General Discussion

pampango

(24,692 posts)

35. No. My point is that I'm sure we have the right to protect the base using troops within the base

Wed Mar 5, 2014, 10:28 AM

Mar 2014

perimeter. Unless Japan has granted it to us (which they have not), we do not have the right to take over the whole island of Okinawa to 'protect' the bases there.

Hypothetically, it could be that the terms of the Sevastopol base lease agreement could give Russia permission to use their troops throughout Crimea in order to 'protect' the base. Equally hypothetically, the terms of our Okinawa base agreement could give the US permission to occupy all of the island of Okinawa in order to 'protect the bases'. Of course, neither Japan nor Ukraine have given permission to the foreign military troops occupying those bases to spread out and take over the entire island or peninsula.

If such provisions were in the Ukraine-Russia base lease agreement, I am sure we would have seen it by now and Putin and others would not have to deny that they troops taking over Crimea were indeed Russian.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

60 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

An important clarification from Russia Today News. [View all] another_liberal Mar 2014 OP

Please put a "put down your drink" warning on this jtuck004 Mar 2014 #1

What is the normal level there then if its not 16,000 ? dipsydoodle Mar 2014 #4

I doubt we will ever know. But we know they have bases, there is a fleet based there, jtuck004 Mar 2014 #7

Far too often we believe just about anything the faces on our televisions tell us to believe. another_liberal Mar 2014 #22

I'm surprised we haven't made hating an Olympic sport. n/t jtuck004 Mar 2014 #47

Maybe its a case like baseball . . . another_liberal Mar 2014 #49

Careful with information on factual agreements. go west young man Mar 2014 #2

Yes. You are right. For months we at DU have been reminiscing fondly Pretzel_Warrior Mar 2014 #3

Do you think this is imagined? newthinking Mar 2014 #8

What is your point? BainsBane Mar 2014 #11

No, but they certainly should not consort and give them executive branch positions newthinking Mar 2014 #12

I guess I'm just an old-fashioned anti-imperialist BainsBane Mar 2014 #14

This message was self-deleted by its author newthinking Mar 2014 #15

Seems to me... Adrahil Mar 2014 #31

Okay, so if a country has neo-Nazis BainsBane Mar 2014 #38

You know they hold parliamentary seats, right? Adrahil Mar 2014 #30

You can't exclude them because they are calling the shots........ rdharma Mar 2014 #37

When it gets to the point of justifying a military incursion into a sovereign nation BainsBane Mar 2014 #10

Crimea is considered and legally an autonomous region and has it's own parliment newthinking Mar 2014 #16

Autonomous regions don't get to invite armed foreign troops to patrol the country muriel_volestrangler Mar 2014 #27

You are superb at reciting Russian propaganda BainsBane Mar 2014 #39

I was called a lot worse when I opposed the Iraq war . . . another_liberal Mar 2014 #25

Yeah, it's not like Russian assholes are firing shots over the heads snooper2 Mar 2014 #42

Our propaganda is better than theirs. L0oniX Mar 2014 #43

As a wise man here on DU once said: RT is bankrolled by the Kremlin... Tx4obama Mar 2014 #5

You should be sceptical of most media newthinking Mar 2014 #13

Such references dipsydoodle Mar 2014 #17

What if the Kremlin "bankrolls" them to tell us the truth? another_liberal Mar 2014 #23

Those who doubt RT may wish to note that even the NYT BlueMTexpat Mar 2014 #6

The part where the NYT excuses thousands of Russian soldiers taking over Pretzel_Warrior Mar 2014 #9

Well, the article is from 1997 - BlueMTexpat Mar 2014 #44

It Is Common Knowledge, Ma'am The Magistrate Mar 2014 #46

I am actually flattered to have BlueMTexpat Mar 2014 #56

You Are Too Kind, Ma'am The Magistrate Mar 2014 #57

You may be correct about the outcome. BlueMTexpat Mar 2014 #58

I Cetainly Share That Hope, Ma'am The Magistrate Mar 2014 #59

So, this articles argument is iamthebandfanman Mar 2014 #18

If there was a non-democratic overthrow of the German government? GeorgeGist Mar 2014 #19

We get to invade Germany using troops from the base? n/t pampango Mar 2014 #21

That is the key question. There is no doubt that Russian troops are allowed in Crimea - that's where pampango Mar 2014 #20

Like our bases in Japan mean we can take over the country when we want, right? randome Mar 2014 #24

I doubt it. another_liberal Mar 2014 #33

No. My point is that I'm sure we have the right to protect the base using troops within the base pampango Mar 2014 #35

I was trying for sarcasm and agreeing with your original point. randome Mar 2014 #40

An important clarification from Fox News: Tommy_Carcetti Mar 2014 #26

And remember, RT is an impartial, objective news source... SidDithers Mar 2014 #28

At least someone had the courage to not just unquestioningly fall into line . . . another_liberal Mar 2014 #34

Yanukovych 'overthrew' himself. The February 21 agreement with the protesters required him to remain pampango Mar 2014 #36

"unquestionably fall into line" BainsBane Mar 2014 #45

Good . . . another_liberal Mar 2014 #50

I'm so gald to know that imperialism is OK Progressive dog Mar 2014 #29

Who is saying that? another_liberal Mar 2014 #32

I see that happen all the time ...seeing what has not been said and blathering about it... L0oniX Mar 2014 #41

RT News defends the Russians in Progressive dog Mar 2014 #53

So why ProSense Mar 2014 #48

Ok, now this is just too much. Give me a break. EmilyAnne Mar 2014 #51

Have you seen how events are being reported in American media? another_liberal Mar 2014 #55

Is this post supposed to be funny? You are citing RT? cthulu2016 Mar 2014 #52

RT has been used as a source ever since Assange went to work there TorchTheWitch Mar 2014 #60

Ex-RT Anchor Liz Wahl: RT 'Not About the Truth, It's About Promoting a Putinist Agenda' Tx4obama Mar 2014 #54