Yokosuka residents call for referendum on nuclear-powered aircraft carrier

Thursday 08th May, 05:57 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 17 Total Comments Show All

TheguyNextdoor at 10:30 AM JST - 8th May

Suck it up people, its inevitable.
jambon at 02:04 PM JST - 8th May

24 Feb 2007 ... U.S. nuclear-powered carrier Ronald Reagan visits Sasebo

Must've been testing the waters? No.

Japan to Harbor Nuclear-Powered Carrier

Associated Press October 28, 2005

WASHINGTON - United States and Japanese officials have agreed to allow the Navy to station a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in Japan for the first time, the Navy announced Thursday.

2005... I suppose this is a big shock to Yokosuka residents.

signatures of 48,600 residents

The membership of the Japan Communist Party in that area.
capone at 03:45 PM JST - 8th May

better to focus your energies on making japan's nuclear power industry safer
Hughgarse at 04:28 PM JST - 8th May

agreed on above.. Japan should be protesting their own nuke powerplants and their shocking safety standards and practices.
Loki520 at 10:26 PM JST - 8th May

Typical Japanese... way to slow at organizing something and getting it going.
OssanULTRA at 11:57 PM JST - 8th May

These people need to get ovet it. It's a matter of time before Japan herself may have nuclear powered MDSF vessels.
VoXman at 12:08 AM JST - 9th May

Ah not to burst anyone's bubble, but most if not all of these people are not Yokosuka residents. But are in fact left wing supporters from all over the Kanto plain. When these groups file there petitions, what they (Yokosuka Chuo gov) generally finds is unverifiable local resident names and verified names from other cities. Asked what party they support and most will admit socialist related groups. Saying you are a Yokosuka Resident and actually living there are 2 different things.
Alphaape at 01:41 AM JST - 9th May

Back in the 60's & 70's, the Japanese maritime industry did have a nuclear powered cargo vessel. The Mutsu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutsu_%28ship%29) was the name of the vessel and it was developed in the 70's and made a few voyages in the 90's. So this whole idea that Japan doesn't want any nuclear vessels or is a nuclear free zone is not really true.

I was got into a discussion with a gentleman passing out a flyer on the GW, and I asked why he was opposed. He mentioned the safety, and I had to explain to him that since the US has had these vessels since the 60's, no major accidents have occured in the US. The reactors are not designed to go "boom" like a Hiroshima or Nagasaki. I then told him, that the Kitty Hawk sitting inport Yokosuka with a full load of about 2 million gallons of main propulsion fuel, and another 3 million gallons of avaiation fuel would make a bigger "boom" if it were to explode (but they have various safety methods installed to prevent that).

Nuclear subs make stops in Yokosuka, Sasebo, Okinawa all the time. No problems. I wish people would do a little resarch before they protest. Their own program needs to have more scrutiny than the US program.
USNinJapan2 at 11:02 AM JST - 9th May

Alphaape

I wish people would do a little resarch before they protest. Their own program needs to have more scrutiny than the US program.

Not going to happen as that would require an ability to reason, but you knew that...
nukefree83 at 12:51 PM JST - 9th May

A lot of you have the wrong end of the stick. America is not in Japan to protect it - it is there to use that country as an unsinkable aircraft carrier for its ugly military.

Japan is being used. The US uses its bases in Japan to attack other countries - including Iraq. US nuclear-powered and and nuclear-armed warships have been banned from my country, Nuclear-free New Zealand, since 1983. It's the best thing we ever did. We don't want the US nuclear umbrella. And we don't take part in illegal wars, that's why we aren't in Iraq. Take the hint - get out of Japan.
rtrhead1 at 02:36 PM JST - 9th May

Uh, aren't all wars illegal?
USNinJapan2 at 07:37 PM JST - 9th May

nukefree83

Nothing personal against your beautiful country, but the reason you don't have (or need) a nuclear umbrella is because New Zealand has absolutely no strategic value and so can afford to be nuclear-free or free from (relative) dependence on other nations' military might. It doesn't exist in a geo-politically volatile theater like Japan and so it doesn't need to be protected by anyone. Do you not see the vast difference between Japan's situation and your country's? As for your statement regarding Iraq, you may want to check your facts as the New Zealand Defense Force (particularly the NZSAS) served in both Iraq and Afghanistan alongside US forces there.
Alphaape at 03:41 AM JST - 10th May

nukefree83,

I think if you have been on this forum long enough, you will see that Japan has benefitted a lot from the US presence here. They do pay a fair share to keep us here, and it is a lot less than keeping a larger military to fend off China. Also, as far as being under an "umbrella" I believe that the NZ forces provide a lot of the patrols and protection in the New Guinea area and many of the islands around. So, do you think it is in your best interest to help monitor the situation in your part of the world, or just stand by until a major crisis deveops on your doorstep.
Alphaape at 03:57 AM JST - 10th May

nukefree83, One more thing, the reason that US ships don't visit NZ is not because they are nuclear powered, but because of the US policy to not inform other nations if the vessels are carrying nuclear weapons. The offical policy is that the "U.S. will not confirm or deny the presence of nuclear weapons aboard any naval vessel, since by international law, each vessel is soverign US territor." So since we can't tell if a conventional powered or nuclear powered ship is carrying nuclear weapons, we just decided that we wouldn't go.

The fact that a ship is nuclear propelled has nothing to do with a nuclear bomb. Reactors are not designed to go "boom!" They do have other issues, but going Hiroshima, or Bikin Atoll is not one of them.
Nessie at 02:35 PM JST - 11th May

Ballot:

Nuke carriers are ( ) a good idea ( ) a grat idea