TOKYO, Japan (AP) -- Japanese authorities are investigating the alleged rape of a teenager by four U.S. Marines in southwestern Japan last weekend, officials and media said Friday.
Police in Hiroshima prefecture are working with U.S. military officials to investigate the allegation, which the 19-year-old woman made to police, top government spokesman Nobutaka Machimura told reporters.
"It would be unforgivable if this turns out to be true," Machimura said.
The U.S. military has about 50,000 troops based in Japan under a bilateral security treaty. Many Japanese complain of crime, pollution and noise associated with the bases.
The rape of a schoolgirl by three American servicemen in Okinawa, which has the largest U.S. military presence, sparked large protests in 1995.
The woman in the newly reported incident allegedly met the men, believed to be Marines from the nearby Iwakuni Marine Corps Air Station, at a restaurant or bar in Hiroshima early Saturday morning, local media reports said, citing unnamed police officials.
The men allegedly took the woman outside to a car and drove her to a parking lot about a mile away where they raped her, according to the reports.
The U.S. Embassy said that it was "aware of the reported incident" and, together with U.S. Forces Japan, was cooperating fully with Japanese authorities.
"We take reports of this nature very seriously," it said.
USFJ spokesman Master Sgt. Terence Peck made a nearly identical statement.
Neither officials nor the media reports named any of the people involved in the alleged incident.
Hiroshima is about 430 miles southwest of Tokyo
Police in Hiroshima prefecture are working with U.S. military officials to investigate the allegation, which the 19-year-old woman made to police, top government spokesman Nobutaka Machimura told reporters.
"It would be unforgivable if this turns out to be true," Machimura said.
The U.S. military has about 50,000 troops based in Japan under a bilateral security treaty. Many Japanese complain of crime, pollution and noise associated with the bases.
The rape of a schoolgirl by three American servicemen in Okinawa, which has the largest U.S. military presence, sparked large protests in 1995.
The woman in the newly reported incident allegedly met the men, believed to be Marines from the nearby Iwakuni Marine Corps Air Station, at a restaurant or bar in Hiroshima early Saturday morning, local media reports said, citing unnamed police officials.
The men allegedly took the woman outside to a car and drove her to a parking lot about a mile away where they raped her, according to the reports.
The U.S. Embassy said that it was "aware of the reported incident" and, together with U.S. Forces Japan, was cooperating fully with Japanese authorities.
"We take reports of this nature very seriously," it said.
USFJ spokesman Master Sgt. Terence Peck made a nearly identical statement.
Neither officials nor the media reports named any of the people involved in the alleged incident.
Hiroshima is about 430 miles southwest of Tokyo
|
|
|
|
コメント(190)
So.. If someone just looks agressive, it's their own fault if someone shoots them out of "self defense"?... I think this is a little extreme... (AND ofcourse this analogy is incorrect, since feeling threatened is a much better excuse to misbehave, than feeling horny... (The same goes for the tiger... The tiger is NEVER to blame, since it will not reason like people do))
Someone acting "loose" MIGHT be more likely to be assaulted, but "blame" (in my opinion) is just not the correct word....
Simply because the term "loose" is relative to time and place.
Men will always get arroussed by women even to the point where women are obliged to wear clothes like in Iran. AND STILL there are rape victims there too... (and they are even less likely to report rape, because they will get punished for adultery)
Where will you draw the line? I think "the line" is "consent". "No consent" is "no consent". This is probably the easiest way to decide who gets ALL the blame...
Someone acting "loose" MIGHT be more likely to be assaulted, but "blame" (in my opinion) is just not the correct word....
Simply because the term "loose" is relative to time and place.
Men will always get arroussed by women even to the point where women are obliged to wear clothes like in Iran. AND STILL there are rape victims there too... (and they are even less likely to report rape, because they will get punished for adultery)
Where will you draw the line? I think "the line" is "consent". "No consent" is "no consent". This is probably the easiest way to decide who gets ALL the blame...
"So.. If someone just looks agressive, it's their own fault if someone shoots them out of "self defense"?" This is were the common sense is suppose to kick in. If you are looking aggressive at the wrong time and place it can get you killed. Welcome to the real world.
The Tiger is not expected to have common sense. And the survival instinct was suppose to make those stupid guys realize that they were doing something that was about to go very wrong.
"Men will always get arroussed by women even to the point where women are obliged to wear clothes like in Iran. AND STILL there are rape victims there too." Very good point, they also
traditionally fuck young boys raised just for the purpose of pleasuring the war lords..
"Where will you draw the line? I think "the line" is "consent". "No consent" is "no consent". This is probably the easiest way to decide who gets ALL the blame... " But what happens when consent is initially given and then taken away? Or if no words are said at all and everything is left up to perception. Whos to blame then ? Again... common sense... right and wrong... it`s actually pretty clear if the person is not insane.
The Tiger is not expected to have common sense. And the survival instinct was suppose to make those stupid guys realize that they were doing something that was about to go very wrong.
"Men will always get arroussed by women even to the point where women are obliged to wear clothes like in Iran. AND STILL there are rape victims there too." Very good point, they also
traditionally fuck young boys raised just for the purpose of pleasuring the war lords..
"Where will you draw the line? I think "the line" is "consent". "No consent" is "no consent". This is probably the easiest way to decide who gets ALL the blame... " But what happens when consent is initially given and then taken away? Or if no words are said at all and everything is left up to perception. Whos to blame then ? Again... common sense... right and wrong... it`s actually pretty clear if the person is not insane.
I don't think any of my statements have shown any unawareness of the fact there is a "real world"... And I have felt welcome in it for quite a while...
I think the difference in our points of view is mainly a point of "semantics". I just refuse to use the word "blame" in this way...
Like I said before., the aggression analogy was incorrect (being threatened is completely different from being arroused)... This was my point exactly... (Even the law allows people to use EXTREME unproportional force of self defense in some cases...).
Still even looking aggressive does not imply a death wish... So if someone gets attacked just because this person looks aggressive but does not ACT aggressively, the BLAME issue is still clear...
But I, myself, still would not start frowning at a man holding a gun...
And when the consents ends, the blame starts...
If you are allowed to kiss some girl on the cheek, this doesn't mean she immediately wants to indulge in a night of fetish filled fantasies....
It's indeed not very difficult to see when to stop. for normal people. I completely agree you have to be insane not to know... Common sense SHOULD reign supreme.... And if someone lacks common sense, this person should be taken out of society...
Of course you should be allowed to make a move (otherwise nobody would ever make a move), but consent always stops somewhere. There is a wide realm between holding hands and S & M Bondage...
And these cases are not about 2 people being naked and one doesn't "feel like it" anymore...
But EVEN then, if one of the persons involved at any stage thinks it's enough.. That's it...
I think the difference in our points of view is mainly a point of "semantics". I just refuse to use the word "blame" in this way...
Like I said before., the aggression analogy was incorrect (being threatened is completely different from being arroused)... This was my point exactly... (Even the law allows people to use EXTREME unproportional force of self defense in some cases...).
Still even looking aggressive does not imply a death wish... So if someone gets attacked just because this person looks aggressive but does not ACT aggressively, the BLAME issue is still clear...
But I, myself, still would not start frowning at a man holding a gun...
And when the consents ends, the blame starts...
If you are allowed to kiss some girl on the cheek, this doesn't mean she immediately wants to indulge in a night of fetish filled fantasies....
It's indeed not very difficult to see when to stop. for normal people. I completely agree you have to be insane not to know... Common sense SHOULD reign supreme.... And if someone lacks common sense, this person should be taken out of society...
Of course you should be allowed to make a move (otherwise nobody would ever make a move), but consent always stops somewhere. There is a wide realm between holding hands and S & M Bondage...
And these cases are not about 2 people being naked and one doesn't "feel like it" anymore...
But EVEN then, if one of the persons involved at any stage thinks it's enough.. That's it...
TokyoOG,
>> But what happens when consent is initially given and then taken away?
That means no consent. Looks pretty simple to me.
>> Or if no words are said at all and everything is left up to perception.
I remember reading an article in Newsweek a while ago. The article talks about how date rape can occur when the guy "assumes" mutual consent without verbal agreements and ends up raping the girl, who never thought such an assumption was there to begin with. You should play it safe - no explicit consent means no consent.
Of course, you may wonder where all the romances are when every single step must be stated and permitted. I am sure once the relationship is established, much of that "consent" thing will probably go away.
>> But what happens when consent is initially given and then taken away?
That means no consent. Looks pretty simple to me.
>> Or if no words are said at all and everything is left up to perception.
I remember reading an article in Newsweek a while ago. The article talks about how date rape can occur when the guy "assumes" mutual consent without verbal agreements and ends up raping the girl, who never thought such an assumption was there to begin with. You should play it safe - no explicit consent means no consent.
Of course, you may wonder where all the romances are when every single step must be stated and permitted. I am sure once the relationship is established, much of that "consent" thing will probably go away.
"I don`t know this particular young girl so I can`t say that she was a tease or a bitch. But I have seen many girls that could fall into this catagory. Not being willing to admit that there are some bad girls out there is being unrealistic when we all admit that there are some bad men out there."
And here is my question to you - does that still somehow imply that they deserve to be raped, or that they should get a lot of blame? Honestly, I'm reading your statements, and I'm seeing a lot of double-talk.
"I am not defending the pervert that rapes an innocent young girl. No one in their right minds would think of doing that. But the moral fiber of this particular young lady seems shaky. Again this still doesn`t give anyone the right to rape her. But if that were the case it would put part of the blame on her for being so loose."
No means no. Basically, what you're saying is that "We men are so weak and that we can't tolerate a woman who is 'loose' (in an attempt to put up a division between women), so even if she tells me 'No', she shouldn't try to arouse me so, so therefore, if I were to rape her, I might get some blame, but she deserves part of it too."
No.
You see, a woman should be able to be as promiscuous as they want, and dress how they want, and not get raped or even have to be blamed for a rape. Sure, promiscuity may hurt their credibility, but it still doesn't mean that they deserve blame. The problem is that it absolves the man of much of the blame and tries to make his decision seem reasonable to an extent. Seriously, even if a sexy woman who isn't wearing anything at all teases you, when she says no, THAT IS IT. It's just that simple. Put your dick in your pants and walk away. Because, seriously, while consensual sex may take two to tango, rape takes an aggressor and an unwilling party, and too many men need to learn how to man up.
And here is my question to you - does that still somehow imply that they deserve to be raped, or that they should get a lot of blame? Honestly, I'm reading your statements, and I'm seeing a lot of double-talk.
"I am not defending the pervert that rapes an innocent young girl. No one in their right minds would think of doing that. But the moral fiber of this particular young lady seems shaky. Again this still doesn`t give anyone the right to rape her. But if that were the case it would put part of the blame on her for being so loose."
No means no. Basically, what you're saying is that "We men are so weak and that we can't tolerate a woman who is 'loose' (in an attempt to put up a division between women), so even if she tells me 'No', she shouldn't try to arouse me so, so therefore, if I were to rape her, I might get some blame, but she deserves part of it too."
No.
You see, a woman should be able to be as promiscuous as they want, and dress how they want, and not get raped or even have to be blamed for a rape. Sure, promiscuity may hurt their credibility, but it still doesn't mean that they deserve blame. The problem is that it absolves the man of much of the blame and tries to make his decision seem reasonable to an extent. Seriously, even if a sexy woman who isn't wearing anything at all teases you, when she says no, THAT IS IT. It's just that simple. Put your dick in your pants and walk away. Because, seriously, while consensual sex may take two to tango, rape takes an aggressor and an unwilling party, and too many men need to learn how to man up.
This thread is right back where it was five pages ago, but Amber's right of course. Everything about our society tells women that in order to be worth anything they have to be sexy and desirable. You can't turn around and say, "Sure, I raped her, but it's partially her fault for being sexy and desirable!"
TokyoOG: You need to let go of this partially-blame-the-woman thing. Women can be fickle, sure, but you're old enough to know that's just part of life. It doesn't excuse anyone from anything.
TokyoOG: You need to let go of this partially-blame-the-woman thing. Women can be fickle, sure, but you're old enough to know that's just part of life. It doesn't excuse anyone from anything.
Military crimes in Japan:
http://japundit.com/archives/2008/02/14/7868/
* September 1955: An American military member rapes and kills a 6-year-old girl in Kadena.
* July 1966: An American serviceman kills a woman in Kin.
* May 1968: An American serviceman rapes and kills a woman on the side of the road in Yomitan.
* February 1969: An American serviceman kills a woman in Koza.
* April 1972: An American serviceman kills a woman in Kitanakagusuku.
* August 1972: An American military member kills a woman in Ginowan.
* December 1972: An American serviceman kills a woman in Koza.
* March 1973: An American serviceman kills a female restaurant worker in Koza.
* October 1974: An American military member kills a woman in Nago.
* May 1995: An American serviceman kills a woman in Ginowan.
* September 1995: Three U.S. military members abduct an elementary schoolgirl in the northern part of the prefecture, keeping her captive in their car before gang raping her. The crime sparks tremendous anti-base sentiment within the prefecture and anti-base rallies are held throughout Okinawa in October.
* October 1998: A U.S. Marine kills a schoolgirl in a hit-and-run in Kitanakagusuku.
* July 2000: A U.S. Marine breaks into an Okinawa apartment, performing indecent acts on the junior high schoolgirl sleeping inside.
* June 2001: A U.S. military member rapes a woman in her 20s in Chatan.
* May 2003: A U.S. Marine rapes a 19-year-old teenager in Kin.
* July 2005: An American serviceman indecently assaults an elementary schoolgirl in Okinawa.
* February 2008: A U.S. Marine is arrested for raping a junior high schoolgirl in Okinawa.
And just think, these are the crimes that are reported and actually acted upon...
http://japundit.com/archives/2008/02/14/7868/
* September 1955: An American military member rapes and kills a 6-year-old girl in Kadena.
* July 1966: An American serviceman kills a woman in Kin.
* May 1968: An American serviceman rapes and kills a woman on the side of the road in Yomitan.
* February 1969: An American serviceman kills a woman in Koza.
* April 1972: An American serviceman kills a woman in Kitanakagusuku.
* August 1972: An American military member kills a woman in Ginowan.
* December 1972: An American serviceman kills a woman in Koza.
* March 1973: An American serviceman kills a female restaurant worker in Koza.
* October 1974: An American military member kills a woman in Nago.
* May 1995: An American serviceman kills a woman in Ginowan.
* September 1995: Three U.S. military members abduct an elementary schoolgirl in the northern part of the prefecture, keeping her captive in their car before gang raping her. The crime sparks tremendous anti-base sentiment within the prefecture and anti-base rallies are held throughout Okinawa in October.
* October 1998: A U.S. Marine kills a schoolgirl in a hit-and-run in Kitanakagusuku.
* July 2000: A U.S. Marine breaks into an Okinawa apartment, performing indecent acts on the junior high schoolgirl sleeping inside.
* June 2001: A U.S. military member rapes a woman in her 20s in Chatan.
* May 2003: A U.S. Marine rapes a 19-year-old teenager in Kin.
* July 2005: An American serviceman indecently assaults an elementary schoolgirl in Okinawa.
* February 2008: A U.S. Marine is arrested for raping a junior high schoolgirl in Okinawa.
And just think, these are the crimes that are reported and actually acted upon...
On one hand, that's obviously not a complete list. On the other hand, apart from rapes the crimes listed (murders, say) are almost always going to be reported.
I said this already, but you can't get a good picture of the situation by talking about a handful of well-known incidents. Either you have statistics about the crime rate or you know nothing.
I said this already, but you can't get a good picture of the situation by talking about a handful of well-known incidents. Either you have statistics about the crime rate or you know nothing.
Amber you are a good girl so No means no. But any guy out there that can say that they have never been in situation when No meant yes has missed out on a little something :) And although we might not get any ladies to admit that no can sometimes mean yes on this forum I know they are out there. Kinky maybe.... but they do exist. The older you get the more experiences you end up having. Nuff said. There are many alternative life styles. This rule does not apply to every situation. And it obviously didn`t apply to this particular case with the Marine in Okinawa. Double talk ? I don`t think so. I just have an open mind.
Fenomas "TokyoOG: You need to let go of this partially-blame-the-woman thing. Women can be fickle, sure, but you're old enough to know that's just part of life. It doesn't excuse anyone from anything."
I agree... because I am SANE. We are talking about people that can not come to this sane conclusion. These are the people committing these types of crimes. Not us normal people.
And this is why the survival instinct is suppose to kick in even for a (fickle,sexy, half naked women) with an attitude. Why? because you can never tell which type a stramge person (Man)
is. A women can feel like she is " in the right" but is it worth getting raped for that feeling.
(And we know this does sometimes happen) I think not. There is a difference in being "sexy and desirable!" and being a foolish slut. I just think a line must be drawn on both sides. Men and women to help avoid these types of crimes. If everyone was sane and good we wouldn`t need Jails.
Fenomas "TokyoOG: You need to let go of this partially-blame-the-woman thing. Women can be fickle, sure, but you're old enough to know that's just part of life. It doesn't excuse anyone from anything."
I agree... because I am SANE. We are talking about people that can not come to this sane conclusion. These are the people committing these types of crimes. Not us normal people.
And this is why the survival instinct is suppose to kick in even for a (fickle,sexy, half naked women) with an attitude. Why? because you can never tell which type a stramge person (Man)
is. A women can feel like she is " in the right" but is it worth getting raped for that feeling.
(And we know this does sometimes happen) I think not. There is a difference in being "sexy and desirable!" and being a foolish slut. I just think a line must be drawn on both sides. Men and women to help avoid these types of crimes. If everyone was sane and good we wouldn`t need Jails.
165 真愛天
> It was a sort of a joke..
So it was, though not the original sort. The usual form is "XX% of statistics are made up", and it's as old as the hills, at least on the internet. I think Steven Wright uses it too. I didn't know I was supposed to inform people that I knew this, but there you are.
> a bit like: "this statement is a lie" (only a bit more subtle)
Here you couldn't be more wrong. The statistics quote is merely cute, but the liar's paradox (for so it is called) has been pondered for well over 2,000 years. Similar paradoxes lie at the heart of Godel's incompleteness theorem, which has subtle but very real applications in computer science and elsewhere.
> hmmm.. you disappoint me somewhat fenomas...
Sorry to hear that. Would it help if the feeling was mutual?
> It was a sort of a joke..
So it was, though not the original sort. The usual form is "XX% of statistics are made up", and it's as old as the hills, at least on the internet. I think Steven Wright uses it too. I didn't know I was supposed to inform people that I knew this, but there you are.
> a bit like: "this statement is a lie" (only a bit more subtle)
Here you couldn't be more wrong. The statistics quote is merely cute, but the liar's paradox (for so it is called) has been pondered for well over 2,000 years. Similar paradoxes lie at the heart of Godel's incompleteness theorem, which has subtle but very real applications in computer science and elsewhere.
> hmmm.. you disappoint me somewhat fenomas...
Sorry to hear that. Would it help if the feeling was mutual?
Hahaha... I know it is an old joke, that's why I was so kind as to put it as a quote, instead of claiming it as my original invention...
Your immediate reply just didn't seem to show any knowledge of this... So that was why I was SOMEWHAT disappointed... But as you seem to have redeemed yourself on this point I will now have to find another reason to be disappointed in you...
Thanks for explaining the "liars paradox" to me... I thought I made it up myself...
And I thought it was exactly the same..
I like to refer to the part where I said "A bit like", where I meant the ressemblence that the staement could be both false or true or both or neither or that you have to figure it out yourself...
Like in many "jokes" if you start to unravel it completely the joke does not really make a lot of sense at all...
Still, for more than 3000 years jokes have resulted in a chuckle, a frown, some pondering, or no reaction at all...
Thanks Fenomas, no reason left at all, to be disappointed in you...
At least some of the background information was "cute"
Your immediate reply just didn't seem to show any knowledge of this... So that was why I was SOMEWHAT disappointed... But as you seem to have redeemed yourself on this point I will now have to find another reason to be disappointed in you...
Thanks for explaining the "liars paradox" to me... I thought I made it up myself...
And I thought it was exactly the same..
I like to refer to the part where I said "A bit like", where I meant the ressemblence that the staement could be both false or true or both or neither or that you have to figure it out yourself...
Like in many "jokes" if you start to unravel it completely the joke does not really make a lot of sense at all...
Still, for more than 3000 years jokes have resulted in a chuckle, a frown, some pondering, or no reaction at all...
Thanks Fenomas, no reason left at all, to be disappointed in you...
At least some of the background information was "cute"
Didn't his mama tell him, "Look, but don't touch!"?
I'd like to know what real, concrete steps can be taken to reduce the number of crimes committed by U.S. personnel on Japanese or any other soil for that matter.
Such a solution should also be applicable to the general population of Japan I would think.
Close Circuit cameras don't appear to reduce crime. The Japanese police force has limited personnel and is primarily tasked with dealing with civilian matters in their jurisdiction.
So what do you think will really work to drastically reduce such abhorrent behavior demonstrated by a very small percentile of the U.S. forces stationed in Japan?
Maybe we can come up with the answer and make a part of the world, and international relations better.
I'd like to know what real, concrete steps can be taken to reduce the number of crimes committed by U.S. personnel on Japanese or any other soil for that matter.
Such a solution should also be applicable to the general population of Japan I would think.
Close Circuit cameras don't appear to reduce crime. The Japanese police force has limited personnel and is primarily tasked with dealing with civilian matters in their jurisdiction.
So what do you think will really work to drastically reduce such abhorrent behavior demonstrated by a very small percentile of the U.S. forces stationed in Japan?
Maybe we can come up with the answer and make a part of the world, and international relations better.
For preventive measures, The US millitary should be completely separated from Japanese ordinal people, to an isolated no-man-livng island, which may be inside or outside of the Japanese territory.
The difference between US millitary people and non-millitary American,
millitary ---> their living, electricy, water etc. everything is paid by Japanese tax payers
in order to protect Japan, not to mess around the local people.
Some even counterfeited US dollar and spent them in Japan.
non-millitary ---> they earn their money working hard by themselves. They pay their own bills by themselves.
The millitary (although just a small part, the ultimate responsibily goes to the whole US millitary; lack of the discipline, strict rules etc) disgrace the non-millitary ordinary Americans, who try to construct an amicable relation with the local Japanese people.
PS
I have heard there are some millitary living outside the base. Is this true?
The difference between US millitary people and non-millitary American,
millitary ---> their living, electricy, water etc. everything is paid by Japanese tax payers
in order to protect Japan, not to mess around the local people.
Some even counterfeited US dollar and spent them in Japan.
non-millitary ---> they earn their money working hard by themselves. They pay their own bills by themselves.
The millitary (although just a small part, the ultimate responsibily goes to the whole US millitary; lack of the discipline, strict rules etc) disgrace the non-millitary ordinary Americans, who try to construct an amicable relation with the local Japanese people.
PS
I have heard there are some millitary living outside the base. Is this true?
#173 "I have heard there are some millitary living outside the base. Is this true?"
Of course that is true!!! Hundreds of military people live in the surrounding towns like Atsugi and Zama, Yokota, etc.. etc... and they pay rent to the Japanese landlords. You have many service men married to Japanese as well. How to you confine them to the base? You can`t. Stop including every single person in the military on your "hate list". There are many that go about their lives day to day and never bother anyone at all and contribute to the community. I did this for 4 years in Kamiseya. Never had one problem, never raped anybody, never printed 10,000 yen bills on my copy machine, never robbed any stores and always paid my rent on time. Thank you.
The fact that there is a curfew now that includes bases outside Okinawa and effects so many innocent service men is totally fucked up!
Of course that is true!!! Hundreds of military people live in the surrounding towns like Atsugi and Zama, Yokota, etc.. etc... and they pay rent to the Japanese landlords. You have many service men married to Japanese as well. How to you confine them to the base? You can`t. Stop including every single person in the military on your "hate list". There are many that go about their lives day to day and never bother anyone at all and contribute to the community. I did this for 4 years in Kamiseya. Never had one problem, never raped anybody, never printed 10,000 yen bills on my copy machine, never robbed any stores and always paid my rent on time. Thank you.
The fact that there is a curfew now that includes bases outside Okinawa and effects so many innocent service men is totally fucked up!
>173 武蔵野千葉氏
Do you actually believe that every single U.S. military person is a criminal? The reality is most, over 99% of American military personnel commit as much crime as the average civilian (non-military Japanese people) counterparts.
A great deal of the military personnel have a respect and like if not love for Japan and it's people. I proffered that the U.S. military should be secluded also but in frustration to the constant complaining of people about the U.S. military presence in Japan.
Isolation is not a realistic solution. Japan would end up paying for a move of such magnitude. Realistically, we have to find a way to make what exists now end the stupid, retarded, and criminal activities of a handful of people.
U.S. Marines are a breed apart from the rest of America's military. Just ask a sailor, soldier, airman or Marine. Army where they work or what branch of the military they are in., Navy and Air Force (as well as Coast Guard) will say, I am in the x, while a Marine will say I AM A MARINE! It's their training and the Esprit de Corps that indoctrinates Marines to be a tight unit ready to march into the front lines of battle. They are definitely wired and all pumped up because they know if they are going to war, most of them will die or be crippled. That doesn't excuse their behavior but helps to explain it.
So let's find a solution so we can stop complaining about it and make Japan a safer place for Japanese.
Do you actually believe that every single U.S. military person is a criminal? The reality is most, over 99% of American military personnel commit as much crime as the average civilian (non-military Japanese people) counterparts.
A great deal of the military personnel have a respect and like if not love for Japan and it's people. I proffered that the U.S. military should be secluded also but in frustration to the constant complaining of people about the U.S. military presence in Japan.
Isolation is not a realistic solution. Japan would end up paying for a move of such magnitude. Realistically, we have to find a way to make what exists now end the stupid, retarded, and criminal activities of a handful of people.
U.S. Marines are a breed apart from the rest of America's military. Just ask a sailor, soldier, airman or Marine. Army where they work or what branch of the military they are in., Navy and Air Force (as well as Coast Guard) will say, I am in the x, while a Marine will say I AM A MARINE! It's their training and the Esprit de Corps that indoctrinates Marines to be a tight unit ready to march into the front lines of battle. They are definitely wired and all pumped up because they know if they are going to war, most of them will die or be crippled. That doesn't excuse their behavior but helps to explain it.
So let's find a solution so we can stop complaining about it and make Japan a safer place for Japanese.
Yeah... Fight back. Put the fear of god in the assholes. There are not that many of them.
Let them know that Japan is not going to put up with this shit.
Have you seen how big and mean Germans are? You would have to be a really crazy Marine to start problems over there. They just want to have some stupid fun, not get executed Nazi style.
You would not see anything happening in Russia either. Form village security watch groups with the power to protect yourselves. They can also watch the crazy young Japanese punks at the same time. What the hell are the police for anyway?
Let them know that Japan is not going to put up with this shit.
Have you seen how big and mean Germans are? You would have to be a really crazy Marine to start problems over there. They just want to have some stupid fun, not get executed Nazi style.
You would not see anything happening in Russia either. Form village security watch groups with the power to protect yourselves. They can also watch the crazy young Japanese punks at the same time. What the hell are the police for anyway?
> 177 TokyoOG
Do you suggest that all the problems would be solved if Japanese do like German; being mean and extreme right activist? I do not think so. Maybe some kind of racial issue might be involved. The other day, a Filipino woman was attacked and currently is hospitalized in Okinawa. How do you say to this? Have you ever heard any rape, assault to a caucassian woman, who lives in japan, by the US millitary here?
I think 99% of Japanese people have anger and hatred against the US millitary (soldiers) with various degree depends upon person. (I guess that not against non-millitary American)
Although as you mentioned there are decent US millitary people who just want to live in peace and are unlikely to commit crimes, eliminating / reducing Japanese victims must be the fisrt priority to consider than lessening the inconveniency those non-problematic millitary people may suffer.
Recently the US milliatry announced the curfew in the okinawa base. Although I do not know how long it will last, their strategy to solve the problems by the US millitary these days, maybe temporarily, is kinda similar as my strategy; complete separation.
Think about it; when these kind of crimes started to happen? I think it's been since the US millitary has been stationed in Japan. Although non-problematic Japanese and likely-to-commit-rape Japanese are extremely difficult to separated, Japanese people and the US millitary are basically different entitiies / groups from the start, therefore easier to be separated.
Do you suggest that all the problems would be solved if Japanese do like German; being mean and extreme right activist? I do not think so. Maybe some kind of racial issue might be involved. The other day, a Filipino woman was attacked and currently is hospitalized in Okinawa. How do you say to this? Have you ever heard any rape, assault to a caucassian woman, who lives in japan, by the US millitary here?
I think 99% of Japanese people have anger and hatred against the US millitary (soldiers) with various degree depends upon person. (I guess that not against non-millitary American)
Although as you mentioned there are decent US millitary people who just want to live in peace and are unlikely to commit crimes, eliminating / reducing Japanese victims must be the fisrt priority to consider than lessening the inconveniency those non-problematic millitary people may suffer.
Recently the US milliatry announced the curfew in the okinawa base. Although I do not know how long it will last, their strategy to solve the problems by the US millitary these days, maybe temporarily, is kinda similar as my strategy; complete separation.
Think about it; when these kind of crimes started to happen? I think it's been since the US millitary has been stationed in Japan. Although non-problematic Japanese and likely-to-commit-rape Japanese are extremely difficult to separated, Japanese people and the US millitary are basically different entitiies / groups from the start, therefore easier to be separated.
Yeah... but the good people want to interact with each other. Many people don`t want to be segregated. We have to think a better idea than mandatory segregation. I still think if the foreigners knew that the Japanese are not easy targets and that there will be a price to pay for their actions
they might think twice before doing something stupid again. In any case the military will handle the problem now because it has gotten way out of hand.
they might think twice before doing something stupid again. In any case the military will handle the problem now because it has gotten way out of hand.
>178 武蔵野千葉氏 "I think 99% of Japanese people have anger and hatred against the US millitary (soldiers) with various degree depends upon person."
Maybe you can explain then why there are so many Japanese women married to U.S. Military men? There sure are a lot of them in Hawaii.
I heard that police in the U.S. will arrest and charge sex offenders in other countries. A lot of arrests were made in Thailand, Cambodia and Laos. Why not arrest Military members who commit crimes abroad and charge them again in their home state?
Once a military person is charged and found guilty (found guilty, not alleged, that is important) in the host country or by their command, that person's home state should be notified so after the puck serves time in the brig or the host country's prison system, he''ll be greeted at the prison gates and extradited to their home state and tried for the same crime there. It is not double jeopardy. It will deter a lot of criminally minded fools if they know that they will be punished again for for their actions. Like being added to the state's sex offender registry or serving time again.
Might work. Armed bands of Japanese attempting to control trained to kill Marines? I don't know about that... Maybe yakuza could pull it off. They did kill a serviceman in Yakosuka as he was pulling into the gate I think. Maybe Karate students? How about after you are tried and convicted, you go to the front lines in Iraq, Afghanistan, or where ever we are currently engaging enemies and after 2 years you go back to Japan to serve time or are sent to Leavenworth or GITMO?
Move the Marines to Sado Island, a lot closer to N. Korea and China and isolated from most of Japan. Move all the Japanese off the island first of course.
I agree with Jeff外人忍者 about people not liking being stationed in Japan but that doesn't give them license to commit crimes to placate their dissatisfaction. Shit, if they stay on base they never have to interact with anything Japanese; TV, radio, people, food, bars, entertainment, ect....
Maybe you can explain then why there are so many Japanese women married to U.S. Military men? There sure are a lot of them in Hawaii.
I heard that police in the U.S. will arrest and charge sex offenders in other countries. A lot of arrests were made in Thailand, Cambodia and Laos. Why not arrest Military members who commit crimes abroad and charge them again in their home state?
Once a military person is charged and found guilty (found guilty, not alleged, that is important) in the host country or by their command, that person's home state should be notified so after the puck serves time in the brig or the host country's prison system, he''ll be greeted at the prison gates and extradited to their home state and tried for the same crime there. It is not double jeopardy. It will deter a lot of criminally minded fools if they know that they will be punished again for for their actions. Like being added to the state's sex offender registry or serving time again.
Might work. Armed bands of Japanese attempting to control trained to kill Marines? I don't know about that... Maybe yakuza could pull it off. They did kill a serviceman in Yakosuka as he was pulling into the gate I think. Maybe Karate students? How about after you are tried and convicted, you go to the front lines in Iraq, Afghanistan, or where ever we are currently engaging enemies and after 2 years you go back to Japan to serve time or are sent to Leavenworth or GITMO?
Move the Marines to Sado Island, a lot closer to N. Korea and China and isolated from most of Japan. Move all the Japanese off the island first of course.
I agree with Jeff外人忍者 about people not liking being stationed in Japan but that doesn't give them license to commit crimes to placate their dissatisfaction. Shit, if they stay on base they never have to interact with anything Japanese; TV, radio, people, food, bars, entertainment, ect....
> 181 Hawaii Ben
Very sorry, I donot get your point. Your discussion does not seem to be focused...
Regarding the jurisdiction agreement between US millitary and japan, somebody already mentioned about it. The jurisdiction agreement said to be better than that of Germany or Korea etc, BTW.
With the best jurisdiction agreemnet, why do you think rape, crimes by US millitary are repeated for long time whereas those in Germany are almost none? I think making the punishment more severe will not eliminate the rape, crimes, as "TokyoOG ", former millitary, implied, Japanese (girls) are considered easy targets anyway. The whole picture looks like the weak molests the weaker.
The mission of the US military in Japan is nothing but to protect Japan. Therefore, there is no need to station the base next to the ordinal Japanese people. Also, as "Jeff外人忍者" said most of the milltary are not interested in Japan or her culture whatsoever, stationing next to the Japanese makes no sense at all. Rather, stationing the base far from the Japanese will be much more reasonable solution.
I think eliminating Japanese victims has to be prioritized than maintaining the conviniency for the millitary. What do you think about this?
Very sorry, I donot get your point. Your discussion does not seem to be focused...
Regarding the jurisdiction agreement between US millitary and japan, somebody already mentioned about it. The jurisdiction agreement said to be better than that of Germany or Korea etc, BTW.
With the best jurisdiction agreemnet, why do you think rape, crimes by US millitary are repeated for long time whereas those in Germany are almost none? I think making the punishment more severe will not eliminate the rape, crimes, as "TokyoOG ", former millitary, implied, Japanese (girls) are considered easy targets anyway. The whole picture looks like the weak molests the weaker.
The mission of the US military in Japan is nothing but to protect Japan. Therefore, there is no need to station the base next to the ordinal Japanese people. Also, as "Jeff外人忍者" said most of the milltary are not interested in Japan or her culture whatsoever, stationing next to the Japanese makes no sense at all. Rather, stationing the base far from the Japanese will be much more reasonable solution.
I think eliminating Japanese victims has to be prioritized than maintaining the conviniency for the millitary. What do you think about this?
"I think eliminating Japanese victims has to be prioritized than maintaining the conviniency for the millitary. What do you think about this?" Of course that would be the ideal situation, but unlikely. On Okinawa and Hawaii, even Guam.. the military has always taken control of the best properties. Beach fronts, hiking ranges, etc.. for them. Some of these bases are so big that you really don`t need to go outside the gates. Everything they need is right there. Even KFC and Wendys in some cases. There was a Burger King on Yokota base the last time I was there. They have to make the bases that way in case they have to lock everything down and close the gates completely isolating them from the outside for security reasons. So they can do it. I just don`t think they will.
>183 武蔵野千葉氏
My understanding of why bases are where they are was the Tokyo government that existed after the end of World War II argued that a lot of bases in the main islands of Japan would demoralize the people or something. So they pushed the burden of hosting the bases on Okinawa. I believe the Marines requested a base on Okinawa because they thought the geography there fit their future missions field.
Military bases attract businesses, and in turn attract employees who want to live close to work in a place with low rent. Bases, like airports are usually build in secluded areas but commerce and low rents (due to the seclusion) attract people.
If Germany really has no problems with Military personnel base commands and local governments in Okinawa, Japan and Germany should get talking to and find out how to apply what is done differently in Germany to eliminate crime caused my U.S. military personnel.
It appears Germany has all the answers needed to make Japan a safer place.
My understanding of why bases are where they are was the Tokyo government that existed after the end of World War II argued that a lot of bases in the main islands of Japan would demoralize the people or something. So they pushed the burden of hosting the bases on Okinawa. I believe the Marines requested a base on Okinawa because they thought the geography there fit their future missions field.
Military bases attract businesses, and in turn attract employees who want to live close to work in a place with low rent. Bases, like airports are usually build in secluded areas but commerce and low rents (due to the seclusion) attract people.
If Germany really has no problems with Military personnel base commands and local governments in Okinawa, Japan and Germany should get talking to and find out how to apply what is done differently in Germany to eliminate crime caused my U.S. military personnel.
It appears Germany has all the answers needed to make Japan a safer place.
> 185 Hawaii Ben
Yeah, we have to know the German method although I do not know if it is applicable to Japan likewise.
Well, anyway, as I mentioned, the raison d'etre of the US millitary in Japan is to protect "Japan", which without doubt includes not only the territory of Japan but the people of Japan. The country without the people means nothing. Therefore, I think the infamies such as the repeating rape or crimes against Japanese people by the US millitary should be considered as the violation of the US-Japan defence agreement. Totally betrayal.
They have to pay back our tax payers money, which supposed to be paid for the job of protecting Japan. They never accomplish their mission yet. US should pay the land rent or the miscellaneous cost by themselves if they "just" want to station in Japan without fulfiling their mission. Japanese budget is very tight lol
Isolating the US millitary base will contribute to the act of protecting "Japan"in a certain way, eliminating the crimes by the millitary, doesn't it?
Yeah, we have to know the German method although I do not know if it is applicable to Japan likewise.
Well, anyway, as I mentioned, the raison d'etre of the US millitary in Japan is to protect "Japan", which without doubt includes not only the territory of Japan but the people of Japan. The country without the people means nothing. Therefore, I think the infamies such as the repeating rape or crimes against Japanese people by the US millitary should be considered as the violation of the US-Japan defence agreement. Totally betrayal.
They have to pay back our tax payers money, which supposed to be paid for the job of protecting Japan. They never accomplish their mission yet. US should pay the land rent or the miscellaneous cost by themselves if they "just" want to station in Japan without fulfiling their mission. Japanese budget is very tight lol
Isolating the US millitary base will contribute to the act of protecting "Japan"in a certain way, eliminating the crimes by the millitary, doesn't it?
I think you have to realize that the Marines are just people. Most people have common sense and good judgment, but there will always be the select few who don't, regardless of their occupation and background.
Isolation will not eliminate military crimes. Isolation will eliminate relations and create more tension. It's also incredibly unfair to basically imprison the innocent Marines with the idea of "preventing" something that has already occurred and been brought to attention.
Also, how can you judge whether the job of "protecting Japan" has been accomplished or not? It will have been protected until one thing goes wrong, in which case failure is inevitable. I think that statement is ridiculous.
I am in no way trying to undermine the severity of rape, but I find bringing anti-american sentiments and drastic measures into this regrettably common occurrance to be disgusting.
Good day. :)
Isolation will not eliminate military crimes. Isolation will eliminate relations and create more tension. It's also incredibly unfair to basically imprison the innocent Marines with the idea of "preventing" something that has already occurred and been brought to attention.
Also, how can you judge whether the job of "protecting Japan" has been accomplished or not? It will have been protected until one thing goes wrong, in which case failure is inevitable. I think that statement is ridiculous.
I am in no way trying to undermine the severity of rape, but I find bringing anti-american sentiments and drastic measures into this regrettably common occurrance to be disgusting.
Good day. :)
> 188 ♡Kelly
> It will have been protected until one thing goes wrong, in which case failure is inevitable.
Sorry, I donot understand what you really mean. Maybe it's due to my poor English ability.
> I find bringing anti-american sentiments...
It's not against non-millitary ordinal friendly Americans at all. Most Japanese have a very, I mean very, positive feeling to them. However, for japanese live in the area where most Americans there are millitary, therefore, Americans are tautological to millitary, it might be anti-American.
Regarding other points, I will get back to you later. I am so exhausted by snow shoveling......
> It will have been protected until one thing goes wrong, in which case failure is inevitable.
Sorry, I donot understand what you really mean. Maybe it's due to my poor English ability.
> I find bringing anti-american sentiments...
It's not against non-millitary ordinal friendly Americans at all. Most Japanese have a very, I mean very, positive feeling to them. However, for japanese live in the area where most Americans there are millitary, therefore, Americans are tautological to millitary, it might be anti-American.
Regarding other points, I will get back to you later. I am so exhausted by snow shoveling......
Sorry, I wasn't really clear.
What I meant was that it's impossible for it to be accomplished unless you use a bit of perspective and leniency. If one incident like this is considered a failure and even a breach of treaty, then either Japan will never ever have another crime or the Marines will be blamed for failing in their duties for the miniscule and trifling events that are clearly overshadowed by their potential counterparts.
Regardless of whether it's civilian or military resentment, the statements made were of little backing and were trying to prove an unvalidated point. From what I have seen, as Hawaii Ben said, there are lots of couples with Japanese women and US Marine men, so the point about 99% of Japanese people resenting the US military comes off as more of an expression of personal dislike rather than a valid argument.
Snow shoveling, huh? :) It doesn't snow where I live... I'm jealous.
What I meant was that it's impossible for it to be accomplished unless you use a bit of perspective and leniency. If one incident like this is considered a failure and even a breach of treaty, then either Japan will never ever have another crime or the Marines will be blamed for failing in their duties for the miniscule and trifling events that are clearly overshadowed by their potential counterparts.
Regardless of whether it's civilian or military resentment, the statements made were of little backing and were trying to prove an unvalidated point. From what I have seen, as Hawaii Ben said, there are lots of couples with Japanese women and US Marine men, so the point about 99% of Japanese people resenting the US military comes off as more of an expression of personal dislike rather than a valid argument.
Snow shoveling, huh? :) It doesn't snow where I live... I'm jealous.
- mixiユーザー
- ログインしてコメントしよう！
|
|
|
|
☆ENGLISH ONLY☆ 更新情報
-
最新のアンケート
