Recently there are signs of Americans getting sick and tired of protecting the “ingrates” (Germany and S.Korea comes to mind). Some Americans are suggesting the US to pull out of S.Korea and see what happens on the basis of many S.Koreans wanted the US troops to leave or the S.Korean government uses the American’s “interests” of stability in the Far East as a chip for internal political motives. But, some Americans suggests to leave S.Korea is to show signs of LACK of leadership that has been the trademark of the US during the cold war. So, what is your opinion on US troops in S.Korea?
Personally, i think the US should pull out from the Soeul region and only have a small amount of troops in the southern city of Pusan. The US should let S.Korea engage the North as it likes since i believe the current crisis had already engrave the necessity of missile defence in the face of Japanese leaders. Without the current crisis, many leaders in Japan still refuses to belive in missile defence for the sake of trying not to antagonize the Koreans and Chinese, now the Japanese got their legitimacy for such as system. Two results, if deplomacy works then the Koreans get to reunite and Americans won’t be viewed as holding Koreans back. If deplomacy fails, then S.Koreans have to taste the responsibility of their own defeat and no doubt American soldiers will come once again. But, the difference is that Japan’s deterence in the form of missile defense against the N.K. is there irregardless of the outcome. I don’t trust the N.Korean leadership at all and i believe the South will bite into a bitter pill, then they’ll realize the amount of American sacrifice. But, of course we’re dealing with real lives and hopefully the best will turn out. What’s your take? by the way, before the pull out of the troops in S.Korea, we should leave Germany asap, why in the world we even have troops there even to this date? It’s wasting our resources and tax payer’s money.
By: Rabie - 24th January 2003 at 20:52
RE: Korea..an example?
what i mean is something like this
america need a USEF – a us expledionary force – stays at home and then goes and rushes out to the conflict
to rush out to the conflict you need bases
now looking at my big map on the wall i’ld say kadena and the philipeans are the best in east asia but of course philipean problems so go east about 1000 miles to Guam
in the IO you ahve diego garcia – great
you’ve now got some great bases in bahrain, qatar, kuwait, etc
you’ve got bugger all to strike south america and africa (bar ascension)
then in europe you’ve got 3 big bases in UK, Germany ad ITaly – proable could get this down to one.
you’ve also got cyprus
so form the abovee im saying you could get way with a few less bases in east asia and europe but not that much
america must cotton on to the whole we must do peacekkeping thing – its all part of the new world order }>
rabie :9
By: Arabella-Cox - 24th January 2003 at 01:31
RE: Korea..an example?
huh? Filipines? The US didn’t wanted to leave…but the Filipine government said no, so we left. As easy as that. Certainly withdrawing troops doesn’t mean not having joint exercises with good friends. I agree, get out of Europe. What’s the point if we base our troops in country A and couldn’t use it when our “interests” are at stake. I don’t really see danger in Europe and somehow the Balkans are so over hyped to lure the Americans in, i suspect it’s to use us as political shields…hey you don’t like the war in the Balkans, blame Americans.
By: Sauron - 23rd January 2003 at 19:31
RE: Korea..an example?
IMHO, apart from supporting the current peace keeping efforts, there is no need for maintaining any US combat forces in Europe. It’s hard to imagine a circumstance where they would be needed given the anti-war views which are now universal throughout Europe and the modifying affect that NATO and the EU now has on politics there, not to mention the UN, which the European nations put so much faith in. Would Greece and Turkey for example actually fight in the current circumstance? What are the chances that another Milosevic could take power?
US forces should be withdraw ASAP from South Korea as their presence is being used by both sides to maintain the status quo and blame the US for the impass. A speedy departure would also force China, Japan and Russia to deal with the issue of the bomb in NK. Japan and the two Korea’s would have to decide whether or not it would be in their best collective interests to remain nuclear weapons free or not. Another good project for the UN.
I agree with EPL’s view concerning Japan, as well as his comments about the need for the US to maintain strong cooperation with its friends around the world re INTEL, joint training, peacekeeping, and so on and in particuliar concerning ways and means to combat the reactionary forces which are a threat to everyone. There would be huge cost savings for the USA, not the least of which would come from army manpower reductions.
The middle east is another issue of cource.
I suspect that some of these changes will come quite rapidly.
Regards
Sauron
By: ageorge - 23rd January 2003 at 18:37
RE: Korea..an example?
If the US and South Korea carry out a pre-emptive strike on North Korea using the North Koreans supposed nuclear capabilities as an excuse what would the Chinese say , given their own stance over Tibet ???
By: Arabella-Cox - 23rd January 2003 at 14:32
RE: Korea..an example?
“All these countries would be much better off without the US troops stationed there. “
I don’t think the’d all be be better off… they’d lose some cash flow in their economies, and they’d also have to pay a bit more for their own defence… but I think that would be a good thing in most cases.
By: seahawk - 23rd January 2003 at 10:45
RE: Korea..an example?
Well I believe there is only one place in the world where US troops belong and that is the US.
To defend the USA you don´t need troops in Germany, Italy, England, SK, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and god knows where else.
All these countries would be much better off without the US troops stationed there.
By: Rabie - 23rd January 2003 at 09:35
RE: Korea..an example?
hmm with degio garcia, and guam i would only keed kadena.
in euope io would scale back
maybee down to one air base in teh uk rather than 3
also one base in germany
a base in italy sounds good to keep
the only problem is that today you really need the philipean bases back and i bet your regretting giving them up
i would say pull the combat units back stateside but keep suport units
if you want reel savings im sure there is stuff stateside that can be cut but there are senators, and congressmen that want them prevented
rabie :9
By: Arabella-Cox - 22nd January 2003 at 09:09
RE: Korea..an example?
🙂 Elp for president… 🙂
By: Geforce - 22nd January 2003 at 05:56
RE: Korea..an example?
I support your plan ELP.
By: Arabella-Cox - 22nd January 2003 at 05:51
RE: Korea..an example?
good plan…Besides, we have Guam which is very different from Puerto Ricans…those tax dollar sucking ingrates.
By: ELP - 22nd January 2003 at 05:45
RE: Korea..an example?
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 22-01-03 AT 05:46Â AM (GMT)]What I suggest isn’t isolationist, it is just practical.
England: Remove the F-15 Wing and KC-135 tanker unit. U2 support.
Germany: Remove everything.
Aviano: Keep what ever is needed to support NATOs effort in that area.
Korea: Remove everything. S. Korea has enough firepower to defend itself.
Japan: Remove everything from Kadena except Recon platforms. Remove the F-16 unit from Misawa. Remove most of the airlift from Yokota. Keep the COMINT/SIGINT assets in place.
Bringing these assests back to the states would allow for a lot of savings in $$.
It would be natural that we deploy units to these countries occasionally for exercises, so practice in combat readiness would not suffer. Also it would leave more active duty forces available to do more important things and take some of the workload off of the Reserve and Guard.
By: Arabella-Cox - 22nd January 2003 at 02:49
RE: Korea..an example?
“I don’t think the south will persue Nuke capabilities. If they do, then that’ll leave Japan no choice to develop them. “
If the Americans withdraw from SK and the NK develop nuclear weapons I think the SK would have no choice but to start their own Nuclear weapons program. If the US withdraws from Japan they will probably develop their own nukes no matter what the SK’s do if China and NK both have nuclear weapons.
There is certainly no love between the Japanese and the Koreans (north and south).
By: Arabella-Cox - 22nd January 2003 at 02:45
RE: Korea..an example?
“And all this time I thought poor political, social and economic choices killed the USSR. “
You mean the same way the same political system is killing China right now? The Favoured trading nation label given to China by the US some time ago seems to promote growth and prosperity for many Chinese citizens despite being crippled by choosing the communist rule of government… every bit as much as the change to free elections seems to be helping serbia… of course if they don’t start handing over the people the west wants to punnish then I guess it will just be another democracy that fails because it didn’t do as it was told, didn’t have oil, and was not a neighbour of a country the US or the West wants bases to attack any time soon.
Seems to me the taleban was not supported because of its wonderful treatment of women but simply because they opposed the side labeled communist in the region. The Chinese were also supported because they opposed the main communist state called the Soviet Union.
Their own governing style seems to have very little to do with whether they prosper or fail.
A building military threat and a clamp on trading partners seems to be the method of choice.
“How are things in beautiful NZ?”
Things are fine here… spoke to Peter Jackson this morning… he said if Bush will hurry up he might get a few shots of Bagdad to get a 1 to 1 scale model of Mordor for a few extra final scenes for the “Return of the King”. }>
By: Sauron - 22nd January 2003 at 00:38
RE: Korea..an example?
Vortex
Yes I would concur that Japan has in some ways been a better friend of the US than the rest.
There was a period when the communists in Japan used the anti-US card during Japan’s elections. Their protests were very entertaining. Lots of colour, noise, smoke and and highly coordinated advances and charges on the police lines. Much more fun to watch than the pathetic and mindless stuff that the anti-globalists come up with now.
Regards
Sauron
By: Arabella-Cox - 21st January 2003 at 18:14
RE: Korea..an example?
I somewhat disagree Sauron. In terms of Japan, their political leaderships by far didnt’ use the American antagonization since the majority of the public is still very proAmerican. I have no problem with people protesting certain things about Americans since afterall that’s how we evolve with our strengths. I do have a cow with politicians taking advantage of it and further stir things that’s totally untrue and the end result is not for their country but for themselves. Ironically, in Taiwan, after the 1995/96 missile crisis, people are little bit more proAmerican due to some very very obvious reasons. But above all, i wouldn’t pull out of Japan. More importantly, it’s time to give ourselves a better image abroad since that’s what all this B.S. European countries are doing.
By: Sauron - 21st January 2003 at 17:43
RE: Korea..an example?
All beneficaries grow to resent their benefactor. This applied to Japan and Germany and more recently to South Korea and Taiwan.
Roh Moo Roh exploited this fact to help him win the recent South Korean election by suggesting that the US is the real problem in Korea (what else is new?)
As usual the rest of Korea’s neighbourhood is willing to stand back and let the US try and pull their collective chestnuts out of the fire for them (how’s that for cold war talk Garry?).
IMHO the South isn’t worth another US life or dollar and I would like to see the US pull all its forces out and let SK, Japan, China and Russia figure out what to do with the North on their own. They are wealthy enough to buy off Kim Ding Dong on their own if thats what they want.
I would go further and pull US forces out of Japan and Germany and throughout Europe including the UK, only maintaining peace keeping forces where necessary. The US should not be wasting its resourses in these areas anymore.
Garry, you old utopian socialist. 🙂 How are things in beautiful NZ?
I especially like your line…” forced isolation killed the Soviet Union and is killing NK and Cuba” Hell! And all this time I thought poor political, social and economic choices killed the USSR. 🙂
Regards
Sauron
Sauron
By: Arabella-Cox - 21st January 2003 at 15:36
RE: Korea..an example?
I don’t think the south will persue Nuke capabilities. If they do, then that’ll leave Japan no choice to develop them. And by far the Japanese are more technologically advanced than the Koreans and they know that so no need to start something you know you’re going to lose out anyways.
As to Germany, why not? I’ve already heard of stories that the US will pull out of the Germany since ironically Eastern European nations are more reliable. Hey, before you know it, we’ll make Poland the third largest economy instead of Germany.
By: Arabella-Cox - 21st January 2003 at 05:49
RE: Korea..an example?
“What’s your take? by the way, before the pull out of the troops in S.Korea, we should leave Germany asap, why in the world we even have troops there even to this date? It’s wasting our resources and tax payer’s money.”
I actually agree, but it will not happen. Before WWII the US had isolationist policies where it kept itself to itself and it did not prosper. Isolationism would kill the US as a superpower, much the same way that sanctions and forced isolation killed the Soviet Union and is killing North Korea and Cuba.
Either way the South Korean forces could easily take out the North if push comes to shove. There is no reason to believe that the South Koreans couldn’t create its own nuclear weapons program 5 times faster than the North… even with the late start.
Sign In
January 21, 2003 at 4:57 am