Trump privately talks about ending Japan defense treaty: Bloomberg

[keemapoot]

6 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

Japan can not defend itself against adversaries such as China or Russia. That's why we have defense treaties because we are stronger when we have dependable allies. I was surprised to see that Japan is not a mutual defender of the US, not that it needs that, but it is what allies are supposed to do for one another.

With 88 total military bases in Japan and 56,000 troops, USFJ (US forces Japan) is the largest military presence by the US of any country in the world, even larger than the presence in Hawaii. The mutual benefits, and security are immeasurable. It's so important that when the Marines get in trouble with locals in Okinawa, as is usual, and the governor opposes the relocating of one of the bases, Abe himself got involved and told the governor to pipe down. 

[lannarebirth]

18 minutes ago, keemapoot said:

With 88 total military bases in Japan and 56,000 troops, USFJ (US forces Japan) is the largest military presence by the US of any country in the world, even larger than the presence in Hawaii. The mutual benefits, and security are immeasurable. It's so important that when the Marines get in trouble with locals in Okinawa, as is usual, and the governor opposes the relocating of one of the bases, Abe himself got involved and told the governor to pipe down. 

 

Yes, I know. I have spent a lot of time at various US military sea ports in Japan; most especially in Okinawa.

[keemapoot]

5 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Yes, I know. I have spent a lot of time at various US military sea ports in Japan; most especially in Okinawa.

Yeah, about half of all Japan-based US military are in Okinawa. As you know, the US has done all sorts of things to fortify this island, including a massive sea wall to protect against tidal waves. The largest US air base is there, Kadena, and together with Guam form the cornerstone of the Pacific air command. Trump should know this, should have been at least briefed, but probably wasn't paying attention at the time.

[JAG]

1 hour ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I don't think anybody's abandoning anything and I suspect you don't either. It's just the A-hole in Chief shooting off his mouth as he is wont to do. That said, Japan is not now and into the far foreseeable future, a global threat, given their demographics. If they're to be an ally, defense treaties should be mutual, no matter how lopsided they are.

Hmm, I am wondering whether Mr Trump is working his way through all of the USA's foreign policy arrangements, with the aim of alienating the USA's friends, allies and potential adversaries, in order to be able to paint himself as the one standing alone for the USA, come the re-election campaign.

 

Perhaps a bit far-fetched perhaps, but then, so is much about his presidency!

[lannarebirth]

1 minute ago, JAG said:

Hmm, I am wondering whether Mr Trump is working his way through all of the USA's foreign policy arrangements, with the aim of alienating the USA's friends, allies and potential adversaries, in order to be able to paint himself as the one standing alone for the USA, come the re-election campaign.

 

Perhaps a bit far-fetched perhaps, but then, so is much about his presidency!

 

He's looking at the low hanging fruit. The US has been willing to pick up the tab all over the World in order to maintain it's nearly global hegemony.  He's looking at one side of the equation and thinking if wedidn't pay everybody else's way then there would be more money to be had for the things the US needs (not that he would spend it on that). But the other side is, if you are not that "big dog" who's covering everybody else's ass at the expense of your own citizens maybe you lose that bigdog status and those you have protected choose other alliances. Personally, I think we're about to see a sea change in how the global power structure is aligned as the US opts to be more inward looking, rather than outward looking.

[keemapoot]

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

Personally, I think we're about to see a sea change in how the global power structure is aligned as the US opts to be more inward looking, rather than outward looking

Yup, and as you remember, this isolationist, jingoist stance is one of the reasons his base supported him and remains passionate in their support. And, this is actually rooted in American history, as the US really didn't want anything to do with the world until it was pulled into two world wars. But yes, Trump has proven he will pander to all these things to get elected, even if he knows better.  

[lannarebirth]

44 minutes ago, keemapoot said:

Yup, and as you remember, this isolationist, jingoist stance is one of the reasons his base supported him and remains passionate in their support. And, this is actually rooted in American history, as the US really didn't want anything to do with the world until it was pulled into two world wars. But yes, Trump has proven he will pander to all these things to get elected, even if he knows better.  

 

No, that's not what I meant. I think Trump and his base would still like to be that "global leader", but you can't have it both ways. You can't pull back from being the guarantor of security while simultaneously making American's lives better at home.. I think Trump goes away, America becomes more inward looking and the World outside America becomes much more dangerous. I can live with that.

[keemapoot]

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

 

No, that's not what I meant. I think Trump and his base would still like to be that "global leader", but you can't have it both ways. You can't pull back from being the guarantor of security while simultaneously making American's lives better at home.. I think Trump goes away, America becomes more inward looking and the World outside America becomes much more dangerous. I can live with that.

Ok, good point. True that Trump and his base think the US can throw its weight around as usual and not have to pony up for that privilege. At the same time, there is a valid argument that the US bears a disproportionate share, but as you say, it has enjoyed the position of being global leader. 

 

Yeah, I kind of agree with you that I could live with more isolationism. That is possible because the US is so resource-rich and self contained that it really doesn't need much cooperation with anybody to survive nicely. But, that's not really possible in today's world and this trade war with China, this bandying about security pacts like with Japan serves no real purpose for anyone and is just noise by Trump. When Trump leaves I expect it to be business as usual and a return to more free trade and participation in global security pacts. One good thing he might do is force re-negotiation of the relative burdens in those pacts like in Nato. Maybe not...

[lannarebirth]

2 minutes ago, keemapoot said:

Ok, good point. True that Trump and his base think the US can throw its weight around as usual and not have to pony up for that privilege. At the same time, there is a valid argument that the US bears a disproportionate share, but as you say, it has enjoyed the position of being global leader. 

 

Yeah, I kind of agree with you that I could live with more isolationism. That is possible because the US is so resource-rich and self contained that it really doesn't need much cooperation with anybody to survive nicely. But, that's not really possible in today's world and this trade war with China, this bandying about security pacts like with Japan serves no real purpose for anyone and is just noise by Trump. When Trump leaves I expect it to be business as usual and a return to more free trade and participation in global security pacts. One good thing he might do is force re-negotiation of the relative burdens in those pacts like in Nato. Maybe not...

 

The thing about Trump is, that while a US president doesn't have much power, he is extremely prone to pulling the levers of what power he does have. And usually there's some truth in many of the claims he makes, though he still lies about it and he has all the wrong solutions. If we can get rid of him in the next term his might still have been a "useful" presidency in that he's exposed a lot of the things that have hurt the US while enriching certain parties in the US. Which is ironic given that he is the patron saint of those parties being enriched.

[yogi100]

On 6/26/2019 at 6:22 AM, nkg said:

 

I believe the 2 countries were at war at the time, following an unprovoked attack on the US by Japan.

 To say nothing of the way they treated people in the countries they invaded and allied POWs. I knew a couple of British POWs in London and they could not and would never talk about what they went through so it's not a matter of the victors writing the history books.

 

My work mate and I tried to get one of them to tell us about it but our boss who'd served in the RAF in the war told us to leave it out. We got the message.

[usviphotography]

4 hours ago, JAG said:

Hmm, I am wondering whether Mr Trump is working his way through all of the USA's foreign policy arrangements, with the aim of alienating the USA's friends, allies and potential adversaries, in order to be able to paint himself as the one standing alone for the USA, come the re-election campaign.

Or perhaps he's simply going through the arrangements, singling out the ones that are insane or obsolete, and suggesting much needed reform. It is not 1945 anymore. In Japan, the US overseas the military defense of one of the wealthiest and most advanced nations in the world. In Europe, the US spends God knows how much on a defensive alliance to protect against a country that hasn't existed for going on 30 years! US Policy has been stuck in a time warp and is so badly at odds with the world as it actually exists it would be comical if so much money wasn't being wasted. 

[billd766]

19 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Look, how about Washington pulls it's soldiers out of Okinawa ?

And once this happens, let China and Japan fight their war. Why on earth should NATO risk it's own soldiers because a load of Chinese and Japanese want to fight each other. Let them get on with it, our soldiers should not be put at risk because these people want to fight one another.

And if Japan wants to buy American combat jets and missiles, let them do it. The important thing is, is that US tax dollars must NOT be used to subsidise Japan's military. Yes, sell to the Japanese a load of weapons, but not at a price that is being partly paid for by US tax payers.

What has NATO got to do with a thread on the USA and Japan?

 

There is a clue in the title of NATO.

North

Atlantic 

Treaty 

Organisation.

 

https://www.thebalance.com/nato-purpose-history-members-and-alliances-3306116

 

NATO is an alliance of 28 countries bordering the North Atlantic Ocean. It includes the United States, most European Union members, Canada, and Turkey. NATO is an acronym for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

The United States contributes three-fourths of NATO's budget. During the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump said other NATO members should spend more on their military. Only four countries reach the targeted spending of 2 percent of gross domestic product. They are the United States, the United Kingdom, Greece, 

[stevenl]

50 minutes ago, billd766 said:

What has NATO got to do with a thread on the USA and Japan?

 

There is a clue in the title of NATO.

North

Atlantic 

Treaty 

Organisation.

 

https://www.thebalance.com/nato-purpose-history-members-and-alliances-3306116

 

NATO is an alliance of 28 countries bordering the North Atlantic Ocean. It includes the United States, most European Union members, Canada, and Turkey. NATO is an acronym for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

The United States contributes three-fourths of NATO's budget. During the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump said other NATO members should spend more on their military. Only four countries reach the targeted spending of 2 percent of gross domestic product. They are the United States, the United Kingdom, Greece, 

Estonia is the missing country.

[bristolboy]

4 hours ago, usviphotography said:

Or perhaps he's simply going through the arrangements, singling out the ones that are insane or obsolete, and suggesting much needed reform. It is not 1945 anymore. In Japan, the US overseas the military defense of one of the wealthiest and most advanced nations in the world. In Europe, the US spends God knows how much on a defensive alliance to protect against a country that hasn't existed for going on 30 years! US Policy has been stuck in a time warp and is so badly at odds with the world as it actually exists it would be comical if so much money wasn't being wasted. 

And yet Trump has supported massively increasing the defense budget.

[billd766]

4 hours ago, stevenl said:

Estonia is the missing country.

You have missed the point which was, What has NATO got to do with a thread on the USA and Japan?

[heybruce]

Military alliances between small powers can be transactional--each side trying to get their moneys worth from the agreement.  This is not the case for a superpower.

 

Like the cheesy movie line says; "With great power comes great responsibility."  If the US wants to maintain its status as the world's sole superpower, and to enjoy the benefits that come with this position, it will have to make lop-sided alliances.  This is especially true when it comes to protecting key trading partners and economically critical parts of the world from would-be superpowers such as Russia and China. 

 

If we don't want all of Asia to be dominated by China and all of Europe to be intimidated by Russia we will have to chip in for defense of our partners.  If we aren't willing to do this we leave the door open for China to become a rival superpower and Russia a dangerous superpower wannabe. (I know, they're already well on their way.  Why make it easier for them?)