Sunday May 27, 2012

JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION

Okada in Hawaii for talks with Clinton over security alliance

Politics Jan. 12, 2010 - 06:58AM JST ( 8 )

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

Order by Time Order by Popularity

8 Comments

0

AdamwestiJan. 12, 2010 - 10:23PM JST

Scy Clinton will be pushing this issue during her talks with Okada. In my opinion, if Okinawa/Japan doesn't want the base on their land, then troops should be withdrawn. Why spend all this money overseas when it could be used in our own homeland.
0

sharky1Jan. 12, 2010 - 11:12PM JST

Okada on secret vacation in Hawaii with Billary...
0

bobbafettJan. 12, 2010 - 11:31PM JST

If Okada shows even a smidgen of interest he can access her snuke silo.
0

toranosukeJan. 13, 2010 - 01:39AM JST

Adamwesti: It's not so simple as to say "if Okinawa/Japan doesn't want the base on their land..." The people of Okinawa and the bureaucrats of Tokyo don't necessarily want the same things. The people of Okinawa, particularly localities like Futenma, deal on a daily basis with petty local issues which derive from having a base nearby. The bureaucrats in Tokyo, meanwhile, have international relations and such to consider. So they're operating on different levels, and there are a number of different considerations; it's not so simple as it looks on the surface.

Secondly, there's a reason we have so many troops out there. Defending the homeland means having troops stationed to address regional issues and regional problems. Our troops in Japan are stationed in a prime location to help our ally Japan, and other friendly nations such as Taiwan and South Korea, be prepared for any possible military action by China, North Korea, or another power in that region. Eliminating the bases in Okinawa is one thing, if we were to move them all to the Japanese "mainland" or to Taiwan or something, but if you're suggesting that we move all our troops back to the US mainland, that leaves our allies and our interests in East Asia wholly undefended, and so cannot (and should not) happen.
0

NeoJamalJan. 13, 2010 - 06:13AM JST

Our troops in Japan are stationed in a prime location to help our ally Japan, and other friendly nations such as Taiwan and South Korea, be prepared for any possible military action by China, North Korea, or another power in that region

Taiwan and South Korea would not accept strategic help from Japan if offered, so why should Japan allow the US to help them?
0

toguroJan. 13, 2010 - 12:07PM JST

NeoJamal: It's not a matter of Japan allowing the US to help them. From the end of WW2, all the way to now, Japan doesn't have much of a choice. Japan isn't exactly the most liked nation in the region. And as the old saying goes "some wounds never heal", so is the case with Japan and her neighbors regarding old scrs from WW2. It is highly unlikely seeing as how most if not all countries have some sort of economic dealings with Japan, than any of the former victim countries of Japanese aggression would seek war with Japan, but the probability can't be ruled out either. Especially when you have nut jobs like "Pajama Boy" still in power, and at the head of one of the largest armies in the world, not to mention WMDs as well.
0

NeoJamalJan. 18, 2010 - 08:44AM JST

NeoJamal: It's not a matter of Japan allowing the US to help them. From the end of WW2, all the way to now, Japan doesn't have much of a choice. Japan isn't exactly the most liked nation in the region. And as the old saying goes "some wounds never heal", so is the case with Japan and her neighbors regarding old scrs from WW2. It is highly unlikely seeing as how most if not all countries have some sort of economic dealings with Japan, than any of the former victim countries of Japanese aggression would seek war with Japan, but the probability can't be ruled out either. Especially when you have nut jobs like "Pajama Boy" still in power, and at the head of one of the largest armies in the world, not to mention WMDs as well.

then isn't it the duty of the Japanese to reap what it sows instead of letting the US protect them from the "eternal ire" of Asia? What a poor excuse for preserving US interests in the region that are not necessary shared with Japan. The only reason the US got what it wants up till now is because a collection of right wing Asia-hating nut job occupational collaborators, otherwise known as the LDP was in power.
0

OneForAllJan. 18, 2010 - 08:56AM JST

"Japan faces reality of China's rising presence in U.S. diplomacy": We also saw yesterday Japan's warning to China that China MUST HONOR their agreement for joint exploration for gas in the disputed waters of the South China Sea Or else some action will be taken. Maybe the Chinese want to opt out of that agreement.

Hatoyama might consider just being straight with the public and explain that international agreements must be honored. With that, get US support to help them with this South China Sea issue. No one wins by not honoring international agreements.

However, Japan's concerns should be address to a certain degree, but not to the degree to where Japan is seen as not honoring international agreements. I do not think I would trust a friend who acted like this continually. For the sake of peace here, Hatoyama needs to be clear. Trust is being lost.