Opponents to fight new US military base on Okinawa

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press

Opponents to fight new US military base on Okinawa
By KEN MORITSUGU, Associated Press | December 27, 2013 | Updated: December 27, 2013 7:53pm

TOKYO (AP) — Threatening lawsuits and protests, opponents are gearing up to fight a decision by Okinawa's governor that could pave the way for a new U.S. military base on the southern Japanese island.

U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel welcomed Friday's decision, calling it "the most significant milestone" so far in a long-running battle to realign U.S. forces in Okinawa.

The new base is designed to reduce the impact of the heavy U.S. military presence in Okinawa by replacing another base in a more congested area, but opponents want the operations moved off Okinawa completely.

"What the governor has done is unforgivable," Yuichi Higa, the head of the assembly in Nago city, said in a phone interview. Nago would house the new base.


Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/science/article/Opponents-to-fight-new-US-military-base-on-Okinawa-5095524.php

[groundloop]

1. Why do we NEED a military base on Okinawa?

And for that matter why do we NEED bases all over the world? I've read that we have a military presence in over 100 countries (no two articles I found could agree on the exact number, it varied from around 110 up to 150). That's a hell of a lot of money being spent, for what? If we want to be fair about this, how many other countries have military bases in the US? Oh, we're the greatest nation in the world, blah blah blah..... Well, maybe if we'd quit throwing so much money away on projecting our military presence and put it toward healthcare, education, and infrastructure.

[ConcernedCanuk]

2. Global Domination silly . . . .

.
.
.

Sorta hard to do when you don't have your weapons and military in everyone else's back yards.

Can you think of a better reason why the USA has so many bases all over the Globe?

I can't.

CC

[damyank913]

3. DUH!!!!!!!!!!!

How else are we gonna bring freedom, democracy, and Walmart to the world?

[MyNameGoesHere]

4. Now the nuttiness can start.

I bet most will oppose a base in Japan, yet defend amurkan escalation regarding those silly little Asian islands half of Asia lays claim to. Selective outrage over expansionism, empire and nose sticking into.

[okaawhatever]

5. Big difference, we have a legal obligation to protect Japan through treaty nt

[MyNameGoesHere]

6. Perhaps you feel that way

I certainly think it's time we don't have to play big brother to the world. Or big bully depending on your dislike of military imperialism. But hey some people love to shove a military base on every corner of every street in the world. It's the new Starbucks.

[okaawhatever]

8. It has nothing to do with my personal feelings and everything to do with the Japanese surrender

agreements and treaties. We promised to protect Japan in the event of an attack provided they dismantle their military and keep only minimum number of troops. This was to thwart Japan's imperialistic advances.

[MyNameGoesHere]

9. Oh yes.

We did a lot of protecting and dismantling.

According to David M. Rosenfeld:
Not only did Occupation censorship forbid criticism of the United States or other Allied nations, but the mention of censorship itself was forbidden. This means, as Donald Keene observes, that for some producers of texts "the Occupation censorship was even more exasperating than Japanese military censorship had been because it insisted that all traces of censorship be concealed. This meant that articles had to be rewritten in full, rather than merely submitting XXs for the offending phrases."
—Donald Keene, quoted in Dawn to the West


And we had a lot of fun as well.

With the acceptance of the Allied occupation authorities the Japanese organized a brothel system for the benefit of the more than 300,000 occupation troops. "The strategy was, through the special work of experienced women, to create a breakwater to protect regular women and girls."
In December 1945 a senior officer with the Public Health and Welfare Division of the occupation's General Headquarters wrote regarding the typical prostitute: "The girl is impressed into contracting by the desperate financial straits of her parents and their urging, occasionally supplemented by her willingness to make such a sacrifice to help her family", he wrote. "It is the belief of our informants, however, that in urban districts the practice of enslaving girls, while much less prevalent than in the past, still exists. The worst victims ... were the women who, with no previous experience, answered the ads calling for 'Women of the New Japan'."
When MacArthur finally closed the brothels on March 25, 1946, it is estimated that more than 25% of the U.S. troops had sexually transmitted diseases

It was a one sided agreement. It was an unconditional agreement. It was and is typical amurkan policy. It was strong-arm diplomacy at its finest. The Iraq supplication was almost as hideous except for the brothels of course, well maybe, I am sure we will find out about those one day.

[okaawhatever]

10. Going off topic because you couldn't bash America anymore? We're not perfect, but we're great. If

you lived here maybe you would understand.