tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805664.post3421765463590519656..comments2008-02-13T10:12:51.858+09:00Tobias Harrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05483833677342376445observingjapan@gmail.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805664.post-71701010147957096272008-02-13T07:03:00.000+09:002008-02-13T07:03:00.000+09:00David,<BR/><BR/>An "equal treaty" isn't really possible as the purpose for the US of stationing troops is force projection. In other words, it's part of the American empire's approach to influencing Asia. An "equal" approach would be for US forces to leave Japan, and for the two countries to maintain all their other ties.<BR/><BR/>Some of this discussion seems a bit unreal, however, such as drawing down forces by 2017. The US seems to be in serious relative decline, so maintaining so many bases around the world may have to end a lot sooner than 2017, at least in my opinion.Willienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805664.post-62821633214435877792008-02-12T22:30:00.000+09:002008-02-12T22:30:00.000+09:00David,<BR/><BR/>The crimes are problem not because of numbers, but because they exacerbate underlying tensions. No country likes being occupied. No people likes a constant reminder of being defeated, the conservatives in the LDP who support the alliance least of all. I think incidents like this draw those feelings to the surface.Japan Observerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05483833677342376445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805664.post-20173105599089405392008-02-12T14:40:00.000+09:002008-02-12T14:40:00.000+09:00Absolutely. The US needs to draw down forces in Japan and in many other areas of the world. Unfortunately, it never seems to think that it is time to do so. Once one justification for it is removed---e.g. the USSR---it always finds another.<BR/><BR/>The Japanese government likes the relationship as it is just as much as the US does. Japan gets a very low cost defense and can hypocritically run around claiming to be the "peace" country without a military. <BR/><BR/>The one-sided nature of the US-Japan security agreement is by far out of date. Imagine what would happen were Japan attacked and the US sent its men and women to be killed for a country which would not even consider doing anything similar for the US because of (US-written) Article 9. How would anyone explain this to the parents of dead US servicemen and women? A new version of "white man's burden?" Perhaps it is time for Uncle Sucker to insist on an equal treaty or none at all. <BR/><BR/>If Japan is a special "peace" country, then let it show the world by taking care of its own defense and accepting full responsibility for its words and actions instead of being able to hide behind the US' skirt all the time.<BR/><BR/>As far as the "crime" problems with military bases. I have never seen any evidence to support this. How true is it? Is it another myth like the supposed huge increase in non-Japanese crime a few years ago? Of course any crime by a non-Japanese in Japan brings near-hysteria, whereas a similar crime by a Japanese against a non-Japanese will rarely get anywhere near the same coverage. This sort of think is not a Japan vs US base problem. This is a Japan problemDavidnoreply@blogger.com