US Marines 'will be moved from Japan's Okinawa'
Source: BBC
The United States and Japan have reached a deal to move thousands of US Marines from the island of Okinawa.
Some 9,000 marines will be sent to ''locations outside of Japan'', a joint statement by Washington and Tokyo said. Some 10,000 troops will remain.
The revised agreement comes ahead of a visit to Washington by Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda.
The two sides have still not reached agreement on closing the controversial Futenma airbase on Okinawa.
Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-17865198
Zorro
(15,747 posts)Darwin, Australia probably is another one.
msongs
(67,430 posts)kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)in Okinawa this summer. I guess this is why.
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,675 posts)There has been so much trouble with the Marines there.
MADem
(135,425 posts)It's just too close to population centers, nowadays.
I guess all that spending power (and it is not inconsiderable) will go off to Guam.
That said, there have been a few 'incidents' that have been pretty serious in recent decades (taxi driver murders, rapes, that kind of thing) that ruin the reputation of the USMC personnel who don't do that kind of crap and are good ambassadors--one can completely understand the hard feelings of the locals when that kind of thing happens, but it makes it difficult for people who aren't bad guys and are respectful. To be fair, not all of those incidents came out of Futenma--at least two of 'em were guys out on the town from Camp Schwab.
I'm guessing there is a bit of wailing and gnashing of teeth at some of the seedier bars off BC Street over this prospect.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)About 12,500 American troops were killed or went missing from the Battle of Okinawa, with another 50,000 casualties in addition. The fact that Japan can call it their own again is a sign of our great generosity to a defeated enemy.
Uncle Joe
(58,389 posts)that has also served us well.
K8-EEE
(15,667 posts)At least, a decent country wouldn't act that way! I don't see the need for having our soldiers there.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)caseymoz
(5,763 posts)Not in the long run. Generosity is not the right word, unless it's generous to give away something you can't use and don't need anyway, something that will turn into a liability over time.
Smart would be the better term. Contrast that with what we did in Philippines after winning them from Spain. To do that again would have been dumb, brutal, inhumane and a crime against humanity.
MacArthur learned something from it, though, and applied it to Japan. He wasn't being generous and neither was his country.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)caseymoz
(5,763 posts). . . then the world would be upside down.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"is a sign of our great generosity to a defeated enemy...."
I'd see it more as a very practical diplomatic and political policy (try Joseph Persico's 'Roosevelt's Secret War), and that as its most valuable resources were merely coral, limestone and sugarcane-- all of which we were getting from our puppet, the Philippines, occupation would not be allow a positive ROI. I imagine that benevolence had little to do with it.
Sen. Walter Sobchak
(8,692 posts)aren't the soldiers, but the wives who seem to have nothing better to do than get hammered by 11am and make a drunk nuisance of themselves in town.
razorman
(1,644 posts)by an equivalent amount.
BeyondGeography
(39,377 posts)I'm glad Obama cared enough about this to make it happen.
RC
(25,592 posts)leaving their friends and loved ones and going back to their families and acquaintances?
Fearless
(18,421 posts)AnotherDreamWeaver
(2,852 posts)Loved the snorkeling at the beach too. I bought a piece of frabic from a shop there because I loved the colors and wore it as a headband, and later as a hatband for years. (Left the hat behind when I went to vote one year, called and they had set it aside, but by the time I went to retrive it someone had tossed it.)
Hawkowl
(5,213 posts)US Marines have been in Okinawa since 1945. It is quite possible we will have troops in Iraq for another 60 years.
Ter
(4,281 posts)n/t
The smug always assume their 'plans' and 'visions' will come true.
Hawkowl
(5,213 posts)It is way past time for this to happen.
Fastcars
(204 posts)Spent a small portion of the immense savings on improving the ability to move troops to hot spots in a hurry. And then only send them to hot spots that directly affect the U.S.