U.S. to move 9,000 Marines from southern Japan, page 1

U.S. to move 9,000 Marines from southern Japan, page

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times

Topic started on 26-4-2012 @ 10:56 PM by UberL33t

TOKYO —The United States is to shift 9,000 Marines out of Japan in a move Washington hopes will ease sometimes fractious relations with its ally over the huge American military presence.

The redeployment, which will see troops moved to Guam, Hawaii and Australia, will go ahead regardless of any progress on the moving of a busy airbase on Okinawa that had originally been a key plank of a deal with the US.

In a joint statement issued in Washington and Tokyo, the two sides said they remained committed to the relocation of the Futenma base from its present urban location to a coastal spot --a move that is heavily resisted in Okinawa.

Source

Interesting bit of news that leaves a lot of room for speculation when it comes to all the news that we hear regarding Japan and Fukishima.

Make what you will of it.

edit on 4/26/2012 by UberL33t because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 26-4-2012 @ 11:00 PM by Wrabbit2000

reply to post by UberL33t

The Japanese around the bases have protested us and had a love/hate thing going long before Fukushima happened. School girl rapes...and other little things make for real pissed off locals and the Japanese seem to have real long memories for some things. Oh, it only happened a few times over many many years, but that's enough when the media make it super-news.

I seem to recall the troop shifts to Guam being talked about well before Fuku as well?

reply posted on 26-4-2012 @ 11:04 PM by hoochymama

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Thats true, but why move now. Protests from the Japanese for us having a Military Presence there has been going on probably since before I was born. Why the quick response from the Military right now. Interesting to say the least??

Unless, they need more troops.

edit on 26-4-2012 by hoochymama because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 26-4-2012 @ 11:08 PM by Portlandia

I thought it may have something to do with Fukushima, but they are still keeping 10,000 of them there and only moving out 9,000 others.

reply posted on 26-4-2012 @ 11:09 PM by UberL33t

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I considered both the things you mentioned. I guess now was a good a time as any to follow through with a move. However, the latter would also be the ideal hush story IF there was perhaps another reason for the move.

I am sure our Aussie friends would love the additional American troops

reply posted on 26-4-2012 @ 11:11 PM by UberL33t

reply to post by Portlandia

If they move them all out it'd be too obvious.

reply posted on 26-4-2012 @ 11:31 PM by watchitburn

The moving of Marines from Japan to Guam and other places has been in the works for many years.

I don't think the US should have bases in any other country but the US. But many local economies have become dependent on those bases. Which is very unfortunate.

The Marines on Okinawa have been confined to the base a few times and after a couple weeks, each time many businesses had to close down.

reply posted on 26-4-2012 @ 11:35 PM by Maluhia

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I seem to recall the troop shifts to Guam being talked about well before Fuku as well?

Yes, I will second that notion. From what I can remember, this has been being negotiated since well before Fukushima. Took a while to work out the details as they were just trying to figure out who the real enemy is. Little do they know - The true enemy is themselves.

edit on 26-4-2012 by Maluhia because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 26-4-2012 @ 11:37 PM by tracehd1

reply to post by UberL33t

I came into your post thinking it had something to do w/ Fukushima....to my surprise it wasn't...but...your opinion was...lol I have a friend that's in the Air Force in Okinawa ....I'm going to ask if they've heard anything on the AF end...I'll let you know...

reply posted on 27-4-2012 @ 05:25 PM by racer451

are we talking over night they are moving 9000 personnel or over a duration of time. That answer could mean something

Pages: ^^TOP^^