Do Japanese citizens pay for the US troops presence?

[justinod]

I have to go with Obeika on this one man. Frankly that was kinda embarrassing as an American that you have to pride yourself on good behavior. Dude, it's the United States military. Shouldn't you expect to have higher standards of discipline to begin with? Especially when you're in a foreign country?? Argh, this kinda-- no-- it really bu
gs me that Americans have this 'the world is our playground' kind of attitude as long as we're doing the right thing on an overall basis.
Think about it this way, if we're going to play world police, then if anything, shouldn't we be doing it in an even more respectful manner that what we usually do at home? I mean common, it's basic housemanners. Your mom tells you to be on your best behavior when you go over to Billy's house, so shouldn't we be doing this in foreign countries as well (meaning you act better than the way you act at home)? If the US promises to do something, then we aught to promise to do a good job of it, and not just think we should be permitted to produce a certain amount of crime. I think this has something to do with being proud of what we do and doing it well if you know what I mean...
I love our military, and honestly I think most would agree that our hearts as Americans are in the right place, but that sometimes our actions dont' reflect that. I just find it sad/slightly embarrassing that establishments such as our esteemed and disciplined military also reflect that attitude in a foreign country.

The US military is far, far, FAR more disciplined than the US population in general. lets consider the lowest crime region in the US:
per 100000 people: about 2750 or so crimes.

though I haven't found stats on just the military, they are by far the 90% majority of americans here in japan:
per 100000 people: about 16 or so crimes

Now, if we were to say that all of the crimes (based on a 16 per 100000 people) committed by americans here were committed by US servicemembers (35571):
per 100000 people: about 45 or so crimes (44.98)

So, the military is much more disciplined here. they commit about 1/61st of the lowest crime region in the states. Yes, it could be better, but our forces are less prone to commit crime than the US public, the Japanese public or any set of gaijin here in Japan.

 

[KirinMan]

I have a very close connection with the Japanese government's connections to the bases. My fiance happens to be a teacher at one of them as an employee of the Japanese government.

Umm so....If you want to get into a pssing contest about who has what connections I think you'll find that you very well could be on the short end of the stick. I am not going to sit here and make comparisons with you only tell you that having your fiance working as a teacher is really short.

Next let's discuss your perception difficulties about what Japan pays for and doesn't pay for as you are talking about in this quote;

Japan helps pay for minor things such as mwr, host nation teachers, etc. I dont know the stats on this, if you can find them, please do. However, I am gonna guess that Japan's government pays for about 5% when the total cost is counted up; that is the high end.
Lets do some logical thinking here. You want a 'better value' than paying less than 10% (good guess) for a massive protection scheme. You consider this to be a bad value due to a 16/100000 crime rate.

Japan doesnt pay for MWR, next ALL Japanese employees on the bases are paid by the Japanese government. The US government pays them "0", there are a total of somewhere around 23,500 Japanese employees on all the bases. Do you have any idea how many military personnel there are here in Japan. About 47,000 or so, and about 5,000 DOD Civilian employees including teachers. I give you the links later.

THe cost of maintaining the troops here in Japan is over 7 billion dollars (US) of which well over HALF in paid by the Japanese government. Oh and that doesn't include the amount paid to the employees from what I understand.

This equals: Japan blows a lot of money in Guam, Hawaii, Las Vegas, etc. every year. Yes, they have a positive impact on the economy of the US.

Japan has the 2nd largest economy in the world, Japan also has the very real ability to bankrupt the US if it ever started selling off the debt that it currently holds. The US and Japan are partners, abiet the US is larger and has more interests through out the world, but dont start looking down on or thumbing your nose at the Japanese and their economy.

You come across as a very arrogant and condescending American here, as well as a few other places in this overly long and difficult to read post. Ever hear of spacing?

This won't happen until the Japanese government is confident that it is protected; the constitution must be changed to allow for an offensive capability.

Have you read any news of late about the "debate" about this very topic? Japan is not going to go "offensive" for any reason anytime soon.

Answer this question: Who is gaining the most from the US presence in Japan?

Currently the US, definetly not Japan. It may have been something different a few years back, but not now.

You underestimate the abilities of Japan and it's people. Do you have any idea at all what the JSDF's capabilities are? Do you even know how much Japan pays for military defense spending every year? Do the research you just may be surprised at the numbers.

Given the US's current arsenals we really don't need bases here. We can hit very hard, very quickly, and very silently with our subs, b2's etc. from the 48 states in the mainland.

Good then get them the heck out of here, won't happen anytime soon and your attitude is fairly naive to me.

Sure Japan benefits, but you miss the point again

You consider this to be a bad value due to a 16/100000 crime rate.

If you had read what I wrote and not interpreted it to mean something totally different you would have noticed that all along I was giving YOU the reason why there is sometimes consternation at the acts committed by the US military. You haven't gotten it yet.

What "value" do you place on human life?

One link out of a host of others;
US Forces Japan

 

[KirinMan]

The US military is far, far, FAR more disciplined than the US population in general. lets consider the lowest crime region in the US:

Statistics mean "0" here as well.

Your logic is flawed, can't you get that? It doesn't matter one bit what the US Military does anywhere else. It's here in Japan that matters.

That's all nothing else.

 

[Rahmie]

Constitution: This is the biggy. Until Japan revises its constitution to allow it to have a more offensively capable force, it can not protect itself. The military realm does not rely on contemplating whether one's attack will be twarted. What keeps enemies at bay is threat of a counter-attack. Japan has no way to counter attack any possible foe, i.e. NK. If Japan wants us gone, we can leave. This won't happen until the Japanese government is confident that it is protected; the constitution must be changed to allow for an offensive capability.
If you go further into the 'counter attack' mentality. What will it be that keeps NK from possibly launching a nuke when they actually have one capable of firing to Japan? The threat of retaliation either in mass conventional style or in 'eye for an eye' style. Japan could probably hit NK with few cruise missiles, bombs ( from fighters since japan doesnt really have attack craft), but that wouldn't do much. Why is nk kept at bay? the mass forces that the US has at its border and the massive firepower it can quickly project from bases here, nuke subs, etc.
Let's face it, the US-Japan alliance is militarily one sided. Japan gets massively discounted defense, we get a few bases that help serve our needs as well as Japan's defense. We will protect Japan if it is ever attacked (which is why it won't be), Do you think that a possible enemy of the US would consider Japan's involvement if it attacked the US, probably not.
Given the US's current arsenals we really don't need bases here. We can hit very hard, very quickly, and very silently with our subs, b2's etc. from the 48 states in the mainland.
The Carrier group at Yokosuka is more firepower projection than all of Japan's Air/Sea power. How can you get a better value than that?
Answer this question: Who is gaining the most from the US presence in Japan?

And don't forget China. I'm sure they would love to get their hands on Japan with all of their technology and money! They did just shoot a satalite down a few months ago remember.

 

[Rahmie]

Japan doesnt pay for MWR, next ALL Japanese employees on the bases are paid by the Japanese government. The US government pays them "0", there are a total of somewhere around 23,500 Japanese employees on all the bases. Do you have any idea how many military personnel there are here in Japan. About 47,000 or so, and about 5,000 DOD Civilian employees including teachers. I give you the links later.

They should pay them. We have millions of dollars of weapons to protect you.

Japan has the 2nd largest economy in the world, Japan also has the very real ability to bankrupt the US if it ever started selling off the debt that it currently holds. The US and Japan are partners, abiet the US is larger and has more interests through out the world, but dont start looking down on or thumbing your nose at the Japanese and their economy.

Which would send the whole world into a recession if not a depression since we are all linked together by the stock markets. we couldn't protect japan leaving you open for any attack by any country not just NK and china. So you shouldn't act like the Japanese and their economy wouldn't be harmed by the selling of the US debt.

 

[KirinMan]

They should pay them. We have millions of dollars of weapons to protect you.

Protect me, what a joke, you think I am Japanese right? Take a look at my profile and you might be surprised. I dont feel protected by the US military, not at all. It's presence here is unfortunately a necessary evil in this day and age.

Do you feel "protected" in the US by the US Military? The biggest protection the US has, not only now, but throughout history, has been the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. Not only the overly burdensome national debt that is partially due to outlandish military spending.

Which would send the whole world into a recession if not a depression since we are all linked together by the stock markets. we couldn't protect japan leaving you open for any attack by any country not just NK and china. So you shouldn't act like the Japanese and their economy wouldn't be harmed by the selling of the US debt.

You don't quite get it either do you. If you actually happened to read my post there is nothing in it that would suggest otherwise.

Oh and please don't go start thinking that if the bases were not here China or North Korea would "suddenly" attack Japan. That is ludicrous as well. The relations between these countries is not even close to the point where "open" warfare could even be thought about let alone be considered.

You also forget that China and Korea do not have the amphibious capabilities to force an invasion of this "island" country. Even theorizing about this subject is pointless.

 

[justinod]

Protect me, what a joke, you think I am Japanese right? Take a look at my profile and you might be surprised. I dont feel protected by the US military, not at all. It's presence here is unfortunately a necessary evil in this day and age.
Do you feel "protected" in the US by the US Military? The biggest protection the US has, not only now, but throughout history, has been the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. Not only the overly burdensome national debt that is partially due to outlandish military spending.
You don't quite get it either do you. If you actually happened to read my post there is nothing in it that would suggest otherwise.
Oh and please don't go start thinking that if the bases were not here China or North Korea would "suddenly" attack Japan. That is ludicrous as well. The relations between these countries is not even close to the point where "open" warfare could even be thought about let alone be considered.
You also forget that China and Korea do not have the amphibious capabilities to force an invasion of this "island" country. Even theorizing about this subject is pointless.

where to start.... hmmm you dont feel protected by the us military, but they are a necessary evil.... why are they necessary?
Get your facts straight. Look at the percentage of our government's budget that is defense... not that high.
As for the amphibious capabilities of China, wait a few years... They are making that capability. And, once again, the reason that people do not attack militarily (nations) is the threat of retaliation/counterattacks. Japan can not do this. What is Japan's shield? the americans.
The relations with China/NK are only at the point they are now because Japan has been protected. Look, the US-JPN alliance is the closest in the world. Don't you think it is pretty clear who is protecting who from any POSSIBLE attack?

Statistics mean "0" here as well.
Your logic is flawed, can't you get that? It doesn't matter one bit what the US Military does anywhere else. It's here in Japan that matters.
That's all nothing else.

who was i responding to in that post?
And the military here is virtually crime free, more so than the locals by 18 to 1. any questions on that?
Statistics or FACTS vs opinion or FEELINGS.... what is more important to real world situations?

 

[KirinMan]

justinod replying to you is like :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: repeatedly, you do realize that my original response to you was about the perception of the Japanese people when a US Military member commits a crime here in Japan.

It had nothing to do with the pointless discussion about budgets, the protection factor, or anything else.

Do you or can you understand that?

 

[Aerain]

No, I don't. And yes, you did.
I might not be clear enough, but you misunderstood what I'm talking about.
I don't think the whole US troops could commit crimes, majority of people must be great people, but it is also true that some of them do commit such crimes - unfortunately it is often reported on TV news.
Such crimes of course are not unique to them, I'm sure the number of Japanese offender is way far more than those from the US troops considering the number of population of Japanese.
Yet...
When I hear the military forces, I expect diciplined people. They are there believing they are doing what they believe is right, aren't they? Considering that and also about the astronomical amount of money being paid to them from our tax, for our security and to protect us, learning that something quite opposite is happening is more than disappointment.

You have to know that the Japanese do commit these crimes also and that the American who commit these crimes get the same treatment than any other Japanese, I don't think people should have special treatment (bad or good) because they are foreigners, but I think the US criminals should undergo their misdeed through their prison system. I don't know why the japanese taxpayers should pay for prisoners who doesn't have the japanese citizenship. Also I believe the presence of the US soldiers is important for both Japan and the US, because the presence of US military act as a bigger dissuasive against the North Korea military; although it would be very unlikely that they would ever attack Japan and the US protects their interest through the defense set up in Japan.

 

[DoctorP]

... I don't think people should have special treatment (bad or good) because they are foreigners, but I think the US criminals should undergo their misdeed through their prison system. I don't know why the japanese taxpayers should pay for prisoners who doesn't have the japanese citizenship.

But why would the USA want to foot the bill to keep someone in prison for a crime committed elsewhere? I would much rather have someone convicted of a felonious crime serve their time right where the crime was committed. Why allow them to go back to the US where they would have more rights and be treated better? Doesn't sound like much of a deterrant to me.

 

[Sukotto]

And don't forget China. I'm sure they would love to get their hands on Japan with all of their technology and money! They did just shoot a satalite down a few months ago remember.

So they wanted to remove a satalite from orbit?

Keep in mind, the US, who invaded one, (arguably two) countries outside
international law under Bush (and overthrew the gov't in Haiti and attempted another in Venezuela) to extend the dishonorable endevor called empire, committing the crime against peace, has stated they want to take control of outer space.
I forget the cute phrase they used for the "defense of forward deployed troops" (i.e. an offensive tool) that is sometimes called "son of star wars".
It's under the air force though.

 

[Aerain]

But why would the USA want to foot the bill to keep someone in prison for a crime committed elsewhere? I would much rather have someone convicted of a felonious crime serve their time right where the crime was committed. Why allow them to go back to the US where they would have more rights and be treated better? Doesn't sound like much of a deterrant to me.

I think you are right, then they must pay the maintenance cost for such prisoners. I mean I don't think japanese should pay for that, they already pay soo much to keep the US in their country.

 

[Capster78]

I don't know how long this thread has been going around. I was searching for racism in Japan as I have been to Korea and personally witnessed it there. I was curious how much I would run into here. It seems there are alot of unfair generalizations made and unfair expectations as well after reading some of the posts on here.
I am a US military member. I believe it is unfair for someone to place a higher standard on another than they place on their own. For example, expecting american servicemembers to never comit any crimes. I am a law abiding citicen and I never cause any troubble as 98% of my fellow servicemembers are as well. I get verry frustrated almost to the point of saying somthing unprofessional but I am usually able to bite my tounge and just chalk up the racist expiriences I have to stupidity. I have no choice but to be here in Japan. I am bound by orders given to me to be here. I have no choice. If I don't like Japan, I can not just pack up and leave. I leave my family and friends thousands of miles away to protect this country. wether your opinon is that it needs US protection or not, is mute because we are here. I willfully signed to do this job and to protect whatever my country deemed to be worth protecting. Japan is one of them and I am happy to do it. I know the percentage of japanese who are racist twords americans or service members is a small percentage of the whole but the stigma is not. I just want to be seen as a human and to be respected as a person. I would hope many out there can look past the steryotypical and see me as someone of value just as they expect to be seen by me.
I read one post that really rubed me the wrong way. To entertain racism by saying if they were not here, thouse crimes would not have been commited is just like saying, if Japanese were not here, thouse crimes would not be commited. So are you saying you should get out of your own country? An unhabited country would be perfect.. 0% crime rate.
US servemembers are the most law abiding people by percentage than most groups. If you have commited a crime prior to the military or show that you can not be trusted they will not let you join. For example.. all service members are scrutinized with credit checks, criminal backround checks and many times, even their family members are checked as well (brothers, mothers, fathers). While we are in the military we have very strict rules and regulations we must abide by. The smallest deviation of rules will result in harsh punishement most of the time. Even being late for work can result in loosing rank and affecting possabilities of re-enlisment. When we are overseas these things are magnified. We are constantly scrutinized and told we are ambassadors of our country. Anything we do will reflect on all of us, unfair or not. The message is out there, and violaters are punished severly.
For expample, just today we had a DUI (Driveing Under the Influence) off base. This person hit a pole and fliped his car. If there had been anyone around it is verry possable he would have injured or killed someone else. I was called in on a saturday and we were put to work. After working a few hours we were lectured by our superiors on the importance of being ambassadors and that we are responsable not only for ourselves but for others around us as well (other service members). If we see somthing wrong we need to stop it (self police our own).
So I want the people on here that think the US service members are a bunch of criminals to think twice about what they are saying.
I would like to add that I hope to have posative expiriences in Japan and I hope to learn and respect the culture. However, this can not be a one way street. I hope the same appreciation and respect I give is also returned.

 

[Glenski]

US servemembers are the most law abiding people by percentage than most groups. If you have commited a crime prior to the military or show that you can not be trusted they will not let you join. For example.. all service members are scrutinized with credit checks, criminal backround checks and many times, even their family members are checked as well (brothers, mothers, fathers).

You might want to learn more about the military and what is called "moral waivers" (waivers for enlistments, allowing in people who have indeed committed crimes before signing up). More entering Army with criminal records - The Boston Globe

Nearly 12 percent of Army recruits who entered basic training this year needed a special waiver for those with criminal records, a dramatic increase over last year and 2 1/2 times the percentage four years ago, according to new Army statistics...

Since Oct. 1, 2006, when the fiscal year began, more than 8,000 of the roughly 69,000 recruits have been granted waivers for offenses ranging in seriousness from misdemeanors such as vandalism to felonies such as burglary and aggravated assault.

Moral waivers must be approved by an officer of the rank of lieutenant colonel or higher and are required when an Army applicant has been found guilty of committing four or more minor offenses such as littering or disorderly conduct -- or two to four misdemeanors such as larcency, trespassing, or vandalism.
Applicants who have committed a single felony such as arson, burglary, aggravated assault, breaking and entering, or marijuana possession must also receive a moral waiver to join. Applicants with more than one felony -- or with a single conviction for a more serious crime such as homicide, sexual violence, or drug trafficking -- are not eligible.

And, here is a related article about Army and Marines, from NBC.
MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos

This article from The Guardian is particularly damning with its last sentences.
Double number of ex-cons join the US army

The number of moral waivers in the military, mostly for misdemeanours such as speeding fines, reached 34,476 in 2006, or nearly 20% of all enlisted soldiers, according to the Palm Centre at the University of California. Recruits with felony convictions are more likely than other soldiers to drop out or be released from the military.

More than one felony conviction disqualifies recruits from the army or marines, but the navy and air force can admit those with multiple offences.

Want a few more stats? Here's CBS.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/14/national/main2474041.shtml

About one in five Army recruits needed a waiver to enlist in 2006, up from 12.7 percent in 2003. In addition, the report showed that the Army granted substantially fewer waivers for drug use and serious traffic violations last year than in 2003.

More than half of the Marine recruits needed a waiver in 2006, a bit higher than in 2003, and largely due to their more strict drug requirements. Felony waivers made up about 2 percent of the Marine waivers, while other lesser crimes made up about 25 percent, both up slightly from 2003.

About 18 percent of Navy recruits required a waiver, up only slightly from 2003. Two-thirds of the waivers granted by the Navy were for misdemeanor-type crimes and about 5 percent were for felonies.

Just 8 percent of Air Force recruits had waivers, down a bit from 2003. Nearly all of the waivers were for the misdemeanor-type crimes.

 

[pipokun]

Don't worry.
The enjoying face of Japanese eating pizza/burger/whatever in the friendship days is also our face.
And you are stationed in the country where some (very few) liberal heads accuse the government of shipping of disaster relief to other country by the SDF plane.

Do Japanese citizens pay for the US troops presence?

Some people might think Japan would be a free rider, but it is just wrong.

 

[Capster78]

Yes, there are special circumstances in which criminal behavior is overlooked. When it is minor and the individual can proove they have changed their ways. The strict rules and regulations don't change for thouse who have been waiverd. They still have to abide by the same strict rules and regs and are quickly thrown out if they don't.

 

[Grandpa Frank]

Alcohol and peer presure turn good to bad.

I saw some pretty bad behavior by my navy buddies in Japan. It almost always was fueled by booze and wanting to show off to friends. I would say 80% of the service people were fine, it was the other 20% that made me feel ashamed I was a serviceman.

Uncle Frank

 

[Capster78]

Yes, I have also seen loud drunk americans. It does look bad and I do get annoyed when I see this. However, being loud and drunk is not a crime. I have also seen loud and drunk Japanese, Koreans.. prety much every nationality since I have been overseas. I have been to Korea, Japan, Philippines, so I know.

 

[USNwife]

capster: I agree with you 100%. I really don't think the military should be held to any higher standards than any other person. Right is right and wrong is wrong. A robbery is no more right for a civilian than it is for a service member. Sure they took an oath to serve and protect yes they did but come on now...as a human being it comes down to morals. And yes they do check service members as well as their families trust me. I am a spouse of a military member and believe you me I have been questioned by the government myself.
As for letting people into the military under a waiver. People can change and sometimes they turn to the military for discipline and change. Sometimes that's all these people need is a little discipline in their lives and they turn to the military for that change. Many are probably trying to change and do better so why criticize them for that? That's the problem with people nowadays, someone tries to better themselves and you just want to keep them down.
And again thanks capster for that last post because even in class for our orientation brief we had a japanese man doing our intercultural brief and he even said during the cherry blossom festivals here please excuse the japanese actions when they are celebrating and drinking so it's not only americans but for some reason everyone likes to put the US military under the microscope for everything. Take a look in the mirror before you speak. If you have never done anything wrong and I'm not talking about getting caught by the police and arrested, but anything lying , cheating anything then you are not perfect so should we hold that against you for the rest of your life?
Stop trying to keep people down that are trying to better themselves and their lives and doing so by protecting their country as well as others and the whole generalization of military members is getting pretty old and really does need to stop. There are tons of military service members and when someone does something wrong the entire military is always generalized for it. If one japanese citizen commits a murder should we generalize all japanese people as murderers? If one Australian commits a robbery should we generalize all australians as robbers? I mean seriously get real.

 

[Dogen Z]

Isn't saying, "Yeah there are bad guys in our group, you should expect it," but also saying, "You don't have the right to scrutinize us so much, we don't deserve it," hypocritical at best. I think it's damned arrogant.

 

[pipokun]

USNwife, I know what you mean, but you should realize that it was the first time when the US force agreed to inform the J local police about the military deserters after the Nigerian killer incident.

And don't worry I am aware that there are some activists who are always saying "no" or "Article 9". Anyways, keep posting here.
https://jref.com/forum/member.php?u=41398

 

[USNwife]

Isn't saying, "Yeah there are bad guys in our group, you should expect it," but also saying, "You don't have the right to scrutinize us so much, we don't deserve it," hypocritical at best. I think it's damned arrogant.

I don't think that is arrogant. It's the same as saying if one of your friends robs a bank, by association you are a robber. Esentially it's the same thing. It's not as if the US military is a small tiny group of people it's a large amount of people but to generalize all US military members because of some of their actions is wrong. I mean say that did happen. How would you feel being an outcast and looked at as a criminal for someone else's actions? And no one said you should "expect it" per say but there are bad people in the world and everyone is human and makes mistakes. Some make bigger mistakes than others, but when it boils down to it we are all human and we all make mistakes big or small we still all do make mistakes.

No one said anyone didn't have the "right" to scrutinize because you do have the right to do it. I just said it's getting kind of old all the generalizations that people make because of some members actions. They are not all like that and for the ones that really are good, do their job to their best ability and are kind and respectful of other people's countries it's just not fair to look upon them in that way because of someone else's actions and probably someone they don't even know. I mean life is not fair yes but that is just my opinion of it. You have your opinion and I have mine doesn't make me arrogant for having an opinion. And if you just put yourself in that situation would you enjoy it or think it fair to be guilty by association? If not then why should the rest of the members of the US military that are not like those in the news doing bad things?

 

[Glenski]

The military abroad is in the public eye, so like it or not, they will be scrutinized.

Americans are arrogant. You can't deny that. I'm American, so I know what the stereotype is, and living in Japan for 10 years, I have seen a lot of arrogant newcomers. It's only after they live here a while that they learn to adapt to some degree.

But, as for your remarks, USNwife, let me say this. Yes, some (not all) of the military recruits are examined carefully before they are admitted. Yes, some are trying to use the service as a means to gain discipline and straighten themselves out. But, not all are, and obviously some are taking advantage of their situations abroad by committing crimes. Of course, that doesn't mean all servicemen are criminals, but just because they have a high profile in the public eye, they will be looked upon more openly and more carefully when a crime is committed (or even alleged) by them.

You just can't get around it. Same goes for foreign and Japanese professionals who commit crimes (lawyers, policement, doctors, teachers, etc.). Public figures are easy targets.

The real problem, though, and I've been saying this for a long time on many forums, is that the Japanese media and locals skew the data on how many crimes are actually committed vs. the percentage when compared to the local population. That is what Americans should be outraged at.

 

[pipokun]

...
The real problem, though, and I've been saying this for a long time on many forums, is that the Japanese media and locals skew the data on how many crimes are actually committed vs. the percentage when compared to the local population. That is what Americans should be outraged at.

Again, you should think your argument, the local vs. the military, is to-the-point or not before getting outraged.
I am just scared if the J police or the SDF members would be proud to say "we have lower crime rate than the local!".

Maybe it is just a cultural difference, though.

 

[Dogen Z]

My little rant yesterday was not aimed at anyone in particular. It was just sort of a general its-Monday-again kind of rant. I don't have a zen mind working properly yet. But if Monday affects me that way, I can imagine how it affects the young, enlisted dudes. Which brings me to what I want to say today.

The U.S. military is having difficulty getting new recruits thanks to George and Dick's Most Excellent Adventure. So the standard for new recruits have been lowered; so much so that even a few guys with serious criminal records have been allowed to join. This means keeping everyone in line will be that much harder for the commanders. For everyone's sake, I hope those commanders are successful.