Self-Defense Forces 自衛隊

[SamuraiBlue]

Originally Posted by NihonKitty

Does anybody know of any plan about what to do with all the space in the middle of the city now?

Once the US military returns it to the Japanese government there should be a contamination evaluation and cleaning activity based on contamination level then return to it's original property owner.
All US military facility in Japan are owned by private property owners. They are leased by the Japanese government and are provided to the US military.

[RyukyuRhymer]

Originally Posted by NihonKitty

Does anybody know of any plan about what to do with all the space in the middle of the city now?

The government of Okinawa has always had development plans in store, should one day the bases be removed. The problem is, its implementation always hits obstacles.. the biggest one being Tokyo. Even when you have the local people, the mayors, the Okinawan governor, and the Okinawan branch of the ruling party, unanimously supporting one idea.. Tokyo will not budge. It goes to show how little they prioritize Okinawans over National level and American opinion.

As SamuraiBlue said, the first thing to do is to measure the environmental impact caused by the base.. the next would be dealing with the rightful landowners. as you know.. many of these bases came about through the forced eviction of landowners.. in fact these evictions began prior to US administration when the IJA turned Okinawa into their fortress (some of the US bases were built upon what the IJA build before).

The previous base that was returned several years ago became the Omoromachi/Shintoshin area, which is now a popular shopping district.

One thing for sure is that commutes will be reduced significantly as most of the island has to drive around the entire base to get to the other side.. turning what should be a 10 minute drive into a 45min - 1 hour drive.

[ukiyo]

Isn't Okinawa really divided on the issue too? I don't know how united they are or not. I remember many polls especially of northern Okinawans accepting ideas while southern didn't etc. Seems like a complicated issue. And of course "Tokyo" does not listen to anyone, even the mainlanders. Don't you remember many people protested for Okinawa in Tokyo and Osaka?

I also don't understand why they dont move some base to Osaka when the government of Osaka said they would be willing/want a base there. Tokyo is way too strong, not only for Okinawa but all of Japan. Did you read the article about Kansai governors uniting to create more autonomy from Tokyo? If they succeed it might happen across the country.

Anyway at least the base will be moved out of the middle of the city. It will be safer for the citizens and reduce travel times. I hope to see some skyscrapers there

[RyukyuRhymer]

Originally Posted by NihonKitty

Isn't Okinawa really divided on the issue too? I don't know how united they are or not. I remember many polls especially of northern Okinawans accepting ideas while southern didn't etc. Seems like a complicated issue. And of course "Tokyo" does not listen to anyone, even the mainlanders. Don't you remember many people protested for Okinawa in Tokyo and Osaka?

I also don't understand why they dont move some base to Osaka when the government of Osaka said they would be willing/want a base there. Tokyo is way too strong, not only for Okinawa but all of Japan. Did you read the article about Kansai governors uniting to create more autonomy from Tokyo? If they succeed it might happen across the country.

Anyway at least the base will be moved out of the middle of the city. It will be safer for the citizens and reduce travel times. I hope to see some skyscrapers there

When I refer to "Tokyo" I'm referring to the bureaucrats, similar to how many Americans refer Washington as. Yes we know many people on mainland Japan support Okinawans on the issue (and in fact.. they can be far far more zealous in their support.. because quite frankly.. many Okinawans can be so damn passive). The average Okinawan is the type of people who feel helpless when faced with certain situations.. they know something is bad, but they just roll with the punches. Its very sad. Kansai people have such stronger will power, to stand up to Tokyo.. to make their voices heard..

And no, the Northern Okinawans are the MOST anti-base. They are more rural and will oppose significant changes to their life style. In the past it is the mayors (not the people), of some of the northern cities who supported it.
And no, north and south.. the sheer majority of Okinawans don't like the bases pure and simple. The difference is the level of tolerance. Some want the bases gone no matter what.. others don't like the base, but may not be willing to part with some of its economic links, so they're willing to tolerate it at a certain point. The past mayors who did support it, only did so because the Japanese gov't promised huge money to fund pet projects they were considering. Again, one of the compromises some of these mayors wanted was that in exchange for the base, their cities gain more economic autonomy for their area, or for Tokyo to build all these things for their cities, etc.

[castermaild55]

[castermaild55]

I think the reason that U,S base exsists in Okinawa is only this. that is, China

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%...AA%8D%E8%AD%98

「中国は沖縄の主権を求めよ」、香港有力誌も強硬論
http://news.searchina.ne.jp/disp.cgi...1005_087.shtml
「中国は沖縄独立運動を支持せよ」、「同胞」解放せよと有力紙
http://news.searchina.ne.jp/disp.cgi...1110_010.shtml




then, no visa for chinese ppl
that is nice...

I hope it does not happen like that

i think okinawa independence patry and Wajin left winger ppl are used by...

an interesting forum
http://www2.rocketbbs.com/11/bbs.cgi?id=mongol

[castermaild55]

ちょっと感動的なお話を見つけたので。。沖縄関連として。。。

[ukiyo]

Originally Posted by RyukyuRhymer

When I refer to "Tokyo" I'm referring to the bureaucrats, similar to how many Americans refer Washington as. Yes we know many people on mainland Japan support Okinawans on the issue (and in fact.. they can be far far more zealous in their support.. because quite frankly.. many Okinawans can be so damn passive). The average Okinawan is the type of people who feel helpless when faced with certain situations.. they know something is bad, but they just roll with the punches. Its very sad. Kansai people have such stronger will power, to stand up to Tokyo.. to make their voices heard..

And no, the Northern Okinawans are the MOST anti-base. They are more rural and will oppose significant changes to their life style. In the past it is the mayors (not the people), of some of the northern cities who supported it.
And no, north and south.. the sheer majority of Okinawans don't like the bases pure and simple. The difference is the level of tolerance. Some want the bases gone no matter what.. others don't like the base, but may not be willing to part with some of its economic links, so they're willing to tolerate it at a certain point. The past mayors who did support it, only did so because the Japanese gov't promised huge money to fund pet projects they were considering. Again, one of the compromises some of these mayors wanted was that in exchange for the base, their cities gain more economic autonomy for their area, or for Tokyo to build all these things for their cities, etc.

So what is your opinion about this:

However, the newly-elected mayor of Nago (which hosts Camp Schwab) formally agreed to accept the relocation when he signed an agreement with Defense Minister Nukaga on 8 April 2006. Mayor Shimabukuro was later joined by all five of the major mayors of northern Okinawa. Although some all-Okinawa public opinion polls indicate that many Okinawans have reservations about the latest plan, residents of northern Okinawa have recently elected and re-elected leaders who have publicly accepted it. In fact, all 12 mayors of northern Okinawa have publicly accepted the new relocation plan. In this respect, the Futenma issue exposes a range of conflicting opinions among Okinawans: from those who maintain that military facilities and associated public works infrastructure benefit the island's economy; environmentalists, and those who either object or are critical to the U.S. military presence on ideological grounds or on rooted sentiments

When it is signed, that means it went into law? If so then I understand now why the DPJ caused so much problems with the US when they changed their mind about it. I read an article and the reason the US doesn't want to move some more to mainland is because Okinawa is in a "strategic position".

[RyukyuRhymer]

Originally Posted by NihonKitty

So what is your opinion about this:


When it is signed, that means it went into law? If so then I understand now why the DPJ caused so much problems with the US when they changed their mind about it. I read an article and the reason the US doesn't want to move some more to mainland is because Okinawa is in a "strategic position".

that was in 2006, things have changed since then, especially as new information emerged on how the base transfer would occur and mayors and succeeding mayors opposing the relocation. At first when the idea of relocating Futenma was mentioned.. people were happy.. but as time went by and new details emerges on how the marine units would be transferred, people grew unhappy. the biggest of which was that everyone thought the US would take the Marine helicopters and equipment to Guam but over time new information emerged that they were going to keep those on Okinawa. Even today, the US government is not fully transparent on its relocation to Henoko and Tokyo is disputing the details, such as the jurisdiction of Japanese and US military aircraft in that area, the type of runways, etc

See this link and read the second half of it.
http://www.japanfocus.org/-Iha-Yoichi/3287
and also this
http://japanfocus.org/-Tanaka-Sakai/3274

as for the strategic position. Most of the arguements supporting a location on Okinawa relies on the island chain defense


basically the reason is containing China's maritime access. While China is a big country.. it has a limited EEZ, and has no direct access to the high seas (it has to travel though another country's EEZ, whether its Japan, Indonesia, etc).

However the reason justifying Okinawa's base location has changed from time to time. In the mid 40s', it was used as a base to attack the rest of Japan. In the 50s, it was because of the soviet union, 60s and 70s.. it was because of Vietnam, not China.. And now we hear China and N.Korea being listed often (however there were reports of Russian bombers flying all the way down near Okinawa too).

Alternatives to Okinawa in the first island chain line are either going to be on other islands in Okinawa Prefecture, or the Amami islands in Kagoshima (Hatoyama's suggestion was one of the Amami islands where the residents were very opposed). Less likely, are some of the Satsunan islands. (why not Tanegashima, it already has a massive space center.. many other countries with space centers.. such as the US's Kennedy Space Center.. have a military base next to it in order to share the facilities).

As I've said before, there's mutual benefits between the US-Japanese relations, but the burden is disproportionately placed on Okinawa (and even if China may increase its aggression.. statistics have shown that the Russians violate Japan's air and sea borders far more often than China). I also feel that Japan needs to change some of its own defense policies and do things on its own.

[ukiyo]

I also feel that Japan needs to change some of its own defense policies and do things on its own.

どんな政策を日本が変えるべきだと思いますか？もしあなたがアメリカが沖縄から去った方がいいと考えているのなら、そうなった場合、沖縄の人は自衛隊、日本を支えていくと思いますか？

[RyukyuRhymer]

Originally Posted by NihonKitty

沖縄の人は自衛隊、日本を支えていくと思いますか？

Many will not. Okinawan's really value peace, especially after how badly the Battle of Okinawa went. So there are still bitter memories of Okinawans who were forced to fight for Japan, and they may view the Jietai (SDF) as the same. I'm a bit more moderate than those people, and I recognize that times have changed, and Japan faces different circumstances than in 1945. For me, one of the biggest differences in accepting SDF over US protection is that the SDF soldiers will more likely be better behaved. Many of the US forces, especially those in Futenma, are young marines far away from home. Most of the crime incidents involving US forces tend to be Marines rather than the USAF who are stationed there.
for the SDF, they will be fighting to protect their homes and country, so the motivation will be different. I also expect them to understand the local culture better, better communication (same language), more respect, etc.

[Restless]

US bases existed in Europe because of the cold war with the USSR.

And even though the USSR is gone, there are still about 80,000 troops in Europe.

Having bases in Okinawa is just so strategically useful for all sorts of contigencies.

Originally Posted by castermaild55

I think the reason that U,S base exsists in Okinawa is only this. that is, China

[7freedom7]

Originally Posted by castermaild55

I think the reason that U,S base exsists in Okinawa is only this. that is, China

PRC is the major reason or excuse to be exact but not the only one. Simply put, the South Korea stationed US troop would be chased out by Koreans one day but that'd not happen in Japan, or we'll see another PM step down

[ukiyo]

More problems

U.S. military base plans in Okinawa face new hurdle
http://www.japantoday.com/category/p...ace-new-hurdle

WASHINGTON — A Senate panel is looking to block the reorganization of U.S. forces in east Asia, which it sees as too costly and impractical, the panel’s chairman said Friday.

Legislation backed by the Senate Armed Services Committee would prohibit funding to relocate the U.S. Marine base in Okinawa. It would also suspend plans to relocate thousands of families to live with U.S. service members in South Korea.

Committee chairman Sen Carl Levin called the plans “unsustainable and incredibly expensive.” The committee wants more studies conducted before the plans are funded.

The panel’s proposals are part of a $683 billion defense spending bill that has to clear several legislative hurdles. While it’s not clear if the Asia provisions will be in the final version of the bill, lawmakers are likely to welcome the efforts to control spending. It follow calls last month from Levin and two other prominent senators for the Defense Department to re-examine the plans for east Asia.

“The major step we have taken is to put all these changes on hold,” Levin told reporters in a conference call Friday. “We are not withdrawing our presence (from east Asia). We are trying to streamline it ... in a way that’s honest and sustainable.”

He singled out as “unachievable” the current plans for Okinawa, which hosts more than half the 47,000 U.S. troops in Japan.

The issue is a politically charged one. Although Japan is a staunch U.S. ally, many of the islanders resent the presence of the American forces, because of noise, pollution and crime associated with the military bases. A 2006 U.S.-Japan agreement aimed at decreasing America’s military footprint remains in limbo as it still requires local assent.

Under the agreement, Marine Corps Air Station Futenma, located in a heavily populated southern part of Okinawa, would be closed and its air operations relocated to a less crowded northern area at Camp Schwab, where a new airfield would be built. Some 8,000 Marines would also be shifted to the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam by 2014. Japan would foot much of the multibillion relocation bill.

The new bill would require the Defense Department to study the feasiblity of relocating Marine Corps air assets to Kadena Air Base in another part of the island rather than build a costly new facility at Camp Schwab. It has been suggested that Air Force assets currently at Kadena be shifted elsewhere, possibly to an underused air base on Guam.

The bill also calls for a suspension of plans to relocate up to 12,000 families to live with service members in South Korea, where there are 28,000 U.S. forces, pending review of costs and alternatives. Some 1,400 families already live in-country.

Other than the cost, critics have questioned the relocation plans because of the uncertain security situation across the heavily militarized frontier in North Korea.

The U.S. troop presence is a legacy of the 1950-53 Korean War which ended with an armistice rather than a peace treaty.

[SamuraiBlue]

Here is something interesting.

Japan's Roadmap To An Indigenous Fighter

Japanese industry is urging the government to keep the country’s planned F-X fighter in production until 2028, raising the stakes for the three Western companies competing for the program.

Full-scale development of an indigenous follow-on fighter, meanwhile, should begin between 2015 and 2017, the industry’s Society of Japanese Aerospace Companies recommends. The industry thus envisages two parallel, long-term projects, one for the factories and one for the development teams, to sustain the country’s fighter industrial base after deliveries of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries F-2s end this year.

There is a sign that the industry expects Japan to order the Lockheed Martin F-35 for the F-X program, because the society fails to advocate the other possible way to keep developers busy: extensive modification of the chosen aircraft. That option has been open for two of the competitors, the Eurofighter Typhoon and Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, but not for the F-35, whose technology is tightly controlled by the U.S.

Anxious to preserve skills, Japanese aerospace companies have previously backed aircraft other than the F-35, industry and government officials say. It now seems industry is looking for another way forward. Even though the competition is still under way, the Mainichi newspaper reported in November that the air force would seek F-35 procurement funds in its budget for the fiscal year beginning April 1, 2012.

Japan is expected to build much of the F-X aircraft domestically.

Whoever wins, the prize will be bigger if the government follows the society’s advice to build until 2028, greatly surpassing the stated program goal of delivering 50 fighters to replace Japan’s remaining F-4EJ Kai Phantoms. If the plants begin delivering fighters in, say, 2014 and maintain the average rate of the F-2 program, eight units a year, then F-X production would reach 120 aircraft.

The winning type would then become a partial replacement for Japan’s 200 F-15s, as the Mainichi has also suggested.

The Phantoms, more than 30 years old and built to a 1950s basic design, are slated to retire by 2015, a date that appears increasingly difficult to achieve as years pass without an F-X decision. The society’s envisaged retirement date for the type is 2018—either because that is the government’s current projection or because it sees 2018 as the earliest time by which enough F-X fighters could be fielded. Typhoons or Super Hornets would be available in larger numbers sooner than F-35s.

The F-X production plan appears in the society’s discussion of a 15-year gap between the end of F-2 production and the beginning of preparatory work in 2026 for volume production of an indigenous fighter. The society suggests either a foreign or Japanese design could fill the gap, but the defense ministry has rejected further production of the available domestic aircraft, the F-2, so the answer can only be the F-X.

The follow-on fighter would be the one already intended to emerge from the i3 technology acquisition effort (AW&ST Nov. 15, 2010, p. 37; Sept. 6, 2010, p. 29). Volume production would begin in 2028. Work on some of the technologies has already begun, including studies for an advanced engine (see p. 33). Research laying the ground for the project should continue until 2017, the society says, while the country test-flies its ATD-X stealth technology demonstrator in 2014-16.

Dovetailing with that, full-scale development of the i3 fighter would begin by 2017, long before the defense ministry’s nominated date, 2021. One consideration must be that work for the developers will tail off once the demonstrator is flying.

The i3’s first flight would come in 2025 and service entry in 2031 under the society’s plan, which it sets out as an industry road map extending into the 2030s.

“Domestic development and production needs to be sustained in case the United States withholds its technology,” it says, indirectly reminding the government of its failed attempt to buy the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor for the F-X.

“Among 13 companies interviewed [for this report], only one said that it could return fighter engineers to fighter work after a five-year gap,” the society says.

Two other issues that are not mentioned but may determine the future of Japanese fighter programs are the U.S. Air Force’s plan for a Next Generation Tactical Aircraft to become operational in 2030, and Japan’s cautious move toward allowing defense exports, with a view to taking part in international cooperative arms programs (AW&ST Dec. 13, 2010, p. 53).

Those two factors, plus the considerable cost of building an indigenous fighter, mean the i3 effort could turn into a Japanese contribution to a U.S. fighter of the so-called sixth generation. If it does not, perhaps because the U.S. declines foreign help on such a sensitive project, then Japan will at least be technologically positioned to go it alone.

Wonder what it would look like.

[RyukyuRhymer]

Originally Posted by SamuraiBlue

Here is something interesting.



Wonder what it would look like.

http://www.mod.go.jp/j/press/news/2010/08/25a_02.pdf

[castermaild55]

it might be an important decision for Japan



20年近く前に「大国の興亡」著者ポール・ケネディ(Paul Kennedy)を読んだ事があります
それで衝撃を受けたことは日本が過去のフェニキア、カルタゴ、世界の道はローマに通じるローマ帝国
大航海時代のスペイン、ポルトガルに似ており不安を掻き立てられたことがあります。共通点は傭兵を雇いそして平和を享受しそのため国防に目を背け没落、または侵略され消滅して行く。。
傭兵を米軍と置き換えれば日本もそれらと同じ道を辿っている。
今回原発では最悪の事態が起こった。想定外である。。
最悪の事態をいつから日本人は忘れたのか？憲法9条で最悪の事態に面したとき国家を守れるのか？

パワーバランスを考えたとき、戦争の反対は平和ではないと思う
平和とは何か？　秩序が保たれている状態です。では誰がその秩序を守っているのか？　警察であり、軍隊であり.....
個人的に思うことはアメリカの没落はすでにオバマが大統領になった時に皆さんも感じたことだと思います。

増田のおっさんはそれでも面白いことを言っている。。
中東における民主化は新しいアメリカの新植民地制度だと
面白いことに、アメリカはアフガンから撤退を示唆しているが国民は不安視している
中東ではやはり米軍に基地を提供し民主化を図ろうとしている。

結局、中東も、民主化すなわち何の政治的決定力もなく日本化することになる
中東の人もアメリカの属国化のために民主化している＾＾

[castermaild55]

[castermaild55]

Very popular in the Japanese people's hard-line rightists in Japan before Tokyo Governor Shintaro Ishihara told the British newspaper "Independent" interview that Japan should develop nuclear weapons to respond to the threat of rapidly rising China.

He said that Japan could build a nuclear weapon within one year.

British "The Independent" published an exclusive interview. In the interview, Ishihara usual hard-line attitude to the question: "All our enemies: China, Korea, Russia, all of our neighbors have nuclear weapons. The world can find another country to live in such a case it? "

Ishihara said that people always talk about that sort of thing costs, but the fact that nuclear weapons would mean a diplomatic bargaining power. All permanent members of UN Security Council have nuclear weapons.

"The Independent" that these arguments comes from the fear of China's military growth. In addition, China has replaced Japan as the world's second largest economy, is also a stimulating factor.

In the interview, Ishihara Diaoyu Islands, also referred to the collision that happened last year. He claims that this release of the Chinese captain of Japan ended in the police exposed the weakness of Japan in Asia. He said, "If Japan has nuclear weapons, China has not dyed fingertips House islands (known as Diaoyu in China)."

He also said that a nuclear-armed Japan, will also win the respect of Russia, Russia in World War II captured the four islands of Japan. Ishihara and suggested that Japan should abolish restrictions on the manufacture and sale of weapons.

He said: "We should develop sophisticated weapons and sell them abroad. In the United States swept the field before, in Japan the world's best tanks. We should put it back."

In 1967, when Prime Minister Eisaku Sato of Japan speech in Congress formally proposed "three non-nuclear principles", that is, not manufacturing, not possessing, not brought into nuclear weapons. November 1971, the Japanese House of Representatives plenary session vote. Eisaku Sato in 1974 I also won the Nobel Peace Prize.

However, Ishihara said in an interview, while Sato secret contacts with the U.S. for help. He said that if the Government later Sato developed nuclear weapons, North Korea would not have so many abductions of Japanese citizens.

Shintaro Ishihara, 78 years old, is a famous Japanese right-wingers, has run for LDP president ended in failure. 1999, as the third governor of Tokyo since. Ishihara strong words, sharp and tough stance toward China to the United States are, but all year round to maintain a high popularity.

I agree with him





It is also taboo to discuss the nuclear weapon in Japan.
Let's dicuss　it

[Restless]

Is there a translation available for this?

Originally Posted by castermaild55