UPDATE 2: If you wanted to get the view from the “other side,” check this out.
UPDATE: Prosecutors have brought criminal charges against 210 for carrying out violent protests; they’ve also filed arrest warrants for 37 ringleaders. Prosecutors also plan to book about 100 students affiliated with the pro-Pyongyang student group Hanchongnyeon for cutting through the Army’s wire fence and entering Daechu-ri, which has been declared a special military zone. They added that they would consider future violations of the special military zone and violent demonstrations connected to the Pyeongtaek base expansion to be frontal challenges to state power, and will respond accordingly. Said one prosecutorial official, “The government has pushed the U.S. base transfer legally through parliamentary ratification and enactment of a special law, and we’ve provided reasonable compensation to villagers, but with outside groups and some villagers coming together to launch violent protests, we have no choice but to punish them severely.”
The military, meanwhile, is considering issuing its men in Pyeongtaek non-lethal self-defense equipment. Most of the troops that were involved in yesterday’s skirmish were unarmed and forced to defend themselves with their bare hands.
Oh, and since your here already, check out Pressian‘s photo essay/agitprop from Pyeongtaek. Pressian—bringing the revolution to your computer screen since 2001.
Oh, and speaking of Pressian, they report that the Chosun Ilbo isn’t the only one pissed off at the ruling party for its silence on Pyeongtaek, albeit for different reasons; the Democratic Labor Party is blasting the Uri Party for not speaking out about Pyeongtaek, and has apparenty ordered its lawmakers and party members to congregate in Pyeongtaek.
ORIGINAL POST: Well, first things first: some 2,000 protesters cut through the wire fences set up by the Army yesterday and entered Daechu-ri, clashing with troops:
A day after the Defense Ministry forcefully evacuated protesters from an area in Pyeongtaek slated for the relocation of U.S. military installations, about 2,500 activists staged abrupt demonstrations by cutting through the fences built around the site of the future base.
About 2,000 protesters from around the nation broke through the police line to seal off the area from outsiders. They marched three hours to join about 500 other protesters who had been scouting in Daechu Village, where the base construction is slated.
The group held a rally, criticizing the Defense Ministry’s forcible eviction of residents from the site. They also cut the fences, built on Thursday after evicting the protesting activists, in 20 places.
The protesters also tried to enter Camp Humphreys, the U.S. military base in Pyeongtaek near by the site, and scuffled with police trying to block them.
About 10 soldiers were injured, two severely enough to warrant an airlift to a Suwon hospital by UH-1H helicopter.
The military is now considering plans to deploy police within the wire fence to prevent further direct clashes between protesters and soldiers.
Anyway, as a result of yesterday’s operations, police arrested 524 protesters. And the butcher’s bill—210 injured: 117 cops and 93 protesters. Oh, and the Hankyoreh and Kyunghyang dailies are claiming their reporters were beaten:
Law enforcement authorities detained more than 520 demonstrators after farmers and activists collided violently with riot police in a rally protesting the expansion of a U.S. military camp located in the area.
Police said 210 were injured in Thursday’s incident _ 117 police officers and 93 protesters _ and the vernacular dailies Kyunghyang Sinmun and Hankyoreh also claimed injuries to some of their reporters covering the scene.
A force of more than 13,000 police, including several thousands armed with shields and batons, was deployed to the area to evict about 1,000 protesters barricaded inside a two-story building they were using as a headquarters. Some protesters resisted violently, hurling rocks and pummeling police officers with bamboo sticks.
About 2,800 military engineers and infantry erected a barbed wire fence around the farmland designated for the base expansion.
Some were apparently miffed by the way in which the police unleashed on the protesters:
The National Human Rights Commission said on Friday it is considering opening an investigation into the incident to confirm whether police had deployed unnecessary force against the Pyongtaek protesters.
Park Soon-hee, a human rights adviser at the National Police Agency (NPA), who was at the protest scene, criticized Thursday’s police suppression as an “embarrassing moment.”
“It would not be so far-fetched to call Thursday’s situation a ‘blood bath,” Park s aid in an interview with local radio broadcaster CBS. He described Thursday as a “dark moment” of the Roh Moo-hyun administration.
“It seemed as if law enforcement authorities were conducting a military operation on their own countrymen. Police officers were beating down protesters with their batons and shields and there were a lot of bloody faces out there,” Park said.
The civic group Sarangbang Group for Human Rights released a statement denouncing the police suppression of the Pyongtaek rallies, going as far as to compare the incident with the Kwangju uprising of 1980 when more than 200 pro-democracy protesters were killed during a government suppression of the rally.
The protesters, for their part, are really into peace, as you can see below:
The police are apparently engaging in psych ops and cyber-warfare as well—according to the Kyunghyang Shinmun, the National Police Agency ordered riot cops, including injured ones, to go online and attach comments on the homepages of various government bodies and progressive news agencies to head off negative public opinion (or perhaps manufacture public opinion) following the crackdown.
The Chosun Ilbo actually hit the nail on the head with their latest editorial on the Pyeongtaek issue:
The administration and ruling party should therefore make every effort to persuade the people that relocating the bases is inevitable and to minimize problems and costs. But government and ruling-party officials, who like to take credit whenever possible, were in hiding, leaving the affair entirely to the defense minister as if he alone were responsible.
To start at the top, the president is fond of speaking to the public, with his “dialogue with the people,” “statement to the people” or “letter to the people.” Yet he hasn’t said a word of concern about the affair. On the eve of Thursday’s clashes he said, “We’ve been greatly indebted to the U.S., but we cannot afford to be obliged to the U.S. forever.” That rather sounds like an invitation to the anti-American activists.
The ruling party chairman was tenacious enough to visit Dokdo on the fifth attempt after four failures due to rough seas, since there he was assured of applause. But he never came anywhere near Pyeongtaek in the present crisis. The ruling party held no meeting with the government on the Pyeongtaek affair, nor has it made any comment on it.
Cheong Wa Dae did issue a statement warning against any further delays in the base relocation, but it’s still got a lot of explaining to do. Not that it will, of course. Although in fairness, the Korean government isn’t the only one with things to explain. The White House and/or the Pentagon really needs to explain why these troops aren’t being moved to Guam or the U.S. mainland.
{ 89 comments… read them below or add one }
“Why can’t you be like the Johnson’s boy? He nevers stirs up anything without good reason, by God. I tell you, boy; you are wearning my nerves thin.”
Yes, this is so much like the Gwangju massacre back in 1980. After all, 200 dead and thousands injured back then stacks up against 200 injured now oh so well. One thing that’s a bit anamolous about the whole thing is that the protestors are claiming that the police used excessive force, and claim to be peaceful, but more police were injured than protestors. I just don’t really see how that would happen, unless the police were using less force than the protestors were. Well, I suppose the police could have brained a few of their fellow policemen by “accident” as well.
And as much as it stuns and amazes me, I actually do agree with that Chosun Ilbo editorial. I never thought I would see the day that would happen. Amazing.
You know, maybe the Pentagon is hedging its bets on pulling the troops until the next S.K. president is elected. Maybe when Donald Rumsfeld met with Lee Myung Bak it was to sound out what the conservative take is on all the protesting, and they figure the opposition is not that popular.
What the f- where soldiers doing being sent there in the first place?
If military engineers were neede to build the fence line, why the f- weren’t thousands of police sent to surround them to prevent activists from getting near them? Why the f- were riot police given the duty (at least in part) to round up protesters and put them in flexicuffs?
I don’t like conspiracy theories, but I’m getting that itching feeling these days.
I do believe — the FTA was set up as an easy beachball on a tee issue —- really set of issues —- for Uri Party to use to help in this and next year’s elections.
Given what I have seen of the videos from the protest, I have a feeling this move in Pyongtaek could very well have also been designed as a cause celebre for progressive political hopefuls against conservatives.
1. Are there not more than enough trained and exerienced riot policemen in the nation that could have been sent instead of the military or at least to surround and buffer the military units?
2. Only a brain-dead Korean would not have images of Kwangju 1980 come up just at the mention of “soldiers” being sent into some city to deal with protests.
3. All of Roh’s top people cut their teeth as dissidents to authoritarian rule in the 1970s and 1980s.
4. Not only has the Roh administration not been out explaining the base consolidation plan to the people —– just days before this clash —- it was out “talking tough” toward the US for domestic Korean consumption along the lines of declaring “diplomatic war” with Japan:
Roh’s people went batshit over a NK Human Rights Amb. commentary in the Wall Street Journal — where he said things members of governmnet in DC and think tank people in the US have been saying for years.
Roh himself goes out 1 or 2 days before the clash — and talks about how Korea can only be a real nation if it finds a way to have an “independant” foreign policy to the US.
Shortly before the start of the year — when all eyes were turning to Pyongtaek since key deadlines were fast approaching – Roh brought back up after a long period of hiding ———- the demand for Korean control of the Korean military during war time.
I give it at least a significant percentage chance —–
—-that Roh and crew see the up coming and current trouble in base consolidation as not only a good tool to stir up the normal conflict between conservative and progressive thought in the society — but they also see it (like The Priest) as the best way to reduce the USFK footprint in Korea against opposition from conservative politicans and press who have more of the nation’s ear on the future of the alliance than the progressives.
I forgot — what got me to thinking this way more than anything today was —
—- seeing the videos from where the military buses were stopped on the road by activists and the soldiers were forced to scrap with them in the street to clear the road — all for the videos to capture.
Why was there no police escort?
Why were soldiers sent to get into it with protesters anyway?
I second what usinkorea said about flexicuffs. Korean riot police need to be trained in their use and should carry them into any riot situation.
USinK, you know there had to be a whole bunch of Sturm und Drang with the base move, it’s the Korean way.
It’s probably difficult to flexicuff a guy who is swinging a two-meter-long bamboo pole at you, but in general yeah, they should round up the protestors quickly without all the dramatics that they just tolerate each time.
The same thing as Kwangju will happen. One truck will drive right through the barbed wire and kill some soldiers. And, angry soldiers will open fire on the civilians. Chase them down and execute all civilians.
Five years later, would you call these Commies as freedom fighters? Whose freedom are they fighting for? KJI’s?
Shoot rubber bullets now and disperse Commies with tear gases. Injure these Commies before they try more stuff.
They are worrying about others’ businesses but they are doing nothing to correct its own people. Why do we need more bases?
My point about the regular soldiers being tasked with making detentions has nothing to do with methods.
Let me put it this way:
The best shot ——– probably the only shot —- The Priest has at getting average Koreans to join him over Pyongtaek —
—– is to enrage them somehow.
Since he can’t pay some GIs to rape a Korean teen or run over some with a tank or murder a non-prostitute…
his next best hope is to make the government look like it is repeating the bad ole days of dictatorship.
This still isn’t a good chance, because fear of paying for self-defense trumps all in Korean society.
But I know one thing for sure —
the moves Roh just did by sending down the military units, having them detain people, then leaving them naked for the counter-attack on the fence line the next day —
is like trying to set the ball on the tee for The Priest……
Green Lantern’s mortal enemy…The Priest
USinK, for those of us who just tuned in, can you explain who you are talking about?
I taught in Korea for over 4 years. I studied about Korea a few more. I was back in Korea for research and langauge study for the fun-fest of 2002.
That orgy of hate finally led me to a feeble attempt to give American people a chance to understand what environment the risks and costs we accept year to year by stationing troops in Korea operates within by creating the http://www.usinkorea.org website (which has undergone a few styles since 2002).
The site tries to show how anti-US culture in Korean society is society wide and a process. That for the generations below 65 or 70 (below the ones who remember the Japanese occupation, 1945-1950, and the Korean War) the US relationship is considered a cancer but a necessary evil — for now.
And the anti-US process is about keeping an acceptable amount of understanding of this in the mind at all times — never too cold but never hot enough to force USFK out – yet.
This has been the case since far back into the past.
Heh… I bet those anti-American protestors are actually North Korea supporters.
Also… interesting how there’s more activists-protestors than the protestors done by the people who actually live at Pyeongtaek.
USinK, I looked at your site a while back and again just now and it didn’t answer my question–exactly who is “The Priest”? A real priest? What is his name? I’m just curious.
I already know Koreans have a love-hate thing going on with the U.S., and why….
He’s referring to Father Mun Jeong-hyeon. Yes, he’s a real priest, but he spends much of his time engaging in political activities, including pro-reunification, anti-American demonstrations.
The prosecution fining loads of these people is the first serious positive move the govenment has made.
Hit them in the wallet, and you will get more of the fence sitters to stop coming and others leaning that way to stay home too…..
there was no reason the battle had to be waged with fists, batons and shields. whomever made the equipment call is responsible for the soldier’s injuries. tear gas and plastic bullets would have stopped such nonsense. when soldier’s have their backs up against the wall from a violent mob, they will always go ballistic with anything they have. do as much damage to as many as possible because the numbers are against you. had they been properly equipped from the get-go, they would not have let it get so far out of control. even i would have known that they would need an overpowering force. obviously, someone wanted it to turn in to such a chaotic situation.
USIK: The prosecution fining loads of these people is the first serious positive move the govenment has made.
I’ll have to agree with you here. Even a token $500 a head would make them think twice.
Why doesn’t somebody report Father Dumbass to the Vatican?
Judge J, the protestors were already billing this one as “Kwangju revisited,” and it looked like they were hoping to get a rise from the military so they could look like heroic martyrs. If they had brought out the gas and rubber bullets it would have played right into the protestors’ scheme.
What happened wasn’t chaos in Korea. It was within the realm of the typical protest culture.
Sending in regular army was not —- not for a couple of decades —- and I believe there must be a political reason behind it.
And in relation to comments above — one huge point – the riot police are trained and utterly used to this type violence ——- which is one of the reasons I’m starting to get steamed about the position Roh and crew have put these regular soldiers in.
As far as riot control, I got to see the preparations for the G8 Summit in Savannah GA up close and personal.
Rubber bullets are not so good these days. There are better tools.
Pepperball guns are great. They hurt when struck like with rubber bullets but without as much potential for injury. And they explode in a pepper gas which, if you can hit the people in the chest area, combined with the velocity, causes the protester to suck in the pepper — and into a wold of pain and discomfort.
Even if hit is not in the desired location, when the stuff gets on any skin, it burns a lot. You do not want pepper spray stuff on your body, in your nose, eyes, or lungs.
That is why pepper spray canisters would be great for Korean riot police.
They would go along way to putting an end to the scrums and unit type groupings to press the fight against the squads of riot police.
Shock grenages are ok for scrum type situations and probably with the running broken up crowds too —- they explode with a loud concussion that can stun people, they spray tear or pepper gas, and they shoot out a half dozen rubber balls at high velocity. One draw back — the people tossing them can get hit.
There are also higher powered paintball guns that fire a variety of balls at greater velocity — which makes them something like rubber bullets, but it looks less shocking to see someone firing a paintball gun than a real thing.
Eventually, the Korean protesters would adapt to these latest riot control tools just like the anti-globalization protesters have, but they are still much better than rubber bullets and tear gas.
i agree that the actual rubber bullets would be overkill. especially coming from soldiers. however, the government could subsidize the pepper farmers and make a pepper spray or pepper gas that would be noxious enough to decapacitate the protesters.
riot police are certainly trained for and experienced with just such kinds of protesters. however far it may be from true chaos, there’s got to be a better way than bloodletting. it doesn’t take much brains for a public administrator in charge of the riot police to know that and create a better solution.
both sides want this type of clash or else they wouldn’t have been doing the same thing for years.
oops…seems i was thinking of another word and melded it with incapacitate…
The Cato Institute pegs the annual cost of stationing US troops in Korea at US$15 billion. What does America get for its US$15 billion, and is there a better use for the money?
Hehe… I originally read “decapacitata” as “decapitate”, and thought to myself, “Damn, that would be some STRONG pepper spray!”
Anyhow, have you seen the price of peppers in Korea?? Talk about expensive? It’s really no wonder most ‘Korean’ pepper products are actually grown in China. (Unless, of course, you want to pay double for it.) The Korean military would be much better off buying the stuff wholesale from the US military.
The protest ritual is to perpetrate violence against the riot police. Injure them, provoke them and create martyrs. The only way to defeat this defeatist culture is to replace the riot police with non-human barriers of some kind. Robocops, armor, barbed wire barricades – whatever it takes. And then the legal system needs to arrest, fine, imprison and blacklist protesters.
It’s time for special measures.
Brendon Carr says,
” The Cato Institute pegs the annual cost of stationing US troops in Korea at US$15 billion. What does America get for its US$15 billion, and is there a better use for the money? ”
/ Brendon, I can think of no better use of $15 billion than preventing nuclear war or a conventional firestorm war in South Korea, which happens to do more than $15 billion worth of commercial business with the US. It’s not the same as putting US troops in Afghanistan, where there is virtually no monetary benefit (there is strategic benefit, after all, Bin laden is there). Remember also that you are talking about the US government. Where people virtually all try to underpay taxes (worldwide phenomenon), and yet money is always around to do what the government really wants to do with the military, and yet there will never be enough money for all public schools and all health care plans. For healthcare, I recommend that the US cut out all medicare plans for wealthy elders who are already generoulsy covered by their retirement plan packages or have enough wealth to buy their own health insurance. And, promote tax free health savings accounts. After all, it is best to let those who have the means to pay for it themselves. Then, maybe, just maybe, there might be enough money to cover the uninsured. A blanket approach to cover everyone equally is just not possible. Not everyone pays their just burden of taxes. Some people pay no taxes or nominal taxes. Yet they want all the same benefits. You can tax the rich to hell, and they won’t hire as much people. Further burden on society. Let’s say Ford cuts jobs 10%, because their taxes went up. Economic mess. I don’t think amazon.com survived during their no-profit years without the Bush tax cut. In short, even if the US saved money, it won’t be put to what you would think of as good use. That’s a fact.
I don’t get it:
Why are they building a new Army camp down there??
I thought We were pulling out?
I don’t understand this stupid Bush Administration anymore.
We need to leave these stupid people alone and get the hell out.
Screw’em.
Katz, asked why we need more bases in Korea?
The fact is that USFK is not making more bases, they are consolidating bases. USFK is giving much more land back to the Koreans than they are being given in Pyeongtaek. Yongsan alone in Seoul is a larger chuck of land than what USFK is annexing at Camp Humphreys not to mention all the land the 2nd Infantry is located on North of Seoul.
The bases need to be consolidated because Yongsan needs to be moved out of Seoul. A foreign army shouldn’t be located in the middle of the capitol city of the host nation. Especially a major metropolis like Seoul.
The 2nd Infantry Division bases are spread out all over Northern Gyeongi province and were originally located outside the nearby cities. With the development of Korea these bases are now surrounded by these cities causing many force protection and safety issues, not to mention the fact that if war broke out the 2ID would have a hard time maneuvering their forces out of these bases due to be swallowed by the cities and the inherent traffic that comes with them which makes the 2ID easy cannon fodder for the North Korean artillery. This fact makes the 2ID less lethal in combat compared to being stationed away from the cities and out of artillery range at Camp Humphreys.
The ROK Army should be the cannon fodder for the initial artllery attack from North Korea, not the US Army. Plus Camp Humphreys is located in the countryside which will make convoys and moving heavy equipment much safer compared to urbanized areas. The relocation makes sense except to the anti-US hate groups who are backed by North Korea. The Norks don’t want 2ID to move out of their artillery range to a better tactical location. They want to have 2ID stay exactly where they are at and are using the hate groups to stop the move.
I don’t give a shit if another War breaks out tomorrow.
If they wanna live under Chinese rule screw’em.
I’ve had it.
I really believe God has kept the U.S. troops in Korea for all these time. Do you have any other explanation? I don’t.
However, as a Korean native (presently KoreanAmerican), I may be biased but I believe the US has some reason to stay in Korea while withdrawing from Japan.
Soon, Japan and China will fight each other, maybe within ten years. If the U.S. is positioned in Korea, it can sell weapons to both countries and make money. Also, the war will be controlled from the start to the end. If either side were to use nuclear weapons, the US would be there to stop them. Just let them fight with conventional weapons (sell more weapons).
After about six months of massive destruction, both China and Japan will come to senses and draw up a peace treaty with the help of the US. And, the US-owned Korean construction companies can make money in re-construction efforts.
If the US does not mediate and control this coming war, either or China will win by using nuclear weapons and completely annihilating the opponent. The country that wins, be it China or Japan, will challenge the US with nuclear weapons eventually.
Let the kids, China and Japan, play. But, the US, as a grown-up, can stay in Korea and play both countries and make money. Just withdraw? Isolationism is the nirvana? Then stay home and get another 9/11, this time from one of these Oriental terrorists.
I know Korea. Commies are less than 10%. 90% of Koreans are pro-American and pro-market economy. They are busy buying up real estate properties.
These Commies around Pyengtaek are a miniscule minority, which is fighting a losing war. And, they know it too. No serious Korean supports these loonies.
Hannara party, that is pro-American and pro-conservative, is becoming more popular, even among young people while Rho and Uri(pig sty) part is loosing their base quickly. Nobody supports their pro-North and pro-Commie philosophy any more. It was a fad that has grown old.
Korean people want to be prosperous. More and more people identify this goal with being pro-American. Koreans love the USA.
Excellent and very astute observations, GI Korea and I feel 100% correct. The Dear Leader would much rather have USFK in artillery range of the DMZ. The Norks do not have the technology for precision targeting.
Judge Judy, what is happening over the base expansion is pure ritual in a Korean manner. As Mizar 5 points out, 90% of Koreans are not university students ordered by their seniors to “protest” something they have no knowledge of. There is a hard core of communists like Father Mum (I was not surprised to see him there) but they have been warned very sternly.
….they would consider future violations of the special military zone and violent demonstrations connected to the Pyeongtaek base expansion to be frontal challenges to state power, and will respond accordingly….
This is really about as strong as it gets from the Korean government. They are in fact very clever about how they do things. They know damned will who is running the show. The secret police will have little “chats” with family members and students about things like future employment and educational oppurtunities which is exactly what they did to end the Race Riots in 2002. Note the National Security Law is still in affect and that is for a good reason.
I recall about 1994 talking to some students at KAIST (where I was working at the time) about the National Security Law. Of course they held all the correct anti-USA views that are an accepted norm of what passes as “academia” in Korea. I was still rather idealistic in those days and spoke that I felt the NSL was a violation of Human Rights, etc. As overtly pro-left as they were, none of them wanted the NSL repealed. When I aske why, the senior said:
“After you are here a few years, you will realise why we need such a law.”
And after a few years, I did.
Cheers from Vancouver
The orgy of hate of 2002 came to an end because 60 Minutes ran a segement on it (in which the USFK commander broke into tears) and Korea was gaining nightly news coverage in the US in December through the first part of 2003.
The government might have sent people out to talk, but the press telling Koreans to shut up and Koreans seeing their image broadcast on all the US news networks has always (well, since the 1990s) to make Korea turtle the hate.
say there will be a war between US and China or Russia…there is a world of difference in having actual military bases on the continent and having to land on the continent via another island base (Japan). Can you imagine if the US had to land on the coasts of Baghdad and airdrop into Afghanistan, versus having land routes and bases secured via Kuwait and Pakistan and the other stans? It’s basically Normandy. In the case of a future war, which is by the way prevented by the mere presence of US presence in South Korea, US is saving money and lives by being stationed in South Korea. It’s an ancient tactial/geographical advantage that Japan, Russia, and China have been interested in, all too much.
By the way, I think taxes are not paid with a loss, so scratch the comment about that.
But it helps a lot, if the profit’s slim. Which I still think was the case. Credit the tax cut for the better economy than what it was.
I don’t think China is interested in actually fighting the US, versus measuring up to it, and keeping on par militarily, so as never to be pressured by might alone.
Chinese people from China have been telling me that the Chinese government has bought a significant amount of US T-Bills, meaning they’re lending money to the US. Why? Can you attack a state that you owe money to, and makes it possible for Wal-Mart prices to be true for lower cost living in the US? Made in China makes a lot of things cheap in the US and South Korea.
South Korea will need the US most definitely at the present, because I think they lack nukes, air craft carriers, and submarines.
Besides, I’ve never seen nuke havers fighting nuke havers yet, and I don’t expect so until the end of the world comes.
spending on military may piss people off, but I think in political science theory, no nation will voluntarily not have a military nor not put military as the #1 priority, because the greatest interest of the state is its existance, and that is guarantteed by might alone. When there is no military barrier, there will always be a state that will try to expand its borders. I think it should be true even now as it was for the last couple of thousand years.
90% of Koreans are pro-American
They are?
http://www.globescan.com/news_archives/bbcpoll06-3.html#usa
Check the rest of that out, btw…interesting link.
The US will not invade China or get into a ground war in North East Asia — unless a complete idiot is in the White House or the worst possible scenerio shoulc play out.
But, I am supposed to accept the risk involved with facing off the teetering nuts in Pyongyang who are not far from collapse and armed to the teeth the monetary costs of being in South Korea the inflexibility of troops that have to locked into the nation to make an adequate deterent South Korea’s love of whoring the troops —– because of some long shot future Cold War where the US might have to invade the Far Eastern territory????
That is asking to accept an aweful lot for an aweful little.
Even as the Cold War I started to get a little hot, our strategic thinkers said a Defensive posture in East Asia was best — and the island nation of Japan fit it to a T. Not a toe hold on the Asian mainland.
Now, we have missile and long range planes and we have an ability to move men and material so far superior to 1949.
The costs and risks of being in Korea are in no way balanced out by any reason anyone has been able to give me for accepting them.
the cost wouldn’t be used for anything better anyway. My guess is that it’s still going to be budgeted for the military, even if it was diverted. In this case, Iraq.
wjk wrote:
Except that Iraq relates to a US strategic objective. What is the US strategic objective accomplished by keeping troops here? What is the US strategic interest in Korea, other than maintenance of the alliance status quo? But what is the reason the US would keep an alliance with Korea?
Why’d they vote for Roh then?
Most Koreans do not realize a large portion of Yongsan Garrison is NOT being relocated. Imagine the protests/riots when the Koreans realize there is still going to be a Yongsan Garrison after the “relocation”.
“dogbertt wrote, May 7th, 2006 at 11:28 am
I know Korea. Commies are less than 10%. 90% of Koreans are pro-American and pro-market economy. They are busy buying up real estate properties.
Why’d they vote for Roh then?
”
/WJK writes: I think they were sick of the old time Han Nara members, who were corrupt, of elite backgrounds, and were rich. It was sort of a workingman/suppressed man’s uprisal against the upperclass and lifting up Roh, who looked like one of them, who worked hard on his own to get where he was. And when the same old, same ol, Han Nara member impeached him, it looked like elite South Korea was putting down the self made man. Now, though, I predict that the communist jive isn’t jiving well with most South Koreans. Anti-US, because of wanting to be on par with US is one thing. Anti-US because of having communist ideology is a different matter. I don’t think South Koreans want communism.
Brendon Carr wrote:
Except that Iraq relates to a US strategic objective. What is the US strategic objective accomplished by keeping troops here? What is the US strategic interest in Korea, other than maintenance of the alliance status quo? But what is the reason the US would keep an alliance with Korea?”
”
/WJK writes: Prevent conventional or nuclear war against modernized and high tech industry nations such as South Korea and Japan. Kim Jong Il supposedly has his missiles pointed towards the following regions. Seoul, South Korea. Somewhere in Japan. And he’s dreaming of the US West Coast. Checking rougly on the cia factbook, US does more business in $ than it spends on defensive forces positioned in South Korea and Japan. If you buy into the idea that government created jobs are good, then these are jobs for US citizens that wouldn’t otherwise exist. I’m sure they would exist elsewhere, but I’m also sure some US military folk would rather station in South Korea or Japan than Iraq. Strategically, having US troops in South Korea prevents North Korean military action, and it tells China and Russia that US troops are at the doorstep of both nations. On the continent. Having them on Japan is fine, but you have to pull a Normandy to land on the continent. High casualties. Plus, on the pretext of protecting South Korea, you can guard China. Why was US interested in having a free Vietnam? I think China was part of the reason. Why have US troops in Germany? It’s pretty clear to tell Russia what’s up. Why have US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan? To tell Iran, that if they fire a nuke, ground troops can cross the border, not airborne paratroopers, which are far more limited in number and force.
I’m of the opinion that US troop presence in Iraq and Afghanistan are steering anti US fighters towards those regions versus trying to get into the US and wreaking havoc.
I didn’t know that m’self, hardy. Details…?
i think HoNam always put in its 95% to which ever side would guaranttee a barrier against YoungNam dominance in politics. Thus, the HoNam 95% went to Roh, who could beat Lee Hoi Chang. Lee Hoi Chang, pro Jap family, wealthy, elitist, went thru all the elite schools, had the elite position of judge, politician, and had zero ability to relate to the average South Korean man. Plus, I think having been from Choong Chung Do hurt him, where as if he was from YoungNam, they would have supported him better and drawn away votes from Roh, who is of YoungNam. Choong Chung Do, always gets the shaft between HoNam and YoungNam. The middle man. South Korean society looks down towards those without the elite school, business, and political ties. People got fed up.
Lee Hoi Chang’s most definitive weakness was none of his sons were “healthy enough” to go to South Korean army, whereas Roh was healthy enough, and lacking elitist ties enough to have gone to South Korean army, in one of the worst conditions. Lee Hoi Chang most definitely paid off some people to let his sons get a free pass. Roh was unable to, so he served. South Koreans liked that and related to that.
Lee In Jae was right when he broke off from the alliance with Roh, during the election contest between Roh and Lee Hoi Chang, saying that Roh is too leftist “Jwa Pa Juk”.
Too bad Lee Hoi Chang couldn’t step aside to give Lee In Jae a chance to counter Roh and possibly prevent socialist South Korea.
Roh would prove to be not that competent nor bright, and he would also prove to be brooding and vindictive and also vengeful. Roh wasn’t that innocent hard working common man after all. He would at some point, try to politically and legally bind former allies like Lee In Jae, Han Hwa Gap, and attack enemies like Lee Hoi Chang.
“I didn’t know that m’self, hardy. Details…? ”
It’s gotten better over the last few years but the USFK still hasn’t realized they can’t keep any part of Yongsan in operation.
Originally, about 5-6 years ago they were estimating a 35 acre military compound, plus embassy and embassy housing. They planned to keep the hotel, the commissary, USFK HQs and support services. Now they’ve scaled back the concept a bit and are keeping it very quiet.
Last year LaPorte said 98% would be given back and they would retain about 50 military personnel, the Dragon Hill Hotel and an Armed Forces Recreation Center, he didn’t mention the actual size, but that would be at least 20 acres. (Not including the impact of a new embassy with housing)
This is all about giving the visiting “VIPs” a place to stay in Seoul and not having to drive them from Incheon to Pyeongtak. It’s not going to happen, but it’s still the USFK’s plan. They’re keeping the focus on the move to Pyongtaek and not saying much about the new Yongsan military compound.
http://www.defenselink.mil/dodgc/olc/docs/test05-03-10LaPorte.doc
“Over ninety-eight percent of Yongsan will be returned to the Republic of Korea; only a small residual presence of approximately fifty personnel will remain in Seoul to conduct liaison between the United Nations Command, the Combined Forces Command, and United States Forces Korea with various ministries and organizations of the Republic of Korea government. Additionally, the Dragon Hill Lodge, an Armed Forces Recreation Center for United States Forces Korea service members and their families, will remain in operation.”
sanshinseon here’s a good article (posted way back by M’sH)
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200401/200401180015.html
“The move would bring an end to the 122-year history of having a foreign military based in Seoul…”
and then in the same article….
“The two sides also agreed to leave behind the Dragon Hill Lodge (which sits on roughly 25,000 pyeong of land), a liaison office of about 50 men, and communications offices for the Commander in Chief of Combined Forces Command (a four-star U.S. general) and the Deputy Commander in Chief (a four-star Korean general).”
So there will still be an American military compound at Yongsan but the 122 year history of having foreign military based in Seoul will end.
Perfect set-up for the 2007 elections.
oh, yeah. I don’t know if this was pre Roh or post Roh, but Choong Chung Do got swung on the empty promise of getting the nation’s capital relocated to somewhere in Choong Chung Do by the Uri Party. Haeng Jung Soo Do is still Seoul = Kyung Sung = Han Sung, is it not? Ha ha ha.
“The US will not invade China or get into a ground war in North East Asia — unless a complete idiot is in the White House …” usinkorea
there’s already a compelet idiot in the WH.
The US has to attack China or Russia if they attack first. And, they will when they perceive the US to be weak. Remember the 9/11.
Do not think that China is so far away from the continental USA and, therefore, has no chance of shooting nuclear missiles to the USA. If it feels it can get away with it, it will.
The world is still a savage place. Just look at what Japan is up to. It will grab lands away from Korea if it can.
Asian countries have a long way to go to catch up to the 21st century. They are still stuck at the 19th century.
Thanks for the good info, hardyandtiny. Makes sense —
keeping the Dragon Hill Lodge and a few military offices
alongside the new Embassy compound seems perfectly justified to me.
Taking the long view, i think that China and Japan stumbling towards World War III has a certain inevitability to it; that’s been building for at least two decades and i don’t know what would stop it, seeing as how low-grade nationalism has eclipsed most actual ideology everywhere. And as always for the past millennium, Korea has the unfortunate location between them, and can’t move out of this bad dangerous neighborhood.
So then the real function and value of US troops stationed in Korea — and elsewhere in the Western Pacific — lies mostly in keeping those two apart, and thus keeping the peace in the entire region. That’s in everyone’s interest, most especially Korea. It’s worth quite a lot of money to the USA. And I think that all leaders of whatever political parties in the region know this perfectly well, but most just can’t say it in public, due to their usage of the above-mentioned jingoism to prop themselves up…
Father Mun Jeong-hyeon is one of my favourite commie agents. Some of his antics have been totally hilarious, like when he said he would walk the length of Korea until the Yankees left. As soon as the TV cameras left, our great Priest stopped walking. He orchestrated the 2002 Race Riots and then slipped out of view for quite a long time. Father Mun know which way the wind blows in Korea and will lay low for a while. It is also famous for stating on an SBS talk show a few years ago that North Korea did not engage in human rights abuses. That also made him lay low for a while.
For people who have not lived in Korea a long time such things are indeed perplexing. For a Korean, saying one thing and doing the complete opposite are not incompatible. For example, is a poll is taken that asks a question such as “Do you wany USFK to leave immediately” the overwhelming response will be “Yes” because that is the expected answer and the one that Koreans must say to avoid being “whang-tta.” However, this does not mean that they actually want USFK to leave. I cannot count the number of times I have heard this line “I hate America but I want to go there.” Hate in the Korean context ususually a feeling of jealousy and inferiority.
Comrade Roh was elected by the narrowest of margains using North Korean agitprop and open support. His election is, however, very much a manifestation of Korean regionalism and that can wait for another day.
Rho got elected because, as wjk wrote, the opposing candidate, Mr. Lee HoyChang, was such a rotten SOB, a typical dirty money elite.
And, people wanted to see what a left-leaning nationalist would do. Now they have seen the result, a total mismanagement, empty rhetoric and amateurism.
Next election, people will overwhelmingly return to conservative market economy and pro-America candidate like Lee MyeungBak. Korea has become richer and more westernized in last five years. Some young people may say “I hate America” but they are saying it inside Starbucks coffee shop.
i agree with Baduk. I would go with Lee Myeung Bak first, and I wouldn’t mind Go Gun.
Go Gun is a much more experienced administrator than Lee Myeung Bak and would get my vote sooner than others.
“…keeping the Dragon Hill Lodge and a few military offices
alongside the new Embassy compound seems perfectly justified to me.”
It means there will still be a military installation at Yongsan, with walls, barbed wire, limited access, gates, military personnel, etc. I believe the vast majority of Koreans are expecting the ENTIRE Yongsan installation to be relocated, and the ENTIRE Yongsan area opened to new development. The “Central Park” of Yongsan is still going to have a military base in the middle of it? I can’t imagine the general public accepting any military installation at Yongsan after relocation. The USFK should start planning to move ALL operations out of Yongsan.
i used to take a couple, limited English lessons from a US army couple ( I think both were officers) who lived inside Yong San. Inside, the residence areas are like American US suburbs. It was like a portal to another world. They drive American cars, and the homes are basically like American homes in the US. Or that’s what I remember of it. 1990. American cars were still pretty hard to spot on the road, although I saw some Mercury Sables here and there owned by South Koreans, and my friends were saying that was a good car. I guess it was, compared to the Hyundai Presto or the Daewoo LeMans. We had a Daewoo LeMans.
The Korean concept is to build a park that extends from Namsan to the Han River.
The US intends to keep a small military installation with hotel in the center of the park, and it hopes it can also build a new embassy with housing in the existing Camp Coiner area.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v304/namsanboy/yongmap.jpg
Incredible. This is what happens when you lack continuity and flexibility in an organization.
Millions of tax dollars spent – wasted – and we can’t figure out a simple way to have what we want and leave the Yongsan area. The reluctance to change is just unbelievable. USFK, WAKE UP! The USFK Commander cannot stay at Yongsan! Share a few offices in the existing US embassy if you need a liaison in Seoul. Is it that difficult to work out? Build a new hotel somewhere between Incheon and Pyeongtak…..do something, anything, just forget about Yongsan. Good Lord! Yongsan is finished!
You mean, a world where the inhabitants have respect for themselves, each other, and the rules? Where there isn’t garbage blowing around on every corner, and where “STOP” means stop at the intersections? Where it’s clean, peaceful, and safe? No wonder everyone is in such a hurry to get such a fucking irritant out of the capital.
There’s no reason to keep a few military officers with support inside of Yongsan. Why is it important to keep them in Yongsan? Just clear out.
Brendon, what are we comparing? Fort Hamilton with Brooklyn?
What’s the point?
Fort Hamilton and Brooklyn is a good comparison. Except when I say “safe” I’m not referring to violent crime, just recklessness.
The difference between life inside the base and out doesn’t matter to Koreans or Brooklynites.
People in Brooklyn see the base as a part of their society………..you know this.
Koreans are ashamed of our foreign military presence in their society, to tourists, to their children, to the media, etc…..and in a practical sense, we are ARE taking up a lot of space in the capital.
Best to move the entire operation with no “residual” Yongsan.
Who should pay for this relocation? In my opinion the ROK should pay 100% for this move. It’s about time the ROK show a little appreciation for the trillions we’ve poured into this 50 year-long effort.
I agree. No residual Yongsan, Osan, or Camp Humphries. I’ll miss AFN, of course.
All this drama over a notion. Cause that’s all this “Move to Pyeongtaek” stuff is, a notion. It has about as much consistency as a fart; creates a stink but nobody can tell where it came from and whoops, pretty soon its gone. The move out of Yongsan has been debated ever since ’78 when CFC was formed, but it is never going to happen. It may be that the land in Pyeongtaek will be absorbed and the footprint of Camp Humphreys will be enlarged, but at most only a few operational forces will ever make more than a temporary (short-term/less than 5 years) home out of Pyeongtaek. As far as the USFK Commander and his cadre, wartime operational authority will be transferred to the ROK before he moves out of Yongsan. His replacement will be a 2-star liaison officer who works out of the attache office in the embassy.
A Park in Yongsan. I love this one. Even politicians argue over its size and scope. Its Urban legend folks. When the land goes back to South Korea it goes to the military. Think they’re gonna just give it all up for sh*ts and giggles?? An advanced military comms hub with 2 bunkers and helopad (newly built, mind you) included…The ROK Army has plans for this land and it doesn’t include civilian use. Sure, they might tear down the old military housing (of course not the brand new 5-story apartment complexes recently completed) and build something else but the only thing that might be turned over to the Yongsan district office is the old helo field just behind the museum and the old embassy housing and commissary area at the southernmost edge of South Post.
Reality and fiction have never come together on this story and unfortunately all this fuss over land in Pyongtaek is setting the stage for another “America screwed us over” tantrum. The alliance is broken and has been for a long time. Exercises are formalities, lacking any realistic data (read: make the ROK general feel good) and comeradery exists only at the most senior of echelons. US Junior officers and staff officers meet unrelenting resistance by ROK officers who insist on ignoring UNC regulations and accepting unit SOPs even if they constitute AA violations. I understand the resentment to taking orders from an outsider, but is it an alliance or not and does the AA matter or not? No, the alliance is broken. The US should withdraw 2nd Infantry Division in its entirety and transfer operational ground control to ROK as soon as possible and replace the 4-star with a 2-star. No move to Pyeongtaek necessary.
Sumo is pretty good.
I stopped missing AFN the day they stopped showing sports and instead put on Star Trek and Law and Order reruns all night. Terrible. The current AFN Prime lineup is miserable (except for General Hospital).
“Prevent conventional or nuclear war against modernized and high tech industry nations such as South Korea and Japan. Kim Jong Il supposedly has his missiles pointed towards the following regions.”
South Korean are convinced North Korea will never attack it because it would bring instant destruction of it, because the US would be involved.
Others say, with less confidence, NK will not attack SK even without the US because they are brothers and because they would lose the war.
Mutually assured destruction is a way to keep the peace, but not very comfortable.
However, without US troops in Korea, the chance NK will decide to attack Japan or US bases in Japan drops considerably – down close to nothing. The chance a unified Korea or South Korea will attack Japan with the US there is nil.
Being in South Korea just makes it absolutely certain Americans will die and many more will be drawn into a war if the North strikes out (probably as it begins to collapse) and gives a 30/70 chance it will strike out at Japan as part of the attack against US forces.
“Why was US interested in having a free Vietnam? I think China was part of the reason. Why have US troops in Germany? It’s pretty clear to tell Russia what’s up.”
Getting into a ground war in Vietnam for fear of a weak China and a strong Soviet Union did wonders for us, and we eventually cut our losses.
But, the main point, in all the examples you mentioned, can be summed up in two words: Cold War.
the USSR a weak but a highly populated China others facing off the US and allies in an ideological social multi-national deadly competition —— made the costs of being in Germany and the rest of Europe – as well as fighting the Korean and Vietnam Wars make sense ——- at the time.
NK is no Soviet Union. It is no China. It is not going to take over the region. It has no backers that are threatening military regional domination which the US and others must deal with.
The NK threat does not warrant us accepting all risks because to do not do so would be an even greater risk.
We risk more to US interests by being in South Korea than we do leaving it…..
Leaving Korea will absolutely save American lives if the North strikes out. We lose next to nothing. We gain security in peace of mind. We also save a ton of money that can be used elsewhere.
And SK can upgrade its military to defend itself.
“Strategically, having US troops in South Korea prevents North Korean military action, and it tells China and Russia that US troops are at the doorstep of both nations…..Having them on Japan is fine, but you have to pull a Normandy to land on the continent. ”
(other comment) “So then the real function and value of US troops stationed in Korea — and elsewhere in the Western Pacific — lies mostly in keeping those two apart, and thus keeping the peace in the entire region.”
Given that an offensive war on the Asian mainland would be absolutely the last thing the US would ever want to do —-
—- it is more likely US troops placed on the southern end of the toe of Northeast Asia would be as much a hostage to Russia and China as they have been pressed up on the DMZ against North Korean artillery.
Yes, they deter the North, but a lot of South Koreans argue the US should stay at the DMZ so Bush can’t attack NK nuclear sites with a limited strike because US troops are within easy killing distance to the North.
If we don’t plan on invading China through Korea —— and only a brain dead crack attack would want to invade China to begin with ——– then having US troops closer to their kill zone – rather than stationed just on the island nation of Japan – doesn’t make a whole lot of strategic sense to me.
To deter China — we gain little (if anything) by being stationed in both Japan and South Korea because our overwhelming position will be defensive – and missile, bombers, and long distance weapons will do just fine —- not ground troops pressed up against an enemy we don’t want to get in a ground war with in the first place.
This is also places all emphasis on the idea that China and the US (via Japan) are going to get into mortal conflict with each other to begin with.
China is either going to fail to spread the wealth around enough and collapse into division and chaos, or – remain a hobbled giant incapable of being a crucial regional threat even if it desired to do so, or – it is going to reach the potential everyone sees for it ———— by integrating itself into the global system which will give it the wealth it needs to spread it around to satisfy the people and build great power.
The idea that China is both going to reach its potential AND threaten US interests through military and economic Cold or Hot Warfare is too much a long shot —
to justify facing off a teetering NK armed to the teeth – for a South Korea that loves to hate us for our committment to South Korea.
Being out of Japan and Korea both would not be good. Being out of Korea but in Japan would be wonderful.
“Why have US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan? To tell Iran,”
Good grief.
We have troops in Afghanistan because it was the training ground for thousands and thousands of Islamic terrorists – some of whom killed 3,000 people in the US by using passenger planes as bombs.
We went into Iraq (whether you or I or anybody agrees with the move or not), because it has been a strategic threat since the early 1990s.
We remain in both nations because they need to be stabilitzed and put on a democratic track and integrated into the global system or they will revert back to a condition that will threaten US interests again.
Any pressure being in either nation puts on Iran is a secondary effect.
“crack addict” not “crack attack” idiot…
“As far as the USFK Commander and his cadre, wartime operational authority will be transferred to the ROK before he moves out of Yongsan. His replacement will be a 2-star liaison officer who works out of the attache office in the embassy.”
It’s irrelevant to speculate about who will be in charge of a command or force. The point is – Is there a US military base at Yongsan after relocation?
“Reality and fiction have never come together on this story and unfortunately all this fuss over land in Pyongtaek is setting the stage for another “America screwed us over” tantrum.”
If both parties continue to mask the fact that a military base will still remain at Yongsan after relocation then we should expect violent protests.
Pyeongtaek is done, it’s a done deal. The ROK governemnt has agreed to that and they are going to support it. Problem is going to come up next spring when the elections get close and people begin to realize that the Dragon Hill Lodge is not leaving.
You’re going to have a million people surrounding Yongsan telling you you can’t have the Dragon Hill Lodge or your CDR in Yongsan anymore. You HAVE to leave.
Then you’re going to wake up and realize it can’t happen.
Don’t feed the left wing, change the plan now.
“It’s irrelevant to speculate about who will be in charge of a command or force. The point is – Is there a US military base at Yongsan after relocation?”
It’s not speculation. It’s in line with other liaison operations around the world. A shell command is left behind with a 2-star in command. SOP. The point is, USFK HQ will never move out of Yongsan. Wartime operational transfer means removing the 4-star and replacing him with a 2-star. Wartime operational transfer is a priority on the DOD list of things to do. The Pyeongtaek deal is mindless chatter for them and will at most be a holding ground for troops permanently on their way out of country. Remember, the speech Laporte gave was to a House Sub-Committee. It’s an update on negotiations only. The fact is that no one on base takes this move seriously because its been talked about for the last 28 years. Perhaps someone can explain why the US is spending money upgrading buildings on Yongsan or building a brnad new airfield there. Or perhaps the installations in Uijongbu? Why spend money if you think you are reall going to be gone in a couple years…It ain’t gonna happen till it all happens.
“Pyeongtaek is done, it’s a done deal. The ROK governemnt has agreed to that and they are going to support it.”
No it’s not. Signing an agreement and providing the funds for it are two entirely different things. So far, no money has been coughed up for moving troops. Humphreys will certainly be an enlarged base someday, but a ROK Army base only.
“Problem is going to come up next spring when the elections get close and people begin to realize that the Dragon Hill Lodge is not leaving.”
Problem is going to come when people realize the ROK Army wants to keep all the land to themselves and Yongsan District will get almost nothing. Dragon Hill will be the last thing on people’s mind.
“It’s in line with other liaison operations around the world. A shell command is left behind with a 2-star in command. SOP. The point is, USFK HQ will never move out of Yongsan
You’re talking out of your ass. What SOP? There will never be a Yongsan USFK HQ’s after the move to Pyeongtak. Get it into your thick head, it’s never gonna happen. The USFK is out of Yongsan, it’s done. Wake up! The Koreans will tear down the walls.
I really hope to eventually hear that there will be an additional drawdown in the numbers of US troops in Korea. With the costs involved and the weakening of the alliance, why not just leave a token force in place? The troops would be better placed elsewhere and with the requirement that they be tied to Korea (no outside deployments) it seems that their usefulness is limited. Would 2-3,000 suffice? With that number, they wouldn’t even have to expand down in Pyeongtaek, right? Maybe they could ship a few thousand to Japan and Guam.
Brendon Carr, based on my recollection, they even had US style stop signs, labeled Stop. Very much like a US suburb pasted onto a foreign land. Gated/Guarded community, of course.
why do you assume all the US troops are sitting ducks within North Korean artillary range?
It’s not like the bulk of the South Korean force is sitting back at Young Nam and Ho Nam. I think the bulk is at Wie Jong Bu or above that line.
Why? Aren’t the South Korean forces just sitting ducks in North Korean artillary range?
They have artillary, too. And counter measures.
Fact is, the mere presence bothers Kim Jong Il enough to repeatedly get nervous about Team Spirit.
It’s foolish to withdraw. What makes you think Japan would welcome the US forces from South Korea to sit there?
South Korea doesn’t owe the US anything special. US got more than its share of interests out of the operation, by having a force on the North East Asian continent to counter the Russian Chinese presence, just like it did by having troops in Germany. In fact, the above link says Germans think worse of US than South Koreans do. Why not withdraw from Germany and move towards Poland, even further to Ukraine? Is there any reason why Putin gets upset with the ever expanding East trend of NATO?
Or is the US still convinced the Germans will start World War III?
So far, South Korea participated in every US war effort since and including Vietnam.
I’m not sure why Koizumi decided to join the US war in Iraq, but I think it has more to do with expanding the Japanese force and deploying it into combat in the future, more than anything.
“why not just leave a token force in place?”
North Korea.
Even if you leave just 2,000 to 3,000 soldiers, that more than likely forces the US to send in ground troops should North Korea begin to collapse and strike outward in a 2nd invasion as it does so.
Tripwire-lite is still a tripwire. Korea doesn’t need military advisers like with KMAG or the initial committment to Vietnam. —— Pull all troops out so we do not have to send thousands more if/when Korean War II breaks out. Promise air and sea support (from outside of Korea), but not boots on the ground.
(Other commenter) “What makes you think Japan would welcome the US forces from South Korea to sit there?”
Who cares? I never said send them to Japan. If Japan wants some, fine, but they aren’t needed in Japan if we understand they are never going back to Korea – even if war breaks out.
Other places will take them —- either in the US or elsewhere.
“South Korea doesn’t owe the US anything special. ”
Who cares?
I don’t.
Whether Korea owes the US or not has nothing to do with why it is in the best interest of the US to get it’s military out.
“In fact, the above link says Germans think worse of US than South Koreans do.”
I didn’t look at which poll you mean, but I find that highly doubtful.
Another poll showed that unlike most other places in the world except some hardline Muslim nations, South Korean society had a high percentage of “general” dislike for the US as opposed to US police or George Bush.
Regardless, since the 1980s ——- German society has made being in Germany NOWHERE remotely close to being as difficult a place to have troops than South Korea.
You are pulling arguments out your ass and jumping all over the place.
There are reasons to keep US troops in Korea —
—but the risks and costs far outweigh the benefits.
Get out now.
Start things in motion and be out by 2008 to 2010.
That should be “US policy” not police
and it should be “since the end of the 1980s” which was a decade when German opposition to the US in Germany was demonstrated often and a lot.
UsinKorea says,
“Promise air and sea support (from outside of Korea), but not boots on the ground.”
/WJK says: Ah, the legacy of the Vietnam War. So does that work really well, using airstrikes and missiles, but no ground troops? I think Bill Clinton’s War on Bosnia spanned a decade, and there are still US and Nato forces guarding Bosnia now, so they don’t kill each other. Nobody likes to talk about this, but it’s true. Essentially what Clinton did was let the Yugoslavs kill each other, and bomb the hell out of Serbia. Wow. I guess since Vietnam, it’s always in the interest of the US to non-commit any source of ground troops. That’s why Afghanistan thought the US would never take it. You can’t do the job right without ground troops.
The link I was talking about, check it out. Unequivocally says Germans are more negative towards the US than South Koreans.
“90% of Koreans are pro-American
They are?
http://www.globescan.com/news_archives/bbcpoll06-3.html#usa
Check the rest of that out, btw…interesting link.
“
isn’t it true that more people die via street crimes in the US than US soldiers who die in Iraq?
Isn’t the US too sensitive now about ground troops deaths since Vietnam?
One bleeding US soldier is enough now a days to call off a whole military operation. Peace, they say. Peace.
Peace exists because your enemies are unable to over power you by might. They don’t do that voluntarily. Never. Freedom was never free. And it still isn’t.
Being a soldier in Iraq is a dangerous job for sure.
According to the Brookings Institution, 818 soldiers died from May 2005 to April 2006 (total of 2400 for the entire war). That’s against an average troop strength of 133,000 over the same period May-April. According to that, a soldier’s chance of being killed is one in 742. Getting wounded in action is a much higher likelihood — May-April saw 6156 US troops getting wounded (one in 21); wounded soldiers total 17,774 for the entire war through most recent figures. And thousands more medically evacuated every year due to illnesses or non-combat injuries. Definitely Iraq is a high-stress environment.
(I’m sure because of rotations and replacements these figures are probably off. But this is back-of-the-napkin statistical analysis.)
“Wounded” runs the gamut from getting turned into a vegetable, or a multiple-amputee, to having a band-aid applied to cover a small abrasion from shrapnel (like John Kerry). As to how many of the wounded are grievously wounded, there aren’t great statistics available. But it looks like — from the reported patient loads at Walter Reed, Bethesda, and other major military medical facilities, and the Pentagon’s estimate of 6% amputees among the wounded — amputees total about 1000. The Pentagon reports 1700 troops with brain injuries of varying degrees.
Advances in battlefield medicine and transport have nearly 90% of soldiers wounded in battle surviving their injuries. (Past conflicts had only 75% surviving, which means those soldiers with more grievous injuries survive these days instead of dying as they would have in the past.) Soldiers in Iraq are only a few hours away from Landstuhl, and a day away from Walter Reed or Bethesda where they get the same care as America offers its President.
But the only ones who want to cut and run from this challenge are lefties like “unity” and her friends. America’s soldiers want to stay and face the enemy; reenlistment rates for all services including the Army and Marine Corps are sky-high, despite the certainty of getting sent to the cauldron. Did you know that 26 amputees have fought their way back to active duty, and 10 of them have returned to Iraq or Afghanistan for combat duty?
Who couldn’t be proud of Americans such as these?
While trolling for these numbers, I found a bunch of information on Coalition partners casualty rates. Miraculously, it appears Korea — despite having the third-largest troop presence — has not had a single casualty. Not one Korean soldier killed or wounded in action. Although I’m glad all of them made it home safely so far (the kid who lives across from us in our apartment was a Zayitun volunteer), one has to wonder how the Koreans pulled it off.
wjk,
You are obviously not paying much attention to what I’ve been saying. You are flying all over the place and attributing to me (our another typical group on this topic) generalized positions that are far from what I believe.
In fact, I think the general trend here is that I’m focusing on specific ideas of cost vs benefits while you are running willy-nilly everywhere.
SK can field its own deterent force against North Korea without the US – period. With a promise of US air and sea support, it can do so cheaper.
Right now, what keeps SK from building that defense force is the availablity of American ground forces — good deal for Korea —- HIGHLY shitty deal for the US.
The real and potential benefits of staying in Korea are outweighed by the tangible risks right here right now —- risks that are not going to go away until after NK is no more.
Repeat — the risks and costs of being in South Korea grossly outweigh the benefits — not Bosnia, not Afghanistan, not Germany, not Nation X.
And I’m not going to dilute the conversation by getting into my thoughts on Germany, Bosnia, Afganistan, Iraq, WWII, Vietnam, and whatever else any more than I have already done, because of how much you have misrepresented my position.
Korea is a dangerous, expensive place to keep ground troops – at a time when the US is stretched thin and spending boat loads of money on other things more vital than defending a nation that can defend itself.
Long term, Japan is the best defensive position for US forces to be in. Adding ground forces does not inhance that position much if even slightly above nil. But, keeping ground forces with the idea of some possible China or Russia threat somewhere in the distant future does keep us in harms way of NK – which will continue to be a step away from collapse until it does collapse.
I don’t care what the poll says.
90% Korea are definately not “pro-American” unless you stretch the term beyond meaning.
If German society is more anti-US than Korean, they do a hell of a job hiding it and Korea does not.
And since German society is not pressed up against North Korea as a mortal enemy — I really don’t give a rat’s ass whether German’s hate GIs and the US.
“Adding ground forces” should include “into Korea”
Isn’t the US too sensitive now about ground troops deaths since Vietnam?
Yes.
Brendon: The Zaytun unit stays behind walls in the safest part of Kurdish-run Iraq, that’s why it has no casualties (but of course, you knew this).
Tiny, Either you can’t read or you don’t have enough background on this subject to put what I wrote into context.
There are 3 arguments in what I wrote:
1. Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek will be enlarged, but not to support any permanent move of USFK. At the most, 2ID will pitch camp there on its way out of country.
2. Wartime operational authority will go back to Korea before HQ is moved out of Yongsan and the liaison left behind isn’t going to be separated from MND. If you think otherwise you’re an idiot.
3. Of course Yongsan will eventually go back to Korea but not to the public and not necessarily anytime soon. It will go to the ROK Army. Coiner was only offered up to keep the US from building the Embassy on palace grounds. The rights to Dragon Hill, post-yongsan occupancy, were included in the agreement to expand the Hotel back in ’98.
Dude, I don’t know how long you’ve been over here but since ’78 this move out of Yongsan has been diddled over repeatedly and this is the 4th agreement (’78 ’86 ’90 and ’02) to be signed yet not once has the money been coughed up on either the US or ROK side. Out of Yongsan by 2008??? What a freaking joke! No land has been permanently secured yet let alone had any ground broken on for buildings. You wanna see USFK out of Yongsan?? Show me the money!! USFK continues to spend money in Uijongbu and Yongsan as if they believe the South Korean government can’t agree to any permament settlement. History has shown that agreements in South Korea aren’t worth their paper. You really think the US is gonna pay to move 5,000 military and there dependants?? You think Yongsan district will appreciate it when thousands of local Koreans working with DPW or other onpost service activities will have to move to Pyeongtaek or be released?? You think the ROK government would be helping to pay for 2 apartment buildings, a helo-pad, an overpass bridge and refurbishing 70 year old buildings on Yongsan Base simply to give the land back to the public in 2 years? Good God!! Please look at more than just the local newspapers….
On a side note, the Koreans may start climbing the walls when they find out the US isn’t moving as soon as they would like. That is certainly possible in fact I predict something along those lines will happen because USFK ain’t movin. But it will only be another example of the ROK government creating fantasy scenarious for them to hope for, only to see USFK get blamed for not following through.
You must log in to post a comment.
{ 5 trackbacks }