Excellent News :)
http://news.yahoo.com/ap-gfk-poll-japanese-support-us-bases-grows-070358548.html
QuoteAP-GfK Poll: Japanese support for US bases grows
APBy MALCOLM FOSTER - Associated Press | AP – 17 hrs ago
TOKYO (AP) — Japanese have become more welcoming to the U.S. military presence in their country over the past six years as fears spread that neighboring China and North Korea are threats to peace, an Associated Press-GfK poll has found.
The survey released Monday on Japanese views of other countries, security and the imperial family also showed that while about half of Japanese are positive about the U.S. and Germany, they are overwhelmingly negative or neutral toward immediate Asian neighbors China, Russia and North Korea. Opinions about South Korea are mixed.
Those attitudes, as well as results showing Japanese are reluctant to allow more foreign workers into the country, suggest a general wariness of outsiders. Some 46 percent are opposed to increasing the number of immigrants — more than double the share in favor of boosting their numbers — even though doing so would help offset the shrinking labor force as the population ages.
And while they gave their own elected leaders low marks, most Japanese think highly of the emperor and military.
Tokyo has cast a cautious eye toward China's increased military spending and more assertive stance on disputed islands in the region. Ties between the two countries deteriorated to their worst point in years last autumn when a Chinese fishing trawler and Japanese patrol vessels collided near islands controlled by Japan but claimed by both in the East China Sea.
China's state-run media have already issued warnings to new Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda for past statements suggesting that Beijing's military buildup is a regional security threat.
For protection, Japan relies on its own military and nearly 50,000 U.S. troops based in the country under a 51-year-old joint security pact. That arrangement received extra scrutiny last year when former Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama sought — and ultimately failed — to move a controversial U.S. Marine base off the southern island of Okinawa.
American forces were also actively involved in humanitarian relief efforts after March's tsunami disaster.
Amid public alarm about China's assertiveness, support for the American military bases in Japan has grown to 57 percent, while 34 percent want them withdrawn. In a similar 2005 poll, Japanese were evenly divided on the issue at 47 percent.
"The U.S. military presence has received a greater acceptance, apparently because people think this region has grown more unstable than before," Foreign Minister Koichiro Genba said Monday in response to the results.
China is viewed as a threat to world peace by nearly three-quarters of respondents, and about as many have a negative impression of the country — which is also Japan's largest trading partner. Unfavorable views of Chinese leader Hu Jintao outweigh favorable views by more than 11-to-1, the AP-GfK poll showed.
North Korea, meanwhile, is viewed as a threat by even more Japanese — 80 percent, up from 59 percent in 2005. The country, which fired missiles into waters between the Korean peninsula and Japan in 2005 and again in 2006, is viewed negatively by 94 percent. Its leader, Kim Jong Il, is disliked by nine in 10.
Many Japanese are supportive of their own military, called the Self-Defense Forces, with 74 percent trusting it to do the right thing all or most of the time.
But people were mixed over changing the constitution to give the military a greater international role, although more favored such a change — 38 percent — than opposed — 28 percent. About a third were neutral.
The Japanese Constitution, drawn up by a U.S. occupation force after World War II, prohibits the creation of an armed force that can be maintained for offensive purposes. But under pressure from the U.S. to play a larger role in regional security, Japan has become more involved in peacekeeping operations abroad. It also sent refueling ships to the Indian Ocean to help with the Afghan war.
Most Japanese continue to hold Emperor Akihito, who lacks any political power, in high esteem: 70 percent view him favorably and 65 percent feel the Imperial family still fits well with modern Japanese society.
Still, just 22 percent would favor giving the emperor power to set government policy, while 43 percent oppose such an expansion of imperial power. About a third are neutral.
President Barack Obama is seen positively by 41 percent of respondents, with the same number viewing him in a neutral way. Some 16 percent see him unfavorably. As a country, the United States is seen favorably by 49 percent, neutrally by 36 percent and unfavorably by 14 percent.
Germany garnered the smallest unfavorable rating — just 4 percent — with 48 percent giving the country a thumbs up. Chancellor Angela Merkel garnered a neutral rating from just over half the respondents, while 28 percent view her positively and 7 percent negatively.
Neighboring South Korea, whose television dramas and "K-pop" singers have become increasingly popular in Japan, isn't so popular itself, with 31 percent viewing the country positively and 27 percent negatively.
Russia, meanwhile, is viewed positively by just 11 percent and negatively by 44 percent.
Japan has come under fire internationally for its whale hunting, but the Japanese public narrowly favors whaling for commercial purposes, the survey showed. Fifty-two percent favor it, 35 percent are neutral and 13 percent are opposed. Far more men are in favor than women.
However, few — 12 percent — are deeply interested in eating whale meat themselves. Most — 66 percent— have little or no interest in dining on whale.
Commercial whaling is banned under a 1986 moratorium but various exceptions have allowed Japan, as well as Iceland and Norway, to hunt whales anyway. Japan claims its hunts are for research purposes, though the meat from the killed whales mostly ends up in restaurants, stores and school lunches.
The AP-GfK telephone poll conducted by GfK Roper Public Affairs and Corporate Communications surveyed 1,000 adults across Japan by landline telephone between July 29 and Aug. 10, and has a margin of error of 3.8 percentage points.
___
Associated Press writer Mari Yamaguchi contributed to this report.
Bring our boys and girls home.
Why is this "Excellent News" (sic)? Are the Japanese incapable of defending themselves? Do we really need 50,000 troops there to prevent the return of Japanese militarism?
I am all for maintaining the possibility for young American servicemen to experience Japan.
I just wish I were one of them. :mad:
i agree with timmy. the stronger the american-japanese alliance, the better. operation tomodachi was one of the better moves we've made in recent years
Quote from: Tonitrus on September 06, 2011, 01:27:18 AM
I am all for maintaining the possibility for young American servicemen to experience Japan.
I just wish I were one of them. :mad:
Damn straight.
Quote from: 11B4V on September 06, 2011, 02:22:06 AM
Quote from: Tonitrus on September 06, 2011, 01:27:18 AM
I am all for maintaining the possibility for young American servicemen to experience Japan.
I just wish I were one of them. :mad:
Damn straight.
I would exclude Marines though, they fuck everything up for everyone else.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 06, 2011, 12:02:18 AM
Why?
Save money.
Let other countries take care of their own problems.
Decrease animosity between us and them.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 06, 2011, 03:13:20 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 06, 2011, 12:02:18 AM
Why?
Save money.
Let other countries take care of their own problems.
Decrease animosity between us and them.
I have no interest in decreasing animosity between the US and Japan.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 06, 2011, 03:13:20 AM
Let other countries take care of their own problems.
We should have left the ROK to repel the invasion by themselves. :yes:
:rolleyes:
How much impact does the base in Japan have on our ability to give China/North Korea a black eye? :hmm:
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 06, 2011, 04:11:23 AM
How much impact does the base in Japan have on our ability to give China/North Korea a black eye? :hmm:
A lot shorter flight than from Guam.
Quote from: Habbaku on September 06, 2011, 12:36:38 AM
Do we really need 50,000 troops there to prevent the return of Japanese militarism?
They haven't been there to prevent Japanese militarism since the 1940s.
And quite frankly, I think the world could use a dose of Japanese militarism. Because this time they'd be on our side.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 03:42:47 AM
We should have left the ROK to repel the invasion by themselves. :yes:
:rolleyes:
Sorry if I wasn't clear Timmy. I meant we should withdraw our troops now, not in 1950.
Quote from: Tonitrus on September 06, 2011, 01:27:18 AM
I am all for maintaining the possibility for young American servicemen to experience Japan.
I just wish I were one of them. :mad:
So in your experience, getting old and no longer being young sucks? :)
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 12:17:09 AM
He's a North Korean sleeper agent.
What a joke. North Korea is a tiny impoverished non-entity.
This just in: The Soviet Union collapsed. No need for us to be over there.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 06, 2011, 04:45:02 AM
And quite frankly, I think the world could use a dose of Japanese militarism. Because this time they'd be on our side.
Yep. Bring back Bushido.
Quote from: Valmy on September 06, 2011, 08:39:51 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 12:17:09 AM
He's a North Korean sleeper agent.
What a joke. North Korea is a tiny impoverished non-entity.
This just in: The Soviet Union collapsed. No need for us to be over there.
The Chinese however are still there, and the hundreds of thousands of soldiers they committed to the war were a bit more important than Soviet pilots.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 09:11:28 AM
The Chinese however are still there, and the hundreds of thousands of soldiers they committed to the war were a bit more important than Soviet pilots.
The Chinese...are going to help the North Koreans conquer South Korea...and Japan.
Yeah...sure. Whatever.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 06, 2011, 04:43:08 AM
A lot shorter flight than from Guam.
The Airforce bombed Serbia from Missouri right?
Quote from: Valmy on September 06, 2011, 09:18:58 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 09:11:28 AM
The Chinese however are still there, and the hundreds of thousands of soldiers they committed to the war were a bit more important than Soviet pilots.
The Chinese...are going to help the North Koreans conquer South Korea...and Japan.
Yeah...sure. Whatever.
They wouldn't start a war, but they could certainly get sucked into it.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 09:21:49 AM
They wouldn't start a war, but they could certainly get sucked into it.
If North Korea invaded South Korea all their neighbors would get sucked into it. But they would be getting involved to force the inmates back into the asylum not offering to spearhead the assault.
No, I'm convinced now. If we leave, space aliens will attack Japan. Do you want the space aliens to take over, Valmy?
If space aliens attacked, it would be Excellent News.
Is that Murdoch's new creation?
The South worries that if Kim starts anything, or if the North just implodes, that the Chinese will move south and make the North an "Autonomous" region of the PRC. Thus necessitating continued militarization of the peninsula and an American presence in perpetuity.
Quote from: Valmy on September 06, 2011, 09:18:58 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 09:11:28 AM
The Chinese however are still there, and the hundreds of thousands of soldiers they committed to the war were a bit more important than Soviet pilots.
The Chinese...are going to help the North Koreans conquer South Korea...and Japan.
Yeah...sure. Whatever.
and even if they did your 50,000 troops aren't going to stop them.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 10:57:37 AM
The South worries that if Kim starts anything, or if the North just implodes, that the Chinese will move south and make the North an "Autonomous" region of the PRC.
While not ideal that is a vast improvement on the current situation.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 06, 2011, 03:13:20 AM
Save money.
Japan pays for the US presence there. We could demobilize the troops to save money, but we could do that anywhere.
QuoteLet other countries take care of their own problems.
All countries? All problems? This is mere bumper-sticker doublespeak.
QuoteDecrease animosity between us and them.
Seems likelier to do the opposite.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 10:57:37 AM
The South worries that if Kim starts anything, or if the North just implodes, that the Chinese will move south and make the North an "Autonomous" region of the PRC. Thus necessitating continued militarization of the peninsula and an American presence in perpetuity.
The chances are that North Korea will collapse. If it does so violently the South Koreans will likely intervene and in all likelihood so will the US. I imagine this contingency has been discussed with the Chinese. There is probably some plans on the shelf for just such an occasion. The big problem would be the Chinese using this this a chip to barter for Taiwan.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 06, 2011, 03:13:20 AM
Decrease animosity between us and them.
Isn't that the very premise this article puts into question?
Quote from: Razgovory on September 06, 2011, 02:26:14 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 10:57:37 AM
The South worries that if Kim starts anything, or if the North just implodes, that the Chinese will move south and make the North an "Autonomous" region of the PRC. Thus necessitating continued militarization of the peninsula and an American presence in perpetuity.
The chances are that North Korea will collapse. If it does so violently the South Koreans will likely intervene and in all likelihood so will the US. I imagine this contingency has been discussed with the Chinese. There is probably some plans on the shelf for just such an occasion.
I've read that that's not the case.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 05:21:37 PMI've read that that's not the case.
source? i remember back when i had access to jstor that the chinese were vely willing to discuss the matter
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 05:21:37 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 06, 2011, 02:26:14 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 10:57:37 AM
The South worries that if Kim starts anything, or if the North just implodes, that the Chinese will move south and make the North an "Autonomous" region of the PRC. Thus necessitating continued militarization of the peninsula and an American presence in perpetuity.
The chances are that North Korea will collapse. If it does so violently the South Koreans will likely intervene and in all likelihood so will the US. I imagine this contingency has been discussed with the Chinese. There is probably some plans on the shelf for just such an occasion.
I've read that that's not the case.
It would surprise me if you are right. I imagine that both sides would very much like to avoid accidents and misunderstandings, something that is likely to happen if Chinese, ROK and US forces all enter NK with out some sort of framework. Nobody wants to stumble into a war in East Asia.
Quote from: LaCroix on September 06, 2011, 05:54:56 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 05:21:37 PMI've read that that's not the case.
source? i remember back when i had access to jstor that the chinese were vely willing to discuss the matter
I read an article by a former official who said it wasn't this case. Perhaps he was wrong, or exaggerating matters.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 06:52:19 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on September 06, 2011, 05:54:56 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 05:21:37 PMI've read that that's not the case.
source? i remember back when i had access to jstor that the chinese were vely willing to discuss the matter
I read an article by a former official who said it wasn't this case. Perhaps he was wrong, or exaggerating matters.
Why don't you search for it, I'm sure if you read it you posted it here as well.
Bring the boys back home
Bring the boys back home
Don't leave the children on their own
Bring the boys back home
Quote from: Valmy on September 06, 2011, 09:20:37 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 06, 2011, 04:43:08 AM
A lot shorter flight than from Guam.
The Airforce bombed Serbia from Missouri right?
Only to justify the B2.
The heavy lifting was done out of Italy, and you know it, smartass.
Quote from: sbr on September 06, 2011, 07:16:37 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 06:52:19 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on September 06, 2011, 05:54:56 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 06, 2011, 05:21:37 PMI've read that that's not the case.
source? i remember back when i had access to jstor that the chinese were vely willing to discuss the matter
I read an article by a former official who said it wasn't this case. Perhaps he was wrong, or exaggerating matters.
Why don't you search for it, I'm sure if you read it you posted it here as well.
I post like a tenth of the stuff I read at most.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 06, 2011, 08:24:29 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 06, 2011, 09:20:37 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 06, 2011, 04:43:08 AM
A lot shorter flight than from Guam.
The Airforce bombed Serbia from Missouri right?
Only to justify the B2.
The heavy lifting was done out of Italy, and you know it, smartass.
We had a powerful congressmen. He just funneled the military pork into the district. He lost last year though. Perhaps we can base the bombers somewhere more sensible now.
I got to thinking on the B2s out at Whiteman. I've never actually seen one, but I have heard them. They are pretty loud. But a thought occurred to me. I decided to look up UFO sightings in Missouri. Sure enough, there are quite a few UFO sightings. Many if not most seem to be along the likely flight path of a B2 bomber and many of the witnesses describe seeing "mysterious black triangles". So I guess some people are seeing them.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 06, 2011, 09:02:07 PM
I got to thinking on the B2s out at Whiteman. I've never actually seen one, but I have heard them. They are pretty loud. But a thought occurred to me. I decided to look up UFO sightings in Missouri. Sure enough, there are quite a few UFO sightings. Many if not most seem to be along the likely flight path of a B2 bomber and many of the witnesses describe seeing "mysterious black triangles". So I guess some people are seeing them.
They're invisible to radar, not to the nekkid eye.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 06, 2011, 09:26:41 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 06, 2011, 09:02:07 PM
I got to thinking on the B2s out at Whiteman. I've never actually seen one, but I have heard them. They are pretty loud. But a thought occurred to me. I decided to look up UFO sightings in Missouri. Sure enough, there are quite a few UFO sightings. Many if not most seem to be along the likely flight path of a B2 bomber and many of the witnesses describe seeing "mysterious black triangles". So I guess some people are seeing them.
They're invisible to radar, not to the nekkid eye.
I know. I think it's somewhat amusing that people are mistaking them for flying saucers. If I was outside and saw a black triangle or some lights in the sky I'd immediatly think that it was a bomber from Whiteman, not an extraterrestrial on a tourist visit. I've seen odd lights in the sky further south in Ozarks, but I'm pretty sure it was ball lighting (there was a thunder off in the distance).
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 06, 2011, 09:26:41 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 06, 2011, 09:02:07 PM
I got to thinking on the B2s out at Whiteman. I've never actually seen one, but I have heard them. They are pretty loud. But a thought occurred to me. I decided to look up UFO sightings in Missouri. Sure enough, there are quite a few UFO sightings. Many if not most seem to be along the likely flight path of a B2 bomber and many of the witnesses describe seeing "mysterious black triangles". So I guess some people are seeing them.
They're invisible to radar, not to the nekkid eye.
You mean no cloak.....I'm disappointed.