couldn't be redeployed to South Korea and have pretty much the same quick-response ability.

KC Dan
02-01-2010, 11:10 AM
I don't know why they couldn't be redeployed to South Korea and have pretty much the same quick-response ability.South Korea's naval attachments are a joke. Been there, and experienced both. The USN & USAF bases in Japan are very good. It would cost mega-bucks to relocate. Plus, Japan isn't quite in the crosshairs as SK is from NK. You want to show power in SK but you also need your defenses and gear safe from an unannounced attack.

Garcia Bronco
02-01-2010, 11:23 AM
Sounds like someone needs another bomb.

Listen you Japanese ****s, you'll owe us forever after you attacked and killed our people in Hawaii. Be glad we let you keep your silly little islands.


LOL

j/k don't really care

Brock
02-01-2010, 11:25 AM
Yeah, it's not like they paid a heavy price for that or anything.

Garcia Bronco
02-01-2010, 11:26 AM
Yeah, it's not like they paid a heavy price for that or anything.

It's the end of the month and rent is due.

patteeu
02-01-2010, 11:27 AM
Thousands, huh? LMAO

Re-written thread title:

A tiny fraction of one percent of the Japanese people want U.S. out of Japan.

patteeu
02-01-2010, 11:31 AM
Why should America have military bases in other countries? If China setup a base in America how would Americans feel about it? World WWII was over years ago, the cold war was over years ago. It's funny how even Liberals and Neo-cons are the same on foreign policy.

Is it equally funny how fringe liberals like Dennis Kucinich and fringe conservatives like billay* are the same on foreign policy?

*You know, it pains me to call you Ron Paulians "fringe" because I really like the direction he wants to move the country in terms of respecting the original meaning of the constitution and reigning in big government, but your ridiculously naive view of foreign policy makes it impossible for me to avoid it.

patteeu
02-01-2010, 11:39 AM
So you want us to be isolationists?

If we are going to leave all of the places you refer to, should we also stop all foreign aid at the same time?

Should we stop trade with them?

Should we secure our borders to complete the isolationism?

Do we kick out any foreign military in the U.S.?

I don't know if they want us to be isolationists or not, but we'd better develop a capability to do with far less access to oil if we go that route because as soon as we withdraw from the world we will become subject to the mercy of any aggressive podunk who wants to cause terrible damage to our economy by cutting off our supply of middle east oil.

patteeu
02-01-2010, 11:41 AM
I agree it's time.

Oh my. Even some of the non-fringe progressives are in agreement with billay on this foreign policy issue. Wonder if he thinks that's funny too. :shrug:

Rain Man
02-01-2010, 11:51 AM
It seems to me that we have the wrong business model in place. If an American presence is good and welcomed, and if we use that presence for things like humanitarian aid in tsunamis, and if we pump money into national economies by having sailors on shore leave buying booze and amphibiously invading local hookers, shouldn't we be putting out an RFP and having other countries bid for the right to have our bases? This should be a money maker for America.

FishingRod
02-01-2010, 12:35 PM
It think this would be an appropriate place for someone to post a picture of the cowboy from Tombstone saying "well Bye"

Bill Parcells
02-01-2010, 12:46 PM
Why would there be a lot of crime around a military base?

A couple of years ago some marines were accused of raping a Japanese woman. I think the people around that okinawa base are bitter.

My friend was in the marines in the early 80's and he was in okinawa for a period of time. he said the locals just wont let go of how the Japanese do and make everything better than us. and that they never stop bringing up nagasaki and hiroshima to americans. this was in the early 80's though..lol

Jenson71
02-01-2010, 12:50 PM
Probably the overwhelming majority of Japanese like having the U.S. basically buy their protection from North Korea and (not so much anymore) China. Is it time for us to get out? Sure, it's a holdover from the Cold War. But one, I don't know that it costs much to stay there against the alternative. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that (versus how much it costs to move soldiers elsewhere, building an extension of a base or a new one altogether). Two, I disagree that it's a symbol of imperialism, like I might have used to think. More of a symbol of Asian protection.

donkhater
02-01-2010, 01:27 PM
So you want us to be isolationists?

No. Basically by your definition every other country in the world is an isolationist because they don't have bases in 700+ countries.

If we are going to leave all of the places you refer to, should we also stop all foreign aid at the same time?

Yes

Should we stop trade with them?

No. What's that got to do with military bases?

Should we secure our borders to complete the isolationism?

Yes It's called national defense, you know, the primary function of the Department of Defense.

Do we kick out any foreign military in the U.S.?

Yes




This isn't isolationism. It's common ****ing sense.

donkhater
02-01-2010, 01:29 PM
Is it equally funny how fringe liberals like Dennis Kucinich and fringe conservatives like billay* are the same on foreign policy?

*You know, it pains me to call you Ron Paulians "fringe" because I really like the direction he wants to move the country in terms of respecting the original meaning of the constitution and reigning in big government, but your ridiculously naive view of foreign policy makes it impossible for me to avoid it.

Being naive has nothing to do with it. It's the logical rational that we can't afford it.

patteeu
02-01-2010, 01:42 PM
Being naive has nothing to do with it. It's the logical rational that we can't afford it.

We can easily afford it. Defense spending isn't what's breaking the bank. Defense spending is flat (relative to our national wealth) compared to the entitlement mountain that we're climbing. Meanwhile, Obama is working on turning the Rockies into the Himalayas.

Rain Man
02-01-2010, 02:07 PM
I suspect there's a long-term cost-benefit analysis (ultra-long-term), which is...

Does it cost more to provide a military umbrella for Japan and (to a lesser extent) Germany, or...

Does it cost more to face down a re-armed Japan and German sometime in the next hundred years?


If we provide all of Japan's defense, we don't have to worry about them rising as a regional aggressor against our interests in the area. I'd never thought about it like that, but there is a risk management element to it that provides a payback to the U.S.

Garcia Bronco
02-01-2010, 02:21 PM
If we provide all of Japan's defense, we don't have to worry about them rising as a regional aggressor against our interests in the area. I'd never thought about it like that, but there is a risk management element to it that provides a payback to the U.S.

Exactly.

tooge
02-01-2010, 02:45 PM
ho hum. I was stationed over there and that was 15 years ago. They have always wanted us out of there.

KC native
02-01-2010, 03:03 PM
We can easily afford it. Defense spending isn't what's breaking the bank. Defense spending is flat (relative to our national wealth) compared to the entitlement mountain that we're climbing. Meanwhile, Obama is working on turning the Rockies into the Himalayas.

Horseshit on defense spending isn't breaking the bank. Our country spends way too much on defense.

That being said we can easily afford a Japanese base and I think we should keep it. My friend grew up in Okinawa and he said the main issue isn't that the base is there, it's the behavior of the soldiers/Marines stationed there. His parents were teachers on base but they lived off base and my friend was more Japanese than American growing up (I still tease him to this day and tell him he's not really black but Japanese. His family is from Mobile, Alabama for context). He has stories for days about the obnoxious shit that our servicemen would do.

HonestChieffan
02-01-2010, 03:09 PM
Our country spends way too much on defense.

Based on what?

donkhater
02-01-2010, 03:27 PM
We can easily afford it. Defense spending isn't what's breaking the bank. Defense spending is flat (relative to our national wealth) compared to the entitlement mountain that we're climbing. Meanwhile, Obama is working on turning the Rockies into the Himalayas.

Really? It's that type of rational that leads to every item on the budget as being 'affordable'.

patteeu
02-01-2010, 03:51 PM
Horseshit on defense spending isn't breaking the bank. Our country spends way too much on defense.

That being said we can easily afford a Japanese base and I think we should keep it. My friend grew up in Okinawa and he said the main issue isn't that the base is there, it's the behavior of the soldiers/Marines stationed there. His parents were teachers on base but they lived off base and my friend was more Japanese than American growing up (I still tease him to this day and tell him he's not really black but Japanese. His family is from Mobile, Alabama for context). He has stories for days about the obnoxious shit that our servicemen would do.

You keep posting about your friends and people you know. Aren't you one of the guys who keeps giving BEP trouble for drawing conclusions from anecdotes?

Our level of defense spending is quite affordable. That's undeniable. We'll have to agree to disagree on how much we should be spending on defense.

patteeu
02-01-2010, 03:53 PM
Really? It's that type of rational that leads to every item on the budget as being 'affordable'.

No, it's not. It's the type of rationale that's based on what portion of our budget we were spending on defense when we weren't dramatically outspending our means as opposed to the same measure of other parts of the budget. Most notably, the exploding cost of our ever-growing set of entitlements.

It's also the type of rationale that focuses on the relative value and the relative constitutional merit of the various expenditures of our federal government.

KC native
02-01-2010, 04:00 PM
You keep posting about your friends and people you know. Aren't you one of the guys who keeps giving BEP trouble for drawing conclusions from anecdotes?

Our level of defense spending is quite affordable. That's undeniable. We'll have to agree to disagree on how much we should be spending on defense.

ROFL Yes, but I wasn't trying to prove my case on it. You already handled that with your post about how few actually want us to leave. I was just adding color for the slower members that post out here.

And yes we will have to agree to disagree about our level of defense spending.

Edit: and my other anecdote was in response to big daddy's comments about gays. Other than that I can't think of any other anecdotes that I've used.

Hydrae
02-01-2010, 04:05 PM
ROFL Yes, but I wasn't trying to prove my case on it. You already handled that with your post about how few actually want us to leave. I was just adding color for the slower members that post out here.

And yes we will have to agree to disagree about our level of defense spending.

Edit: and my other anecdote was in response to big daddy's comments about gays. Other than that I can't think of any other anecdotes that I've used.

We can complain about the level of spending on defense (the Military Industrial Complex is alive and very well off in this country) but at least it is Consitutional spending.

Radar Chief
02-01-2010, 04:07 PM
Soldiers go out, get piss pounded drunk, then do some seriously stupid shit. Back in the day, a Marine got into some deep shit for getting hammered, jumping on his motorcycle, then driving through neighborhoods near his base and lobbing tear gas cannisters into houses.

There are also loads of parasites hanging around waiting to take advantage of young, dump privates with pockets full of money.

PunkinDrublic
02-01-2010, 04:22 PM
A military base, aircraft carrier or ships population is like the population of any american city. Overwhelmingly the servicepersonel are good people and do great things, but you're always going to have a small percentage of that population who will go out and act like the proverbial shitbag ugly americans. Unfortunately they are the ones that screw it up for everybody.

donkhater
02-01-2010, 04:38 PM
No, it's not. It's the type of rationale that's based on what portion of our budget we were spending on defense when we weren't dramatically outspending our means as opposed to the same measure of other parts of the budget. Most notably, the exploding cost of our ever-growing set of entitlements.

It's also the type of rationale that focuses on the relative value and the relative constitutional merit of the various expenditures of our federal government.

You're using a constitutional argument? You can't be serious.

So just because "Defense" spending hasn't increased as much in the last few years relative to everything else in the budget we can afford it? Oh, O-kay.

Your attitude is closer to a liberal than you think, pat. We go into these countries to establish 'democracies' because we think we know better than they do on how to govern their country. Sound vaguely familiar to a health care argument the libs roll out?

Is some evil taking place in these countries? Yes in most cases, but you're playing a losing game if you think you can eradicate that from the world.

People are pissed that we are blowing up bridges in third world countries AND rebuilding them and yet we are running a huge deficit here at home. As much as I despise the entitlement programs, at least the spending stays within the borders (which would be more secure if all our troops weren't elsewhere, BTW).

Thig Lyfe
02-01-2010, 04:43 PM
They gathered for a rally at a park - under a banner that read 'Change! Japan-U.S. Relations' - for speeches by civil leaders and politicians.


http://www.english.uiuc.edu/-people-/faculty/debaron/wolimages/connery.jpg

Norman Einstein
02-01-2010, 06:43 PM
I don't know why they couldn't be redeployed to South Korea and have pretty much the same quick-response ability.

At what cost? Besides, if we left Japan would they possibly revisit what they started in the mid 20th century? Didn't the surrender of WWII stipulate they would not mount an armed force?

Norman Einstein
02-01-2010, 06:45 PM
I don't know if they want us to be isolationists or not, but we'd better develop a capability to do with far less access to oil if we go that route because as soon as we withdraw from the world we will become subject to the mercy of any aggressive podunk who wants to cause terrible damage to our economy by cutting off our supply of middle east oil.

Don't go attempting to use common sense here, most of the left doesn't want to hear that.

bevischief
02-01-2010, 06:47 PM
Europe is a country?

European Union.

Norman Einstein
02-01-2010, 06:52 PM
A military base, aircraft carrier or ships population is like the population of any american city. Overwhelmingly the servicepersonel are good people and do great things, but you're always going to have a small percentage of that population who will go out and act like the proverbial shitbag ugly americans. Unfortunately they are the ones that screw it up for everybody.

There are bad apples in every basket, but something you have to ask is what Japan is like outside the bases. In San Diego a few years ago the Navy shut down off time activites for the personnel due to the criminal activity outside the fence. There was a 6 block buffer zone that you were not allowed to walk, wait for a bus or frequent any of the businesses.

My estimation of a foreign base would be the area immediately outside the base is just about the same as San Diego. The criminals involved are locals doing their best to rip off the soldier with a fat wallet.

What kind of money is infused into their economy because of the bases there? Other than regaining the land and getting all of those 'free' buildings what will they gain from the U.S. military leaving?

Norman Einstein
02-01-2010, 06:53 PM
European Union.

Not one country, maybe a communal agreement to share financial systems, but still very different governments and laws.

bevischief
02-01-2010, 07:41 PM
At what cost? Besides, if we left Japan would they possibly revisit what they started in the mid 20th century? Didn't the surrender of WWII stipulate they would not mount an armed force?

Yes but since then they have had a hand in a lot of technology enhancements since WW2. They don't need a armed force to take us out.

Norman Einstein
02-01-2010, 07:45 PM
Yes but since then they have had a hand in a lot of technology enhancements since WW2. They don't need a armed force to take us out.

Right. I wasn't worried about us. They didn't worry about us for a while when WWII started.

bevischief
02-01-2010, 07:49 PM
There are bad apples in every basket, but something you have to ask is what Japan is like outside the bases. In San Diego a few years ago the Navy shut down off time activites for the personnel due to the criminal activity outside the fence. There was a 6 block buffer zone that you were not allowed to walk, wait for a bus or frequent any of the businesses.

My estimation of a foreign base would be the area immediately outside the base is just about the same as San Diego. The criminals involved are locals doing their best to rip off the soldier with a fat wallet.

What kind of money is infused into their economy because of the bases there? Other than regaining the land and getting all of those 'free' buildings what will they gain from the U.S. military leaving?

They will have to grow up and take care of themselves and help others like we have done for the most part. Something we should have done a long time ago.

patteeu
02-01-2010, 08:39 PM
ROFL Yes, but I wasn't trying to prove my case on it. You already handled that with your post about how few actually want us to leave. I was just adding color for the slower members that post out here.

And yes we will have to agree to disagree about our level of defense spending.

Edit: and my other anecdote was in response to big daddy's comments about gays. Other than that I can't think of any other anecdotes that I've used.

That's the other one I was thinking of. I'm just giving you a hard time. Whether anecdotes really make a case or not, they add color to an argument. I don't mind BEP's anecdotes either, although I do agree that sometimes she tries to make more out of them than they really justify. :)

patteeu
02-01-2010, 08:43 PM
You're using a constitutional argument? You can't be serious.

I've always taken the constitution seriously so I'm not sure why that part surprises you. One of my main reasons for supporting McCain was because the SCOTUS was hanging in the balance. If McCain had nominated the latest Justice, there was at least a chance that he'd nominate someone like Roberts. With Obama (or Hillary for that matter) it was a forgone conclusion that the nominee would be a Sotomayer or the equivalent. Imagine what kinds of positive changes would be in store for our constitutional jurisprudence if the court had 5 solid conservatives plus Kennedy instead of 4 with a Kennedy swing vote.

patteeu
02-01-2010, 08:49 PM
So just because "Defense" spending hasn't increased as much in the last few years relative to everything else in the budget we can afford it? Oh, O-kay.

Your attitude is closer to a liberal than you think, pat. We go into these countries to establish 'democracies' because we think we know better than they do on how to govern their country. Sound vaguely familiar to a health care argument the libs roll out?

Is some evil taking place in these countries? Yes in most cases, but you're playing a losing game if you think you can eradicate that from the world.

People are pissed that we are blowing up bridges in third world countries AND rebuilding them and yet we are running a huge deficit here at home. As much as I despise the entitlement programs, at least the spending stays within the borders (which would be more secure if all our troops weren't elsewhere, BTW).

Wow. You completely misunderstand the rationale for having a global military. It's not for the benefit of other countries and it's not to eradicate evil for the sake of eradicating evil. It's for our own benefit and it's to reduce threats to OUR interests. In some cases, this means helping an ally. In others, it mean eradicating an enemy. But the motivation is always about making things better for the US.

donkhater
02-01-2010, 09:19 PM
Wow. You completely misunderstand the rationale for having a global military. It's not for the benefit of other countries and it's not to eradicate evil for the sake of eradicating evil. It's for our own benefit and it's to reduce threats to OUR interests. In some cases, this means helping an ally. In others, it mean eradicating an enemy. But the motivation is always about making things better for the US.

Oh I get that you think it is a rationale. Just as you think we have the money to spend to maintain it.

patteeu
02-01-2010, 09:38 PM
Oh I get that you think it is a rationale. Just as you think we have the money to spend to maintain it.

It looked to me like you were trying to describe how my rationale was closer to a liberal than I realized, except that you got the rationale part completely wrong.

KC native
02-01-2010, 10:47 PM
That's the other one I was thinking of. I'm just giving you a hard time. Whether anecdotes really make a case or not, they add color to an argument. I don't mind BEP's anecdotes either, although I do agree that sometimes she tries to make more out of them than they really justify. :)

I know. I was genuinely laughing out loud at that.

spicygirl
02-02-2010, 02:55 AM
The p90x workout (http://www.p90xworkoutschedule.me/) is one of the most physically demanding home workouts out on the market and it is used by celebrities and every day folks alike, but for one man, the experience landed him in the hospital.
Those who have bought the DVDs and viewed them give a distinct view. Therefore when we look at the comments provided by the users within the net, we can uncover that the insanity workout schedule (http://www.insanityworkoutschedule.org/) P90X Workout Calendars (http://www.p90xworkoutscheduletoday.com/)very best for many individuals. After completing the training, it fully adjustments the appear of an individual and 1 begins sporting the look of an athlete. The insanity exercise demands far more quantity of endurance than the p90x workouts.

Rain Man
02-02-2010, 11:42 AM
bring ALL the troops home

What about the ones on submarine patrols?

Radar Chief
02-02-2010, 03:08 PM
bring ALL the troops home

Tax the rich, feed the poor
Til there are no rich no more.
Id love to change the world.

wazu
02-03-2010, 12:21 AM
If we provide all of Japan's defense, we don't have to worry about them rising as a regional aggressor against our interests in the area. I'd never thought about it like that, but there is a risk management element to it that provides a payback to the U.S.

Sadly, this is the only feasible defense of our policy I can think of. But honestly, does anybody really think the Japanese and/or Germans are going to rise up again for world domination? It's really not in style anymore.

Jenson71
02-03-2010, 12:32 AM
Sadly, this is the only feasible defense of our policy I can think of. But honestly, does anybody really think the Japanese and/or Germans are going to rise up again for world domination? It's really not in style anymore.

They figured out how to "rise up for world domination" through banking, finance, high-tech industries. That's today's land and people and gold mines and coal fields.

But . . . when Germany and Japan rose up, it was in an era of balance of powers. One goes up, the others bring em down. We're in a different era now, and it's marked by . . . yep, US bases. Take the US bases away, take the FDRian "policeman" concept away, and balance of powers is back in style.

wazu
02-03-2010, 12:36 AM
They figured out how to "rise up for world domination" through banking, finance, high-tech industries. That's today's land and people and gold mines and coal fields.

But . . . when Germany and Japan rose up, it was in an era of balance of powers. One goes up, the others bring em down. We're in a different era now, and it's marked by . . . yep, US bases. Take the US bases away, take the FDRian "policeman" concept away, and balance of powers is back in style.

So if I'm reading you correctly, you believe that if the U.S. did away with all the bases, we would once again have a world that could be on the verge of full-scale war a couple of times each century, with the goal being annexation of foreign lands?

Jenson71
02-03-2010, 01:08 AM
So if I'm reading you correctly, you believe that if the U.S. did away with all the bases, we would once again have a world that could be on the verge of full-scale war a couple of times each century, with the goal being annexation of foreign lands?

Very possibly. And that was exactly the thinking post World War II.