This is one of those Trump real estate deals: The Japanese Government buys an island and lets the US Navy have it.
That way, it’s totally not US expansionism or something. And they’re going to turn it into an expensive military base (maybe) and will probably expand and stabilize it. You know, like the Chinese did to the Spratly Islands, which was a big no-no because the Chinese did it, not the US/Japanese. [cnn]
It’s not like it’s a dagger aimed at the ass of China, or anything. And the US will probably station nuclear weapons there, and will tell the Japanese it’s not, and the Japanese will nod and say “sure, boss.”
By the way, the US used to store nuclear weapons on Okinawa, and had Mace-B batteries situated there, aimed at: China. I’ll post about those someday, but the situation with the Mace-B batteries is worse than most Americans are capable of imagining. [gwu]
Additionally, the article reveals for the first time that the United States and Japan signed a secret agreement in 1968 enabling the U.S. military to store nuclear weapons on the two islands in the event of an emergency. According to co-author William Burr, “This agreement was an important precedent for a similar nuclear storage arrangement reached in 1972 when the U.S. returned control of Okinawa to Japan.
The US even lost an H-bomb, which it did not have on a ship off Okinawa: [lat]
U.S. officials acknowledged Monday that a Navy warplane carrying a hydrogen bomb rolled off the deck of an aircraft carrier in 1965 and sank in the ocean 70 miles from Okinawa.
The plane, the pilot and the weapon–lost in 16,200 feet of water off the Japanese island–have never been recovered.
Japan had passed a law that nuclear weapons were not allowed in Japanese territory or within its coastal waters. The US blatantly ignored it and it turns out that the US government and Japanese government signed a secret agreement, in effect, mooting the desires of the Japanese electorate.
The US nuclear arsenal was set up so it could be quickly loaded on a boat and sailed out to sea, in the event that the Japanese government wanted to schedule an official visit to make sure the US didn’t have nukes. This may seem like ordinary government stupidity, except that the Chinese aren’t stupid and neither are the Japanese – hosting nuclear weapons on Okinawa guaranteed that if there was another war, Japan would get nuked again. No wonder the Japanese government kept that agreement secret!
Please continue to get upset over the Chinese build-up of the Spratlys, and the US “freedom of navigation” exercises, though.
Let’s spend a ton of money and build a base in a tsunami zone, that is above sea-level but not much. Then, let’s put stealth bombers and nuclear weapons there. Then, let’s all be shocked when it winds up underwater.
This is the kind of stuff that the pentagon is doing with all those extra billion$ congress gave them.
You’re right, it’s not – it’s aimed at the jugular. The shipping route through the East China Sea is the third most important route in the world (after the Suez and Panama canals) and carries virtually all of China’s seaborne freight. It’s about 400 miles due east of Shanghai, which is the world’s busiest container port. The entire Chinese economy (not to mention much of its ability to feed its people) depends on shipping through that stretch of water.
My first question, which you did not address, is bought it from whom? Who owns their own frickin island? Had to click through to find it:
That is rather ambiguous. Was this Dr. No Real Estate Holdings? Anyway, it was apparently Japanese territory.
So unlike Okinawa, no worries about disgruntled civilian neighbors.
BTW, don’t worry about tsunamis, the anti-kaiju wall should take care of that.
It’s not uncommon. What’s the difference between owning an entire island and owning the same area of land on a larger island? I mean, sure, if you want to take issue with the fundamental concept of land ownership I’m not unsympathetic in principle, but I get the feeling that’s not where you’re going here…
Wikipedia lists the population as zero and ethnically Japanese :P
All this seems like a surefire way to make things worse
Would it be too cynical to assume that to be deliberate? Unexpectedly losing a lot of expensive gear would mean more equipment turnover which would be great for the, uh, the economy. It would also be an excuse to increase inventory sizes. If half your fleet of [sth] is swept out to sea, the other half needs to be sufficient to fight off – if you’re the US – the rest of the planet.
If this sort of thing kept happening it would even be an exuse to initiate ever more
preposterous boondogglesadvanced defence projects. How about water-proof nuclear bombs? And a specialised nuclear bomb retrieval sub.* And a mothersub to carry it.** And a mothership to support that.*** And the mother of all airplanes to deploy the whole lot anywhere in the world within 24 hours.*****Deep Sea Research Vessel
**Exploration Vessel
***Research Ship
****Science… Express?
komarov@#5:
And a specialised nuclear bomb retrieval sub.*
You mean an NR-1 2.0? [wik]
dangerousbeans@#4:
Wikipedia lists the population as zero and ethnically Japanese :P
Probably not a result of ethnic cleansing. Most likely it was boredom. Look at the place! You could barely fit a bunch of nuke bunkers on it!
Apparently everyone left because its a terrible place to live. I just find the idea of a non existant person with an ethnicity funny
@komarov presumably there’s a large chunk of the American military who also deny that climate change is a problem, so they’re probably the ones making this decision
dangerousbeans@#8:
there’s a large chunk of the American military who also deny that climate change is a problem, so they’re probably the ones making this decision
I think it’s more likely just a case of “fuck it, it’s not our money.” Which, in a nutshell, explains US Navy and US Air Force procurement processes. The Army, too, of course (have you seen the MRAP? it’s designed like a great rolling ATGM-catcher)…
They don’t have to be smart about money, so they aren’t.