Report asks Pentagon to justify F/A-22

Kevin Brooks wrote:
"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...
Use of Okinawa requires the permission of the Japanese government, which
might not want to get involved in a shooting war with the Chinese.

No, it does actually does not really require their approval. The latitude
for the US to use Okinawa bases as it saw fir has been codified in treaty
format since as early as 1952: "Such forces may be utilised to contribute to
the maintenance of international peace and security in the Far East and to
the security of Japan..." Note the "and" in that sentence from the original
agreement. When the treaty granting reversion of Okinawa to Japanese control
was negotiated, the following clause was included: "the return of the
administrative rights over Okinawa...should not hinder the effective
discharge of the international obligations assumed by the United States for
the defence of countries in the Far East including Japan." Note the use of
"including".

See: http://www.niraikanai.wwma.net/pages/base/chap2-1.html

And this treaty can be changed.

The people on Okinawa are fed up with the American bases and will
continue to apply presure until something is done about it.

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20040313wo03.htm
Inamine also told Rumsfeld that "we can't put up with an increase in
practice drills and other noisy activity by U.S. forces. Our patience
is limited."

-HJC

"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...
Kevin Brooks wrote:
"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...
Use of Okinawa requires the permission of the Japanese government, which
might not want to get involved in a shooting war with the Chinese.

No, it does actually does not really require their approval. The
latitude
for the US to use Okinawa bases as it saw fir has been codified in
treaty
format since as early as 1952: "Such forces may be utilised to
contribute to
the maintenance of international peace and security in the Far East and
to
the security of Japan..." Note the "and" in that sentence from the
original
agreement. When the treaty granting reversion of Okinawa to Japanese
control
was negotiated, the following clause was included: "the return of the
administrative rights over Okinawa...should not hinder the effective
discharge of the international obligations assumed by the United States
for
the defence of countries in the Far East including Japan." Note the use
of
"including".

See: http://www.niraikanai.wwma.net/pages/base/chap2-1.html

And this treaty can be changed.

The people on Okinawa are fed up with the American bases and will
continue to apply presure until something is done about it.

ROFLOL! Henry, you have gone now from "*requires* a permission slip" to,
"Well, they may change their minds..." (ignoring the FACT that the treaty
section noted was a joint document signed by both Japan and the US, and as
it set forth the conditions under which we agreed to cede control of Okinawa
back to the japanese, they are not in any position to unilaterally do much
about it).

You were wrong, Henry. Be a man for once and admit it.

Brooks


http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20040313wo03.htm
Inamine also told Rumsfeld that "we can't put up with an increase in
practice drills and other noisy activity by U.S. forces. Our patience
is limited."

-HJC

Kevin Brooks wrote:
ROFLOL! Henry, you have gone now from "*requires* a permission slip" to,
"Well, they may change their minds..." (ignoring the FACT that the treaty
section noted was a joint document signed by both Japan and the US, and as
it set forth the conditions under which we agreed to cede control of Okinawa
back to the japanese, they are not in any position to unilaterally do much
about it).

If Japan asks not to be a part of the fight the United States will not
press the issue.

China can hit Japan with IRBMs without using any of their ICBMs.

And Kadena Air Base will remain in a very well known location that the
CSS-5s can take out at any time.

-HJC

"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...
Kevin Brooks wrote:
ROFLOL! Henry, you have gone now from "*requires* a permission slip" to,
"Well, they may change their minds..." (ignoring the FACT that the
treaty
section noted was a joint document signed by both Japan and the US, and
as
it set forth the conditions under which we agreed to cede control of
Okinawa
back to the japanese, they are not in any position to unilaterally do
much
about it).

If Japan asks not to be a part of the fight the United States will not
press the issue.

Ah, so now we are to accept YOUR personal viewpoint on an issue that you
obviously were utterly clueless regarding in the first place, and just
ignore the FACT that the treaty does allow the US carte blanche in terms of
its use of the facilities to support military operations throughout the
region? I don't think so.


China can hit Japan with IRBMs without using any of their ICBMs.

So what?


And Kadena Air Base will remain in a very well known location that the
CSS-5s can take out at any time.

CSS-5's with a CEP of around 400 meters, and a warhead of only about 600 kg
in the HE mode, will be of only limited affect, especially given that you
can expect layers of Aegis and Patriot coverage defending the bases. But it
is interesting that you have now switched from the "US has to have a
permission slip" (proven false) to the "Okinawa will be toast" argument
(which would seem to point to early entry of the japanese into the
confrontation, as they won't be likely to stand idle while CSS-5's are flung
at them).

Stop dancing, Henry--admit you were clueless about the ability of the US to
use its bases on Okinawa without having to secure Japanese approval.

Brooks

-HJC

Kevin Brooks wrote:
Ah, so now we are to accept YOUR personal viewpoint on an issue that you
obviously were utterly clueless regarding in the first place, and just
ignore the FACT that the treaty does allow the US carte blanche in terms of
its use of the facilities to support military operations throughout the
region? I don't think so.

OK, I give.

If the F/A-22 ever actually works it will be allowed to operate from
Okinawa.

http://www.niraikanai.wwma.net/pages/base/chap2-5.html
Japan has clearly and systematically shifted the overwhelming burden
for Japan's commitment to the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and
Security to Okinawa, which is distant from the mainland, and is
perfectly content to leave it that way.

-HJC