Is it time for US Force to leave Japan?

Haruspex · 4 Dec 2007

There are that kinda rebels anywhere, but most of the time, they're just lowlifes pissed about their low salary, lack of success or something, they just need a cause, any cause as long as it promises to destroy the present state they're in and rebuild the country in some wondrous way.
Sometimes rebels are justified, but in a prospering country like Japan there's no need for militarism.

scorpion da black · 4 Dec 2007

well, that is true, why would some one not like to be in japan?
it has grown to be an awesome country.
but some japanese people are not satisfied with what japan has become and wish it could respect traditions more...instead of being a country where people just emitate the west.
i know that from my interactions with many japanese on line

Haruspex · 4 Dec 2007

Well one thing is for certain, only experience you gain (as a country) can preserve traditions in a civil way, in our open world that is. If you let someone take over that, it will either turn into neo-futurism, destroying everything old and rebuilding the whole thing, or radical conservationism enforced with some militarism too. Let the Japanese people come over that issue as time passes, after all in this case its them who are influenced by the west, and not the west forcing its ways on them.
The only thing that has to be dealt with in a quick manner is the flood of unnecessary English words in the language that have equivalents in Japanese.

scorpion da black · 5 Dec 2007

Derfel said:
Well one thing is for certain, only experience you gain (as a country) can preserve traditions in a civil way, in our open world that is. If you let someone take over that, it will either turn into neo-futurism, destroying everything old and rebuilding the whole thing, or radical conservationism enforced with some militarism too. Let the Japanese people come over that issue as time passes, after all in this case its them who are influenced by the west, and not the west forcing its ways on them.
The only thing that has to be dealt with in a quick manner is the flood of unnecessary English words in the language that have equivalents in Japanese.

i totaly agree

nyouyaku · 30 Jan 2008

scorpion da black said:
well, that is true, why would some one not like to be in japan?
it has grown to be an awesome country.
but some japanese people are not satisfied with what japan has become and wish it could respect traditions more...instead of being a country where people just emitate the west.
i know that from my interactions with many japanese on line

You know, the Japanese people are really into being isolationist. So I can sympathize some of them would want to leave for freer countries. But why should North America take more of them in when they are not allowing others in with open arms despite the cry of help due to population decline. A Visa is a tit for tat deal. Compared to the rest of Asian countries, the Japanese still have it the best. They should come and see the rest of southeast Asia, especially China. If they just tried eating the MSG infested food that you would want to throw up, and breathed in the smog from Beijing China, the Japanese need to be thankful that they still have the most declicious food (unless if you are vegetarian) to offer. Grunting that Canada or Hawaii is a better place to live doesn`t wash. It might be so, but the Japanese have it good enough. The Chinese who have to endure nasty food and toxic shopping malls with toxic fumes leaking out need help migrating abroad to North America.

ajackson17 · 20 Feb 2008

I do believe that the military forces should be shrunked and more discipline should be instilled in the military as for I am part of the USAF, but leave japan, I don't think so, because it gives a lot of people a chance to learn about different culture and instilled, but I do understand that the military does a lot of awful things and stuff. Like I'm interested in Japanese history, language, music, art, movies, and other soughts of things. So when I become civilian in a few years, I'll try to live here, because I love it out here. I'm stationed in okinawa and I love the peaceful nights, the people, the live bands, becoming bilingual in japanese. Its something really amazing. Thats what I fear for those who don't get to the chance to indulge themselves in this amazing culture, but for those who don't want to be here, than I believe they shouldn't be here.

Dogen Z · 22 Apr 2008

Even more reason to reduce U.S. troops in Japan

"The Army also listed a handful of felony waivers granted for kidnapping, making terroristic threats, rape or sexual abuse, and indecent acts or liberties with a child."

Army and Marine Corps Grant More Felony Waivers (Published 2008)

Glenski · 24 Apr 2008

ajackson17 said:
for those who don't want to be here, than I believe they shouldn't be here.

And, just exactly how are you going to ensure that? Let enlisted men vote on their assignments? Yeah, right.

Capster78 · 3 Sep 2008

Ocean Dude said:
"The Army also listed a handful of felony waivers granted for kidnapping, making terroristic threats, rape or sexual abuse, and indecent acts or liberties with a child."
Army and Marine Corps Grant More Felony Waivers (Published 2008)

I guess you missed this in your article....

"Over all, the numbers represent less than 1 percent of the 115,000 new enlistments last year in the active-duty Army and Marine Corps."

That is just enlistments in the last year, that is not inclusive of thouse who are already in the Army/Marine's. Then you also have to consider that more than half of the military that is stationed in Japan is Air Force. The Air Force does not grant wavers for any type of misconduct. So you are talking about probably a quartern to a tenth of a percent. Then you also have to consider the percentage of thouse that ever get sent to Japan as most of thouse troubblemakers are in jobs that would put them in Iraq or Afghanistan because they are desperatly needed in Combat roles which are not present in Japan.

alantin · 14 Oct 2008

We are missing the "necessary evil" option..

Capster78 · 14 Oct 2008

alantin said:
We are missing the "necessary evil" option..

Necesary evil huh?? That sounds like a good way to feel less guilty about knowing you need our protection.

alantin · 15 Oct 2008

The US protecting doesn't sound very plausible, does it.. Exploiting sounds much more like what it stands for!

Because of the way US forced itself on Japan it's presence might have gained the position of a necessary evil but since when has invading a country, making sure it can't defend itself, and maintaining a military presence there, been protecting?
In some kind of anarchy perhaps..

Of course it is understandable if what they tell to their own people is something very different. That's how propaganda has always been!

In the end perhaps the best one of the given choices would be "Yes, They did a lot of very bad things"--

Capster78 · 17 Oct 2008

alantin said:
The US protecting doesn't sound very plausible, does it.. Exploiting sounds much more like what it stands for!

Because of the way US forced itself on Japan it's presence might have gained the position of a necessary evil but since when has invading a country, making sure it can't defend itself, and maintaining a military presence there, been protecting?
In some kind of anarchy perhaps..

Of course it is understandable if what they tell to their own people is something very different. That's how propaganda has always been!

In the end perhaps the best one of the given choices would be "Yes, They did a lot of very bad things"--

All you have to do is look at the history of the region and the underlying fears of a mass military buildup would cause in this part of the world. Japan, China and Korea have clashed for centuries. There is still alot of animosity between the three countries despite the decades of relative peace. The US acts more as a appeaser in this region. Everyone is happy. We have an agreement with japan to have limited military capability in exchange for our promise protection. This appeases Korea, China, the Philippines and several other surrounding countries that somthing like WWII would never happen again. On the other hand it appeases Japan because it is not forced by large sanctions and limited protection like germany after WW1. If the US leaves it could throw that out of ballance. With everything happening in the middle east right now, the world can not afford another large troubbled region of the world.

alantin · 18 Oct 2008

Thus "necessary evil"!

That sounds like a good way to feel less guilty about knowing you need our protection.

I'm really happy that my country isn't invaded by the arrogant world police or doesn't "need USA's protection" as you put it..

Cheers! ^^

Capster78 · 18 Oct 2008

alantin said:
Thus "necessary evil"!

I'm really happy that my country isn't invaded by the arrogant world police or doesn't "need USA's protection" as you put it..

Cheers! ^^

Keep repeating that propaganda which you have been brainwashed with. Ill be right back, I have to clean my guns and torture the small iraqi children hiden in my closet. -signed- American

alantin · 20 Oct 2008

LoL

You just keep believing your propaganda if it's easier!
I do understand that one would want to think of one's own country as "the good guys" and representing the "just cause" but is it really that hard to imagine that someone wouldn't warmheartedly welcome foreign invaders or is the detail that they are american supposed to make the people happy about it?

One just has to wonder, what "patriotism" means to an american..

I wonder if you would be fine with a foreign power, Russia?, occupying your country in order to "protect" it..
If you think, it wouldn't be right in your own country why would it be right in someone else's country?

I am proud that my grandfathers fought for the independence of this country and as a national of a country that formerly was under foreign rule I see foreign military presence in a country as a disgrace for everybody involved!

No one should have to carry the shame of a foreign occupation or rule, but Japan screwed up good in the WWII and now they are still paying the price. Yet, I sure can sympathise.

-Signed-
Foreign rule never again!

EdZiomek · 21 Oct 2008

Sure, why not.

I say, yes, Japan is self sufficient, warm and wonderful to the world, why should we need military bases there?

Besides, VietNam might allow us to use facilities in their region, or the PI once again.

Just like our forefathers told us... beware of a large, standing military... it almost suggests going to more and more wars, which will never be eliminated anyways.

Of course, Washington will state that the rise of China as a major force makes it a necessity to stay.

I say, When can we leave and return as tourists 100%?

Capster78 · 23 Oct 2008

alantin said:
LoL

You just keep believing your propaganda if it's easier!
I do understand that one would want to think of one's own country as "the good guys" and representing the "just cause" but is it really that hard to imagine that someone wouldn't warmheartedly welcome foreign invaders or is the detail that they are american supposed to make the people happy about it?

One just has to wonder, what "patriotism" means to an american..

I wonder if you would be fine with a foreign power, Russia?, occupying your country in order to "protect" it..
If you think, it wouldn't be right in your own country why would it be right in someone else's country?

I am proud that my grandfathers fought for the independence of this country and as a national of a country that formerly was under foreign rule I see foreign military presence in a country as a disgrace for everybody involved!

No one should have to carry the shame of a foreign occupation or rule, but Japan screwed up good in the WWII and now they are still paying the price. Yet, I sure can sympathise.

-Signed-
Foreign rule never again!

Obviously ignorant of WWII and why we are in japan. Obviously ignorant of the Korean war and why we are in Korea. I understand completly where you are coming from in regaurd to having a forign military in your country. It does take away a bit of pride. I don't know many people who's pride would not be hurt by having to have a protector. No one likes that opinion of them and on an international stage it is even more shamefull in the eyes of a nationalistic country such as japan and korea to have a forign military and not their own protecting them.

And what is this about invading???? The US has not invaded anyone in my opinion. We landed in South Korea to keep North Korea and china from spreading communism. We landed in Japan to keep japan from building another army capeable of invading its neighbors again. Later on, this turned into a mission to protect Japan from any backlash affects down the road from anyone trying to get revenge. North Korea invaded to Conquer, Japan invaded to Conquer, Germany invaded to Conquer.. America invades to liberate. I think there is a HUGE difference there. There is no nationalistic pride americans hold to expand america.

grapefruit · 23 Oct 2008

Capster78 said:
And what is this about invading???? The US has not invaded anyone in my opinion. We landed in South Korea to keep North Korea and china from spreading communism. We landed in Japan to keep japan from building another army capeable of invading its neighbors again. Later on, this turned into a mission to protect Japan from any backlash affects down the road from anyone trying to get revenge. North Korea invaded to Conquer, Japan invaded to Conquer, Germany invaded to Conquer.. America invades to liberate. I think there is a HUGE difference there. There is no nationalistic pride americans hold to expand america.

As a person who does not believe the Soviet style communism was/is an effective model for creating an ideal society, I'm glad that the US fought in Korea and Vietnam. However, whether one considers war in a foreign territory as liberating or conquering depends on if one perceives the war brings in more positive results or negative ones. This is, to some extent, confirmed when we observe the war in Iraq and the difference in how the US and some in the Arab world recognize it.

I also feel "liberating others", sort of, forms a part of nationalistic American pride. The US is not motivated by territory, but the country is certainly motivated by other things. Also, when you take a close look at how European countries colonized others, it appears that their interests shifted toward the end of the colonial era from territorial ones to others like access to markets and natural resources. So, it is not just territorial motivations that often attract criticisms of colonization.

I concur with the fact that Japan and Germany had territorial motivations, but it appears strange to frame Korean War as "North Korea invaded to Conquer." After all, the Korean Peninsula belongs to Koreans. They have every right to govern themselves.

Obviously ignorant of WWII and why we are in japan. Obviously ignorant of the Korean war and why we are in Korea. I understand completly where you are coming from in regaurd to having a forign military in your country. It does take away a bit of pride. I don't know many people who's pride would not be hurt by having to have a protector. No one likes that opinion of them and on an international stage it is even more shamefull in the eyes of a nationalistic country such as japan and korea to have a forign military and not their own protecting them.

This is true, though. I agree.

Capster78 · 23 Oct 2008

grapefruit said:
As a person who does not believe the Soviet style communism was/is an effective model for creating an ideal society, I'm glad that the US fought in Korea and Vietnam. However, whether one considers war in a foreign territory as liberating or conquering depends on if one perceives the war brings in more positive results or negative ones. This is, to some extent, confirmed when we observe the war in Iraq and the difference in how the US and some in the Arab world recognize it.

It is funny you should mention this. Many predicted that as a result of the war the US would gain favorable business deals with Iraq. This is far from the truth. If you do some research you will find that there was an american deal for oil that was put down by the government of Iraq. The only real financial gain the US can hope to have is lower gas prices once Iraq is stable. When you really sit down and think of all the countries in that neighborhood and the many disputed boarders in that region you can see the makeing of another large regional conflict much like WW1 or WW2. Pakistand and India, Pakistand and Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq, Israel and.... everyone in the middle east, Tibet and china, North Korea and South Korea.. Where is the spark going to ignite the fire at???? The largest spark at the time was in Iraq.

I also feel "liberating others", sort of, forms a part of nationalistic American pride. The US is not motivated by territory, but the country is certainly motivated by other things. Also, when you take a close look at how European countries colonized others, it appears that their interests shifted toward the end of the colonial era from territorial ones to others like access to markets and natural resources.

How is this working out for america right now? If we are looking for pride in liberating Iraq we are not doing a very good job. Most polls show America to be totally against the war, that is not pride is it? If we are looking for financial gain... again, not doing a good job if that is the case.

Capster78 · 23 Oct 2008

EdZiomek said:
I say, yes, Japan is self sufficient, warm and wonderful to the world, why should we need military bases there?
Besides, VietNam might allow us to use facilities in their region, or the PI once again.
Just like our forefathers told us... beware of a large, standing military... it almost suggests going to more and more wars, which will never be eliminated anyways.
Of course, Washington will state that the rise of China as a major force makes it a necessity to stay.
I say, When can we leave and return as tourists 100%?

Do you believe tentions between Japan and all the surrounding countries is gone? WW2 was not as long ago as you think, you are simply to young or not even born to remember it. It probably did not affect you like it affected the people in China, Korea or the Philippines. The general feeling I get when talking to a Korean or a Japanese person is that they are still very leery of each other. Its obvious the Chinese are leery of their neighbors given there mass military buildup over the last 5-10 years. Now you have Russia coming back to power. This may favor China and North Korea depending on how Russia's forign policy twords these countries evolves.

If you wish to eliminate war, the only way of doing so is to try and do what Hitler did and rid the world of all races and cultures leaving it with only 1 race, 1 culture and 1 ideology. This would be the only type of world that could exist without conflict. Even then, its still not a gauruntee. A country without a military is going to be easy prey.

EdZiomek · 23 Oct 2008

Capster...one question...

Capster... I am 56, still too young for my own good, and so old nothing works anymore (ask my wife!). Great posts here, but your comment..."If you wish to eliminate war, . ...." ...the Hitler ref is all wrong, when you think about it.

But yes, Humans are programmed for war, for dominance, for sex drives, for power drives, even for something as simple as ..."Gee, I like your sneakers, give them to me or I will kill you!"

My opinion...If iwo humans are left on this earth, they will eventually fight. And if there are two men and one woman, it will take at least 5 minutes for hostilities to commence, sex a little longer.

And if there are two women and one man, at least 3 days and ten minutes for war, with sex much longer!

What I want to know is ...if the United Nations was created in '46 or '48 to discuss all the world problems, at what point did they give the United States the Crown of "Head Honcho, Protector of the Earth, Grand Occupier of all Strategic Locations"?

And is the world now generally saying... "Hey self-appointed King-ster, you did good and bad in the past, take a break already, leave!"

"Change" is a healthy, wonderful thing. And there 30 more wars ongoing in the world we can concentrate on.

America should leave anywhere the people want us to leave.

alantin · 23 Oct 2008

Capster78 said:
Obviously ignorant of WWII and why we are in japan.

Obviously icabable of understanding what others are saying. Did you even read my post?

The invader is always morally inferior and in this regard I consider Japan even worse. I know very well how american military ended up in Japan and this is exactly why I wrote about "necessary evil" and:
"No one should have to carry the shame of a foreign occupation or rule, but Japan screwed up good in the WWII and now they are still paying the price".

And what is this about invading???? The US has not invaded anyone in my opinion. ...
... America invades to liberate.

Hmm..?

I think it boils down to perception just like grapefruit said. To you it might be liberation but go tell it to the countless people who lost their mothers, fathers, sons, daughers (civilians!) because the US came to liberate..

Also this just made me wonder how the native americans, who were liberated to their wonderful reservations, would feel about this..

grapefruit · 23 Oct 2008

Capster78 said:
How is this working out for america right now? If we are looking for pride in liberating Iraq we are not doing a very good job. Most polls show America to be totally against the war, that is not pride is it? If we are looking for financial gain... again, not doing a good job if that is the case.

I believe the US failed to "liberate Iraq" and had no gain in pride, rather lost some reputation, and American people learned them too. I think that's why most Americans are against the war now. The reason why the US is unwilling to pull out immediately seems, to me, to avoid further damage to the US's reputation for liberation, since irresponsible sudden withdrawal will certainly cause Iraq more chaotic than its state prior to the "liberation".

Americans also turned against the war probably because most of them realized that there is no prospect for financial gains. The war turned out to be too costly. If I remember correctly, the initial assessment of how long the war was going to continue was much shorter than what we ended up with. So, the costs of the war became much higher than the expected gain.

Anyway, I guess my post was off topic.

grapefruit · 24 Oct 2008

Capster78 said:
Hitler did and rid the world of all races and cultures leaving it with only 1 race, 1 culture and 1 ideology. This would be the only type of world that could exist without conflict. Even then, its still not a gauruntee. A country without a military is going to be easy prey.

I am not supporting what Hitler did, but it is dangerous to believe what the US is (or has been) doing is completely different from what Hitler did. Self-reflection is always valuable. The US is surely trying to expand its ideology to the world (whether it is good or bad is what history will decide). Who to decide which country is "evil" and which is not? Isn't it an ideology? (By the way, I'm not judging which ideology is better, here.) Whether we like it or not, American globalization is also killing some type of cultural diversity.

Is it time for US Force to leave Japan?

is it the time for US Forces to leave Japan?

Yes, They did a lot of very bad things

Yes

they protect Japan

NO

I'don't care

先輩

a friend

先輩

a friend

先輩

後輩

aka YOSUQUE

Just me

先輩

日本語を勉強する者

先輩

日本語を勉強する者

先輩

日本語を勉強する者

先輩

日本語を勉強する者

後輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

後輩

日本語を勉強する者

先輩

先輩

Similar threads