Japan to permit continued marine occupation of Okinawa

[Fluiddude]

Japanese Prime Minister Accepts U.S. Base in Okinawa

TOKYO—Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama said he will accept a longstanding U.S. proposal for positioning American troops in Japan, removing a major source of friction between the two allies, but raising the prospect of new domestic political troubles for the fragile ruling coalition.

Mr. Hatoyama's agreement to keep a large Marine presence on Okinawa breaks one of the most prominent promises of his administration: to reduce significantly the American military footprint on the southern island. His eight-month-old government has tried in vain to persuade the U.S. to accept alternative locations, or to persuade local communities in other parts of Japan to host more U.S. troops.

Conceding failure, a contrite Mr. Hatoyama traveled to Okinawa on Sunday, and issued a public apology. "I had said I would try to relocate the base outside of Okinawa, but I was not able to keep my word," he told the island's disgruntled governor during a nationally televised meeting. "And for the difficulties that local people have had to experience, I would like to apologize to the Okinawan people."

He added, "This was a heartbreaking decision for me."

Read on

 

[dr. hfn]

poor Japanese ;(

 

[0zzy]

poor Japanese ;(

They should move that -specific- base. That seems to be all they care about when I read these articles.

But Okinawa, a small island some hundreds of miles away from Japan, has plenty of bases, including the largest Air Force Base in the east I do believe. I lived there for 5 years, nice place, great people.

But I don't think all these Okinawans protesting are protesting "US Occupation," but this specific base and location. The military, families, and Americans who live in Okinawa contribute a lotttt to the economies there.

 

[Fluiddude]

But I don't think all these Okinawans protesting are protesting "US Occupation," but this specific base and location. The military, families, and Americans who live in Okinawa contribute a lotttt to the economies there.

My impression is that the vast majority of Okinawans want all US forces to leave. As do I.

 

[0zzy]

My impression is that the vast majority of Okinawans want all US forces to leave. As do I.

That is most likely an incorrect impression. The main things that causes these controversies are one thing: Marines. Several times it was marines who went off base and raped, in one incident a 14 year old girl. Then the US doesn't allow the marine to go through the court system, almost protecting them. This, obviously, causes uproar. So when things like that happened, there were protests indeed.

This specific incident, however, involves a base that is next to a heavily populated area, where planes and training exercises disturbs the peace. They don't like that, they don't want that, they want it off. and it looks like their leaders failed them.

But to say, because of this case, that all Okinawans, or even most, want all the bases off and Americans off is, most likely, not a correct (but then again, I moved in 2002 so things could of changed. but not likely.)

The people there generally good and the businesses very much thrive off the Americans who go off and venture the lands (especially off Gate 2 of Kadena).

 

[Fluiddude]

Yes, I overstated the amount.

The daily Asahi newspaper published a survey on Friday showing that 43 percent of Okinawans would like US forces to leave the island, while 42 percent just want the US military presence reduced.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2010/0514/US-base-in-Okinawa-looms-in-Japan-elections

 

[Promontorium]

Those Marines did go through Japanese courts, and did their time in Japanese prison. The use of the term "occupation" is also inflamatory. There was an American occupation of Japan, and it lasted much longer in Okinawa.

To use this term when it isn't true diminishes the actual occupation.

You can be honest about this subject, and still have valid points. For example, it's too expensive. While the strategic benefit of our Japanese bases is great, almost ironically promising that if there were another "pearl harbor" it would probably happen in Yokosuka Japan, the tradeoff is this eternal threat. America is too damn militaristic. If we end up in another world war, fine, go back to Japan and build a nice forward deployed force. In the mean time, pack it up, trim it, save America.


But those marines are not statistically more likely to rape anyone. The military in Japan does not commit more crimes per capita. The military does not shelter its servicemembers from prosecution. And there sure as hell isn't an occupation. No servicemember, even one performing the duties of law enforcement has any authority to do or say anything to a Japanese civillian off base.

I served in Japan for 3 years. I've seen this villification, that comes primarily from Americans, and the Japanese Communist Party. The majority of Japanese love Americans and the military. Okinawa is a special case, it is a small island that still hasn't even completely forgiven Japan for taking over. Okinawa is historically not Japanese it is as much Chinese as it is Japanese and was taken over by Japan just about 60 years before we took over Japan. There is still bad blood.


But to villify a group for the inordinately small number of crimes by a few is just wrong. You villify the military personnel, and what is your goal? To say if Americans acted better, maybe we could "occupy" more countries? If that's not your point, why focus on the group, and not the policies? And if you had any interest in the truth, why do you paint the crimes of the few on the many without regard for the statistically low crime rate?

It is dishonest, and misguided. You're concluding that the American military is too evil to occupy, but occupation would be ok if America had better personnel. It's bullshit and you know it. Say what you mean.

 

[0zzy]

Those Marines did go through Japanese courts, and did their time in Japanese prison. The use of the term "occupation" is also inflamatory. There was an American occupation of Japan, and it lasted much longer in Okinawa.

To use this term when it isn't true diminishes the actual occupation.

You can be honest about this subject, and still have valid points. For example, it's too expensive. While the strategic benefit of our Japanese bases is great, almost ironically promising that if there were another "pearl harbor" it would probably happen in Yokosuka Japan, the tradeoff is this eternal threat. America is too damn militaristic. If we end up in another world war, fine, go back to Japan and build a nice forward deployed force. In the mean time, pack it up, trim it, save America.


But those marines are not statistically more likely to rape anyone. The military in Japan does not commit more crimes per capita. The military does not shelter its servicemembers from prosecution. And there sure as hell isn't an occupation. No servicemember, even one performing the duties of law enforcement has any authority to do or say anything to a Japanese civillian off base.

I served in Japan for 3 years. I've seen this villification, that comes primarily from Americans, and the Japanese Communist Party. The majority of Japanese love Americans and the military. Okinawa is a special case, it is a small island that still hasn't even completely forgiven Japan for taking over. Okinawa is historically not Japanese it is as much Chinese as it is Japanese and was taken over by Japan just about 60 years before we took over Japan. There is still bad blood.


But to villify a group for the inordinately small number of crimes by a few is just wrong. You villify the military personnel, and what is your goal? To say if Americans acted better, maybe we could "occupy" more countries? If that's not your point, why focus on the group, and not the policies? And if you had any interest in the truth, why do you paint the crimes of the few on the many without regard for the statistically low crime rate?

It is dishonest, and misguided. You're concluding that the American military is too evil to occupy, but occupation would be ok if America had better personnel. It's bullshit and you know it. Say what you mean.

You seem awfully upset.

You are correct, they did serve trials. My mistake, I read somewhere something about how some were avoiding the court system or some other outrage or the other. but since I don't have the article on hand I take that statement back.

As for the Marines comment, you seem to misunderstand me. I do not say all Marines are rapists. I say, though, that there were 2 or 3 incidents that I recall which occurred on Okinawa involving a military person raping or sexually assaulting someone. In all those cases which I recall, the military person was a Marine. (the 1995 case was a Marine+Navy, though).

That is what I mean. I find it funny that the largest military air force base sits on top of Okinawa and that those 3 times it was a drunk marine who wondered off base to cause trouble. That is not to say all marines are like this, nor most.

Why do I point out that they are even marines at all? I don't know, just an interesting factoid I suppose.