Because Trump 2.0

[JWB]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGnE83A1Z4U

[JWB]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DggDdV9uSI4

[Tim the Tank Nut]

well done JWB, I'd hope it will buy us a few posts in peace but it never does...

[JWB]

....and this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqhStfe3MtE

[NickM]

 

The left never uses fear tactics, intimidation, exploitation, etc.............

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9KxE4Kv9A8

Greta Thunberg is not left wing.

She's a climate change activist, a single issue advocate.

Republicans hating her (like seemingly almost everyone) does not make her left wing.

 

Besides, siding with science is not fearmongering.

 

siding with the "dark light of a Perverted Science", dontcha mean?

Edited December 12, 2019 by NickM

[JasonJ]

How does the Trump supporters of this thread feel about the following? Do y'all feel it is a true statement? Do you feel it is not necessarily true but serves for good bargaining position for coming cost sharing negotiations? Or do you feel its not true but he said it it more as to reduce a singling out effect of criticism on European NATO countries? If any criticism was to be made, shouldn't it be at Japan's 1% GDP defense budget rather than cost sharing? Anything else about it, cost-sharing, or the US-Japan alliance in general?

 

Trump:

 

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

 

LONDON (Kyodo) -- U.S. President Donald Trump said Tuesday he has asked Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to pay more for the cost of stationing U.S. forces in the Asian country.

 

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

 

Trump, who has called Japan a free-rider on security during his 2016 presidential campaign, told reporters that Abe "is gonna do a lot" regarding his request.

 

U.S. allies such as Japan have "never been asked" to increase their financial contributions to support U.S. troops on their countries, but "now, they're being asked," Trump said.

 

Japan's so-called host-nation support, which totals nearly 200 billion yen ($1.8 billion) annually, covers costs for base workers, utilities and other items. As the current five-year payment agreement is set to expire after March 2021, new negotiations on the issue are expected to be in full swing possibly next spring.

 

Under the Japan-U.S. security treaty, about 50,000 U.S. troops are stationed in Japan. Japan serves as a hub for forward-deployed U.S. forces.

 

Japanese government sources acknowledged last month that the United States had asked Japan to make financial contributions about five times as much per year.

 

The request was delivered by John Bolton, then national security adviser to Trump, when he visited Japan in July for talks with top officials, but Tokyo rejected the request, according to the sources.

 

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20191204/p2g/00m/0na/003000c

 

He made that statment right around the time I made this post.

http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=42678&page=817&do=findComment&comment=1458932

[Mobius]

 

 

The left never uses fear tactics, intimidation, exploitation, etc.............

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9KxE4Kv9A8

Greta Thunberg is not left wing.

She's a climate change activist, a single issue advocate.

Republicans hating her (like seemingly almost everyone) does not make her left wing.

 

Besides, siding with science is not fearmongering.

 

siding with the "dark light of a Perverted Science", dontcha mean?

 

Teenage snake handler.

[Rick]

 

 

The left never uses fear tactics, intimidation, exploitation, etc.............

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9KxE4Kv9A8

Greta Thunberg is not left wing.

She's a climate change activist, a single issue advocate.

Republicans hating her (like seemingly almost everyone) does not make her left wing.

 

Besides, siding with science is not fearmongering.

 

siding with the "dark light of a Perverted Science", dontcha mean?

 

The "Cindy Sheehan de jour."

[Rick]

How does the Trump supporters of this thread feel about the following? Do y'all feel it is a true statement? Do you feel it is not necessarily true but serves for good bargaining position for coming cost sharing negotiations? Or do you feel its not true but he said it it more as to reduce a singling out effect of criticism on European NATO countries? If any criticism was to be made, shouldn't it be at Japan's 1% GDP defense budget rather than cost sharing? Anything else about it, cost-sharing, or the US-Japan alliance in general?

 

Trump:

 

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

 

 

LONDON (Kyodo) -- U.S. President Donald Trump said Tuesday he has asked Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to pay more for the cost of stationing U.S. forces in the Asian country.

 

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

 

Trump, who has called Japan a free-rider on security during his 2016 presidential campaign, told reporters that Abe "is gonna do a lot" regarding his request.

 

U.S. allies such as Japan have "never been asked" to increase their financial contributions to support U.S. troops on their countries, but "now, they're being asked," Trump said.

 

Japan's so-called host-nation support, which totals nearly 200 billion yen ($1.8 billion) annually, covers costs for base workers, utilities and other items. As the current five-year payment agreement is set to expire after March 2021, new negotiations on the issue are expected to be in full swing possibly next spring.

 

Under the Japan-U.S. security treaty, about 50,000 U.S. troops are stationed in Japan. Japan serves as a hub for forward-deployed U.S. forces.

 

Japanese government sources acknowledged last month that the United States had asked Japan to make financial contributions about five times as much per year.

 

The request was delivered by John Bolton, then national security adviser to Trump, when he visited Japan in July for talks with top officials, but Tokyo rejected the request, according to the sources.

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20191204/p2g/00m/0na/003000c

 

He made that statment right around the time I made this post.

http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=42678&page=817&do=findComment&comment=1458932

 

"How does the Trump supporters of this thread feel about the following? OK, I'll bite.

Do y'all feel it is a true statement? Yes.

Do you feel it is not necessarily true but and serves as a for good bargaining position for coming cost sharing negotiations?" There, made it more accurate. Other than illegal immigration, foreign affairs are not a threat to the U.S. The internal affairs of liberalism are.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Rick

[JasonJ]

 

How does the Trump supporters of this thread feel about the following? Do y'all feel it is a true statement? Do you feel it is not necessarily true but serves for good bargaining position for coming cost sharing negotiations? Or do you feel its not true but he said it it more as to reduce a singling out effect of criticism on European NATO countries? If any criticism was to be made, shouldn't it be at Japan's 1% GDP defense budget rather than cost sharing? Anything else about it, cost-sharing, or the US-Japan alliance in general?

Trump:

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

 

 

 

LONDON (Kyodo) -- U.S. President Donald Trump said Tuesday he has asked Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to pay more for the cost of stationing U.S. forces in the Asian country.

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Trump, who has called Japan a free-rider on security during his 2016 presidential campaign, told reporters that Abe "is gonna do a lot" regarding his request.

U.S. allies such as Japan have "never been asked" to increase their financial contributions to support U.S. troops on their countries, but "now, they're being asked," Trump said.

Japan's so-called host-nation support, which totals nearly 200 billion yen ($1.8 billion) annually, covers costs for base workers, utilities and other items. As the current five-year payment agreement is set to expire after March 2021, new negotiations on the issue are expected to be in full swing possibly next spring.

Under the Japan-U.S. security treaty, about 50,000 U.S. troops are stationed in Japan. Japan serves as a hub for forward-deployed U.S. forces.

Japanese government sources acknowledged last month that the United States had asked Japan to make financial contributions about five times as much per year.

The request was delivered by John Bolton, then national security adviser to Trump, when he visited Japan in July for talks with top officials, but Tokyo rejected the request, according to the sources.

 

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20191204/p2g/00m/0na/003000c

He made that statment right around the time I made this post.http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=42678&page=817&do=findComment&comment=1458932

"How does the Trump supporters of this thread feel about the following? OK, I'll bite.

Do y'all feel it is a true statement? Yes.

Do you feel it is not necessarily true but and serves as a for good bargaining position for coming cost sharing negotiations?" There, made it more accurate. Other than illegal immigration, foreign affairs are not a threat to the U.S. The internal affairs of liberalism are.

Rick, I understand the importance of domestic politics, even if I haven't stated it clearly. I have never put forward a priority of foreign policy over domestic. So I wish it discussion wouldn't come to "I'll bite". Thank you for your reply. I have been growing more of the opinion that the US is too involved in the western Pacific primarily because the majority average American just simply does not understand Asia well enough to justify it having the most military influence for balancing China. But look what's going on. The US military continues very active activities in military excahanges with practically all countries in Asia, is running the FONOPs, trying to amways be the primary arm supplier to countries to counter China, passed the HK democracy bill, meet Fat-Kim, all the while requesting Japan to pay more for US troops instead of require Japan to pay more in defense expenditure, and so on. So it seems to me that the US driven either by Trump or the Deep State, or both, the US is very committed in being the biggest player in balancing China, dealing with DPRK, and so on. So now, isn't that the big elephant in the room of people talking how the US should stop taking care of the defenses of other countries? Does that not go contrary to a view here that the US should be willing to only have allies with a few worthy countries? Has the lurking around of this double standard not been noticed. It's been in my mind for awhile now. Or is it playing dumb in order to avoid have to straightly and plainly say "yes, the US should continue to limit Japan and it should be the US that continues to reign supreme in the Asia-Pacific? My own view is that it should be balanced partnership in the US-Japan alliance.

[rmgill]

Jason, I am confused. If the US is asking for countries to chip in for their defense, why is this bad?

Do you want the US to leave a power vacuum and let China fill that gap?

[JasonJ]

Jason, I am confused. If the US is asking for countries to chip in for their defense, why is this bad?

Do you want the US to leave a power vacuum and let China fill that gap?

Ryan, please look more closely what Trump said. He said it in the context that Japan has to pay more for US troops, not pay more for its own military forces. And then there'sthe following part..

 

..."And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially,"

 

What does that mean? That the US is paying fof the Japanese military? Does it mean that the US is paying for the cost of some of theType 10 tank, C-2 aircraft, P-1 MPA, giving discount on F-35s?

[Stuart Galbraith]

So they, they US Defense industry, force you to buy their product through Presidental pressure, then the President blames you that you dont do more yourself, and they are subsidizing you? How the hell does that work?

 

The US has a VERY cosy position exporting military equipment to Japan. They could easily end up cutting their own throat if they push this position hard.

[JasonJ]

So they, they US Defense industry, force you to buy their product through Presidental pressure, then the President blames you that you dont do more yourself, and they are subsidizing you? How the hell does that work?

 

The US has a VERY cosy position exporting military equipment to Japan. They could easily end up cutting their own throat if they push this position hard.

Why does he have to word it like how he does so openly? How are Japanese soldiers supposed to feel during joint-training with US forces when US Potus makes false statements about JSDF? :(

 

Or how it doesn't helpLDP compete agaisnt left wing political parties in Okinawa. Or how it makes Chicoms appear to have a valid point with "Japan lapdog and big daddy US"

Edited December 12, 2019 by JasonJ

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

So they, they US Defense industry, force you to buy their product through Presidental pressure, then the President blames you that you dont do more yourself, and they are subsidizing you? How the hell does that work?

 

The US has a VERY cosy position exporting military equipment to Japan. They could easily end up cutting their own throat if they push this position hard.

Why does he have to word it like how he does so openly? How are Japanese soldiers supposed to feel during joint-training with US forces when US Potus makes false statements about JSDF? :(

 

Or how it doesn't helpLDP compete agaisnt left wing political parties in Okinawa. Or how it makes Chicoms appear to have a valid point with "Japan lapdog and big daddy US"

 

 

You can see how irritated I feel when Trump and other Americans right roughshod over NATO forces who fought in Afghanistan.

 

Look at it from a strategic point of view. If the US WANTED to push Japan into the arms of the PRC and a regional alliance against US interests, he could scarcely do a better job than he is doing.

[JasonJ]

 

 

So they, they US Defense industry, force you to buy their product through Presidental pressure, then the President blames you that you dont do more yourself, and they are subsidizing you? How the hell does that work?

 

The US has a VERY cosy position exporting military equipment to Japan. They could easily end up cutting their own throat if they push this position hard.

 

Why does he have to word it like how he does so openly? How are Japanese soldiers supposed to feel during joint-training with US forces when US Potus makes false statements about JSDF? :(

Or how it doesn't helpLDP compete agaisnt left wing political parties in Okinawa. Or how it makes Chicoms appear to have a valid point with "Japan lapdog and big daddy US"

 

You can see how irritated I feel when Trump and other Americans right roughshod over NATO forces who fought in Afghanistan.

 

Look at it from a strategic point of view. If the US WANTED to push Japan into the arms of the PRC and a regional alliance against US interests, he could scarcely do a better job than he is doing.

PRC can't be trusted. Bets have to be put into.... India. Along with Australia, the Philippines, etc. ROK is the disappoint, still butthurt about fake history.

[Stuart Galbraith]

There are already some nascent exercises with India IIRC?

I dont know, you are the expert on Japanese politics. Is there any wings favourable to appeasing the PRC? I hope Abe is not the only butch one?

[JasonJ]

There are already some nascent exercises with India IIRC?

I dont know, you are the expert on Japanese politics. Is there any wings favourable to appeasing the PRC? I hope Abe is not the only butch one?

Defense relations have been developing solidly in various areas. Abe is heading to India in a couple of days for a first 2+2 meeting in India. It seems likely a logistical agreement is to be made. About a week ago, both sides made plans for Indian air force jets to come to Japan for joint-training. There's been a few firsts in joint-training with ground forces. Joint-naval training has benn growing and going on for about 5 or more years now. Still India is India.. It shouldn't be too hard for POTUS to not embark on monopoly making statements.

[Rick]

As of today President Trump -- this sounds so much better than President Clinton -- has had his 50th successful appellate court appointment confirmed in three years in office, and his second to the historically liberal Ninth Circuit. Further betterment of the federal court system will occur in Trump's fourth year in office and especially when he is re-elected.

[JasonJ]

As of today President Trump -- this sounds so much better than President Clinton -- has had his 50th successful appellate court appointment confirmed in three years in office, and his second to the historically liberal Ninth Circuit. Further betterment of the federal court system will occur in Trump's fourth year in office and especially when he is re-elected.

As you have said, you are grateful every day that Trump won the election. Ane that's good. Actually... there was one big point made not long ago but disinterest in US domestic politics by Stuart, that I disagreed with but said nothing. But actually, even from abroad paying attention to US domestic politics is very important. And I think the Japanese side took this approach. The moment Trump won the presidential election, still in 2016 so before Trump's inarguration, Abe headed to the US to meet with Trump in good faith to build a good relation. And they both cooperated quite well in the first two years with DPRK. US and Japanese cooperation and joint-training has been really go well. And it was great that Trump walked on JS Kaga. I'm here and watching Japanese TV, they don't hammer on Trump. Things are generally pro-US. Sure Trump will make tough statements, that's fine. If its trade, I'll make a point if I think "but, blah blah" but whatever. Or tariffs, AFAIK, tariffs are still on Japan aluminum, but whatever. No relation has to be perfect. And it is important that the Anerican side feels they are in a fair defense or trade relation as well. He said something about Kamikaze, but no video, so meh whatever, nothing has to perfect. I've defended Trump quite a lot even, partially as payback for positive responses I got from other American right wingers on the boards but also because there were some genuine fair defensivble points I could make, so I made. I try to not forget positive and fair points made for either I or Japan. Went on a bit of a tangent... but the reason its important to pay attention from abroad is because if Japan as America's solid and trustworthy ally will want to know about America's internal condition and by knowing, better cooperate with the US. If not paying attention, then addressing America needs can't be done. Japanese take the word ともだち seriously. That's one reason. Another reason to know and support Trump or the Republicans in general is because, with respect to Josh, but the democrats lean a little more willing towards generosity with China. And the Japanese right wingers have said it quite often in 2016 and 2017 that personality-wise, Obama did not fit well with Abe. Well some pluses and minus in the total package, that's a whole other topic. But the reason I'm rambling on so much even if I say, "aluminum tariffs, whatever", "trade deficit, whatever", "Kamikaze blah blah, meh, whatever" but this time I can't brush off that last sentence Trump said about the US essentially paying for the Japanese military. I think I have posted quite enough on these boards to prive that the JSDF is well at work and the Japanese defense industry is doing what it can, and that it has in the lobg term been deeply cooperating with the US. Even if the US remains top tier and Japan is second tier, I can live with that. But statements made to many ears that misrepresent all of that.. I cannot brush off and for all that I and Japan has been willing to do in cooperation, at the very least I could get a "yeah, he wasn't right in that case".

[Rick]

 

 

How does the Trump supporters of this thread feel about the following? Do y'all feel it is a true statement? Do you feel it is not necessarily true but serves for good bargaining position for coming cost sharing negotiations? Or do you feel its not true but he said it it more as to reduce a singling out effect of criticism on European NATO countries? If any criticism was to be made, shouldn't it be at Japan's 1% GDP defense budget rather than cost sharing? Anything else about it, cost-sharing, or the US-Japan alliance in general?

Trump:

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

 

 

LONDON (Kyodo) -- U.S. President Donald Trump said Tuesday he has asked Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to pay more for the cost of stationing U.S. forces in the Asian country.

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Trump, who has called Japan a free-rider on security during his 2016 presidential campaign, told reporters that Abe "is gonna do a lot" regarding his request.

U.S. allies such as Japan have "never been asked" to increase their financial contributions to support U.S. troops on their countries, but "now, they're being asked," Trump said.

Japan's so-called host-nation support, which totals nearly 200 billion yen ($1.8 billion) annually, covers costs for base workers, utilities and other items. As the current five-year payment agreement is set to expire after March 2021, new negotiations on the issue are expected to be in full swing possibly next spring.

Under the Japan-U.S. security treaty, about 50,000 U.S. troops are stationed in Japan. Japan serves as a hub for forward-deployed U.S. forces.

Japanese government sources acknowledged last month that the United States had asked Japan to make financial contributions about five times as much per year.

The request was delivered by John Bolton, then national security adviser to Trump, when he visited Japan in July for talks with top officials, but Tokyo rejected the request, according to the sources.

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20191204/p2g/00m/0na/003000c

He made that statment right around the time I made this post.http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=42678&page=817&do=findComment&comment=1458932

"How does the Trump supporters of this thread feel about the following? OK, I'll bite.

Do y'all feel it is a true statement? Yes.

Do you feel it is not necessarily true but and serves as a for good bargaining position for coming cost sharing negotiations?" There, made it more accurate. Other than illegal immigration, foreign affairs are not a threat to the U.S. The internal affairs of liberalism are.

Rick, I understand the importance of domestic politics, even if I haven't stated it clearly. I have never put forward a priority of foreign policy over domestic. So I wish it discussion wouldn't come to "I'll bite". Thank you for your reply. I have been growing more of the opinion that the US is too involved in the western Pacific primarily because the majority average American just simply does not understand Asia well enough to justify it having the most military influence for balancing China. But look what's going on. The US military continues very active activities in military excahanges with practically all countries in Asia, is running the FONOPs, trying to amways be the primary arm supplier to countries to counter China, passed the HK democracy bill, meet Fat-Kim, all the while requesting Japan to pay more for US troops instead of require Japan to pay more in defense expenditure, and so on. So it seems to me that the US driven either by Trump or the Deep State, or both, the US is very committed in being the biggest player in balancing China, dealing with DPRK, and so on. So now, isn't that the big elephant in the room of people talking how the US should stop taking care of the defenses of other countries? Does that not go contrary to a view here that the US should be willing to only have allies with a few worthy countries? Has the lurking around of this double standard not been noticed. It's been in my mind for awhile now. Or is it playing dumb in order to avoid have to straightly and plainly say "yes, the US should continue to limit Japan and it should be the US that continues to reign supreme in the Asia-Pacific? My own view is that it should be balanced partnership in the US-Japan alliance.

 

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said..."

 

In a nutshell, my opinion is your reading this as a literal statement, while it is meant to be a general statement to a general audience. For the rest of your very informative post, " I have been growing more of the opinion that the US is too involved in the western Pacific primarily because the majority average American just simply does not understand Asia well enough to justify it having the most military influence for balancing China. But look what's going on." I think the most important phrase is the "...the majority average American just simply does not understand Asia..." I agree and I also believe, and please pardon me for sounding harsh, is that to the average American should not have to "understand" Asia. As I have stated previously, the average American needs to be much more concerned with the horrors liberalism and "the swamp" than China. I don't wish to put words in your mouth, but it appears you agree Americans are more concerned with internal affairs than foreign ones.

From my admitted small knowledge of U.S./Asian affairs, it appears China has surrounded itself with rivals due to China's foreign affairs. Something the U.S. does not suffer from. Just my opinion, but this North Korea "threat to the U.S." is liberal news media B.S. parroting the "orange man bad" syndrome. North Korea is a threat to China, not the U.S.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Well as far as I can see, the US Internal political debate can be wildly different from what its doing abroad. A case in point, Nixon. He was cracking down on subversives, lefties and other internal troublemakers via Conintelpro. At the same time, he was glad handing real lefties in the PRC, at the same time as carpet bombing their allies in North Vietnam, and at the same time as doing a deal with the PRC's enemies, the Soviet Union. There is no real consistency in any of these positions, other than making the US the top dog. Which is absolutely fine, Im not criticizing it, im just illustrating a basic study of the US internal situation is no real guide to how they will behave on the world stage. In 1939 they were pacifist and insular, and in 1945 they were at the other end of the spectrum. Under the exact same President. In 1965 Johnson was trying to build a welfare state, and instead engaged on what was a 10 year war in South East Asia. Internal politics is no real guide to what happens next.

 

I guess the point im making is, America is schizophrenic in politics and always has been. Perhaps that is the key to their success, because they can build a house made up of a multitude of different bricks and make it work. Until recently, at any rate.

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

 

 

How does the Trump supporters of this thread feel about the following? Do y'all feel it is a true statement? Do you feel it is not necessarily true but serves for good bargaining position for coming cost sharing negotiations? Or do you feel its not true but he said it it more as to reduce a singling out effect of criticism on European NATO countries? If any criticism was to be made, shouldn't it be at Japan's 1% GDP defense budget rather than cost sharing? Anything else about it, cost-sharing, or the US-Japan alliance in general?

Trump:

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

 

 

LONDON (Kyodo) -- U.S. President Donald Trump said Tuesday he has asked Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to pay more for the cost of stationing U.S. forces in the Asian country.

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Trump, who has called Japan a free-rider on security during his 2016 presidential campaign, told reporters that Abe "is gonna do a lot" regarding his request.

U.S. allies such as Japan have "never been asked" to increase their financial contributions to support U.S. troops on their countries, but "now, they're being asked," Trump said.

Japan's so-called host-nation support, which totals nearly 200 billion yen ($1.8 billion) annually, covers costs for base workers, utilities and other items. As the current five-year payment agreement is set to expire after March 2021, new negotiations on the issue are expected to be in full swing possibly next spring.

Under the Japan-U.S. security treaty, about 50,000 U.S. troops are stationed in Japan. Japan serves as a hub for forward-deployed U.S. forces.

Japanese government sources acknowledged last month that the United States had asked Japan to make financial contributions about five times as much per year.

The request was delivered by John Bolton, then national security adviser to Trump, when he visited Japan in July for talks with top officials, but Tokyo rejected the request, according to the sources.

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20191204/p2g/00m/0na/003000c

He made that statment right around the time I made this post.http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=42678&page=817&do=findComment&comment=1458932

"How does the Trump supporters of this thread feel about the following? OK, I'll bite.

Do y'all feel it is a true statement? Yes.

Do you feel it is not necessarily true but and serves as a for good bargaining position for coming cost sharing negotiations?" There, made it more accurate. Other than illegal immigration, foreign affairs are not a threat to the U.S. The internal affairs of liberalism are.

Rick, I understand the importance of domestic politics, even if I haven't stated it clearly. I have never put forward a priority of foreign policy over domestic. So I wish it discussion wouldn't come to "I'll bite". Thank you for your reply. I have been growing more of the opinion that the US is too involved in the western Pacific primarily because the majority average American just simply does not understand Asia well enough to justify it having the most military influence for balancing China. But look what's going on. The US military continues very active activities in military excahanges with practically all countries in Asia, is running the FONOPs, trying to amways be the primary arm supplier to countries to counter China, passed the HK democracy bill, meet Fat-Kim, all the while requesting Japan to pay more for US troops instead of require Japan to pay more in defense expenditure, and so on. So it seems to me that the US driven either by Trump or the Deep State, or both, the US is very committed in being the biggest player in balancing China, dealing with DPRK, and so on. So now, isn't that the big elephant in the room of people talking how the US should stop taking care of the defenses of other countries? Does that not go contrary to a view here that the US should be willing to only have allies with a few worthy countries? Has the lurking around of this double standard not been noticed. It's been in my mind for awhile now. Or is it playing dumb in order to avoid have to straightly and plainly say "yes, the US should continue to limit Japan and it should be the US that continues to reign supreme in the Asia-Pacific? My own view is that it should be balanced partnership in the US-Japan alliance.

 

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said..."

 

In a nutshell, my opinion is your reading this as a literal statement, while it is meant to be a general statement to a general audience. For the rest of your very informative post, " I have been growing more of the opinion that the US is too involved in the western Pacific primarily because the majority average American just simply does not understand Asia well enough to justify it having the most military influence for balancing China. But look what's going on." I think the most important phrase is the "...the majority average American just simply does not understand Asia..." I agree and I also believe, and please pardon me for sounding harsh, is that to the average American should not have to "understand" Asia. As I have stated previously, the average American needs to be much more concerned with the horrors liberalism and "the swamp" than China. I don't wish to put words in your mouth, but it appears you agree Americans are more concerned with internal affairs than foreign ones.

From my admitted small knowledge of U.S./Asian affairs, it appears China has surrounded itself with rivals due to China's foreign affairs. Something the U.S. does not suffer from. Just my opinion, but this North Korea "threat to the U.S." is liberal news media B.S. parroting the "orange man bad" syndrome. North Korea is a threat to China, not the U.S.

 

No Rick, it really is not. It was a pending threat under George Bush, it was an emerging threat under Obama, and its a real threat today.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/12/us-warns-north-korea-of-consequences-of-missile-test-christmas-gift

 

Burying ones head in the sand does not make these problems go away.

[JasonJ]

 

 

 

How does the Trump supporters of this thread feel about the following? Do y'all feel it is a true statement? Do you feel it is not necessarily true but serves for good bargaining position for coming cost sharing negotiations? Or do you feel its not true but he said it it more as to reduce a singling out effect of criticism on European NATO countries? If any criticism was to be made, shouldn't it be at Japan's 1% GDP defense budget rather than cost sharing? Anything else about it, cost-sharing, or the US-Japan alliance in general?

Trump:

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

 

 

 

LONDON (Kyodo) -- U.S. President Donald Trump said Tuesday he has asked Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to pay more for the cost of stationing U.S. forces in the Asian country.

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Trump, who has called Japan a free-rider on security during his 2016 presidential campaign, told reporters that Abe "is gonna do a lot" regarding his request.

U.S. allies such as Japan have "never been asked" to increase their financial contributions to support U.S. troops on their countries, but "now, they're being asked," Trump said.

Japan's so-called host-nation support, which totals nearly 200 billion yen ($1.8 billion) annually, covers costs for base workers, utilities and other items. As the current five-year payment agreement is set to expire after March 2021, new negotiations on the issue are expected to be in full swing possibly next spring.

Under the Japan-U.S. security treaty, about 50,000 U.S. troops are stationed in Japan. Japan serves as a hub for forward-deployed U.S. forces.

Japanese government sources acknowledged last month that the United States had asked Japan to make financial contributions about five times as much per year.

The request was delivered by John Bolton, then national security adviser to Trump, when he visited Japan in July for talks with top officials, but Tokyo rejected the request, according to the sources.

 

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20191204/p2g/00m/0na/003000c

He made that statment right around the time I made this post.http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=42678&page=817&do=findComment&comment=1458932

"How does the Trump supporters of this thread feel about the following? OK, I'll bite.Do y'all feel it is a true statement? Yes.Do you feel it is not necessarily true but and serves as a for good bargaining position for coming cost sharing negotiations?" There, made it more accurate. Other than illegal immigration, foreign affairs are not a threat to the U.S. The internal affairs of liberalism are.

Rick, I understand the importance of domestic politics, even if I haven't stated it clearly. I have never put forward a priority of foreign policy over domestic. So I wish it discussion wouldn't come to "I'll bite". Thank you for your reply. I have been growing more of the opinion that the US is too involved in the western Pacific primarily because the majority average American just simply does not understand Asia well enough to justify it having the most military influence for balancing China. But look what's going on. The US military continues very active activities in military excahanges with practically all countries in Asia, is running the FONOPs, trying to amways be the primary arm supplier to countries to counter China, passed the HK democracy bill, meet Fat-Kim, all the while requesting Japan to pay more for US troops instead of require Japan to pay more in defense expenditure, and so on. So it seems to me that the US driven either by Trump or the Deep State, or both, the US is very committed in being the biggest player in balancing China, dealing with DPRK, and so on. So now, isn't that the big elephant in the room of people talking how the US should stop taking care of the defenses of other countries? Does that not go contrary to a view here that the US should be willing to only have allies with a few worthy countries? Has the lurking around of this double standard not been noticed. It's been in my mind for awhile now. Or is it playing dumb in order to avoid have to straightly and plainly say "yes, the US should continue to limit Japan and it should be the US that continues to reign supreme in the Asia-Pacific? My own view is that it should be balanced partnership in the US-Japan alliance.

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said..."

 

In a nutshell, my opinion is your reading this as a literal statement, while it is meant to be a general statement to a general audience. For the rest of your very informative post, " I have been growing more of the opinion that the US is too involved in the western Pacific primarily because the majority average American just simply does not understand Asia well enough to justify it having the most military influence for balancing China. But look what's going on." I think the most important phrase is the "...the majority average American just simply does not understand Asia..." I agree and I also believe, and please pardon me for sounding harsh, is that to the average American should not have to "understand" Asia. As I have stated previously, the average American needs to be much more concerned with the horrors liberalism and "the swamp" than China. I don't wish to put words in your mouth, but it appears you agree Americans are more concerned with internal affairs than foreign ones.

From my admitted small knowledge of U.S./Asian affairs, it appears China has surrounded itself with rivals due to China's foreign affairs. Something the U.S. does not suffer from. Just my opinion, but this North Korea "threat to the U.S." is liberal news media B.S. parroting the "orange man bad" syndrome. North Korea is a threat to China, not the U.S.

I agree that the majority of Americans should be more informed and interested in internal affairs. The principles about the founding of the country itself are actually rather major topics. Most Americans probably would struggle to name just two of the founding fathers. Something with this.

 

But foreign policy and foreign relations still take place. Even if downgraded, say a large reduction of the total forces deployed in the Asia-Pacific, there's still much benefit in maintiaing regular contact. The US would never have to worry about a hostile anti-democratic power coming up on its western side if relations with Japan are kept healthy. It might be best if the US keeps a monopoly on nuclear weapons and grants Japan its nuclear umbrella, even if Japan with other Asia countries like the Philippines or Australia on their own were strong enough in conventional forces to balance China. Keeping good relations with Japan for that purpose would not require so much of the American population to be properly informed on Asia because in this case, US responsibilities would be far less so far less frequent and critical decisions would be needed to be made.

 

But the scenerio described in the above paragraph is not are world. Even if we want to reach that point, it'll take decades, so step by step. Japan is up for it I would imagine. But the outcome from the chaos of WW2, Korean War, and Cold War has left the world where the US is stuck (or inhereted, or gifted, depends on whose asked ya) with being critically important posture in balancing China right now in a network of defense relations with other asian countries because the other asian countries, particularly Japan, got stuck with the opposite situation after all that chaos up until the end of the Cold War.

 

However what Trump said "Japan must pay more for US troops" goes contrary to that vision doesn't it? That's in addition to the misreprestation of the Japanese defense industry and JSDF.

 

On the last point, I do not think DPRK's primary threat is China and vice-versa. I've seen you and a few others make this opinion sometime ago. I disagree. For the many decades, DPRKs by far most important trade partner has been China. DPRK sets off first nuclear test in 2006, but China did nothing. China could easily squeeze the economy on of DPRK. Another nuke test in 2009. China does nothing. Again 2012 or something. Nothing. Two times in 2016. China does nothing. Comes 2017 and a plathora of BM and ICBM testing... China. does. nothing. BMs mounted on alledgedly China supplied TELs. Late 2017, the US was Haley at the UNSC is twisting China's arm to pass the UNSC measures. That whole, China had done nothing. I think there are a few other misconceptions with the whole DPRK thing. One is the degree of damage Seoul would take from DPRK bombardment. Lots of damage for sure, but, its a huge city with massive buildings. Assuming that any shooting cannon or rocket launcher detected is going to get a targeted by precision munitions fast from the air. One other misconception, and more related to the point of DPRK being a problem for China is that if war breaks out, China would be stuck with a refugee crisis. Of course yes, but if Turkey and Jordan can handle the Syria refugees, China where everthing comes big including being a police state, should be able to handle it IMHO.

Edited December 12, 2019 by JasonJ

[Rick]

 

 

 

 

How does the Trump supporters of this thread feel about the following? Do y'all feel it is a true statement? Do you feel it is not necessarily true but serves for good bargaining position for coming cost sharing negotiations? Or do you feel its not true but he said it it more as to reduce a singling out effect of criticism on European NATO countries? If any criticism was to be made, shouldn't it be at Japan's 1% GDP defense budget rather than cost sharing? Anything else about it, cost-sharing, or the US-Japan alliance in general?

Trump:

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

 

 

LONDON (Kyodo) -- U.S. President Donald Trump said Tuesday he has asked Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to pay more for the cost of stationing U.S. forces in the Asian country.

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said in London where he is visiting to attend a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Trump, who has called Japan a free-rider on security during his 2016 presidential campaign, told reporters that Abe "is gonna do a lot" regarding his request.

U.S. allies such as Japan have "never been asked" to increase their financial contributions to support U.S. troops on their countries, but "now, they're being asked," Trump said.

Japan's so-called host-nation support, which totals nearly 200 billion yen ($1.8 billion) annually, covers costs for base workers, utilities and other items. As the current five-year payment agreement is set to expire after March 2021, new negotiations on the issue are expected to be in full swing possibly next spring.

Under the Japan-U.S. security treaty, about 50,000 U.S. troops are stationed in Japan. Japan serves as a hub for forward-deployed U.S. forces.

Japanese government sources acknowledged last month that the United States had asked Japan to make financial contributions about five times as much per year.

The request was delivered by John Bolton, then national security adviser to Trump, when he visited Japan in July for talks with top officials, but Tokyo rejected the request, according to the sources.

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20191204/p2g/00m/0na/003000c

He made that statment right around the time I made this post.http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=42678&page=817&do=findComment&comment=1458932

"How does the Trump supporters of this thread feel about the following? OK, I'll bite.

Do y'all feel it is a true statement? Yes.

Do you feel it is not necessarily true but and serves as a for good bargaining position for coming cost sharing negotiations?" There, made it more accurate. Other than illegal immigration, foreign affairs are not a threat to the U.S. The internal affairs of liberalism are.

Rick, I understand the importance of domestic politics, even if I haven't stated it clearly. I have never put forward a priority of foreign policy over domestic. So I wish it discussion wouldn't come to "I'll bite". Thank you for your reply. I have been growing more of the opinion that the US is too involved in the western Pacific primarily because the majority average American just simply does not understand Asia well enough to justify it having the most military influence for balancing China. But look what's going on. The US military continues very active activities in military excahanges with practically all countries in Asia, is running the FONOPs, trying to amways be the primary arm supplier to countries to counter China, passed the HK democracy bill, meet Fat-Kim, all the while requesting Japan to pay more for US troops instead of require Japan to pay more in defense expenditure, and so on. So it seems to me that the US driven either by Trump or the Deep State, or both, the US is very committed in being the biggest player in balancing China, dealing with DPRK, and so on. So now, isn't that the big elephant in the room of people talking how the US should stop taking care of the defenses of other countries? Does that not go contrary to a view here that the US should be willing to only have allies with a few worthy countries? Has the lurking around of this double standard not been noticed. It's been in my mind for awhile now. Or is it playing dumb in order to avoid have to straightly and plainly say "yes, the US should continue to limit Japan and it should be the US that continues to reign supreme in the Asia-Pacific? My own view is that it should be balanced partnership in the US-Japan alliance.

 

"I've asked Japan. I said to Prime Minister Abe, a friend of mine, Shinzo. I said, 'You have to help us out here. We're paying a lot of money. You're a wealthy nation. And we're, you know, paying for your military essentially," Trump said..."

 

In a nutshell, my opinion is your reading this as a literal statement, while it is meant to be a general statement to a general audience. For the rest of your very informative post, " I have been growing more of the opinion that the US is too involved in the western Pacific primarily because the majority average American just simply does not understand Asia well enough to justify it having the most military influence for balancing China. But look what's going on." I think the most important phrase is the "...the majority average American just simply does not understand Asia..." I agree and I also believe, and please pardon me for sounding harsh, is that to the average American should not have to "understand" Asia. As I have stated previously, the average American needs to be much more concerned with the horrors liberalism and "the swamp" than China. I don't wish to put words in your mouth, but it appears you agree Americans are more concerned with internal affairs than foreign ones.

From my admitted small knowledge of U.S./Asian affairs, it appears China has surrounded itself with rivals due to China's foreign affairs. Something the U.S. does not suffer from. Just my opinion, but this North Korea "threat to the U.S." is liberal news media B.S. parroting the "orange man bad" syndrome. North Korea is a threat to China, not the U.S.

 

No Rick, it really is not. It was a pending threat under George Bush, it was an emerging threat under Obama, and its a real threat today.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/12/us-warns-north-korea-of-consequences-of-missile-test-christmas-gift

 

Burying ones head in the sand does not make these problems go away.

 

Stuart, we'll have to respectfully agree to disagree on this one.