http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8574208.stmThe names of 200,000 Japanese troops and civilians are engraved in granite at Okinawa's memorial park, remembering the last major battle of World War II.

Alongside them are the 12,500 Americans who also perished in the brutal, inch-by-inch fight for the small, tropical island of coral 1,000 miles south of Tokyo.

"The United States has been here ever since, but a peace deal signed 50 years ago was not an equal one, agreed in the aftermath of war, surrender, then occupation.

There are now 24,000 US troops on Okinawa, most of them marines, and their bases, airfields, housing and training facilities cover a fifth of the island.

The people of Okinawa felt their lives were sacrificed in the war for the sake of the country, and they now believe they are shouldering more of their share of the burden of hosting US forces - with three quarters of American facilities in Japan on their small island...."
Source BBC.

Dear Examinator,

American bases throughout the world -
particularly in unstable regions
act as a deterent and a first point
of response against any aggressive
action in the region.

It also provides security to Australia.
With the instability in North Korea
and certain neighbouring regions it is
good to maintain American presence in
the Pacific.

cont'd ...

I forgot to add that the Americans have learned
that at the start of World War II - the concentration
of their Pacific power in Pearl Harbour was a disaster.
As a result their forces today are spread out throughout
the Pacific which includes Okinawa, South Korea, Guam,
Taiwan, the Phillipines, et cetera.

The Okinawans should welcome the Americans for the diversity and multiculturalism they bring to their otherwise insular, homogeneous population.

The Pentagon's reason for the presence of miltary bases in foreign countries is to secure America's interests by deterring attacks as a first line of defence.

They also “serve the national economic interests of the United States, ensuring access to markets and commodities needed to maintain the American standard of living…” and are a “visible expression of the extent of America’s status as a superpower”.

Another argument “sees them as positive expressions of American character, and particularly its humanitarian ethos.” The Pentagon portrays itself as a benefactor, a liberator, and helper on the scene at times of natural or other disasters.

They also claim bases are “gifts to other nations, both as defense sites and as wealth generators. They represent American altruism and sacrifice” when, in fact, they’re for hardline dominance intolerant of opposition, national sovereignty, democratic freedoms, and social justice.

Instead of providing safety and security, they often incite antagonism, opposition and blowback against an American occupier and enemy.

They are also hugely profitable for the defense establishment and related industries. When (and if) they pull out of an area they leave horrendous pollution behind for the inhabitants to clean up.

I wonder have many foreign governments are allowed to have miltary bases within US borders?

What would the consequences be IF they left?