Skip to comments.
U.S. keeps Kitty Hawk, JFK on deck
Japan Times ^
| The Japan Times: May 12, 2005
Posted on 05/12/2005 6:34:16 AM PDT by Paul_Denton
WASHINGTON (Kyodo) The U.S. Congress passed a measure Tuesday effectively requiring the Defense Department to keep the two remaining conventional aircraft carriers -- the USS Kitty Hawk and USS John F. Kennedy -- as candidates for deployment in Japan unless the Japanese government agrees to host a nuclear-powered carrier. The measure is included in an $82 billion supplementary spending bill for fiscal 2005 approved by the Senate on Tuesday and passed by the House of Representatives last week.
The extra budget, mainly for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, will be finalized with the signature of President George W. Bush.
With the Japan-based Kitty Hawk scheduled to be retired in 2008, its replacement has become a sensitive issue due to strong opposition in Japan against hosting nuclear-powered vessels.
The U.S. Navy recently reversed its plan to deploy a nuclear-powered carrier and came up with two options -- keeping the Kitty Hawk on active duty or replacing it with the JFK.
The Japan Times: May 12, 2005 (C) All rights reserved
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; Japan; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: japan; navy; ussjohnfkennedy; usskittyhawk
To: Paul_Denton; DTogo
2
posted on
05/12/2005 6:34:31 AM PDT
by
Paul_Denton
(Get the U.N. out of the U.S. and U.S. out of the U.N.!)
To: Paul_Denton
With the Japan-based Kitty Hawk scheduled to be retired in 2008, its replacement has become a sensitive issue due to strong opposition in Japan against hosting nuclear-powered vessels. Do the protesters whine about Japan's nuclear power plants?
3
posted on
05/12/2005 6:44:24 AM PDT
by
demlosers
(Rumsfeld: "We don't have an exit strategy, we have a victory strategy.'')
To: Paul_Denton
i gots me an idear!
pull all of them out of Japan. while we're at it, pull all our military out of Japan.
Let Japan deal with an increasingly hostile China, North Korea, etc..
4
posted on
05/12/2005 6:46:14 AM PDT
by
camle
(keep your mind open and somebody will fill it full of something for you.)
To: demlosers
Do the protesters whine about Japan's nuclear power plants?I have no idea why they whine about nuke powered carriers but not their own nuke plants.
5
posted on
05/12/2005 6:48:24 AM PDT
by
Paul_Denton
(Get the U.N. out of the U.S. and U.S. out of the U.N.!)
To: camle
No we need Japan's help against China and to protect Taiwan, and to protect South Korea (however ungreatful its population is) from North Korea. We need Japan's help against China and North Korea and Japan needs us if/when they come under attack by one of both. Japan is also the front line for the National Missile Defense system. Taiwan has anti-ballistic missile weapons that could and should be integrated into the US-Japan system.
China is already in Panama (Thanks Carter) and South America. We need to maintain our own forces on their doorstep, which we do by basing the 7th fleet in Japan.
6
posted on
05/12/2005 6:52:00 AM PDT
by
Paul_Denton
(Get the U.N. out of the U.S. and U.S. out of the U.N.!)
To: Paul_Denton
Your absolutely right. It is silly.
But the times they are a changing in Japan and if NK blows up a nuke, they will probably let us station a Nimitz class in Yokosuka.
Also there is a plan to put JSFs on LHAs which are deployed in Sasebo Japan as they come on line.
7
posted on
05/12/2005 6:53:14 AM PDT
by
ProudVet77
(Warning: Frequent sarcastic posts)
To: Paul_Denton
Speaking of CHICOMS in Panama ... I was driving up Military Highway (near Norfolk) and saw a Panamainian (eh spl??) flagged ship (garbage hauler) that had a Chinese name (that I forget right now.)
8
posted on
05/12/2005 6:56:23 AM PDT
by
dagar
To: Paul_Denton
I wasn't aware of Japan protesting nuclear powered vessels, but rather nuclear armed vessels. I thought the policy was to keep any nuclear munitions out of Japanese territory (ships, planes, cargo), or at least not confirm/deny that nukes are on such vessel/ship, etc.
9
posted on
05/12/2005 7:29:45 AM PDT
by
DTogo
(U.S. out of the U.N. & U.N out of the U.S.)
To: camle
I can hear the screams already. Better then hanging them up by their thumbs and applying the hot irons. I wonder what would happen to the West Pac economy if all our troops came home and the back door subsidy came home with them. Im doubting that it would be a big deal in Japan but in some of the other locations the base is the only reason they keep the lights on. Does anybody have any numbers on the payroll we drop on the host countries? Ive always been curious of that one.
10
posted on
05/12/2005 7:44:39 AM PDT
by
grayforkbeard
(If it’s not controversial, how can we learn from it?)
To: DTogo
wasn't aware of Japan protesting nuclear powered vessels, but rather nuclear armed vessels. I thought the policy was to keep any nuclear munitions out of Japanese territory (ships, planes, cargo), or at least not confirm/deny that nukes are on such vessel/ship, etc.I never knew that. I always thought they were against nuclear powered vessels. But that will change real fast if North Korea sets off a nuke.
11
posted on
05/12/2005 7:01:32 PM PDT
by
Paul_Denton
(Get the U.N. out of the U.S. and U.S. out of the U.N.!)
To: Paul_Denton
First time their rabid neighbors come after them; minds will change and they will recover their sanity and realize what kind of world we live in!
12
posted on
05/12/2005 7:16:31 PM PDT
by
winker
To: Paul_Denton
If the Japs do not agree, sell the two carriers to China. They will get the message.
13
posted on
05/12/2005 7:20:53 PM PDT
by
cynicom
(<p)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson