Split: The removal of U.S. forces from Japan
 

The other thread wast big and going everywhere so I wanted to focus on the key to new relations in Asia for Japan.

Japan and America can be alias but the U.S. manned bases have to go. No other industrialized nation has foreign military bases operating autonomously. The American forces in South Korea are realistically under Korean supervision. they can't do anything without Korean approval(from what I've heard in Korean forums). You never hear of G.I.s raping little girls in Korea.

I believe a compromise would be for Japan to purchase at a reasonable price the U.S. bases and over a five year period slowly take over the operation.

1) U.S. and japan are still allies but U.S. ability to apply political pressure on Japan is far Less.

2) US military is out of Japan making it easier for Japan - China- Russian relations, I think it will help US-China relations as well since China won't have U.S. forces close by, except in DMZ.

3) Japan has a military able to defend itself. No explanation needed.

4) Japan can purchase military hardware from anyone not just the U.S. Further more the military can be built towards what we think we will need not along U.S. interests.

4) Japan can develop some military technology. Like the U.S. this will help private business develop and compete. Sales of weapons will help offset military costs.

5) With self defense of the table, Japan can negotiate with America on a more equal level. After all, America's enemies don't have to be Japan's enemies. And American agenda need not be Japan's agenda. When we agree, we can work with each other, but it will be truly voluntary. No more side-ing with the U.S. simply because we need military protection or we need the market shares. In The end, I think it will make US-Japan better allies since it will be a partnership forged of freewill rather than reliance.


Basically, most other countries including, U.S. Russia, China, Canada, England, France, Switzerland etc.. are doing this. They all have their own military.

You write as if Japan and the US aren't quite allies and they have different interests and different enemies.

If I understand correctly, the majority of Japanese are happy having the US taking care of Japan's military defense.

Your argument about self-regulation and sexual assault around military bases in Japan vs. Korea doesn't ring true, as US soldiers have been accused of theft, and rape in Korea as well as Japan. That being the case, there are bad apples in any group of people.

ALTs on the JET Program have also been accused of terrible crimes. Does that mean the JET Program should be cancelled and all foreign teachers in Japan should be expelled? Or does the benefit outweigh the cost? That's blaming the majority for what a handful of bad apples do.

sorta not
 

dude, several other industrialized nations have US bases located in their countries. Some since end of WW2 1945,. Germany and Italy for example have US forces forces stationed in their respective countries for the simple reason Germany and Japan, Italy unilaterally started a 2nd World War and lost.

US forces do not operate autonomously in Japan but under A Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) is an agreement between a host country and a foreign nation stationing forces in that country. SOFAs are often included, along with other types of military agreements, as part of a comprehensive security arrangement.

While the United States military has the largest foreign presence and therefore accounts for most SOFAs, the United Kingdom, France, Australia, Germany, Italy, Russia, South Korea, and many other nations also station troops abroad and negotiate SOFAs with their host countries.

In order for Japan to re-arm itself - it would have to trash it's consitution and and remove the current US forces. All the while setting off a arms race throughout Asia. Japan has the 3rd largest economy on the planet with a spending defense budget that ranks fifth largest on the planet.

FYI the US spends more on defense than 2nd,3rd,4th and 5th militay powers on the planet combined and then some.

Good luck with your fantasy removal of US forces.

Eventually, maybe.

Germany?

The US actually even have the control of South Korean military.(戦時作戦統制権) Korean can't even control their own military force if they go into a war. Korean guys are usually very nationalistic, so I would take their word with a grain of salt. I doubt there was no rape case in Korea. I would also like to point out that American military personnel's crime rate is lower than Japanese civilians' average in Okinawa.

Under 米軍再編 that is going on right now, America is returning 4 or 5 bases to Japan. For free.

this is good

Yes, China would be happy for sure. How will we defend Senkaku and Okinawa?

What do we do about 33 Chinese nuclear missiles that are pointed at all major Japanese cities?

I would pass made in China when it comes to weapons.

Somewhat agree. Export of weapons may be crucial to military autonomy.

Honestly, I don't find any country in the area I want to side with than the US. Yes, America is not perfect, but most anybody else is a lot worse.


Japan has military... It's only Japanese people who say it doesn't.　自衛隊 is not 軍隊 is a word play which only makes sense with Kanji.

True, but it's not the same. Germany has a huge military - they don't need U.S. protection. those base are still there to serve U.S. needs as jump points so U.S. can project its power. The bases in Germany as well as others are only there because countries lost the war.

[quote/]
The US actually even have the control of South Korean military.(戦時作戦統制権) Korean can't even control their own military force if they go into a war. Korean guys are usually very nationalistic, so I would take their word with a grain of salt. I doubt there was no rape case in Korea. I would also like to point out that American military personnel's crime rate is lower than Japanese civilians' average in Okinawa. [\quote]
Maybe Koreans are bios but I'm leaving that there. I've heard of korean protest against U.S. in there country but that was 15~20 years ago.

Bad comparisons. small number of U.S. solders Vs total Okinawan population. By the way, did you know up until 30 years ago a lot of this was note being recorded or cases were found innocent by military courts. One case changed all that, three black solders raping a 15 year old and dumping her for dead in the fields. The military courts tried the three and found them innocent. this time it wasn't only Japanese TV that was watching, but U.S. TV was carrying the news and following the story. The truth wouldn't even be out if it wasn't for this case. This alone is reason enough to take over the bases.


[quote/]
Under 米軍再編 that is going on right now, America is returning 4 or 5 bases to Japan. For free.[/quote]
Good. I bet they keep at least one as a jump point, forever.

[quote/]
Yes, China would be happy for sure. How will we defend Senkaku and Okinawa?
What do we do about 33 Chinese nuclear missiles that are pointed at all major Japanese cities?[/quote]
this is were politics comes to play. Let China know that we are removing the U.S. for more stability in the region. But start anything remotely aggressive and see how fast the U.S. will jump at the chance to keep close eyes on China.


"I would pass made in China when it comes to weapons." Me too.


"Somewhat agree. Export of weapons may be crucial to military autonomy." And help tech all around.


"Honestly, I don't find any country in the area I want to side with than the US. Yes, America is not perfect, but most anybody else is a lot worse."
Asia will be the next economic giant if we work together on it.

[quote/]
Japan has military... It's only Japanese people who say it doesn't.　自衛隊 is not 軍隊 is a word play which only makes sense with Kanji.[/quote]
I've spoken to white solders station in Japan about this( closing the bases). They felt the Japanese forces are too weak without the bases to fall back on. I believe them. But, we can turn the SDF into a force capable of repelling as well as discouraging attacks.

crime rates are independent of how many people are involved. A rate is like 1 in every 100,000 or whatever. Doesn't matter if you are talking about a few thousand or few million people.
Not sure if cranks assertion is correct but the difference in populations of soldiers versus Okinawans doesn't influence the rates, it affects the total number.

It is a good comparison. The rate (%) is lower in military population than in the Okinawan population.

So international military policy should be changed because of one case that took place 30 years ago?

Germany have a huge military?

If I remember correctly, they have a similar military expeniditure to Japan.

And the bases are not there just because they lost the war. There was a period after the World War 2 which ended in 1991. It was called the Cold War. Its the same reason the bases in Japan stayed.

The bases are still there because the countries involved in the Cold War are still competing for influence.

Anyway... I would like to see the Americans leave Japan too.

But I think it can only happen under a stronger Asia.

The South East Asian region needs to come together to become like the EU, and forge an alliance as potent as NATO, if it wants to be free of Chinese AND American influence. This would hopefully include Japan, Korea, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand.

Unfortunately this sort of community is a long way off.

Topic of 3MEF/1st MAW(III Marine Expeditionary Force/1 Marine Aircraft Wing)?:confused:

Can you supply me source? What I've found is a bit fishy.
1) crime rate by Solders in Okinawa is less than crime rate of Americans solders anywhere in the world. Sounds odd to me.

2) The data I've seen are Okinawan police only( not including MP records ) and the data is crimes by Solders Vs All crimes. That includes foreigners that aren't solders and I know that Okinawa tourism has gone up in the last thirty years.

It's a fact that 30 years ago a mockery of the law and judicial process was being committed by the solders and military courts in Japan and the Japanese government could do anything about it. Same stuff happened in the Philippines were local police were told to look the other way in the red light districts. What's the likely hood that any of this has really stopped? their is 50,000 solders and they mostly hang around the area close to the bases. It wouldn't be too hard to make good P.R. for this group. I wouldn't be surprised if the Okinawan police were told to layoff and let the MP's handle it. Of course I have no proof, but I'm a skeptical when the data is too rosy and doesn't match the norm.


2~3 weeks ago another attempted rape happened.

Here you are.
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/lovelovedog/20080218/beihei
You can still make an argument on the exact rate, but one thing for sure is that the average of American military personnel is not that much worse than the average of Japanese people in Okinawa even in the worst case scenario.

Many rape cases by 自衛官 are happening everywhere too. Including in 沖縄.
自衛官　強姦　の - Google Search

A military force needs to keep its autonomy, otherwise it can't do its job. 自衛隊 holds the same kind of autonomy when it goes abroad. That Japan does its own defense is nice. But it NEEDS to BE ABLE to do it. With the US withdrawing, China is already coming.
http://www.jiji.com/jc/zc?k=201009/2...15&rel=j&g=soc

Unlike many people believe, the attack wouldn't start with bombing of Okinawa. It will start as "fishing boats" coming into the area, and they'll send some "guards" to protect these "fishing boats" in what they claim is their territory. China is doing it in Indonesia too.
インドネシア領ナトゥナ諸島 ラウト島 - Google Search

China is also taking full control of 南沙諸島 with pretty much the same tactics after the US military withdrew from Philippine.
http://www.recordchina.co.jp/group.php?groupid=38700

The issue is not the US not wanting to withdraw from Okinawa. It's doing it. It's Japanese absurd military policy that is making the area unstable. Japan doesn't need to physically increase its military force, but it needs to be able to actually use it, and that has nothing to do with the US. Actually, the US WANTS Japan to take on more military responsibilities. I believe the problem lies mainly in Japanese politics.

Cranks has supplied you the sources.

You have found that crime rates by soldiers stationed in Okinawa is lower than other parts in the world. Why is that fishy? Every time a crime is committed by an Okinawan soldier the base goes into lockdown. I remember a very public case about 15 years ago, and the local bars complaining that when the base goes into lockdown it really hurts local businesses, like bars, restaurants and other stores the soldiers would frequent.

You are not addressing my answers to your questions. You stated there was an accusation of attempted rape by a soldier in Okinawa in recent weeks (a tenuous statement at best... "Hey young lady, can I buy you a drink" can be construed as an attempted rape these days)... but I know of cases were ALTs (foreign English teachers) have been sent home for sexual assault.

Therefore should all ALTs be kicked out of Japan?

Tokyo Metropolitan Police Department - Statistical data
統計（警察庁）

2009 number of crimes
1.Chinese 12572
2.Brazilian 4013
3.Korean 2588 :rolleyes:
4.Vietnam 1714
5.Filipino 1503
6.Columbia 723
7.Peruvian 674
8.Thai 484
9.Sri Lankan 353
10.Taiwanese 294
Others.2918

The United States was defeated. out of radar range:ywave:

sorta not
 

The EU is not a good example for SE Asia unless you have'nt followed what has happened to Greece earlier this year.

Why European Countries Are Like American Banks
by Andy Kessler
With Grecian urns, Irish eyes, Spanish flies, and Portuguese waterdogs all up to their eyeballs in debt, it’s only a matter of time before the whole venture implodes. Even after an almost trillion dollar bailout across Europe, Moody's Investors Service last week downgraded Greece's debt from A3 to Ba1--junk bonds.
You can bail out Wall Street banks and recapitalize their balance sheets and someday they can start lending again (we’re still waiting). On the other hand, you can’t really bail out a country without massive structural changes, cuts in entitlements, huge reduction in government as a percent of GDP, and a rewriting of the social contract between government and workers.

And NATO if you have'nt noticed is stuck in Afghanistan .

My ability to read Kanii is not strong. My point is , I don't trust data that comes from Okinawan police or U,S, MP. The data was tampered before, why is it accurate now?
United States Forces Japan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I remember that story: It uncovered that U.S. Military crimes were not being recorded and cases of obvious rape judged innocent. If you looked up U.S,. crime rate back then it would look rosy too.(BECAUSE THE DATA WAS CORRUPT!). Here is the link to 1995 story:
1995 Okinawa rape incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and here is the latest rape about 20 days ago:
Marine indicted on sexual assault and trespassing charges on Okinawa - Okinawa - Stripes


Last point. I'm in California(living here 20 years) and I don't know were the rest of you is at. But, the people in Okinawa or more precisely, the people that are coming into contact with the U.S,. forces are the backbones of this "get the U.S. bases out" movement. the people making a lot of money off the soldiers want them there of course, outside of the profiteers, if things are so rosy, why are the people living next to this bases the core of the voices that want U.S. bases gone? Data is not always reliable depending on the source, like "where are the WMDs??" but the opinion of a community usually was some reason for it.

If enough ALTs cause problems, there should be restrictions on visa, say interviews and questions to find out the type of person who wants this visa to Japan. The ones that do cause crimes should be dealt with as the law provides.

Well.. the idea of the EU is good, at least in so far as the idea of coming together to create something that can stand up to China and the US.

NATO in Afghanistan is bullshit. The Americans really had no right to activate the alliance considering the Taliban were offering up Osama bin laden immediately after 911. All a SE Asian alliance need do is make their mission more focused.

chiuchimu, most ALTs (all that I know of at least) have an interview before they are accepted.

I've heard of cases where Japanese men have raped Japanese children, and in the last year there have been plenty of cases of Japanese murdering other Japanese. I guess the only way to solve this problem is to remove all the Japanese from Japan...

sorta stuck
 

US bases are in Germany and Japan, Italy since the end of WW2 because these countries did'nt just lose the war? They unilaterally (pre-emptively) started a world war by attacking their neighbors. - quite a bit of a difference than just one side 'losing a war'.

Nato has been in Afghaniston since Dec 2001

Council on Foreign Relations
Analysis Brief NATO in Afghanistan
February 19, 2009
Greg Bruno

After seven years of urging coalition countries to beef up troop commitments in Afghanistan, Washington appears to have concluded the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) cannot be relied upon to provide the "hard power" needed to counter Taliban gains.

"When the United States asks for a serious partner, it doesn't just want advice, it wants, and deserves, someone to share the heavy lifting," Scheffer told the annual NATO international security conference in Munich.

Ever since the toppling of the Taliban in 2001, the Afghan fight has been seen as a test case for the sixty-year-old NATO alliance. Few would argue NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan has passed the test. American troops joke that ISAF stands for "I Saw Americans Fight" (USNews).

chiuchimu,
Things have changed. There were a lot of brutal crimes by the US force under the US occupation right after the war. That's for sure. But in the past 20 years or so, there is only about 1 alleged rape case per year. Even if you don't trust the statics by the Japanese police, which I think is a very unreasonable attitude, rape cases by the US military personnel are under extreme scrutiny, and you just need to read the papers to know what's going on, as most of them surface on there.

And as far as I can find, all of the suspects were arrested by the Japanese police. Some of them were acquitted by the Japanese, and tired in the military court again.

http://www.cc.matsuyama-u.ac.jp/~tam...ujyuboukou.htm
http://blog.goo.ne.jp/taezaki160925/...1549864fceb030
http://ryukyushimpo.jp/news/storyid-...ytopic-86.html
沖縄米兵少女暴行事件　よみがえる95年沖縄小学生集団� ��致強姦事件 - 美粒ブログ　〜水の記憶〜

The 2 week old case your brought up is actually not a rape charge, but the suspect has been arrested immediately after the incident by the Japanese police.
米海兵隊員 強制わいせつで逮捕４日未明、沖縄・那覇市のアパ...: フレッシュアイQ&A

Your view of American military personnel raping locals like crazy was correct 60 years ago. Even 40 years ago, the crime rate was somewhat high. But if you talk about the past 20 years, it is just not right.

I agree that Japan should do its own defense. But Chinese is openly claiming that Okinawa is their territory. They are pointing a bunch of nukes at Japan and sending submarines and warships INSIDE Japanese sea around Okinawa. The US military's brutality is absolutely nothing compared with what People's Liberation Army has done in Tibet.

If you want Japan to protect herself, by herself, she needs to be able to repel Chinese. If you want Okinawa to be protected by Japanese military, what is needed is Japanese military using more force against the border violations. Not Americans going home. Not at this stage anyways.

So, The topic: Japan buys out the U.S. bases and the Americans leave but we stay Allies.

Good Idea or Bad?

I think cranks agrees. anyone else for or against the main topic?

Thats because the Americans are stupid and trying to call on NATO for what it isnt designed to be.

NATO was effective in the cold war as a deterrent to Soviet hard power and probably still is a deterrent to the new Russia.

A South East Asian version of NATO would be a deterrent to Chinese and American hard power but not something that could be envoked if say Thailand wanted to start a war with Chile.

Bad idea unless Japan seeks out a stronger alliance and working political relationship with other countries in South East Asia which could deter the Chinese and the Russians.

Japan has no chance on its own even IF Japan spends more on her military.

sorta not
 

pls explain how any force - NATO or otherwise could be a deterrent in SE Asia?

NATO was a deterrent in Europe during the Cold War because the US military
did the heavy lifting ie; ground forces, airforce, and navy backed up with nuclear weapons and delivery systems.
The military doctrine during the Cold War for NATO was to stop a massive soviet armor thrust through the Fulda Gap btween East and West Germany .

A conflict in SE Asia would be completely different and involve control of the sea lanes and oceans with a major emphasis on naval operations.

Your fantasy about any force opposing US hegemony in SE Asia without another superpower also a member of this force is pure fantasy. The US defense budget for 2010 fiscal year totals more than next 2nd,3rd,4th,5th military budgets on the planet combined and then some.

Now Soviet is gone and China isn't THAT much of a power. And its economy relays heavily on the US and Japan. So I don't think the same degree of superpower is needed. Still, we definitely need an aircraft carrier around there. USS George Washington is now visiting Vietnam to pressure China over the 南沙諸島 issue. Also, I don't see any chance of Japan forming a Marine. We still need some US bases in Japan, at least in any foreseeable future. The number can be decreased, and the US is actually in a process of doing so, but how far they can go depends on how much millitary resopnsibility Japan is willing to take. I don't think many Japanese people want their government to spend hundreds of billions of yen to build and maintain an aircraft carrier and other weapons.

Fantasy perhaps considering that I havent addressed the unresolved issues that exist between SEA.. but it would work.

Consider this.

Having India on board would be essential. Nuclear power and land deterrent to China. Also Indonesia is home to the fourth largest population and borders some of the vital sea lanes we talk about.

All that is needed is a restructuring of armed forces in the region and the economic growth of Indonesia, the Phillipines and we could have a serious deterrent to the US.

Im not saying we will outspend it. But the US and China will think twice before it thinks it can have its way with Asia if this sort of cooperation is worked out.

sorta not
 

I like your determination. :)

Your'e problem with India. Is that the US has already beaten you to the punch with India.

note;
That's why the US is having such a difficult time in Afghanistan which is another area of conflict between Pakistan and India besides Kashmir.

Wall Street Journal
US Pegs Globemaster Sale to fighter deal
Mon Aug 26' 2010
K. Raghu
The US defense dept. has pegged the sale at a potential 10 Boeing transport aircraft to the IAF Indian Airforce - $ 5.8 billion USD.

(Bloomberg)
India Deal for Fighter Jets Raises U.S. Stake, Replacing Russia
By Ken Fireman - February 18, 2008

The U.S. is deepening its involvement with the world's fastest-growing major economy after China as its relations with its traditional partner in the region, Pakistan, have become unsettled.
India's purchase of warplanes and the unfinished U.S.-India nuclear-power agreement are likely to be prominent on Gates's agenda during a visit that will ``reinforce the growing strength of our relationship, especially on the defense side."

The US could still have keep this relationship with India of course. The kind of South East Asian community I imagine wont be hostile to the US or China. It will just be able to compete with them both as well as stand up to the US or China.

To begin with, only small number of 3MEF is in Japan.
(III Marine Expeditionary Force)
You had better check what kind of military unit 3MEF was.

It is restored to the private organization.
The extension and the novel base of other bases exist.
Integration and strengthening.

The US Navy dwarfs all other navies combined, hell even many ships from those navies are old American ships. One Supercarrier has more firepower than what was used in all of WW2 and can project that power over a long distance. It would be like playing chess with all pawns on one side and all queens on the other.

Britain was a superpower for so long despite it's small size because it had a dominant navy. The US has a Dominant navy and is basically a continant..not a small island.

To include India for the nuclear advantage is an interesting point. It is true that the U.S. doesn't mess with countries possessing nukes. I also had similar ideas but didn't include India. I think your plan is better.

No country messes with another country that posseses nukes, thats just standard protocol. That doesn't mean when push comes to shove the US couldn't handle a country with a few nukes.

We can, the patriot missle system isn't an anti missle system, it's an anti aircraft system that works so well it can shoot down missles, the actual anti missle system has never been seen in real time scenarios. It's also why we get upset when goofballs like kim ill try to launch two stage rockets, we don't want anybody else knowing how well developed our defensive systems really are.

We don't inform anyone because it keeps the illusion up, once the illusion that we don't have a workable defensive ability goes, stability goes as well because now we would be "first strike" capablility, wich jacks up tension. It's why places like iran must not be allowed to develope such systems, because it threatens to reveal the aces we have. Everyone knows we have them, but as long as no one see's them it's not mentioned.Iiran could change world stability by being stupid.

sorta not
 

That probably explains why the US after 9 (nine) yrs in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban and Al Qaeda which have no airforce or navy has managed no better than a stalemate?

This thread is a stupid joke. Japan is as likely to split from the US (to whom it owes it's very existence and success) as it is to sink into the sea tomorrow. The people who run the governments of Japan and America (and other countries) are not idealistic young idiots who dream about what the world should be like, they are people with education and life experience who know that they can only work within the boundaries of reality.

Here is the reality: the world is a competitive place where people and nations will do anything and everything to get ahead. They will happily lie, cheat, or steal to do so if they can get away with it.

The countries of the world do not maintain military forces at huge expense just for self defense. These forces often as not are deployed throughout the world to protect national interests and to insure safe and free trade. In other words, they use the threat of force to further their interests, and protect themselves from being cheated or robbed.

Countries will ally together from time to time for the common good, but only if there is enough to be gained by such an alliance. Japan and the US have a unique relationship which is far different from that of any other nations. This uniqueness has been of great benefit to both countries, and anyone who thinks that Japan or America will give up this relationship anytime in the near future is too stupid to be taken seriously.

India and China will never form any kind of meaningful national alliance. Has anyone here ever actually been to India? India will not be a major world competitor until drastic reforms in the country (ridding of corruption, having a national language, reforming industry and work conditions) are made, and these are unlikely to be completed within the lifetimes of anyone here today. China is in it only for themselves, and will make no alliances without getting the lion's share of any benefit. The rest of Asia recognizes this, and always have; it's only wistful America and Western Society haters that seem to think that another reality is possible.

America will continue to be the world's largest economy going into the 22nd century. China knows this, Japan knows this, and India knows this, and they have been planning accordingly. America is uniquely blessed with the geography, resources, and political system to continue to succeed as such. Japan is allied to the US, as is Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam. India has close ties, and China's vast possession of US bonds have more or less chained it's economy to that of America.

Stop being stupid. If Japan distances itself from America, China and India will be more than happy to step in and continue the dance.

<------------------------------ +1

Sangetsu-

You are missing the point. Your post might be realistic to an extent (though Id take issue with a couple of sentences) but its not ideal.

Furthermore, whenever the status quo doesnt satisfy, the potential for change is there.

Not to mention the status quo doesnt last forever.

We are discussing what sort of shape that change would or could take. Now I dont think that is stupid at all.

Now to address a couple of things...

I think you might have got the misunderstanding that people were saying that Japan and India could stand up to China and the US. I was saying that Japan and South East Asia INCLUDING India could stand up to China and the US.

Its not as absurd as you might think it is. Already ASEAN is working on creating an EU type trading bloc in South East Asia. Naturally if such a goal is realised, the sort of military alliance to protect the collective interest would be needed.

Your assessment of the US economy in the 22nd century is very positive. But its not what Ive heard. You have to realise that measuring economies is not like measuring your dick. There are various things you have to take into account. What Ive heard is that in a couple of decades the Chinese economy will overtake the US economy in many areas.

On a side not.... have you heard of the DongFeng 21D? Its China's new anti-ship missile that is undergoing tests at the moment. Its dubbed "the carrier buster" and could be a real game changer. I mean with the threat of US carriers nullified, I dont know how the US could hope to project its power.

So, you think the people in power(US and Japan) know what they are doing? Are acting in the most intelligent way?

The core Idea here was Japan having it's own military. Every Industrialized nation has it's own military. What could possibly be so stupid about that?

If you even suggested to Israel, England, France, Canada, Australia or anywhere that they should give up there military and let America handle it because American military is so much more effective and it will cost less, They will laugh at your face first, then spit in it and send you on your way. Give Japan the same respect you would these countries.

Try looking up what the US has been upto over the last decade that makes China's anti-ship missile look like a harpoon. Also striking a carrier is not as easy as it sounds its not like the carrier is out at sea by itself there are countermeasures already in place. The US knew that someone eventually would develop this type of missile. You know the US does not show its hand and hardly ever shows the full extent of the military might it possess. Its like a game of poker keep your poker face on keep your card hidden and make the other guy blink first.

Anyway though i think this thread is pretty pointless because these kind threads never truly go anywhere and usually turn into a flame war. I will say that Japan and the US's partnership will not change anytime soon if it does it will not be in our lifetime. We can speculate all we want but in honesty there is no one here that is qualified to make any type of educated guess to the matter.

I see the OP is saying though very naive the OP bought real points i dont agree with all them but trying to think outside the box is admirable. chiuchimu However you are missing several points that numerous people have tried to tell you "Japan does not want it own military" "it does not want to spend trillions of yen a year to maintain it". This is more than just give Japan more respect. If Japan wants a military they need to change their "pacifist Constitution" to do so. You make it sound like its so easy for them to do so when an over whelming number of Japanese do not want it.