UPDATE
GI Korea compares the media coverage (which, truth be told, has been relatively subdued, not to mention belated) with the silence regarding the recent burglary and rape of a USFK soldier in Daegu. He writes:
I guarantee if it was USFK service member that did this crime there would be never ending news coverage of it complete with all the emotional pictures of crying families, talk of the unfair SOFA agreement, and talk of all the crimes committed by US service members in Korea while simultaneously ignoring the fact that Koreans commit just as serious crimes against USFK soldiers.
Oh My News and the rest of the Korean media where are you? Is a drunken brawl that happens all over Korea every day more news worthy than the rape and and burglary of a 22 year old female? The silence in this case is deafening.
Mostly valid criticism, IMHO. To be fair, however, a search of Naver.com’s news service revealed that three media companies DID cover it — albeit briefly — and one of them WAS OhMyNews. The others were Seoul Shinmun (also rather leftish) and Yonhap. Of course, OhMyNews’ piece is hardly the emotionally charged in-depth expose we’d expect from them concerning GI crimes (I guess they don’t have writers that simultaneously write for USFK advocacy groups), and some of the comments (not that there were many) are, to put this politely, unhelpful. But for the record, it did cover the piece, as did the other two news services mentioned above.
ORIGINAL POST
A 35-year-old Korean man was pretty messed up after he was beaten by three beer bottle-wielding GIs in not-so-lovely Uijeongbu on July 2 (the story is only making the papers now). The assailants were reportedly angry because the victim, identified by his last name of Cho, accidentally bumped into them as they were crossing the street. Two of the assailants fled, and their identities (including, as USFK points out, whether they were U.S. military personnel) remain unknown. One, however, was caught by Mr. Cho’s friends who turned him over to police (the GI denies having beaten Mr. Cho or knowing who the other two assailants were, and instead claims that he was attacked by unidentified Koreans as he was trying to help the victim).
Nothing in English about this story so far, but if you read Korean, check out the OhMyNews and NoCut News stories. Of the three, the OhMyNews piece is by far the best — despite the fact that a) it’s OhMyNews, and b) the journalist works for the National Campaign for the Eradication of Crime by U.S. Troops in Korea, the piece is relatively even-handed (it distinguishes hard facts from simply claims made by Mr. Cho and his friends), quotes USFK officials for their side of the story, and actually notes that just because the police blame the SOFA for failing to do their jobs doesn’t necessarily make it true. In this case, police handed the U.S. suspect over to USFK without questioning him, with the excuse that under the SOFA, Korean police do not have the right to question suspects. In December of 2002, however, revisions to the SOFA enabled the Korean police to investigate suspects before turning them over to USFK. The National Police Agency issued guidelines to this effect in January 2003 and even distributed a manual on how to handle SOFA cases in June of that year. Police on the ground, however, are still not with the program.
Anyone with more info on this, feel free to enlighten us in the comments section.
Note to media: In all three pieces I linked above, the full name of the U.S. soldier arrested was printed. Is that really necessary?
30 Comments
Not a great stretch for USFK. Kill the milk woman, steal the truck, beat the man with the beer bottle.
Whereas it’s only Mr. Cho/?‘°?ͺ¨?¨…
I guess the soldier could sue the “news” outlets for libel, as a Korean would do.
And I always thought the “Don’t make a beer bottle a weapon commercial on TV was stupid and a waste of time. Now I realize it is ncecessary because the grunts are stupid and a waste of space…
Well, I would say that if it is true, then the GI’s need to be punished, but something in the story seems to be missing. I prefer a wait and see approach as opposed to the knee jerk condemnation of the poster above.
Interesting that the mainstream media are holding off on this.
And if this does become a big deal, I hope the USFK side and their media sympathizers (e.g., the Chosun Ilbo) will point out to everyone that it was not the SOFA that prevented them from doing their jobs. Using that as an excuse now deflates the agenda of the far-left.
And that is a very big misstep to reveal the full name of the alleged “attacker” instead of the conventional “E-?¨” or whatever is appropriate. Think what some of you will about how universally anti-USFK everyone is in Korea, but that kind of thing doesn’t play well to most people in the public, whether Koreans or non-Koreans.
And while we’re at it, weren’t these gentlemen out past curfew (the story says it happened at midnight)? I thought it was midnight on the weekends now, or is it 1 a.m.?
Though this is not to blame the GIs for being angry for having been hit by a car. It’s easy to see that many Koreans also react with considerable anger over such things, occassionally even with a beer bottle. Ultimately this was a drunken street brawl that would be no big deal, news-wise, had it involved two groups of Koreans or perhaps even two groups of non-Koreans.
There appears to be no real anti-SOFA angle, either, so there is no point in making a big deal out of this.
Anyway, whether busting curfew or not, the GIs involved should have read this USFK info website more carefully:Small but aggressive radical elements gain widespread media coverage of their demonstrations against the United States. These radical groups capitalize on any negative actions which can be used to depict the U.S. and Americans as the culprits. Most of the protests are against what is perceived to be unjust U.S. policies and laws which are interpreted as having a detrimental affect on Korea.
Crimes such as murder and rape allegedly committed by U.S. personnel trigger immediate and repeated protests at USFK installations. Even disorderly conduct with or without injuries or property damage can become distorted out of proportion and become a major problem for those U.S. personnel involved.
Although the ROK government and USFK take steps to minimize risk to USFK personnel and property, all personnel and their family members must obey Korean laws and regulations.
Showing respect for the host nation’s culture and customs will enhance the chances of a tour of duty in Korea being interesting and enjoyable.
Those who are boisterous, arrogant, rude and/or disrespectful can expect to become enbroiled in physical altercations resulting in bodily injury and legal complications.
The dividends of being friendly are significant and pleasant. The consequences of being an ugly American can be painful, costly and long lasting.By the way, the photo of the guy does look bad, but I looked just as bad after a trip to the emergency room to put my split forehead back together and sew the skin over my nose bridge back onto my face after a “helpful” ajoshi in a parking garage shut the large and heavy rear door of the minivan I was using while my face was still in its arc. I guess I could have gotten on Ohmynews: Disgruntled Parking Lot Attendant Assaults Foreign-Goods-Buying Man from California.
Not a great stretch for USFK. Kill the milk woman, steal the truck, beat the man with the beer bottle. I know you’re just trolling, but the facts are that USFK personnel have an extremely low rate of reported violent crime.
Kushibo, curfew is midnight on workdays and one a.m. on days not followed by duty. Also, the part about this not being picked up by the major media outlets, unfortunately, isn’t quite true. I first saw it on the MBC 9:00 news a couple days ago (though that is the channel the Unification Minister Chung worked at right? Maybe they should be lumped in with OhMY and the Hanky..)
You’re right about how this wouldn’t have been an issue were it an incident between two drunk old Koreans but I’d take it one step further. This wouldn’t be a big deal in almost any of the other countries American troops are stationed in and certainly not national level news. For whatever reason the Korean people expect perfect, crime-free behavior of a bunch of single and liquored up young men. A standard they certainly don’t hold for their countrymen. Sh*t happens and as long as you’re lucky enough to belong to the ????Ό?‘± it’s no sweat off anyone’s back but be born an American and all bets are off.
Now, I’m not here to get into one of those “I’m a foreigner, I hate Korea, and I’m damn proud of it” rants that are so common in the English language Korea blogosphere. I usually enjoy my time outside the confines of my camp. I’ve never been spat on or yelled at because of who I am or what I do. Far from it, in fact. The point I want to make is for the enlisted slobs, like myself, who are treated like children during their time in this country. I had much greater priviliges in my first year in the Army, back in school where a young soldier is SUPPOSED to be treated like an infantile moron.
Most guys I know just slam the Army or 2ID as being the problem, that somehow the entire mindset of men of rank transforms upon arrival to this country. I see the restrictions they impose upon us as the natural consequence of years of experience in a country where a bar fight can become an international controversy. It’s understandable that our leaders try and find ways to eliminate the petty crimes that damage our collective image. That they go about it in a counter productive way (curfew, restriction of driving privileges, “battle buddy” policies) is an issue but me but not the only one, as it is with my fellow enlisted soldiers. My problem is with the host nation’s culture that expects perfect behavior of we young slobs that drives my leadership to curtail MY rights and MY privileges.
Whatever BS spills out of this street brawl only one thing is sure in my mind. It’s not that the Korean-American military alliance will suffer yet another blow, or that our two nation’s (amicable?) divorce will continue inching closer to reality. No, I only know that the juvenile restrictions will continue unabated.
I see your point, CoryCarly, but I don’t entirely agree that this kind of thing would only be a problem here. I think the Okinawans (NGOs, if not the local media) would also be on this kind of thing.
You’re also right that when you have the population of a small city living somewhere, that crime is going to happen.
I wish the USFK PAOs would be less concerned about who to dole out media access and privileges out to and would get a little more proactive and savvy about how to deal with the Korean media. USFK could counter a lot of the bad media with good old facts and get a lot of the non-agenda media to counter the nonsense coming out of the agenda-driven anti-USFK groups like usacrime for them. (I still am trying to figure out who the American was who was working for them and essentially told me in 2000 that American GIs have never been victims of murder or other violent crime by Korean citizens.)
saturday links
Late-linkage after a blogging-free Frida
I know you?re just trolling, but the facts are that USFK personnel have an extremely low rate of reported violent crime.
I am not trolling for anything I am simply stating a fact. It’s been a rough month for USFK.
??΄??° ?° ?°?? wrote:I know you?re just trolling, but the facts are that USFK personnel have an extremely low rate of reported violent crime.
I am not trolling for anything I am simply stating a fact. It?s been a rough month for USFK.I see the problem now, ?°. I had misinterpreted what you meant when you said the following:Not a great stretch for USFK. Kill the milk woman, steal the truck, beat the man with the beer bottle.By “not a great stretch,” you meant “not a great month,” but I thought you meant “not a great stretch” as “no real effort,” as in killing people, stealing things, and causing fights was quite easy for them to get caught up in.
My unsarcastic apologies for assuming you were trolling.
Now I realize it is ncecessary because the grunts are stupid and a waste of space??
That’s painting a lot of people, worldwide, with a rather broad stroke of the brush, isn’t it?
Nomad,
point. far to broad, and I wish I could retract the breadth of that statement…
Nomad, I agree with you that it wasn’t quite fair . . . but it was funny.
“USFK could counter a lot of the bad media with good old facts and get a lot of the non-agenda media to counter the nonsense coming out of the agenda-driven anti-USFK groups like usacrime for them.”
It would be nice if this were true, but it doesn’t work that way. In some article in the Western press, I believe, in early 2003 when SK was scaling back the orgy of hate after 60 Minutes and other news orgs in the US started running pieces solely about anti-US activities in Korea, it was reported that the Korean counterparts to USFK and US embassy top guys were sypathising with the problem and wishing it would go away, and part of the fretting was the constructive idea that if USFK and the embassy or DC had done this or that or this, so much of the explosion of anger could have been avoided.
The US guys replied that, in fact, most of the suggestions offered had been done by them.
The 2002 tank case is the biggest examples, but the trend is similar down to small environmental infractions on US bases across the land.
The Korean media did not report the candlelight vigil (the first for months before Koreans used them for anti-US benefit) USFK held for the two girls 1 week after the accident. USFK also held press conferences with media and locals. They put out info sheets for the press and people. They talk to the media people for these stories. And what they said is often used to fuel the fire. And too often, key pieces of information are left out — like the vigil or the basic fact of the monetary settlement reached about a month after the tank accident with the families and the Korean government and USFK.
The US gov can’t force the Korean media to report anything.
One idea I had before was USFK using people with Korean language skills or even KATUSAs as part of the USFK news department — in short, have the USFK media resources produce a report (television) (and why not print too?) in Korean to be offered to the Korean media outlets. If they won’t show them, then put them up on the USFK website and mention the link to the segment as much as possible to get the word out in the Korean public. Also, they could show the clip on USFK tv channel. Some Koreans watch it, and it really wouldn’t waste much air time considering some of the info-commercials I remember seeing aired frequently on it.
On the other types of crimes, the best example I can think of that didn’t get reported was the Chusok brawl in Itaewon involving security guards and a group of Irish expats in which gas guns and other implements were used and at least one of the Irish got shot in the head. It was a major scene with injuries. But, no arrests. The Irish were questioned but the police quickly decided it didn’t want to have any part of it and wanted it to go away. And only an online news org ran anything on it even though it was big and it generated a good bit of buzz in among the expats on the net.
I did a review of it, but it is currently off line. I’ll work on it today.
I do agree with you that USFK’s efforts often are fruitless, but not always.
As for proactive behavior (i.e., what to do when there is no major issue going on), I can’t go into this too much, but I have had occasion to see first-hand the press end of USFK-press relations, and I will tell you that the response to certain reasonable requests bordered on adversarial from the get-go. This kind of arrogant and hostile reaction was completely unwarranted and I think it would leave a bad taste in the mouth of reporters who would otherwise sympathize with USFK.
I have also encountered public relations people who were downright caustic when it came to constructive suggestions about how to proactively avoid engendering bad relations with the neighbors regarding certain sensitive issues.
Sorry for being so oblique, but there are people’s professional cirumstances to consider.
Another black eye for USFK
The Marmot posted yesterday about Korean
CorpyCarly said: ” Most guys I know just slam the [US] Army or 2ID as being the problem…[but] I see the restrictions they impose upon us as the natural consequence of years of experience in a country where a bar fight can become an international controversy. It?s understandable that our leaders try and find ways to eliminate the petty crimes that damage our collective image. That they go about it in a counter productive way (curfew, restriction of driving privileges, ?battle buddy?? policies) is an issue [to] me, but not the only one, as it is with my fellow enlisted soldiers. My problem is with the host nation?s culture that expects perfect behavior of we young slobs that drives my leadership to curtail MY rights and MY privileges.
Whatever BS spills out of this street brawl only one thing is sure in my mind…I only know that the juvenile restrictions will continue unabated.”
I contrast this well-written and intelligent comment by a US Army enlisted to the image presented earlier by EFL Geek:
“Now I realize it is ncecessary [sic] because the grunts are stupid and a waste of space…”
Actually, the “grunts” are mostly just a bunch of pretty good 18 to 25 year old Americans, usually ones who happened to decide not to go to college (at least not yet). Many of them assigned to ROK may be “first termers” and outside of the US for the first time in their lives.
I wonder how many ROK citizens (and, for that matter, other civilians reading here of whatever nationality) realize that that US military recruiters have to work extremely hard to find prospects able to meet the high standards mandated for inductees.
A “standard” quota is two inductees a month per NCO recruiter. Doesn’t sound like much, but to meet it many of the recruiters have to put in many more hours a week than they did when they were in operational units. NCO recruiting duty is one of the highest stress jobs in the Army.
Aside from the age/medical/physical/educational standards, the recruiters can’t send anyone for induction who has a “serious” criminal record (a rough rule of thumb for “serious”: any offense involving lying, cheating or stealing after the age of 16 is disqualifying with no waivers allowed).
Do those of you resident in ROK think that ROK citizens understand this? I wonder if a lot of them think that the US military serves as a “reform school” for our country’s delinquents. Indeed, many Americans may still have this impression, though it’s a stereotype that’s at least 50 years out of date (to the extent it was ever true).
So, if a US servicemember commits a serious crime off post while overseas, IMO it’s something that the US military has done its best to preclude, at least from the “big picture” institutional perspective, by not taking in “employees” with prior criminal records.
Corpy, an interim part of the solution to the problem of undue restrictions you describe (as much as it can be solved) is to end the individual replacement/rotation of soldiers to ROK for one year tours. (I gather from items I see on the internet that this is gradually happening, probably enhanced by the war in Iraq and the fact that we are using a “unit” rotation policy for ground combat units sent there for one year tours).
Once we begin withdrawing from Iraq, and the move to the more southerly bases in ROK is complete, I think we will see this “unit” rotation (of entire battalions brigades) implemented for ROK tours. I hope this will greatly improve the unit climate and cohesiveness and thus reduce potential disciplinary problems.
The 99% of your fellow US troops currently in ROK, who are well-behaved, are fundamentally right in their complaints IMO. Only thing you can do is remind them (and yourself) of the fact that your military chain of command can do relatively little to correct the Korean public’s perception, and since the c/c can’t just ignore the problem they have to use whatever non-disciplinary preventive measures are available. (Would that ROK political leaders at all levels do the same equally as strenously with their own public).
If the military chain of command doesn’t take measures they are condemned by outside observers for not being in control. And when they do take measures, they get criticized for being “overbearing” brass hats. The geeks of this world are always going to take smug delight in pointing out onerous “stupid” rules, as well as the mishaps that weren’t foreseen and prevented by these selfsame rules.
But, such scrutiny is part of the burden you took on yourself when you swore the oath. Consider it an ironic compliment that the Korean public indirectly holds you to a higher standard of behavior than they do their own fellow citizens (to include, especially, their “northern” cousins).
Rest assured that a lot of us out here still appreciate those of our young people who are willing to assume this burden. In the times to come, I suspect we’re going to need you all even more.
The permanent solution? I think it is to withdraw our ground forces back to CONUS now that the Cold War is over.
We should only send ground combat battalions/ brigades to ROK for occasional maneuvers of relatively short duration. Since many citizens of the ROK now find it convenient to use USFK as a whipping boy, it’s long past time for this to happen (and, lest anyone think I’m only fixated on Korea, this goes for Germany as well).
If you stay in and become a senior NCO I predict you will see this happen. If you get out and go back to just being a voter, I hope you and your fellow voters will tell your Senators and Congressmen that this needs to be implemented, the sooner the better. We should be closing more overseas ground forces bases long before we shut down any more CONUS ones.
Paul, you are right that the vast majority of USFK personnel are law-abiding people. And it is ironic that the same people who are criticizing US military personnel are often holding them to a higher standard (though the fact that some who are here to help defend the country are beating up the local citizens underscores the need for that higher standard).
I don’t think the average Korean knows about the standards of conduct for recruits; but I don’t think the average American knows this, either. I think a lot of the negative image today comes from the leftist media exacerbating innocuous events or milking actual incidents of misconduct for all they’re worth, but this is all built on a foundation of bad conduct that was commonplace before (according to former GIs I know from the 1960s and the 1970s). The impression was passed along in books by Americans, like “Korean Patterns” by Dr. Robert Crane and Bruce Cumings in his leftist America-is-evil screeds which are like the Book of Mormon to the student radicals.
It will take a long time to erase the negative impressions, some of which are genuine and some of which are based on nonsense.
But does this mean that USFK should leave? Absolutely not. The North-supporting far-left that promotes anti-American sentiment in this way should not be rewarded for their persistence, particularly when most of the Korean population does not support that aim. And how much of a target would we be making US military personnel everywhere else if they can be defeated by bad press?
The “Don’t use a beer bottle as a weapon” commercial makes a lot more sense now doesn’t it? I was hit in the face with a beer bottle once. 50 stitches inside out, laser cauterizing, arterial bleeding, nerve damage, scarring. I know what this poor guy is in for. He’ll be reminded of the incident every time he looks in the mirror for the rest of his life.
If this was a US soldier (I don’t think the title of this post is quite accurate as that hasn’t been determined yet), then the US government should offer to fly this guy to the best maxiofacial plastic surgeon in the world and pay for everything, for as long as it takes. This is the least we should do. If it turns out to be an American who did this, than I suggest a campaign to raise funds to help this kid. I pledge the first $500.
We should be closing more overseas ground forces bases long before we shut down any more CONUS ones. America’s projected power around the world protects its shores, its economy, and its way of life. Isolationism, whether military, economic, political, or social, is a disaster-in-the-making for the United States.
I disagree on the military isolationism being a disaster in the making. Even if the China threat rises, we are not faced with the kind of unifying doctrine (like communism) that provided the kind of global threat that not only needed US forces stationed around the world, but much coordination and pooling of effort in such things as NATO.
It is time our global force posture reflected the end of the Cold War.
Part of that is recognizing too that the forces of cohesion with allies as also gone out the window with the end of the global communist threat.
I know much less about NATO than I do about the US-SK alliance, but I would like to see fundamental death nails put in both their coffins — until someone can convince me otherwise.
As for the nature of the average recruit, I offer this limited thought —- I didn’t hang around with US soldiers much in Korea or groups of expats of any stripe for that matter, but what I saw and what I heard about
“America?s projected power around the world protects its shores, its economy, and its way of life. Isolationism, whether military, economic, political, or social, is a disaster-in-the-making for the United States.”
I know I’m not going to convince you, Kushibo, but I’ll say it again for anyone else who might be interested. I’m not advocating isolationism and I disagree with your labeling of my posture as such.
I said withdrawl of “ground forces”, not airbases (though in the case of ROK I would remove the vast majority of all US personnel). US can support the alliance from offshore and from Japan immediately with air and sea power in the event of an actual attack, as requested by the ROK.
Minimal US forward bases for wartime use, in the southern part of ROK can be maintained using contractors and a few supervisory personnel for rapid reinforcement from elsewhere in the Pacific and/or CONUS, using airlift. Or the mission can be given to USMC as Lirelou advocated.
I imagine in 10 more years we’ll see the new US bases further south becoming such “contingency” ones(assuming the situation vs a vs the North remains essentially unchanged).
I don’t think DPRK will ever be able to mount a full scale invasion of the South unless the PRC supported such an invasion logistically (ie with petroleum products); and I can’t see that happening in this modern era of expanding trade relationships. Maybe if we’re gone, the ROK and PRC can get on with dealing the DPRK more fully into this economic relationship; that will be the “engagement” that so many on these blogs want to see, and they’ve got a point. It’s fine with me, as long as the USFK are out of the country.
ROK is fully capable of defending itself on the ground; the sooner it sees that this is becoming an inevitable choice for them, the better it will be for the overall health of the alliance.
Methinks you need to drink some more jingoistic, depleted uranium-tipped Kool Aid Paul.
Actually, Paul, if you are in support of keeping most of the air bases, the naval base, and a considerably smaller ground force that is also trained to go to work in situations outside the Korean Peninsula (whether Roh agrees with such a thing or not), I would be in support of that.
My education and my experience both tell me that the presence of the US in South Korea and in Japan (including Okinawa) is a major wet blanket to international tensions that in the past have easily boiled over into war. The United States and the US alone is in that unique position, and its continued presence here serves everyone’s interests, not least of which is the US’s own economic, political, and social interests. But even if it should not be eliminated, that presence can be gradually reduced and there is no real reason why parts of it shouldn’t be transformed into a more mobile force to deal with the new challenges we face.
Maybe if we?re gone, the ROK and PRC can get on with dealing the DPRK more fully into this economic relationshipThat’s the red herring served by the North and eaten with a side of kimchi and rice by the far-left here. Everybody else would like something else on the menu, or to go back to the kitchen and fix something up themselves, or head for a different restaurant altogether.
Where Paul and I part company is on keeping forces on the ground in Korea at all.
I would rather see the forces we have in there now or perhaps what we plan to stop at after the current round of downsizing is completed.
I am not a military strategist. I do not know how many US forces need to be in Korea to offer an effective fighting force in the first phases of a defense against a North Korean invasion, but I do not want to see the forces cut back to a token show.
I’ve said this before —- I do not want to see the trip wire remain in effect but with just a handful of US forces in Korea.
If we are going to cut back to a token force, remove all of USFK assets from Korea — and promise some air and sea support if an invasion comes.
South Korea has the resources to provide an adequate deterent on the ground if it takes measures to build it. It has the population size, population health, wealth, and industry to do it. They don’t need our boots on the ground (any US bases) to defend themselves.
In short, what I mean to say is, what I would hate to see is bascially a fundamental continuation of the US-SK security alliance minus the USFK muscle on the ground. Do not pull another Truman. Do not take out any real US forces of size in Korea but maintain the promise that if war comes, we’ll pump tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands back in.
If we are going to change the US-SK alliance, change it fundamentally.
As to “Methinks you need to drink some more jingoistic, depleted uranium-tipped Kool Aid Paul.”
What are you talking about????
I really don’t have much of a clue???
Kushibo:
My unsarcastic apologies for assuming you were trolling.
Not a problem. Perhaps I should have made myself more clear on such a volatile issue.
Last time I was in Korea was just after the floods on the east coast. I was watching a province, local MBC or one of the other 2 networks do a report on USFK helping out. Well, I guess that is technically correct.
The headline for the segment was something like “This is Humanitarian Assistance?” They started off with a clip of an A-10 just after take off, then they looped the same footage — a large US (I think medical) cargo helicopter with that big net thingy hanging under it. It was flying low over a school to gently lay the load of badly needed supplies onto the dirt soccer field. In between runs of the clip, they did interviews with different locals complaining about the “noise pollution” and wondering how the US military could expect the children to be able to concentrate with all that going on over their head…..
I agree with Kushibo, the average Korean does not understand the implications of having a volunteer professional military just as they do not understand the need or purpose of the SOFA. From their conscription based point of view, all men with the exception of a few disqualifying clauses (gang-banger tats, boobs, being otherwise physically incapable of caring out ones duties as a soldier and I would imagine serious crimes like murder conviction but not lesser crimes involving truthfulness) MUST serve. The Korean media is not likely to publish anything exposing the goodwill efforts of the US soldiers like the time that some people donate volunteering or doing other charitable social type work for the simple reason that it does not sell. All political labeling aside, the average Korean is much more likely to stop and listen to or read a news report on how Korea is still being oppressed by foreigners who wont even let the Korean justice system deal administer justice to them the same way it does to Koreans than they are to a story outlining the real reasons for SOFA and the recruit standards of USFK personnel.
Furthermore, I agree that the US forces should be a more flexible force, able to be shifted or utilized where they are needed to in the region. The utility of US troops stationed on the Korean peninsula should not be predicated on the South Korean political climate. They are here to act as a mutual deterrent against aggression towards South Korea presumably by the North. As long as this role is not neglected, the US should have complete flexibility to complete other missions as the need arises.
As for the guy that was hit with the beer bottle, that was an unfortunate event. Like many have stated, if it happened between Koreans, there would have been nothing to report but because it involved USFK personnel it became news. I suppose it could have been blown much further out of proportion and I am glad that it was not. It often seems like the .05% of the population that are the real A-holes causing all the problems are responsible for the rules laws that make everyone else?s lives so difficult.