JapanForum.com  


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
(#71 (permalink))
Old
Ryzorian (Offline)
Busier Than Shinjuku Station
 
Posts: 1,126
Join Date: Jun 2009
01-24-2010, 02:48 AM

Termogard; I actually agree with you, I was rather disapointed in the Administrations lack of fortitude in defending an actual ally, we should have supplied air support in the very least.
Reply With Quote
(#72 (permalink))
Old
TokyoMadman (Offline)
Banned
 
Posts: 6
Join Date: Jan 2010
01-27-2010, 02:02 PM

what a Load of C0ck.
Everyone here has no idea what they are talking about. There is NO secret pact. The US forces are not there against Japan wishes. stop living in a conspiracy Dream Land.

"The Japanese Foreign Minister’s letter explicitly refers to the Commission: “It was reported in some sections of the Japanese media that, during the production of the report of the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States released in May this year, Japanese officials of the responsible diplomatic section lobbied your government not to reduce the number of its nuclear weapons, or, more specifically, opposed the retirement of the United States Tomahawk Land Attack Missile – Nuclear (TLAM/N) and requested that the United States maintain a Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP).

I don’t know who made a reference to RNEP (the Commission didn’t; perhaps it was a reference to earth-penetration capabilities in general rather than RNEP per ce), but Okada’s rejection of the TLAM/N claim is clear:

“[A]lthough the discussions were held under the previous Cabinet, it is my understanding that, in the course of exchanges between our countries, including the deliberations of the above mentioned Commission, the Japanese Government has expressed no view concerning whether or not your government should possess particular [weapons] systems such as TLAM/N and RNEP.” (my emphasis)

Okada’s statement suggests that he has checked the government’s files. It also matches the statement made by Admiral Timothy J. Keating, the former Commander of U.S. Pacific Command, in July 2009, that he was “unaware of specific Japanese interests in the” TLAM/N.

If the TLAM/N were retired, Okada says, Japan would of course like to be informed about how this would affect extended deterrence and how it could be supplemented."
Reply With Quote
(#73 (permalink))
Old
Ryzorian (Offline)
Busier Than Shinjuku Station
 
Posts: 1,126
Join Date: Jun 2009
01-28-2010, 05:42 AM

in other words, what other American military system would replace it.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




Copyright 2003-2006 Virtual Japan.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC6