Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Hatoyama's dream : Kick Americans out of Japan.
SlowMan    9/2/2009 5:34:06 PM
< link > < link > Newly elected Japanese government's diplomatic friction with the US is beginning, starting with stopping of refueling of US warships near Afghanistan by JMSDF ships and removal of Futenma US Marine airbase in Okinawa completely off Japan instead of another place within Japan. Japan Democratic Party is expected to call for a ban on entry of US nuclear submarines into Japanese ports next. It is interesting to note that Japan Democratic Party long called for complete removal of US troops from Japan, with single exception of the 7th fleet in Yokosuka and convert Self Defense Force into a full military in the name of self-reliance on national defense. Ironically, Japan Democratic Party's drive to kick Americans out of Japan would only increase its desire to acquire advanced American weapons since they would need American weapons to fill the void of American troop removal. Expect Japan's demand for F-22 to get only louder.
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20   NEXT
SlowMan       12/17/2009 2:34:03 PM
Hatoyama and Ozawa's policy is that Japan should improve its security by improving diplomatic and economic ties with its former adversaries, not spend more on defense. Under the Hatoyama/Ozawa spending policy,
 
- Missile Defense : Suspended
- GX Rocket : Cancelled
- World's fastest supercomputer : Tried to kill it but failed.
- F-35 : No need to buy new fighters, until JASDF fighter strength goes down to planned reduction of 260.
- US bases in Okinawa : Should be removed. Removal of US forces from Okinawa saves Japan $6 billion a year in defense contribution to US presense and this money should be spent on social programs.
- Social/Welfare programs : Spending increased. 
 
Quote    Reply

maruben       12/17/2009 4:35:08 PM


Japan pulls out of missile defense. <link... >


 

 "Japan to axe new funds for missile defence

TOKYO — Japan's centre-left government, which took power three
months ago, will suspend new funds for its joint missile defence system
with the United States next year, officials said Thursday.


The
cabinet approved defence spending guidelines for the 2010/11 financial
year, including a delay in the deployment of new Patriot Advanced
Capability-3 (PAC-3) surface-to-air interceptors until after April 2011."




The information is misleading. The 3 locations for the PAC-3 will not been decided  until the of the MOD announces the new defence policy principles and plans (DPPP). The government want to more time to review the new DPPP. Thus the installations of the PAC-3 been postponed one year until the DPPP tells us where the PAC-3 are needed and as result they were not included in next year budget, BUT they have not been eliminated or canceled. 
 
It is very strange, but it looks like the somebody is confusing the Japanese PAC-3 with the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense with the US.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       12/17/2009 5:42:26 PM

Hatoyama and Ozawa's policy is that Japan should improve its security by improving diplomatic and economic ties with its former adversaries, not spend more on defense. Under the Hatoyama/Ozawa spending policy,

 

- Missile Defense : Suspended

- GX Rocket : Cancelled


- World's fastest supercomputer : Tried to kill it but failed.

- F-35 : No need to buy new fighters, until JASDF fighter strength goes down to planned reduction of 260.

- US bases in Okinawa : Should be removed. Removal of US forces from Okinawa saves Japan $6 billion a year in defense contribution to US presense and this money should be spent on social programs.

- Social/Welfare programs : Spending increased. 




Good for them.  Sounds in general like a pretty wise philosophy to me.  I wish we'd do more of the same.  Hopefully, we'll oblige the will of the Japanese people, if that truly is their will, and leave Okinawa to the Japanese.  SlowMan, the more you post, the more I'm liking Japan.  Keep it up.
 
 
Quote    Reply

maruben    Defense Ministry preserves spending   12/17/2009 9:36:06 PM
Defense Ministry preserves spending

Provisional steps adapted in face of planning delays
Kyodo News

The government on Thursday endorsed provisional basic policy guidelines on defense spending in the fiscal 2010 budget as it put off compiling new long-term guidelines for a year.

Based on the current guidelines, the provisional guidelines seek to curb spending because of the government's financial problems while striving to maintain deterrence. They do not include an increase in Self-Defense Forces personnel.

"Because filling and improving the SDF's frontline units are extremely important, we will consider measures to (increase personnel levels) in the process of reviewing the National Defense Program Guidelines," Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa said.

The provisional guidelines also address the need to consider deepening cooperation between Japan and the United States to maintain peace and stability in the region and the international community.

The reference to cooperation is an apparent attempt to ease U.S. frustration over the Futenma base relocation dispute.

The guidelines were endorsed at a formal extraordinary meeting of Cabinet ministers after some of them, including Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and Kitazawa, gave the go-ahead at a meeting of the Security Council of Japan, the decision-making panel on defense and security matters.

The guidelines express concern over the North Korean nuclear and missile threats while noting that countries near Japan, China in particular, have modernized their military capabilities.

The government crafted the provisional guidelines to keep its decision to put off compiling the new guidelines from affecting next year's funding for SDF operations and procurement.

Along with that postponement, the government has also put off devising a new midterm Defense Program, which maps out the size of troop units and expenses based on the guidelines.

Meanwhile, the government has put on hold an additional deployment of Patriot Advanced Capability-3 interceptors for ballistic missile defense in fiscal 2010.

The Japan Times: Friday, Dec. 18, 2009
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/17/2009 11:33:30 PM


The information is misleading. The 3 locations for the PAC-3 will not been decided  until the of the MOD announces the new defence policy principles and plans (DPPP). The government want to more time to review the new DPPP. Thus the installations of the PAC-3 been postponed one year until the DPPP tells us where the PAC-3 are needed and as result they were not included in next year budget, BUT they have not been eliminated or canceled. 

It is very strange, but it looks like the somebody is confusing the Japanese PAC-3 with the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense with the US.



not really, he's is so keen to disparage anything japanese, or do anything that can held drive a social wedge into the japanese US relationship that he will eagerly snap up anything even if its technically inaccurate.
 
he's a deceptive racist troll.
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    SYSOP 911 call for the wahhmbulance   12/18/2009 11:07:38 AM
I don't care if he's racist, though no doubt that is a bad thing.  What disturbs me about SlowMan is that his contributions are of no value.  They are generally insincere and deliberately provocative, not in a Socratic effort to improve debate, but to inflme passions and upset people.  I'm at the thumbs-down point at this stage.  I'd prefer SlowMan to be warned - up your game or go home - but if SYSOP wants to go straight to the banhammer, I don't see what we will be deprived of. 
 
SlowMan, justify your existence here on StrategyPage.
 
Quote    Reply

Reactive       12/18/2009 1:51:56 PM

I don't care if he's racist, though no doubt that is a bad thing.  What disturbs me about SlowMan is that his contributions are of no value.  They are generally insincere and deliberately provocative, not in a Socratic effort to improve debate, but to inflme passions and upset people.  I'm at the thumbs-down point at this stage.  I'd prefer SlowMan to be warned - up your game or go home - but if SYSOP wants to go straight to the banhammer, I don't see what we will be deprived of. 

 

SlowMan, justify your existence here on StrategyPage.


Seconded - However, the thing that sysops are probably cautious of is that if you get rid of the trolls your post/page impressions rate goes down - see, despite POSTERS being tired of Slowman in particular (at least Bluewings is a very sincere fanboy enthusiast). Slowman is responsible for a continual volume of usage that they may well be reluctant to get rid of - as you say, it would benefit the quality of the board but then looking at the quality of the strategypage "news" posts it is pretty clear to me that they really just don't care.
 
It's a sad thing - how about setting up a forum with the following:
 
a) accreditation of expert - i.e. defense industry posters (whether anonymous or not and verified by the forum admins) so that people can easily discern who REALLY is in a position to know. The "number of posts" method (of ranking) isn't reliable.
 
b) vote-to-mute posters if they troll.  For example, a 3 day ban on posting if 20+ members click a "troll" button on the posts submitted by slowman et al.
 
c) Heirachical forum structure - threads that can spread out in to several seperate debates that then split when messages go O/T, this makes it FAR easier to view the specific parts of a debate that are relevant while ignoring the inevitable "rafale section" that will come up.
 
Any other suggestions as to how a new forum could improve on what exists here?  I'm sick of Slowman and many other elements of this forum. 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    Dear Reactive   12/18/2009 7:00:00 PM




I don't care if he's racist, though no doubt that is a bad thing.  What disturbs me about SlowMan is that his contributions are of no value.  They are generally insincere and deliberately provocative, not in a Socratic effort to improve debate, but to inflme passions and upset people.  I'm at the thumbs-down point at this stage.  I'd prefer SlowMan to be warned - up your game or go home - but if SYSOP wants to go straight to the banhammer, I don't see what we will be deprived of. 



 



SlowMan, justify your existence here on StrategyPage.






Seconded - However, the thing that sysops are probably cautious of is that if you get rid of the trolls your post/page impressions rate goes down - see, despite POSTERS being tired of Slowman in particular (at least Bluewings is a very sincere fanboy enthusiast). Slowman is responsible for a continual volume of usage that they may well be reluctant to get rid of - as you say, it would benefit the quality of the board but then looking at the quality of the strategypage "news" posts it is pretty clear to me that they really just don't care.

 

It's a sad thing - how about setting up a forum with the following:

 

a) accreditation of expert - i.e. defense industry posters (whether anonymous or not and verified by the forum admins) so that people can easily discern who REALLY is in a position to know. The "number of posts" method (of ranking) isn't reliable.


 

b) vote-to-mute posters if they troll.  For example, a 3 day ban on posting if 20+ members click a "troll" button on the posts submitted by slowman et al.


 

c) Heirachical forum structure - threads that can spread out in to several seperate debates that then split when messages go O/T, this makes it FAR easier to view the specific parts of a debate that are relevant while ignoring the inevitable "rafale section" that will come up.


 

Any other suggestions as to how a new forum could improve on what exists here?  I'm sick of Slowman and many other elements of this forum. 


 

Whaddya, high? That would cost monies!  They can't do any mods worth doing.  You come here for the company...and given how many studs (mike_golf, albanyrifles, etc etc etc etc etc) have taken their eyeballs elsewhere, you'd think they'd better value what they have left!
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/22/2009 4:52:02 AM
Hatoyama's approval rating drops by one-third
Kwan Weng Kin
Tue, Dec 22, 2009
The Straits Times

TOKYO: The honeymoon is over for Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama, his popularity sharply eroded by indecisiveness in dealing with key tax, budget and security issues.

A survey by the influential Asahi Shimbun daily, conducted over the weekend, showed that only 48 per cent of voters now support him.

This is a d
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/22/2009 4:54:06 AM

  link
 
Main

Cabinet approval rating drops to 55%

The Yomiuri Shimbun

The approval rating for the Cabinet of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama dropped four percentage points to 55 percent in the latest Yomiuri Shimbun survey, while 51 percent of respondents opposed the government's decision not to resolve within the year the issue of relocating a U.S. airfield in Okinawa Prefecture.

Conducted on Friday and Saturday, the most recent poll found the Cabinet's disapproval rating to be 33 percent, up four percentage points from the previous survey, which was held Dec. 4-6.

The government officially announced Tuesday that it had postponed making a decision on where to relocate the functions of the U.S. Marine Corp's Futenma Air Station until next year. According to the survey, 51 percent of respondents said they did not support the government's decision, while 68 percent believed the decision would harm bilateral ties between Japan and the United States.

The decline in the Cabinet's approval rating appears to reflect public discontent over the delay in concluding the Futenma issue and concerns over the adverse impact on the Japan-U.S. relationship.

Asked where the functions of the Futenma airfield should be transferred, 35 percent said outside the country and 34 percent said Nago in the prefecture, the site agreed upon by the two governments in 2006. Fourteen percent said the airfield's functions should be relocated to another prefecture in this country.

Asked about Hatoyama making special arrangements for Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping to meet with the Emperor, sidestepping protocol that calls for such audiences to be requested at least one month in advance, 44 percent found it problematic and 47 percent did not.

Imperial Household Agency Grand Steward Shingo Haketa expressed concern regarding the meeting, saying that breaking with convention could lead to political exploitation of the Emperor. Haketa's remarks drew strong criticism from Ichiro Ozawa, secretary general of the Democratic Party of Japan, who said if Haketa truly opposed the meeting he should have first resigned and then made such statements.

Seventy-six percent of respondents thought Ozawa did not act properly in the case, while only 14 percent thought he did.

Regarding Hatoyama and the ongoing scandal involving his political funds, 81 percent of respondents did not think the prime minister had fulfilled his responsibility to explain the situation, down from 85 percent in the previous survey.

Forty percent of respondents said the prime minister should resign from his post if his secretary is indicted over the scandal, up from 37 percent in the previous survey, while 51 percent did not think he should have to do so, down from 54 percent in the last survey.

The DPJ's approval rating was 43 percent, up one percentage point from the previous survey, while the rating of the Liberal Democratic Party was down to 18 percent from 19 percent.

Sixty-four percent said they did not approve of the coalition government framework comprising the DPJ, the Social Democratic Party and People's New Party. That figure was up from 56 percent in the November survey, reflecting increasing discontent with the DPJ, which has been influenced by the SDP and PNP in deciding the Futenma issue.

The nationwide interview was conducted by telephone on 1,722 households with eligible voters, using a random-digit dialing method, of which 1,007, or 58 percent, gave valid responses.

(Dec. 20, 2009)
 
 
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy