"Rodney Webster" <rgw_news001@knot.mine.nu> wrote in message
news:rgw_news001-C5935D.22481323062003@news01.so-net.ne.jp...
> Surely the closing of the Philippines base makes those in Okinawa and
> Japan even more important?  If the US were to pull out of Japan it would
> create a large vaccum in the political situation, and greatly reduce the
> US ability to carry out military operations.  Hawaii just seems too far

Here is the solution: Bases in Taiwan!

> > Yes. So even if things have changed (in (almost?) all cases the suspects
are
> > eventually handed over now), but it's too little, too late.
>
> "Eventually" being the key word here - as long as this situation
> continues they US forces will be viewed (correctly, IMHO) as "above the
> (Japanese) law".

I think that this situation would generally be accepted today, if it were
not abused in the past. That is to say, if they had eventually turned over
suspects from the beginning, there would not be such a problem today.
Although the analogy is not perfect, think of extraditing suspects who have
fled to other countries -- a bit of bureaucratic crap is expected, but as
long as the suspect is eventually sent back for prosecution, everybody is
pretty much happy. But since there was abuse in the past, any delay or hint
at special treatment now draws outrage.

> > about being subjected to Japanese legal procedures, the military is
surely a
> > different case.
>
> How so?  Because the servicemen do not have a choice in where they are
> stationed?

On the individual level yes, although this does not excuse illegal behavior.

But on the global level, the servicemen are under the SoFA, and so that is
the system under which they should be prosecuted.

I have stated this before, but I don't think the US military could function
in Japan without a measure of autonomy. So the only viable options are keep
the bases with the current SoFA or something similar, or scrap the bases
altogether. But putting US servicement completely under the jurisdiction of
the Japanese legal system is not an option, IMO.

I hate to say this, but a certain level of crime is probably inevitable,
given the demographic and situation. From parental control, to a repressive
training environment, then let loose on the streets of Japan, without any of
the recognized restraining influences (tabi no haji and all that). Think
about it: even the JETs are three years or so older than your average FOB
GI.

One American writer argued that servicemen should just be confined to base
for the duration of their tour, but that person has obviously never been in
the miltary, nor does he have any idea about the concept of morale.

As an aside, when I was stationed in Monterey CA, there was a group of
Australian soldiers there for training or somesuch. I swear, every weekend
those guys were involved in some sort of drunken brawl. Those not brawling
were just drunken.

> > I would say that mainland Japanese get "naichaa kaere" more than US
> > servicemen get told to go home.
>
> In what way?  Have you seen demonstrations calling for that, or is it
> just comments you have heard from Okinawans?

No demonstrations, but I have heard this from both Okinawans and mainland
Japanese. There is quite a lot of resentment toward the Japanese by the
Okinawans, not so much for past misdeeds (the Okinawans are a pretty
forgiving lot), but for present discrimination on the one hand, and economic
domination on the other. I imagine the feelings are similar to what many
native Hawaiians have toward mainland US.

One of Reiko's uncles once told me that he would rather have had Reiko marry
a foreigner than a naichaa. I took this as high praise.

-- 
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom