• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US Marines begin relocation from Okinawa to Guam (1 Viewer)

Puerto Ricans are US citizens by birthright and parents. Since 1917. I think a grand total of 12 Americans know this.

Puerto Ricans cannot vote in elections of the US President however, so Puerto Ricans in Puerto Rico do not have a full USA citizenship. All the same Puerto Ricans can vote in party presidential primary elections in the USA because political parties are private organizations.

All federal laws, rules and regulations apply in Puerto Rico. Yet even being the US citizens Puerto Ricans are, they do not pay federal income taxes. The citizens do pay FICA taxes. They do receive Medicaid benefits. PR's do elect their own leaders of government. Puerto Rico is in the jurisdiction of the US District Court of Puerto Rico and is in the 2nd Judicial Circuit Court of Appeals that sits in Boston MA. It's like Guam that has the US District Court of Guam and that is in the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in SFO.

If Puerto Rico became a state it very likely would elect two Democrats to the Senate and with a population of 3 million it's expected that Democrats would have the numerical advantage to the US House. And if the District of Columbia were to become a state it too would send two Democrats to the Senate and one to the US House. Trump would have to invade and seize two conservative provinces of Canada to balance this :). I'd suggest the three most rightwing of 'em, namely Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. (y)

Indeed when Alaska and Hawaii were granted statehood in 1959 everyone knew Alaska was Cro Magnon Republican and Hawaii was Fabian socialist Democratic and on a surfboard besides. Things balanced out near perfectly in the Senate and near perfectly in the House where Hawaii gave the Democrats a one seat advantage over Alaska. Actually early on Hawaii elected a Republican senator Hiram Fong and a Democrat. Since then though Hawaii has been all Democrats in Congress. Alaska has varied too by political party but the state is predicably Cro Republican.
 
Last edited:
Opinion noted. And rejected due to facts.
The facts in question: Puerto Rico, despite being owned by the US for well over a century, has not become a state, despite endless votes on the matter.

The facts: Puerto Rico has been subjected to all manner of different legislation, such as the Insular Cases of 1901, which have legally defined them as being “lesser” than white Americans. The Insular Cases still, to this day, are standing in place. The only reason Puerto Ricans even have citizenship is the US wanted to use them in the First World War.

There is no real reason to oppose statehood for Puerto Rico from the perspective of the mainland, yet the US still fervently refusing to grant it.

To try and claim race isn’t the driving factor is, as already established, deeply stupid.
 
The facts in question: Puerto Rico, despite being owned by the US for well over a century, has not become a state, despite endless votes on the matter.

The facts: Puerto Rico has been subjected to all manner of different legislation, such as the Insular Cases of 1901, which have legally defined them as being “lesser” than white Americans. The Insular Cases still, to this day, are standing in place. The only reason Puerto Ricans even have citizenship is the US wanted to use them in the First World War.

There is no real reason to oppose statehood for Puerto Rico from the perspective of the mainland, yet the US still fervently refusing to grant it.

To try and claim race isn’t the driving factor is, as already established, deeply stupid.

See Post #113

As I stated... You didn't even try to learn the real reasons Puerto Rico isn't a state.
 
The facts in question: Puerto Rico, despite being owned by the US for well over a century, has not become a state, despite endless votes on the matter.

The facts: Puerto Rico has been subjected to all manner of different legislation, such as the Insular Cases of 1901, which have legally defined them as being “lesser” than white Americans. The Insular Cases still, to this day, are standing in place. The only reason Puerto Ricans even have citizenship is the US wanted to use them in the First World War.

There is no real reason to oppose statehood for Puerto Rico from the perspective of the mainland, yet the US still fervently refusing to grant it.

To try and claim race isn’t the driving factor is, as already established, deeply stupid.

Yet one suspects that if the people PR were white and spoke English as a first language, there would be no issue
Doubly so, if they were Republican inclined.
 
See Post #113

As I stated... You didn't even try to learn the real reasons Puerto Rico isn't a state.
The reasons why Puerto Rico is not a state have already been addressed. You not liking having to face those reasons doesn’t change them.
 
See Post #113

As I stated... You didn't even try to learn the real reasons Puerto Rico isn't a state.

As in specifically, they have never taken the next step to become a state.

This is actually rather well laid out, our country has done it many times in the past 200+ years. First a referendum in the territory (this has been done overwhelmingly several times now).

After that, the Territory has to petition Congress. And in this, we see the first problem, as Puerto Rico has never actually petitioned Congress. What we saw was Congress telling them we want them to become a state and approving the measure. First problem.

Then the third step, Congress approving it and enacting an Act to move forward. Once again, Congress has done that without Puerto Rico requesting it (step 2 as outlined above).

After that comes their submitting an Application, and along with it a proposed State Constitution. That is actually the step they are at now, and as should be obvious, this is entirely in the court of Puerto Rico. Nobody else can submit the application and a draft Constitution other than them. But they have done neither, not even assembled a Constitutional Convention to create a draft document to submit with their application.

After that comes the next steps. Congress reviewing the Application and determining if they meet the criteria (primarily administrative like population, capitol, local legislature, etc) as well as a Constitution that is valid and abides by all other requirements of the US Constitution. After that Congress votes, and upon passage a Joint Resolution is passed to the President for signature.

Of the 8 major steps that need to be taken to become a state, Puerto Rico itself has only done Step 1. The US congress on their own initiative took Step 3, as a nudge for them to get off the fence and take the next step as their own people want. It is entirely up to the local leadership to move things forward. Nobody else can do that for them.

And Guam is in a slightly different position, as once again the majority of the population want Statehood, but the local government is dragging their feet. But as they are a Territory and not a Commonwealth, at this time they have a tad less self-determinization. But just like with Puerto Rico, they have to be the ones to take the next step. Nobody can do that for them. And it is not like they have not had choices, Multiple times the Northern Mariana Islands have proposed merging, but this has been repeatedly rejected by the people of Guam. But they are a step behind Puerto Rico, as while they have held informal polls and ballot measures, they have yet to have it an actual referendum to legally determine what they should do next.

But both of them are still in the same position. It is up to those local government to take the next step, nobody can do it for them.

And it is not even language, as some try to claim. Case in point, the State of New Mexico has it in their State Constitution that they are bi-lingual, and both Spanish and English are legal languages. And while the House wanted to reject it, President Taft twisted a lot of arms to have them pass the proposal.

And like in 1912 and 1958-1959, it would not surprise me if in the end we had two territories becoming states close together. But like in every other case, they have to make the next step.
 
And to circle back on what I said earlier a bit more.

The next step for any Territory or nation that wants to become a State is to submit an Application with a Draft Constitution. And this has to be a real Constitution, created just as the US Constitution was, with a Constitutional Convention and ratified by the population. New Mexico became a state in 1912, but held their Constitutional Convention between 1910-1911. Then submitted it with their application in 1911.


The Alaskan Constitutional Convention was in 1955-1956.


Hawaii actually had their Constitutional Convention back in 1949-50. But there were some issues with it, and it had to be amended before Congress approved it in 1959.


So once again, as can be seen in all three of the most recent territories to become states, the next step is a Constitutional Convention, and drafting a State Constitution. So how anybody can even try to scream "racism" when they have not themselves taken that step (let alone drafted one or submitted it) is beyond ignorance. And as I have already stated, Congress had absolutely no problem with New Mexico declaring their proposed state be bi-lingual. Interestingly enough, it was a Republican President that had to twist arms to get the Democratic House to finally pass that.

And yes, I did indeed state "Territory or Nation", as Texas had been an independent nation for ten years before it decided to become a state. And went through the exact same process as a Territory. But with a few differences, as they did not turn over their state owned lands to the Federal Government as previous and following territories did, which is why the BLM has little presence in the state to this day.
 
Guess what....

Okinawa can complain until the cows come home. It matters very little.

The government of Japan is the final arbiter of Base locations within Japan.

Yep, keeping bases in places where they're not wanted is a fine plan if the plan is to piss off the locals.

Having 70% of the local population want you out is not a good sign.
 
Yes. In Post #113.

They haven't tried to become a state.

One guy I served with in the Army was from Puerto Rico. And interestingly enough, as was typical his family moved to join him from Puerto Rico in Texas after he was stationed there.

And we actually talked about this very thing many times, and he was rather pissed that the government of Puerto Rico would not "get off the dime" and take the next step. And when he finished his four years, he elected to move his family to Florida. They did not like the hot dry and bitter cold of El Paso, and wanted something closer to the tropical climate they were familiar with. But neither he nor his wife wanted to return to Puerto Rico, and preferred living in an actual state.

And if they do want to become independent, there is always the route of Micronesia. It also was a US Territory, but in 1979 made the decision to ratify a new National Constitution and become an independent nation. Something the US had no problem with, and simply waved as they became the Federated States of Micronesia. An independent nation that after a decade of UN-US Trusteeship became fully independent.

But even then, one that is a tad unusual. As the nation of Micronesia itself does not actually have a military. Instead, they have an agreement where the US provides them any military they might need, and in exchange their citizens can serve in the US military. And I have actually served with two people from Micronesia. A status that the Philippines once used to have as well, in the 1980s I served with a hell of a lot of people from the Philippines in the US military.
 
Yes. In Post #113.

They haven't tried to become a state.
The U.S. has made it openly and explicitly clear that they won’t be accepted as a state on numerous occasions.

The incoming President is on record as an “absolute no” on the topic.

Hilarious you can’t handle facing that reality.
 
Central to statehood for Puerto Rico is its representation in the Senate and the US House.

Because it's commonly accepted in Washington that PR would elect Democrats to the Senate and, for the most part, the House, Republicans in Congress will vote against it for whatever that would be worth. No Republican Potus would sign onto PR statehood.

Back in the 70's and 80's when I was a civilian living and working in Washington the talk was heavy about DC becoming a state which I among other sensible beings always viewed as a wild notion. There is always the massive consensus DC would elect two Democrats to the Senate which guaranteed Republican opposition to statehood.

All the same a number of Republicans zanies started talking the counter wild notion of getting the Azores islands of Portugal into statehood to balance DC statehood (which isn't ever going to happen of course). Indeed, the Azores are profoundly Catholic Christian rural rightwing farmers and fishermen through and through which made Republicans in DC confident that would balance any statehood for DC. Rightwingers in Portugal's national politics always carried the Azores 99-1 or whatever it is.

While statehood for either or each of 'em is always a zany and looney notion, it demonstrates how frantic each party is about admitting any new state that would give the other party a benefit in the Senate and the House too.

Indeed and as I mentioned in scrolling Alaska and Hawaii to include for their population numbers were a near perfect balance for the Senate and the House. Each is a plus given the mineral resources and strategic location of Alaska and the natural assets of Hawaii to include its own strategic value to the USA.
 
The U.S. has made it openly and explicitly clear that they won’t be accepted as a state on numerous occasions.

The incoming President is on record as an “absolute no” on the topic.

Hilarious you can’t handle facing that reality.

Puerto Rico hasn't tried.

Please fail again.
 
Yep, keeping bases in places where they're not wanted is a fine plan if the plan is to piss off the locals.

Having 70% of the local population want you out is not a good sign.

I think we need to distinguish between the "local population", and the population of the whole country.
 
I would walk from MCAS Futenma to Kadena AFB occasionally. I bicycled all over the southern part of the island checking out castles. Some lovingly restored. Others mere rubble. I visited the tomb of the first Ryukuan king.... Tucked away in someone's back yard. And not once was I in danger. I was able to pedal down to Naha for the giant tug of war. That was a spectacular event.
As a teenager I learned Uechi-Ryū Karate with Sensei Ryuyu Tomoyose along with a small group of Marines at the base gym on what was then MCAF Futenma. Our first Okinawa home was in Ojana just a short trek from the south end of the MCAF runway. We later moved to Sunabe, not far from the Kadena Air Base East China Sea Gate. By the time I left after graduating from Kubasaki High School at Ft Buckner/Sukiran, my family had moved a third time to Ishikawa on the Pacific side.

I loved that island and the people. I knew the virtues and faults of both Americans and Okinawans, as well as the Koreans, Taiwanese, Filipinos and Japanese who also lived and worked there. Yep, there was a significant number advocating for early release from the U.N. mandate which gave oversight to a U.S. Army general as High Commissioner. But there were many more who were in no particular hurry for that to happen. Indeed, when asked why I never learned to speak fluent Japanese (or Okinawan), I answer there was little chance to practice. When my friends and I went into the local village restaurants, invariably one or more young people would approach us to practice their English!

I was stateside when the Koza Riot erupted. A brother told me about it. As violent and spontaneous as it was, it was not that surprising. The military and their dependents were protected from civilian prosecution which led to all sorts of mutual suspicion and distrust. Many Okinawans believed Americans could get away with anything. Many Americans believed Okinawans would bring frivolous or false complaints in hope of a payday. Neither, of course, was true.

When we lived in Ojana the area south of the Marine air facility was open or planted with sugar cane. Recent aerial photographs I've seen show virtually no separation between civilian development and the military fence line. They're butted up right next to each other in one of the island's most populous areas. Air operations and an unwelcoming civilian community fearful of accidents does not bode well for good relations.

Just my two cents after reading some of the less than accurate depictions of American forces on Okinawa.
 
As a teenager I learned Uechi-Ryū Karate with Sensei Ryuyu Tomoyose along with a small group of Marines at the base gym on what was then MCAF Futenma. Our first Okinawa home was in Ojana just a short trek from the south end of the MCAF runway. We later moved to Sunabe, not far from the Kadena Air Base East China Sea Gate. By the time I left after graduating from Kubasaki High School at Ft Buckner/Sukiran, my family had moved a third time to Ishikawa on the Pacific side.

I loved that island and the people. I knew the virtues and faults of both Americans and Okinawans, as well as the Koreans, Taiwanese, Filipinos and Japanese who also lived and worked there. Yep, there was a significant number advocating for early release from the U.N. mandate which gave oversight to a U.S. Army general as High Commissioner. But there were many more who were in no particular hurry for that to happen. Indeed, when asked why I never learned to speak fluent Japanese (or Okinawan), I answer there was little chance to practice. When my friends and I went into the local village restaurants, invariably one or more young people would approach us to practice their English!

I was stateside when the Koza Riot erupted. A brother told me about it. As violent and spontaneous as it was, it was not that surprising. The military and their dependents were protected from civilian prosecution which led to all sorts of mutual suspicion and distrust. Many Okinawans believed Americans could get away with anything. Many Americans believed Okinawans would bring frivolous or false complaints in hope of a payday. Neither, of course, was true.

When we lived in Ojana the area south of the Marine air facility was open or planted with sugar cane. Recent aerial photographs I've seen show virtually no separation between civilian development and the military fence line. They're butted up right next to each other in one of the island's most populous areas. Air operations and an unwelcoming civilian community fearful of accidents does not bode well for good relations.

Just my two cents after reading some of the less than accurate depictions of American forces on Okinawa.

How then do you explain the local desire to see the US military leave Okinawa ?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom