Stay in touch with the latest and widest range of Japan News with JapanToday's News Alert newsletter.
Up to the moment news in your inbox everyday. Subscribe now!
NEW USER REGISTRATION
Already a JapanToday registered user?
Login to update your settings to subscribe to News Alert.
Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday.
Letters and numbers only; 5 to 50 characters. This cannot be changed later.
You will be sent an email to activate your account before you can log in.
Yes, I would like to receive news alerts from JapanToday
voiceofokinawaMay. 16, 2013 - 08:25AM JST
Maria (May 16, 2013 - 07:03AM JST) and Yubaru (May. 16, 2013 - 07:06AM JST ):
Okinawa has been dumped on by one country and its own for the benefit of its suzerein, the great United States of America.
Posted in: Okinawan women demand apology from Hashimoto
voiceofokinawaMay. 14, 2013 - 11:49PM JST
Did these academics really argue that China might have rights to the Ryukyu Islands because Ryukyu was once a vassal state of China? Could such argument hold water at all? If it could, then China definitely could lay claim to Vietnam and Korea, that were also vassals of ancient China. Even Japan paid tributes to Sui and Tang Dynasties from 600 to 618 to 894.
Okinawa Governor said the scolors' claim is not worthy of commenting. And I agree with him for now.
Posted in: China should reconsider who owns Okinawa: People's Daily
voiceofokinawaMay. 01, 2013 - 04:19PM JST
Again, you are arguing the problem based on particulars -- exceptional ones at that. And it's you who said, "People having babies contributes to the perpetuity of the human race," which I expanded by saying that's the biological as well as social aspect or purpose of marriage.
I don't know what 1000 rights and benefits are denied to gay and lesbian couples, but certainly they are guaranteed basic human rights, I suppose. Basic human rights, as I understand, are innate rights all men and women are supposed to possess that transcend the state and constitution. Are gays denied to those rights?
Posted in: Thousands march for gay rights in Japan's first 'Rainbow Week'
voiceofokinawaMay. 01, 2013 - 11:45AM JST
What are basic human rights mean to you? Are all basic human rights denied to gays?
As you say, "People having babies contributes to the perpetuity of the human race," and that I think is the biological as well as social aspect or purpose of marriage. Does gay marriage have such biological and social aspect and purpose?
voiceofokinawaMay. 01, 2013 - 07:06AM JST
Abstracting away from concreteness is not fantasizing. There's no perfect circle in the actual world; there's no perfect triangular. All there is is an imperfect circle or imperfect triangular. The same with marriages, whether it's straight or gay. So when you compape the two, you think as if there were perfect straight marriage and perfect gay marriage. You then argue which will contribute to the perpetuity of the humanity biologically and socially.
voiceofokinawaApr. 30, 2013 - 03:54PM JST
I am talking about the matter idealistically, abstracting away from concreteness. Yes, there are many married couples who want a child but cannot due to some biological reasons and whose last resort is adoption and/or in-vitro fertilization. There are also cases in straight marriages in which child rearing is neglected or even infanticides occur. I am abstracting away from such concreteness and talking about the matter more idealistically. You cannot take up peripheral cases such as these and justify your position. The comparison must be done between idealistic straight marriage and idealistic gay marriage.
voiceofokinawaApr. 30, 2013 - 12:43PM JST
I am not a biologist, but I take your word in explaining the mechanism of how fertilization occurs. But does that happen between homosexual couples?
voiceofokinawaApr. 30, 2013 - 11:05AM JST
Marriage, by nature, is a personal matter. But marriage is profoundly a social matter as well. By marriage society is assured of its perpetuation and prosperity because posterity is born from married couples. That's why in any society in the world marriage or wedding is celebrated as a big social event.
Of course that applies only to a heterosexual marriage and not to a homosexual one. The latter should therefore be confined to a personal world. Issuing legal licenses to homosexual couples is out of question.
voiceofokinawaApr. 23, 2013 - 04:11PM JST
As Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga says, sure enough, the Japanese constitution (Article 20th) ensures the freedom of faith to the nation. But visiting Yasukuni Shrine by cabinet ministers and lawmakers has nothing to do with the freedom of faith. Those 168 lawmakers who visited the shrine today, plus two cabinet ministers who visited yesterday, are composed of people of all faiths -- Buddhists, Christians, Shintoists and what not.
How can they pay visit to the war shrine when neighboring countries that experienced brutal occupation by Imperial Japan say the shrine symbolizes Japan's military past and that Japan needs contrition above anything else? Suga should answer this question first before obfuscating the lawmakers' action as a matter of faith.
Posted in: 168 lawmakers visit Yasukuni shrine
voiceofokinawaApr. 19, 2013 - 08:08AM JST
So it's turned out my questioning stands well after all.
The following excerpt from the new Special Measures Agreement (SMA) signed on Jan. 21, 2011 between Japan and the U.S. gives a clear idea about what's going on in this historically most aberrant bilateral relations.
Expenditures (Term: 5 years) to be borne by Japan:
"Japan will bear all or a part of the labor costs, the utilities costs and the training relocation costs. As for the training relocation costs, costs for the relocation to territory under the administration of the United States of America such as Guam are added as the expenditures which can be borne by the GOJ, in addition to the costs for the relocation to other facilities and areas in Japan."
"- Policies for implementation of the new SMA: the Notes between Minister Maehara and Ambassador Roos concerning the new SMA
Labor Costs: The Upper Limit of the Number of Workers that the GOJ funds is to be reduced from 23,055 to 22,625.This adjustment is to be phased in over the new SMA period.
Utilities Costs: Setting the percentage of utilities cost sharing between the GOJ and the USG, the GOJ is to bear 72 percent () of the annual utilities costs up to 24.9 billion YEN. This adjustment is to be phased in over the new SMA period.
() Currently, Japan bears approximately 76%."
Posted in: U.S. footing greater bill for overseas bases
voiceofokinawaApr. 18, 2013 - 04:18PM JST
Is this figure correct, Washington paying "$2 billion in non-personnel costs" for the U.S. military presence in Japan? The two-plus-two agreement signed in 2011 stipulated that Japan's host nation supports must be no less than 20.6 billion yen per year (or $258 million), which is said to be 74.5% of the total cost for the maintenance of U.S. bases in Japan. Therefore, "$2 billion in non-personnel costs" as mentioned in the above article must be incorrect; it must be the grand total of personnel and non-personnel costs. Can someone give an exact answer?
voiceofokinawaApr. 16, 2013 - 10:21PM JST
Nakaima is the 19th-generation descendant of the Cai clan, not 15th. BertieWoost is correct.
Posted in: Okinawa governor to skip ceremony marking restoration of Japan's sovereignty
voiceofokinawaApr. 16, 2013 - 11:39AM JST
Can one be a Texan and a U.S. citizen at the same time? Can one be a Scottish and a U.K. citizen at the same time? Can one be an Okinawan and a Japanese citizen at the same time? The answers to them all is, of course, Yes, he/she can. As smithinjapan says, one's native background is irrelevant here.
Nakaima is an Osaka-born Okinawan, a 15th-generation descendant of the Cai clan from Fujian, China, one of the 36 families who are said to have migrated to Okinawa in 1392 and, according to one theory, by the order of Emperor Hongwu, to teach advanced Chinese culture to the backward people of Okinawa.
voiceofokinawaApr. 15, 2013 - 12:03PM JST
Nakaima from Osaka? That's a most irresponsible posting by someone whose real identity is hidden behind a pseudonym. You can't say anything because you are invisible. Nakaima is a native Okinawan.
voiceofokinawaApr. 14, 2013 - 11:44PM JST
Just a tip:
The Okinawa Times conducted an urgent inquiry about whether or not governors would attend the April 28 ceremony commemorating restoration of post-war Japan's sovereignty. The result: 19 of all inquired 46 governors will attend it themselves; 19 prefectures will send only proxies, more than half of them being chiefs of Prefectural Tokyo offices. Oita Prefecture Governor will not attend, just like Okinawa Governor. Four governors haven't decided yet.
voiceofokinawaApr. 11, 2013 - 06:24AM JST
In announcing the bilateral agreement, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe expressed satisfaction with it, saying the return of the bases would reduce burdens on Okinawa significantly. Okinawa is obliged to host 73.8 % of all U.S. bases planted in Japan. But it's turned out during talks between visiting Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera and Okinawa Governor Hirokazu Nakaima that the reduction would be a mere 0.7% from 73.8% to 73.1%.
Posted in: U.S. military to return some Okinawa land to Japan
voiceofokinawaApr. 11, 2013 - 06:02AM JST
Fadamor (Apr. 11, 2013 - 04:31AM JST):
The most hyped attraction item in this base return accord is MCAS Futenma with an area of 481 ha. Next comes Naha Port with an area of 56 ha. Their combined areas amount to 537 ha. So you want to say their return is not mere token but very, very significant.
But the story would be different if their replacements must be provided in whole and even with refurbished high-end facilities attached. How much money would be requied and how much environmental destruction would be inflicted upon the pristine nature around Henoko, the planned relocation site?
Can you accept such deal in your own country, a foreign army demanding a new base in exchange for the return of an old one that requires refurbishment? You are taking too much for granted.
voiceofokinawaApr. 10, 2013 - 09:43PM JST
To Yubaru (Apr. 09, 2013 - 06:55PM JST):
The Battle of Okinawa started on March 26 in 1945 with the U.S. army's invasion and occupation of the Kerama Islands about 40 km west of Okinawa Island. Invasion of the main island of Okinawa took place on April 1, 1945, with 176,491 men committed on the U.S side. The battle ended on June 23 with the invading army occupying the island with its overwhelming fire power.
The formal occupation of Japan and Okinawa ended in 1951 when the San Francisco Peace Treaty was signed, but occupation continued in Okinawa for another 20 years until 1972 when its administrative rights were restored to Japan. Major bases remained intact even after the reversion, occupying 18% of the land mass of Okinawa Island. In addition, vast areas and spaces in surrounding waters and skies were reserved for exclusive use by the U.S. forces.
Thus, a virtual occupation has continued even though the formal one ended in 1951.
To Yubaru (Apr. 10, 2013 - 07:31AM JST):
According to the agreed-upon time line for the return of bases south of Kadena, implementation of base return will be carried out in 3 installments: (1) Category 1 (my terminology) areas can be returned immediately when necessary procedures are finished; (2) Category 2 areas will be returned when replacements for facilities are relocated to other areas within Okinawa; (3) Category 3 areas will be returned when the Marine contingents stationed in Okinawa move out from Okinawa completely.
In the case of Camp Kinser (area: 274 ha.), the area around Gate 1 (2 ha.) is the Category 1 area that will be returned immediately. A Category 2 area is the section along National Highway No. 58 where warehouses are concentrated (area: 129 ha.). An attached condition for its return: Replacements for the warehouses must be built at Torii Station in Yomitan. The scheduled year for its return is 2017 or later. The remaining area (143 ha.) falls within Category 3 and therefore will not be returned in the foreseeable future because nobody knows when the Marine contingents will completely withdraw from Okinawa.
Yubaru, I'm using the figures from the DoD-released document, "Consolidation Plan for Facilities and Areas in Okinawa," which you referred to me. Original base-area figures are from a document published by the Base Affairs Section of Okinawa Prefectural Government. Now, can you dare say I am 100% wrong and you are 100% correct?
voiceofokinawaApr. 09, 2013 - 10:48PM JST
The return of MCAS Futenma is an attraction item in the announced time line for base returns. But as known well the world over now, its replacement must be built in Henoko in northern Okinawa. Its return is thus not called "return" because it is countermanded by the Henoko relocation.
The same with Naha Military Port Facilities (Naha Port). Naha Port (area: 56 ha.) is one of those U.S. bases south of Kadena Air Base that are subject to return. Its total return was promised 39 years ago, in 1974, on condition that new port facilities were built at the coastal area of Urasoe City.
Camp Kinser (area: 274 ha.). is also one of the bases south of Kadena, which we thought would be returned as a whole. But only half of it will be returned. The other half facing the East China Sea won't be returned.
A new military port to be built at Urasoe will be equipped with a staging area with almost the same size as Naha Port and adjacent to Camp Kinser. The announced time line says Naha Port will be returned in 2017 or later, a good 43 years after its return was promised!
Will Naha Port be returned? And will Futenma, too? I doubt it. But they must be returned by all means. If they were not to be returned, should they be removed by force? That's the question. Futenma is stolen goods, anyway.
Maybe, we can appeal to American conscience patiently and incessantly.
voiceofokinawaApr. 09, 2013 - 06:07PM JST
Thomas Anderson's posting hits the point in almost all respects. (1) Okinawa is occupied by the U.S. army and Thomas Anderson's posting hits the point in almost all respects. (1) Okinawa is occupied by the U.S. army and Japan lets this happen. (2) Japan is not an independent nation (Read: Japan is also virtually occupied by the U.S. army, deprived of genuine sovereignty.) (3) The U.S. bases here are staging posts for the troops to be deployed somewhere else, like Iraq and Afghanistan.
The irony is that most Japanese people from prime ministers down to men in the street believe what Washington says: U.S. troops are deployed here to defend Japan, ready to give their life, as the USFJ brass keep telling the Japanese people. Buying the brass's words at face value, Japan loans bases (entire Japan: 3,089 ha.; Okinawa alone: 2,281 ha. (73.8%)) to the U.S. Forces free of charge and pays an average annual sum of $2,274 million for maintaining the U.S. military presence.
What else can one call this except history's most laughable tragicomedy?
May. 21, 2013 - 06:49AM JST
Guru 29, thanks for your point of view on this sensitive subject. It will be entertaining…
Posted in: China trying to strengthen its claim to Okinawa
May. 21, 2013 - 06:45AM JST
Please please please get rid of this monstrosity and start serving some of the "healthy" alternatives…
Posted in: Mega Potato to go back on sale at McDonald's Japan
May. 21, 2013 - 06:37AM JST
The reality is that China by its emerging belligerance is inducing more animosity around the world…
May. 21, 2013 - 05:56AM JST
As long as the sovereignty issue of Ryukyu remains unsettled
Unsettled ? To who? Some nuts…
May. 21, 2013 - 05:54AM JST
1.We-the President of the United States, the President of the National Government of the…