>

An immediate downvote tends to be Reddit's "vote fuzzing" feature or whatever it's called. I forget what its purpose is.
That's a US aircraft carrier that sails all over the western Pacific, it isn't permanently in Japan. And there's already tons of US missiles in Japan at the US military bases. >

Yeah, I spent 5 years as part of the West Coast Navy. I know the Reagan gets underway. Hence the words "a little". >

I spent a similar amount of time stationed in Japan. My point was it's so mobile that it's not a reliable defense for a Japanese island. You might as well call the article misleading because the US already has Tomahawks in South Korea lol. >

Yes, that too. I'll amend my statement to "a little tiny eansy weenie bit misleading". >

I’m a little surprised that we don’t have those missiles already there, considering how many ballistic missiles North Korea throws into the ocean near Japan. >

Very badly worded title. Or it's intentionally misleading to get clicks. You're either lazy or deceptive. >

To protect Taiwan ? >

Why doesn't Japan have nukes?