<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cheong Wa Dae leak identified</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/02/24/cheong-wa-dae-leak-identified/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/02/24/cheong-wa-dae-leak-identified/</link>
	<description>Korea... in Blog Format</description>
	<pubDate>Wed,  9 Jul 2008 05:55:24 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: When Me-Goons Attack</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/02/24/cheong-wa-dae-leak-identified/#comment-54608</link>
		<dc:creator>When Me-Goons Attack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 17:51:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/?p=2471#comment-54608</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Why I Laugh at those Hokey AFN OPSEC Comercials...&lt;/strong&gt;

I woke this morning to an article in the Chosun Ilbo that addresses the very likely possibility that the North Korean Spy ring that has grabbed headlines as of late had infiltrated the United States Forces in Korea to the highest levels. No shit. But d...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Why I Laugh at those Hokey AFN OPSEC Comercials&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>I woke this morning to an article in the Chosun Ilbo that addresses the very likely possibility that the North Korean Spy ring that has grabbed headlines as of late had infiltrated the United States Forces in Korea to the highest levels. No shit. But d&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee Jong-seok said what? at The Marmot&#8217;s Hole</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/02/24/cheong-wa-dae-leak-identified/#comment-30869</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee Jong-seok said what? at The Marmot&#8217;s Hole</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2006 04:42:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/?p=2471#comment-30869</guid>
		<description>[...] The Korea Times&#8216; headline reads, &#8216;Korea Needs US Forces After Unification,&#8217; but in actual fact, it appears Unification Minister Lee Jong-seok&#8217;s comments were not quite as direct. What he actually said (and take a look at the Korean version here) is that the North mustn&#8217;t raise the issue of USFK during the process of creating of peace regime on the Korean Peninsula, and that two sides &#8220;needed to see USFK as a constant.&#8221; Still, I&#8217;m sure his comments will please none too much his detractors within and without the government. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The Korea Times&#8216; headline reads, &#8216;Korea Needs US Forces After Unification,&#8217; but in actual fact, it appears Unification Minister Lee Jong-seok&#8217;s comments were not quite as direct. What he actually said (and take a look at the Korean version here) is that the North mustn&#8217;t raise the issue of USFK during the process of creating of peace regime on the Korean Peninsula, and that two sides &#8220;needed to see USFK as a constant.&#8221; Still, I&#8217;m sure his comments will please none too much his detractors within and without the government. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: usinkorea</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/02/24/cheong-wa-dae-leak-identified/#comment-29782</link>
		<dc:creator>usinkorea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:48:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/?p=2471#comment-29782</guid>
		<description>"but also refused to properly share information citing security concerns."

That's a hoot.  If it did come from the midlings, they proved the point.

What is odd about this is that if it had happened before 2001 or 2002, the independance group would be working for the conservatives in the GNP in a round about way.  I don't think it was terribly unusual in pre-9/11 times for the conservatives to play up ultra-nationalism or at least quietly support the more liberal factions stir up trouble to put pressure on the allaince to stall changes the conservatives saw as weakening the US committment.

That could be the case today, but it is slighly more likely the conservatives will not like what the leaking faction is trying to accomplish (stalling pre-signed deals), because the conservatives believe the US is willing to leave and won't except the typical long delays of the past.

And in that same area.....I would think the leakers are probably doing this stuff out of habit and instinct, because the actual agreements are old.  Strategic flexibility as a concept is more new or given much more emphasis to day, but base consolidation and especially moving Yongsan has been around for many years, agreed to for many years, and bitched about for many years after the deal was signed.

So, either the leaker faction is short-sighted and running on routine, or perhaps, they might really want USFK out and want to push push push and delay delay delay to see that come about, or, like in previous decades, they are convinced the US wouldn't leave regardless of what Korea said.

These are interesting times...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;but also refused to properly share information citing security concerns.&#8221;</p>
<p>That&#8217;s a hoot.  If it did come from the midlings, they proved the point.</p>
<p>What is odd about this is that if it had happened before 2001 or 2002, the independance group would be working for the conservatives in the GNP in a round about way.  I don&#8217;t think it was terribly unusual in pre-9/11 times for the conservatives to play up ultra-nationalism or at least quietly support the more liberal factions stir up trouble to put pressure on the allaince to stall changes the conservatives saw as weakening the US committment.</p>
<p>That could be the case today, but it is slighly more likely the conservatives will not like what the leaking faction is trying to accomplish (stalling pre-signed deals), because the conservatives believe the US is willing to leave and won&#8217;t except the typical long delays of the past.</p>
<p>And in that same area&#8230;..I would think the leakers are probably doing this stuff out of habit and instinct, because the actual agreements are old.  Strategic flexibility as a concept is more new or given much more emphasis to day, but base consolidation and especially moving Yongsan has been around for many years, agreed to for many years, and bitched about for many years after the deal was signed.</p>
<p>So, either the leaker faction is short-sighted and running on routine, or perhaps, they might really want USFK out and want to push push push and delay delay delay to see that come about, or, like in previous decades, they are convinced the US wouldn&#8217;t leave regardless of what Korea said.</p>
<p>These are interesting times&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: snow</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/02/24/cheong-wa-dae-leak-identified/#comment-29773</link>
		<dc:creator>snow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2006 06:28:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/?p=2471#comment-29773</guid>
		<description>If US forces are stationed in Korea only to protect Korea, then after they are removed, the US could claim that US forces are only in Asia (other locations) to protect their interests in Asia, not to provide security for Korea.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If US forces are stationed in Korea only to protect Korea, then after they are removed, the US could claim that US forces are only in Asia (other locations) to protect their interests in Asia, not to provide security for Korea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sperwer</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/02/24/cheong-wa-dae-leak-identified/#comment-29760</link>
		<dc:creator>Sperwer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2006 03:09:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/?p=2471#comment-29760</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;The ??ndependence??faction claims that USFK strategic flexibility, which would allow U.S. forces based in Korea to respond to contingencies outside of the peninsula, would violate the Korea-U.S. mutual security pact; U.S. forces are stationed in Korea only to protect Korea, they say.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Let's hope the US makes these knuckleheads "walk the walk" - which in Korea's case would be walking the plank - by withdrawing all US troops, and putting all other security matters on an arms-length basis, and letting Korea have its independence in security matters.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>The ??ndependence??faction claims that USFK strategic flexibility, which would allow U.S. forces based in Korea to respond to contingencies outside of the peninsula, would violate the Korea-U.S. mutual security pact; U.S. forces are stationed in Korea only to protect Korea, they say.</p></blockquote>
<p>Let&#8217;s hope the US makes these knuckleheads &#8220;walk the walk&#8221; - which in Korea&#8217;s case would be walking the plank - by withdrawing all US troops, and putting all other security matters on an arms-length basis, and letting Korea have its independence in security matters.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/02/24/cheong-wa-dae-leak-identified/#comment-29742</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2006 23:44:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/?p=2471#comment-29742</guid>
		<description>With so many gyopos running around Yongsan with top secret clearances and SIPRNET accounts, there will always be leaks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With so many gyopos running around Yongsan with top secret clearances and SIPRNET accounts, there will always be leaks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
