Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
IF it's truly a mutual defense treaty, how many Japanese troops are stationed in the US defending our soil and how many yen is Japan spending to do so?
Before answering your question, let me further elaborate on my stance with Japan and their military capabilities. For one: I do believe Japan should continue revising their constitution to be able to be more involved in war, and I do believe the US should stay out of their future incursions, but when it comes to the security of Japan I believe we play an intricate role in their defense as we should. Second, Japan did contribute to the Iraq War, but because of their constitution things became a bit tricky in regard to how much they could truly do. Third, as pointed with the case for Iraq, Japan would assist the US in an attack by a foreign power rather financially or with troops.
Now answering your question, why would Japan need to station troops here? Why would any county for that matter? We're a superpower with friendly neighbors and no combat here for the foreseeable future, in other words: all war happens in the Old World/East, not here in the West. I've seen Brazilian troops here before, my guess on a training mission, so I'm sure to a certain extent Japanese troops are here but only for training.
And I can't kept saying this: but we do owe Japan a trillion dollars, I mean how much further are they truly supposed to pay? 120% of all cost? US Forces-Japan aren't so expensive to the point it's overbaring, we give a country like Afghanistan more foreign aid per year than the U.S.-Japan force cost and Afghanistan is still a s*** hole.
I read it somewhere on the internet that the USA ARE closing a lot of bases in Germany - and Germans (especially in the communities around the bases) are rather unhappy about this. The US bases have been a steady source of income for decades, in what normally wasn't a well-off area of Germany.
I don't know if this is true or not, but this makes me pretty mad. If they want military (American military) base there, then they should not be bi*ching and moaning about American foreign policy. It is about time for these European countries to defend themselves.
I agree, it sickens me that Germany makes us pay to stay there at that. It should be a free ride and Germany needs to pick up the slack in the defense of Europe, the UK and France can't do everything.
Before answering your question, let me further elaborate on my stance with Japan and their military capabilities. For one: I do Japan should continue revising their constitution to be able to be more involved in war, and I do believe the US should stay out of their future incursions, but when it comes to the security of Japan I believe we play an intricate role in their defense as we should. Second, Japan did contribute to the Iraq War, but because of their constitution things became a bit tricky in regard to how much they could truly do. Third, as pointed with the case for Iraq, Japan would assist the US in an attack by a foreign power rather financially or with troops.
Now answering your question, why would Japan need to station troops here? Why would any county for that matter? We're a superpower with friendly neighbors and no combat here for the foreseeable future, in other words: all war happens in the Old World/East, not here in the West. I've seen Brazilian troops here before, my guess on a training mission, so I'm sure to a certain extent Japanese troops are here but only for training.
And I can't kept saying this: but we do owe Japan a trillion dollars, I mean how much further are they truly supposed to pay? 120% of all cost? US Forces-Japan aren't so expensive to the point it's overbaring, we give a country like Afghanistan more foreign aid per year than the U.S.-Japan force cost and Afghanistan is still a s*** hole.
bolded = sigh, Japan doesn't have to worry about Muslim problem because Japan has no muslim problem.
I wonder why?
According to this article
"Unlike most other countries that host U.S. military bases, Japan shoulders most of the cost of maintaining them: more than $4 billion per year in direct or indirect support. U.S. troops in Japan are hardly something new. Some 50,000 of them are spread among 73 bases on the main islands and Okinawa, and the Japanese shell out $2.6 billion yearly to keep them there. - See more at: Japan
Maybe closing some of the bases in Japan sounds reasonable for both countries. The Japanese sure have paid big price for US military in Japan, unlike some of these European countries.
I agree, it sickens me that Germany makes us pay to stay there at that. It should be a free ride and Germany needs to pick up the slack in the defense of Europe, the UK and France can't do everything.
If they are paying for protection, then they should show some appreciation. Appreciation = Pay $$$$$$ and take care of the U.S. service men and women.
Because our allies know that we are omnipresent with a "big stick" it puts us at a disadvantage and gives them an advantage.
-It encourages us to spend more on military, which means we have less on improving our own people's lives
-It adds more debt that will hurt all Americans
-It allows our allies to spend less on military and more on improving their people's lives
-We often don't get a lot of credit for providing defense for allies, spending a lot of money (including service family $) boosting foreign economies, and in fact our bases are sometimes resented by local populace in some locations
Certainly there are benefits to being a world super power, but there are also drawbacks to having so many military bases all over - and (non-combat zone) military bases that are still growing in number.
Couldn't have said this better myself.
The American taxpayer is being ripped off by these foreign leeches sold to us by our politicians and the big money defense establishment as "allies."
bolded = sigh, Japan doesn't have to worry about Muslim problem because Japan has no muslim problem.
I wonder why?
According to this article
"Unlike most other countries that host U.S. military bases, Japan shoulders most of the cost of maintaining them: more than $4 billion per year in direct or indirect support. U.S. troops in Japan are hardly something new. Some 50,000 of them are spread among 73 bases on the main islands and Okinawa, and the Japanese shell out $2.6 billion yearly to keep them there. - See more at: Japan
Maybe closing some of the bases in Japan sounds reasonable for both countries. The Japanese sure have paid big price for US military in Japan, unlike some of these European countries.
What does having a Muslim population have to deal with Japan attempting to help in Iraq and footing the bill of our forces? And there are seven or eight main US bases in Japan, but I wouldn't discount there being many other facitilies across Japan. As I said previously, Japan is already paying for the US to move bases to nearby Guam, the amount of forces and bases in Japan is an entirely different argument than what I'm making: my argument is to not abandon Japan and our obligations to them, we have a mutual DEFENSE treaty with them, I didn't say anything about mutual offense therefore Japan does need offensive capabilities, but in the event of an attack on Japan OR another country in the region, we can respond rapidly from Japan/SK as opposed to Guam or Hawaii.
Maybe it's because I do believe the US has a position on the world militarily, but I do understand the financial burden of it and I believe countries should be paying us for our work or at least footing part of the bill which is why I say Japan is okay. I don't expect any country, unless they intend for us to be their military completely, to have to pay for ALL of the expenses but I do believe they should pay something; in Japan's case they've paid us what, 70% of the fees PLUS they've given us a ton of cash to finance the DoD or build roads or whatever that trillion we owe them goes to. Hell, Japan is even going to build a MAGLEV from DC to Baltimore free of charge for us as sort of a sample of the future, they are a reliable partner compared to any other country that hosts us.
If they are paying for protection, then they should show some appreciation. Appreciation = Pay $$$$$$ and take care of the U.S. service men and women.
Germany makes us pay to be there which is a slap in the face considering there are many other countries nearby that would love to host our troops, probably free of charge ie Poland or the Ukraine. The UK is already pulling out of Germany by 2020, we only stay in Germany because it serves as a good transition position for our troops coming home from the Middle East but our troops contribute to their economy, billions in fact, so the least Germany could do is let us stay go free and contribute to cost of troops that are officially stationed there.
What does having a Muslim population have to deal with Japan attempting to help in Iraq and footing the bill of our forces? And there are seven or eight main US bases in Japan, but I wouldn't discount there being many other facitilies across Japan. As I said previously, Japan is already paying for the US to move bases to nearby Guam, the amount of forces and bases in Japan is an entirely different argument than what I'm making: my argument is to not abandon Japan and our obligations to them, we have a mutual DEFENSE treaty with them, I didn't say anything about mutual offense therefore Japan does need offensive capabilities, but in the event of an attack on Japan OR another country in the region, we can respond rapidly from Japan/SK as opposed to Guam or Hawaii.
Maybe it's because I do believe the US has a position on the world militarily, but I do understand the financial burden of it and I believe countries should be paying us for our work or at least footing part of the bill which is why I say Japan is okay. I don't expect any country, unless they intend for us to be their military completely, to have to pay for ALL of the expenses but I do believe they should pay something; in Japan's case they've paid us what, 70% of the fees PLUS they've given us a ton of cash to finance the DoD or build roads or whatever that trillion we owe them goes to. Hell, Japan is even going to build a MAGLEV from DC to Baltimore free of charge for us as sort of a sample of the future, they are a reliable partner compared to any other country that hosts us.
well, I was just pointing out the fact that Japan has no Radical Muslim problem. No more, No less.
You may want to do a further review of the situation.
How many bases do we have in Japan? more than one. Like I said earlier, maybe reducing the numbers of bases in Japan will help both countries.
We are talking about agreements between democratic nations. If they did not want us there, we would leave (there is precedent for that). Likewise, if what you (and I) desire were favored by the majority, it would happen. It does not because the majority does not wish it.
This has been the consensus since 1945. Your complaints are nothing new. I would love it if America transformed into a larger version of Switzerland. But I am in the minority. So are you.
And dude, Okinawa is but one small part of Japan. The rest of Japan does not care what they think. There's that tricky notion of majority again.
Last thing first...
I've mentioned the point about Okinawa....that's the problem. The Japanese can pretend that we aren't there precisely because they don't care about Okinawa or what Okinawans think. Do the Okinawans in majority numbers want us there?
Is that question even important to you? Do Americans in majority numbers want us to stay in Japan? If you say 'yes they do', where's the proof of that?
And saying that if we weren't wanted, we'd leave, is ridiculous. You're not discerning the difference between what governments want and what people want.
In fact, nevermind Okinawa...I don't even think a majority of Japanese people want us in Japan anymore. If you have evidence that they do, I'd sure like to see it.
Germany makes us pay to be there which is a slap in the face considering there are many other countries nearby that would love to host our troops, probably free of charge ie Poland or the Ukraine. The UK is already pulling out of Germany by 2020, we only stay in Germany because it serves as a good transition position for our troops coming home from the Middle East but our troops contribute to their economy, billions in fact, so the least Germany could do is let us stay go free and contribute to cost of troops that are officially stationed there.
We're bribing the Germans to stay within our orbit.
In fact, that's really what these defense pacts are...bribery in a exchange for 'friendship.'
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
