PDA

View Full Version : Look out for Japan!


Tyburn
08-28-2009, 07:23 PM
:ninja: Did you know that a HUGE number of Forces from the United States are permantly deployed in Japan? They have been eversince the Second World War, and now they use Japan as a useful stop for refueling, and for having a boarder closer then Hawaii to the Orient.

Everything has been fine for Decades due to a Single Party Dominance in Tokyo. The Liberal Democrats.

However, at present it looks like for only the second time since the war, the Opposition will probably gain power. The Democrats, and they do not think highly of the way the United States is using them as a Military Outpost, particularly their southern Island.

If they come to power, they shall look to dramatically cut the number of United States Forces that are based in their Country, and the Obama Administration is likely to give them what they want, for with recent issues reopening the Korean disputes, they can ill afford not to have a country that will act as host on that side of the world.

China and Russia certainly wont Host the United States, and a lot of the Countries in that area are still communistic. Austrailia would probably be the closest for the Americans if they got the shove out of Japan.

..They wont though...they'll just lower the troops to appease the new Japanese Administration, and then, slowly, over time, quietly, increase them again :laugh:

NateR
08-28-2009, 07:40 PM
:ninja: Did you know that a HUGE number of Forces from the United States are permantly deployed in Japan? They have been eversince the Second World War, and now they use Japan as a useful stop for refueling, and for having a boarder closer then Hawaii to the Orient.

Everything has been fine for Decades due to a Single Party Dominance in Tokyo. The Liberal Democrats.

However, at present it looks like for only the second time since the war, the Opposition will probably gain power. The Democrats, and they do not think highly of the way the United States is using them as a Military Outpost, particularly their southern Island.

If they come to power, they shall look to dramatically cut the number of United States Forces that are based in their Country, and the Obama Administration is likely to give them what they want, for with recent issues reopening the Korean disputes, they can ill afford not to have a country that will act as host on that side of the world.

China and Russia certainly wont Host the United States, and a lot of the Countries in that area are still communistic. Austrailia would probably be the closest for the Americans if they got the shove out of Japan.

..They wont though...they'll just lower the troops to appease the new Japanese Administration, and then, slowly, over time, quietly, increase them again :laugh:

I spent 2 years in Germany (91-93) and 1 year in Korea ('00). I remember there being constant anti-US protests where they would "demand" that American troops be taken out of their country. It was almost a weekly thing in Korea and we were always cautioned to stay away from them to keep them from turning into riots. In Germany, we'd just be warned to stay away from certain areas because of the Turks who were always looking for Americans to kill.

So, we've never been welcome in any country where we have held a steady military presence. I don't see Japan being any different.

que
08-28-2009, 08:00 PM
how would americans like it if japan had permenant military forces in america and used us as a stopping base to be closer to cuba (or some other country)? we wouldn't like it at all, we would cut them out. same goes if the germans did that to us, or the french, or the russian, etc. no country likes to be a stopping base for other countries military forces

Miss Foxy
08-28-2009, 08:03 PM
how would americans like it if japan had permenant military forces in america and used us as a stopping base to be closer to cuba (or some other country)? we wouldn't like it at all, we would cut them out. same goes if the germans did that to us, or the french, or the russian, etc. no country likes to be a stopping base for other countries military forces
How would they like it if we stopped buying cars and everything else from em? :laugh:

NateR
08-28-2009, 08:30 PM
how would americans like it if japan had permenant military forces in america and used us as a stopping base to be closer to cuba (or some other country)? we wouldn't like it at all, we would cut them out. same goes if the germans did that to us, or the french, or the russian, etc. no country likes to be a stopping base for other countries military forces

You mean like the German Air Force Base outside Alamogordo, NM? The Americans there like it just fine, since the property owners get to charge 3 times more for rent and the German government will pay it.

sender
08-28-2009, 08:54 PM
How would they like it if we stopped buying cars and everything else from em? :laugh:

Japan exports alot more than just cars you know :tongue0011:

matthughesfan21
08-28-2009, 09:26 PM
Japan exports alot more than just cars you know :tongue0011:yep electronics also....i think they remember `1945, so i think they won't get to out of control:laugh:

Tyburn
08-28-2009, 10:01 PM
I spent 2 years in Germany (91-93) and 1 year in Korea ('00). I remember there being constant anti-US protests where they would "demand" that American troops be taken out of their country. It was almost a weekly thing in Korea and we were always cautioned to stay away from them to keep them from turning into riots. In Germany, we'd just be warned to stay away from certain areas because of the Turks who were always looking for Americans to kill.

So, we've never been welcome in any country where we have held a steady military presence. I don't see Japan being any different.
Obviously you've never been to England then :blink: (Okay...so I know you have, but not to North England where two considerable US Bases are located.

I live very close to one of them :w00t:

I'm suprised there are uprisings in Germany against Americans, I would have thought they knew better, as for Japan, well the present Government hasnt got a problem, but the next one might. Even so...I dont suppose the Governments would be able to get rid of the Americans without quite a fuss...noone is wanting to actually...offend her...its just that some of us would quite like our own space I suppose :laugh:

I dont mind the Americans in England because they are a very quiet bunch, they just opperate out of a few bases and keep themselves to themselves...but I Suspect in other countries they are more like the United Nations, in that they probably are extremely visable and perhaps show more signs of readiness against hostilities which could be missconceived as threatening to the local population.

The thing with America is she NEEDS these Hosts in order to be able to have outlets close to battles she is fighting. She couldnt fight in Iraq or Afghanistan without somewhere close by as a safe out of country base, and a half way house...The logistics of getting forces from a-b are completely lost on most people, let alone getting the arms and equipment they need.

When going to Iraq, MANY of the American Arms passed through Civilian Airports in England. Without those Airports, there would be a certain amount of difficulty in getting the arms to the sites of battles. So the Americans have never truely withdrawn from anywhere they have fought in, or any allied country they have fought from. They have simply kept hold of the bases, so that they can use them almost as a Military Envoy.

Noone else needs to do this in quite the same way. In the past, England managed it useing a superior Navy, but even then, alot of our Empire was COASTAL for a damn good reason. Its hard to collonize inland without Air transport, and somewhere to refuel half way to wherever you are going.

Tyburn
08-28-2009, 10:06 PM
how would americans like it if japan had permenant military forces in america and used us as a stopping base to be closer to cuba (or some other country)? we wouldn't like it at all, we would cut them out. same goes if the germans did that to us, or the french, or the russian, etc. no country likes to be a stopping base for other countries military forces
I'm sure there are a few bases in American Territories that dont belong to her. The thing is, due to her Geography noone needs a half way house in America, if they are flying that way its because America is their destination. I suppose if one were to go to war with Canada or Mexico or somewhere in Latin America an airbase in the United States would be required...but...who is going to bother with Mexico?? and Canada is part of the Commonwealth so, she's unlikely to be targetted by anyone powerful enough to do what we're talking about. :laugh:

Play The Man
08-29-2009, 04:02 AM
how would americans like it if japan had permenant military forces in america and used us as a stopping base to be closer to cuba (or some other country)? we wouldn't like it at all, we would cut them out. same goes if the germans did that to us, or the french, or the russian, etc. no country likes to be a stopping base for other countries military forces

America didn't just invade those countries and set up bases. The bases were part of the surrender agreements of WWII. Japan attacked the U.S. on December 7th, 1941. Germany started the aggression in Europe with their invasion of the Sudetenland and Poland. The U.S. helped stabilize those countries after the war and their subsequent economic success can at least partially be attributed to the magnanimity of the U.S. Since the end of the war, many countries have been able to skimp on defense spending because they can depend on the U.S. to protect them and they know that they are not at risk from an invasion or an attack from us. Furthermore, with the Marshall Plan and other forms of aid, the U.S. helped rebuild many countries after the war. In contrast, can you imagine how the U.S. and the Allied Forces would have been treated if the Axis Powers had won WWII? The Nazis probably would have wiped out every Jew in the U.S. Germany and Japan would have seized our natural resources and left us in poverty. Our government would have been abolished and we would be a vassal state of the Axis Powers. We would likely not have any personal liberties. In the vast scheme of things, allowing U.S. military bases in their countries is a small price to pay, considering the destruction that their countries precipitated with their belligerence.

NateR
08-29-2009, 04:33 AM
America didn't just invade those countries and set up bases. The bases were part of the surrender agreements of WWII. Japan attacked the U.S. on December 7th, 1941. Germany started the aggression in Europe with their invasion of the Sudetenland and Poland. The U.S. helped stabilize those countries after the war and their subsequent economic success can at least partially be attributed to the magnanimity of the U.S. Since the end of the war, many countries have been able to skimp on defense spending because they can depend on the U.S. to protect them and they know that they are not at risk from an invasion or an attack from us. Furthermore, with the Marshall Plan and other forms of aid, the U.S. helped rebuild many countries after the war. In contrast, can you imagine how the U.S. and the Allied Forces would have been treated if the Axis Powers had won WWII? The Nazis probably would have wiped out every Jew in the U.S. Germany and Japan would have seized our natural resources and left us in poverty. Our government would have been abolished and we would be a vassal state of the Axis Powers. We would likely not have any personal liberties. In the vast scheme of things, allowing U.S. military bases in their countries is a small price to pay, considering the destruction that their countries precipitated with their belligerence.

Excellent point. The children in the playground who can't play nice require extra supervision. :)

atomdanger
08-29-2009, 08:56 AM
We still have Hawaii

Tyburn
08-29-2009, 12:40 PM
America didn't just invade those countries and set up bases. The bases were part of the surrender agreements of WWII. Japan attacked the U.S. on December 7th, 1941. Germany started the aggression in Europe with their invasion of the Sudetenland and Poland. The U.S. helped stabilize those countries after the war and their subsequent economic success can at least partially be attributed to the magnanimity of the U.S. Since the end of the war, many countries have been able to skimp on defense spending because they can depend on the U.S. to protect them and they know that they are not at risk from an invasion or an attack from us. Furthermore, with the Marshall Plan and other forms of aid, the U.S. helped rebuild many countries after the war. In contrast, can you imagine how the U.S. and the Allied Forces would have been treated if the Axis Powers had won WWII? The Nazis probably would have wiped out every Jew in the U.S. Germany and Japan would have seized our natural resources and left us in poverty. Our government would have been abolished and we would be a vassal state of the Axis Powers. We would likely not have any personal liberties. In the vast scheme of things, allowing U.S. military bases in their countries is a small price to pay, considering the destruction that their countries precipitated with their belligerence.
England would have been treated well.

Hitler would have ordered the round-up of the Jews, although England has never had a high concentration of them. He would have called for the execution of the Government Ministers no doubt.

After that, Hitler had already said that he planned on reinstating the Nazi King Edward who only rulled for a year before Abdication. They were friends before the War. Hitler said that he would allow King Edward back on the Throne and they would split Europe in two and rule together. Hitler actually had quite an admiration for the British Empire, and the collonialism that our Empire had produced. He was also supportive of the Monarchy which was SO Germanic in origin, the Queen was forced to CHANGE HER SURNAME by Deedpoll!! Although she and her Descendants will be called "Windsor" its a fabricated name. More confusing still, her Husbands name is ALSO a complete fabrication. Mountbatten is not his real name either, his is a quadrupple-barrelled surname of Baltic descent.

Her Real name is Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg-Gotha I believe. It actually the names of three districts of Germany that were run by princes at one point in time. The Family married into many European Monarchies, like Belgium, and Portugal also. The Ironey is that this name came in BY MARRIAGE

Victoria married Albert, and Albert was Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. When Victoria died, for some reason her Heir decided to keep the MALE Surname of his Father. They changed it as quite a process over a couple of Kings all called George who reigned between the Start of the First and the End of the Second World War.

In Truth, the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha still reigns, at least until Elizabeth dies, then you could argue that Charles should take his Fathers Fabricated name and become Charles Mountbatten...of course a purist would tell you that as Mountbatten and Windsor are BOTH fabricated names...perhaps he should take his Fathers REAL surname...but then we'd be here forever trying to write that down :laugh:

KENTUCKYREDBONE
08-29-2009, 07:22 PM
If memory serves at one time Bush talked about ethier downsizing or closing some of our bases overseas but some of them wanted us to stay for economic reasons.

Play The Man
08-29-2009, 09:59 PM
England would have been treated well.

Hitler would have ordered the round-up of the Jews, although England has never had a high concentration of them. He would have called for the execution of the Government Ministers no doubt.

After that, Hitler had already said that he planned on reinstating the Nazi King Edward who only rulled for a year before Abdication. They were friends before the War. Hitler said that he would allow King Edward back on the Throne and they would split Europe in two and rule together. Hitler actually had quite an admiration for the British Empire, and the collonialism that our Empire had produced. He was also supportive of the Monarchy which was SO Germanic in origin, the Queen was forced to CHANGE HER SURNAME by Deedpoll!! Although she and her Descendants will be called "Windsor" its a fabricated name. More confusing still, her Husbands name is ALSO a complete fabrication. Mountbatten is not his real name either, his is a quadrupple-barrelled surname of Baltic descent.

Her Real name is Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg-Gotha I believe. It actually the names of three districts of Germany that were run by princes at one point in time. The Family married into many European Monarchies, like Belgium, and Portugal also. The Ironey is that this name came in BY MARRIAGE

Victoria married Albert, and Albert was Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. When Victoria died, for some reason her Heir decided to keep the MALE Surname of his Father. They changed it as quite a process over a couple of Kings all called George who reigned between the Start of the First and the End of the Second World War.

In Truth, the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha still reigns, at least until Elizabeth dies, then you could argue that Charles should take his Fathers Fabricated name and become Charles Mountbatten...of course a purist would tell you that as Mountbatten and Windsor are BOTH fabricated names...perhaps he should take his Fathers REAL surname...but then we'd be here forever trying to write that down :laugh:

I wasn't aware of that. Hitler made a pact with Stalin and obviously didn't keep his word as the history of the Eastern front teaches us.

Miss Foxy
09-04-2009, 03:21 AM
Japan exports alot more than just cars you know :tongue0011:
Sorry did not have time to make a detailed list of what they export, but you get the hint and if you did not well now you do....:wink:

sender
09-04-2009, 04:27 AM
Sorry did not have time to make a detailed list of what they export, but you get the hint and if you did not well now you do....:wink:

cars, electronics and weird cartoon porno.... Am I missing anything? :frantics: