Just Jack Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 Japanese troops will converge on California's southern coast in the next two weeks... http://www.10news.com/news/us-japanese-troops-head-to-calif-beaches-for-training-06092013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 "Tokyo's move to boost its amphibious training is "hugely significant" since the United States is obligated to defend Japanese territory under a post-World War II security pact," Really...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinga Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 "Tokyo's move to boost its amphibious training is "hugely significant" since the United States is obligated to defend Japanese territory under a post-World War II security pact," Really...? Yes, "really".... We wrote it into their Constitution after WWII, that the military could only be used for defense. Since then, we have provided the majority of that defense which btw, happens to be one of the reasons they became such an economic power. Ya see, ya save a bit of money not having to provide for your own defense. Aside from that however, centuries of war in the Far East, has bred perhaps more distrust than even here. between Reps and Dems (that was a joke... maybe)... Similar to the Middle East, they tend to tolerate each other when it's convenient, but otherwise, hate each other... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 Maybe we'll get some decent sushi places in WNY once the Japs conquer us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 Yes, "really".... No need to be condescending. I didn't know that and was surprised to read it. We wrote it into their Constitution after WWII, that the military could only be used for defense. Since then, we have provided the majority of that defense which btw, happens to be one of the reasons they became such an economic power. Ya see, ya save a bit of money not having to provide for your own defense. You said their military can only be used to defend themselves, but that doesn't explain why we are obligated to help defend them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 No need to be condescending. I didn't know that and was surprised to read it. You said their military can only be used to defend themselves, but that doesn't explain why we are obligated to help defend them. I may be mistaken, but I believe that part of our defense obligation is because Japan can only spend a limited percentage of their budget on their defense forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 (edited) No need to be condescending. I didn't know that and was surprised to read it. You said their military can only be used to defend themselves, but that doesn't explain why we are obligated to help defend them. Japan has this day signed a Treaty of Peace with the Allied Powers. On the coming into force of that Treaty, Japan will not have the effective means to exercise its inherent right of self-defense because it has been disarmed. There is danger to Japan in this situation because irresponsible militarism has not yet been driven from the world. Therefore Japan desires a Security Treaty with the United States of America to come into force simultaneously with the Treaty of Peace between the United States of America and Japan. The Treaty of Peace recognizes that Japan as a sovereign nation has the right to enter into collective security arrangements, and further, the Charter of the United Nations recognizes that all nations possess an inherent right of individual and collective self-defense. In exercise of these rights, Japan desires, as a provisional arrangement for its defense, that the United States of America should maintain armed forces of its own in and about Japan so as to deter armed attack upon Japan. The United States of America, in the interest of peace and security, is presently willing to maintain certain of its armed forces in and about Japan, in the expectation, however, that Japan will itself increasingly assume responsibility for its own defense against direct and indirect aggression, always avoiding any armament which could be an offensive threat or serve other than to promote peace and security in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter. That, basically. From one of the treaties that formally ended WWII. Oh, and... This Treaty shall expire whenever in the opinion of the Governments of the United States of America and Japan there shall have come into force such United Nations arrangements or such alternative individual or collective security dispositions as will satisfactorily provide for the maintenance by the United Nations or otherwise of international peace and security in the Japan Area. Edited June 10, 2013 by DC Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 That, basically. From one of the treaties that formally ended WWII. Oh, and... Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 So, if their armed forces are only to be used in defense, why are they practicing amphibious landings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 So, if their armed forces are only to be used in defense, why are they practicing amphibious landings? Defense of the Sinkaku/Diayou islands. Easier to defend islands when you have an "over the beach" capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 Defense of the Sinkaku/Diayou islands. Easier to defend islands when you have an "over the beach" capacity. Not sure I understand. Are they retaking lost territory or is their defensive strategy to let the enemy come ashore and then catch them napping from behind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 Not sure I understand. Are they retaking lost territory or is their defensive strategy to let the enemy come ashore and then catch them napping from behind? Yes, you don't understand. You can't defend without mobility. If you're defending islands, that mobility has to be seaborne. Same reason Taiwan has three amphibious brigades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 (edited) Yes, you don't understand. You can't defend without mobility. If you're defending islands, that mobility has to be seaborne. Same reason Taiwan has three amphibious brigades. Yes, but is Taiwan only allowed to play "defense"? If you haven't guessed, I've only been busting balls and if I was in charge of a country I'd have the "shoot 'em in the back" contingency too. Edited June 10, 2013 by 3rdnlng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 Defense of the Sinkaku/Diayou islands. Easier to defend islands when you have an "over the beach" capacity. Then why not practice amphibious assaults on those islands. Being able to bring their military all the way to the shores of the US and conduct amphibious training here is pretty damn offensive if you ask me. Offensive as opposed to defensive not offensive as in displeasing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 But Jim, our land is the best approximation of those island beaches to be found anywhere in the world! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 That, basically. From one of the treaties that formally ended WWII. Oh, and... We weren't smart enough to write a Groupon for all Japanese goods into that treaty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PearlHowardman Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 The Japanese are very smart. They dislike Islamokooks. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=it8wuJ21LlM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 Then why not practice amphibious assaults on those islands. Being able to bring their military all the way to the shores of the US and conduct amphibious training here is pretty damn offensive if you ask me. Offensive as opposed to defensive not offensive as in displeasing. Seriously? Because amphibious training on disputed islands is needlessly provocative, because they might not be suitable for the training they need, because they come over here to train with the US Marines (not unlike how much of the world sends pilots to train at Red Flag). That's just a dumb question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Defense of the Sinkaku/Diayou islands. Easier to defend islands when you have an "over the beach" capacity. Islands? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts