November 17, 2006
Where Diplomacy Needs To…
… be discarded, to some extent and be replaced by the U.S.’s asserting ourselves.
At the conclusion of actual combat in the Korean War, the U.S. signed a treaty with South Korea that has seen American troops over there ever since, their mission to protect the SKs in the event of an invasion by their northern neighbors (the NKs), who view both Koreas as being the same country and believe that SK should also fall under the thumb of communism. In short, the Ills in Pyongyang have long wanted their piece of the ROK.
I haven’t a clue as to how much money it costs the U.S. taxpayer to maintain what? Thirty thousand or so troops in perpetual presence over there? I know it’s got to be at least a few bucks more than dinner at the Four Seasons, Superbowl tickets, a new suit or even ten million times the amount of money I’ll “own”, collectively, in my entire life.
Which is why this kind of ticks me off.
South Korea will not join a U.S. plan to intercept North Korean ships suspected of carrying arms cargo out of fear of raising tensions with its neighbor, officials said on Monday.
South Korea officials have said interdicting North Korean ships could lead to military clashes between the two countries that are technically still at war.
Okay, fine. So why the hell are we there?
“To protect them”.
Great. They obviously haven’t got much faith in our ability to do that, or they wouldn’t worry so much about making Kim Jong Illness angry.
Add on the fact that their “grateful” citizens spend an awful lot of time expressing hostility toward the United States. They don’t even want us there. Maybe they’d rather be lickin’ boot for the “Dear Leader”.
Washington has been pressing Seoul and other governments to take a tough stand toward Pyongyang. However, South Korea, which fears instability in its heavily armed neighbor to the North, has remained committed to engaging Pyongyang.
If they want to go against us thus, we need to pull the plug on the treaty, begin withdrawing our troops, and then — and then see if they still want to give us an argument.
We need to do this everywhere we provide protection — “You don’t like the way we take care of business? Okay, fine. We’re gone, do your own thing….”
My bet is that some tunes will be changed, posthaste.
http://hardastarboard.mu.nu/wp-trackback.php?p=569
November 18th, 2006 at 6:42 am
I don’t really understand the comment above mine, Seth. Strange!
I agree with you completely. It doesn’t make any sense to me why we should waste or time, troops and money protecting people who are unwilling to protect themselves. Right on!
November 18th, 2006 at 9:12 am
Gayle –
I just deleted a bunch of spambot comments that arrived overnight and this morning — it was probably one o’ them thar critters.
On topic, I’m all for withdrawing a very big chunk of our personnel from areas where they are not actually engaged in combat directly related to our interests and cutting off all money flow to countries that are hostile to us or refuse to go along with programs we need them to cooperate in. The same applies to the UN.
A diplomat would probably tell us we do things for other countries to maintain their friendship, so it seems to me that if we’re not accomplishing the stated goal, there’s no sense in throwing good money after bad.
November 18th, 2006 at 9:20 am
Seth:
S. Korea is reminding me of France. I think we should pull out and just stay in Japan. Let them fend for themselves. I’m fed up with their spineless and ungrateful attitude.
November 18th, 2006 at 10:25 am
Atheling2 –
Our presence there for 1/2 century has been all that’s kept Ills Sr and Jr from invading them, and they have become complacent, as though they are our masters or something over there, or even our equals re their security.
Our “redeployment” from the ROK might be just the wake-up call they need.
November 18th, 2006 at 11:51 am
Seth:
Speaking of needing to discard diplomacy and reasserting oneself, how about Israel’s envoy walking out of a UN session which called for Israel to end its military operations in the Gaza Strip?
http://washingtontimes.com/upi/20061118-084936-7081r.htm
I wish we would walk out too. And kick the UN off our soil!
November 18th, 2006 at 11:55 am
Of course, these shipments are unlikely to be a hazard to South Korea, as they are already within target range of North Korea’s military forces (and weapons). The issue is that these shipments are a hazard to the rest of the world, including the U.S. If South Korea is unwilling to help prevent arms smuggling, then this makes them at least an accomplice the North Korea’s actions, which include the destruction of the U.S. In that case, we need to view them as hostile to our national interests and act accordingly, which minimally would involve our withdrawing our forces and leaving them to the tender mercies of their friends to the north.
I”m starting to think that South Korea’s action be motivated by tribal/racial solidarity with the North (which means a radical avoidance of provoking conflict with them) as much, or even more, than being motivated by appeasement. Or perhaps, when they weigh the risk of their economy being devastated by war with the North, they are far more interested in avoiding that at all costs, even if that means allowing great harm to other nations in the world, (including their putative allies).
What I find puzzling is that, given that South Korea has been experiencing such an explosive growth in the Christian church, why would these Christians want to be under the rule of a country that has been ruthless in its extermination of Christians within its borders. Are they really in such a state of suicidal denial? Or do they think they can convert their northern cousins?
November 18th, 2006 at 12:19 pm
Atheling2 –
Good for them! It’s about time they stood up to the U.N., which is as much an enemy of Israel as it is of the U.S.
I’m glad we came down on their side in the vote, unlike when we went along with France re Lebanon and enabled Hezbollah to begin regrouping and re-arming.
The U.N. totally ignores the reasons behind Israel’s every defensive action, always, 100%, no matter what, and favor their terrorist attackers.
November 18th, 2006 at 12:48 pm
Civil Truth –
There is a rather large movement in the ROK (students at the forefront, who else?) for reuniting the two Koreas — this can only be the product of airheaded university liberals/leftists and a strong propaganda campaign from the north.
As usual, these “useful idiots”, so comparable to our own liberals, even living in such close proximity to Kim Jong Illness’s workers’ paradise, seem to have absolutely no clue as to how different life would be under the “Dear Leader”’s dear leadership.
I wouldn’t think the Christians in South Korea would be among those seeking reunity, though they might indeed seek solidarity with an optimistic eye toward conversion, and toward helping to maintain the faith of those NK Christians who are forced to practice their religion in secret.
During the Cold War, you’ll remember, various Christian organizations, at great risk to their members, made a practice of smuggling Bibles into eastern Europe. I don’t know that this is happening between the two Koreas, but I wouldn’t bet against it, either.
As a whole, though, it seems that the ROK has been leaning more and more to the left hand side of the global political equation in recent years, anyway. Look, for example, at the increasing opposition to U.S. positions at the U.N. by the ROK, and where the UN has gone shopping for Kofi Annon’s successor.
I believe this 50+ year old protection treaty has gone on long enough. Let the UN send in French troops to protect them — or at least surrender on their behalf, LOL.
November 18th, 2006 at 7:22 pm
Seth,
Actually, your idea has been underway, albeit slowly. In 1971, Nixon removed the 7th Div, about 20,000. 3,600 more left under the Carter
Administration and the Bush I era withdrew a combat brigade of about 7000. The current adminstration has removed another approximate
10,000, a 5,000 man brigade transfering to Iraq
in 2004. In terms of boots on the ground, there are probably more at Ft. Carlson; although we maintain a considerable USAF contingent. As for sending French (spit!) troops, I suspect they reflected on their asian experinces and said,
“Dien Ben Phooey, Monsieurs!”
November 18th, 2006 at 10:08 pm
Actually Seth, I’ve come to believe the rest of the world don’t appreciate nothing, and we should just pull our military out of all countries, and to hell with them all. Maybe after about 100 of these socialist dictatorships have genocide running rampant in their back yard, they’ll learn to appreciate what the western world has done for them all these years. Pull everyone back, and let them sink. A hard lesson, yes, but the only one that opens eyes.
November 18th, 2006 at 10:30 pm
BB –
“Dien Ben Phooey, Monsieurs!”
ROTFLMAO!!!!
We seriously need to start moving them all out — not a word to the Seoul govt. When they come to us in alarm, we say “welllllll, pilgrims, you don’t wanna cooperate with us, so we thought we’d move our troops where they’d be better appreciated. Give our best to the Dear Leader, wouldja?”
November 18th, 2006 at 10:35 pm
ABF –
That’s what we really need to do. Just let ‘em cold turkey on help from the U.S.
The consequences would definitely be a wake-up call, and a great attitude adjustment in realizing who their real friends are and respecting us rather than spitting on us.
All spit! after all, should be reserved for the French.