Yuki, I respectly disagree with your conclusions in your post.
Originally Posted by Yuki
Jus' a general statement on safe sex and helmets at large.
But now that you mention it, since Japan still relies on a heavy US military presence with China and N. Korea next door, they too, like Israel are on Uncle Sams welfare rolls.
Yuki I RESPECTFULLY disagree with your generalized conclusion: "...they too...are on Uncle Sam's welfare rolls." Japan PAYS for the leased land or outright purchase of land, construction, maintanence of ALL bases currently in exclusive U.S. use (many bases in Okinawa or Yokota, among others) or co-use bases (Iwakuni). Sharing many direct costs attributed to existance among others.
Your assumptions are incorrect and please don't misinform the Epicski members on this point. Japan's altered Constitution (1945), amendment #9, forbids it from building up or maintaining an "offensive" military presence, thus the phrase (translated) Japanese Self-Defence Forces vs. Army, Navy, AF, Marines, Special Forces, etc. I am sure Japanese nationals would not be happy with your blanket conclusions.
Subsequently the American Japanese Security Treaty (still in effect) was finalized in the the early sixies in where the bases that so to speak "occupied" a WWII defeated Japan, stipulated that Japan "pay" for these bases in the manner stated above.
Succinctly put, Japan unlike Israel and others as you mention, under this security treaty, RELIES on this treaty, to relaliate the current number rouge or rouge-like anti-Japan regimes in the Far East.
Lastly, Japan's public and public leaders are openly discussing the alteration of #9 amendment, among other post WWII altered (by Allied Forces but marketly led my Gen. McAruther/Pres. Truman's input and the U.S.) amendments, to NOT return to a pre-WWII constitution but an amended one that reflects current geopolitical situation and the near future.