<?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: East Asia&#8217;s &#8220;Lost Child&#8221;?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/</link>
	<description>Korea... in Blog Format</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 03:04:23 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: John Martinson</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-182396</link>
		<dc:creator>John Martinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 07:50:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-182396</guid>
		<description>It is funny how what people say about SK today was said about Japan in the 1980s and, especially, 1990s. With the difference that in the case of the US-Japan alliance, 80-90% of "experts" thought that it would not be in place by 2010. I wonder how many of those saying that the US-SK alliance will break or even weaken are as clueless about foreign relations as RMH was. An alliance does not break just because those at the top cannot stand each other. RMH is gone, GWB will be gone soon. These two could not even pretend not to dislike each other. Yet, the US-SK alliance was reinforced while RMH was president, mainly because of SK commitment in Iraq and Afghanistan. Australian troops are being withdrawn from Iraq. Does anyone think that the US-Australia alliance is going to suffer significantly because of this? Please. The same goes for SK, Japan or any other long-term ally that the US has. It takes much more than some friction and two unable leaders to break any alliance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is funny how what people say about SK today was said about Japan in the 1980s and, especially, 1990s. With the difference that in the case of the US-Japan alliance, 80-90% of &#8220;experts&#8221; thought that it would not be in place by 2010. I wonder how many of those saying that the US-SK alliance will break or even weaken are as clueless about foreign relations as RMH was. An alliance does not break just because those at the top cannot stand each other. RMH is gone, GWB will be gone soon. These two could not even pretend not to dislike each other. Yet, the US-SK alliance was reinforced while RMH was president, mainly because of SK commitment in Iraq and Afghanistan. Australian troops are being withdrawn from Iraq. Does anyone think that the US-Australia alliance is going to suffer significantly because of this? Please. The same goes for SK, Japan or any other long-term ally that the US has. It takes much more than some friction and two unable leaders to break any alliance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: yourbutt</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-95844</link>
		<dc:creator>yourbutt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2007 09:02:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-95844</guid>
		<description>Dudes......I think Australia-Korea compare and contrast was not the issue of the post concerning how Korea is ..alas, again, "a shrimp among whales" with no where to swim.

As Walter wisely noted, "Dude, the CHinaman is not the issue, Dude!"
Let us all take pause to those sage words.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dudes&#8230;&#8230;I think Australia-Korea compare and contrast was not the issue of the post concerning how Korea is ..alas, again, &#8220;a shrimp among whales&#8221; with no where to swim.</p>
<p>As Walter wisely noted, &#8220;Dude, the CHinaman is not the issue, Dude!&#8221;<br />
Let us all take pause to those sage words.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul H.</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-76571</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul H.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2007 18:18:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-76571</guid>
		<description>From #12 hoju_saram:

"....For 2 years prior to Pearl Harbor Australia did all the heavy lifting against Japan, inflicting the imperial army’s first defeats..."

Need to review your Aussie mil history here soju.  British Empire and its dominions did not declare war on Japan until after Pearl Harbor.  

It's certainly true that the Australian Army and Air Force were heavily involved in WWII prior to Pearl Harbor, but this was as part of the British Empire forces fighting the Germans and Italians, mainly in the Mediterranean theater.  

After the disastrous loss of Malaya and the surrender of Singapore in Dec 41-Jan 42 (which involved some Australian forces, can't remember how many offhand), your Prime Minister at the time (Curtin?) insisted on the return to the Australian theater of two(?) divisions of  Australian troops, from North Africa.  (Churchill wanted these divisions diverted to assist in the defense of Burma; good thing they weren't, as Burma was also lost to the Japanese in mid-1942).  

These two divisions ended up doing some extremely hard fighting against the Japanese, for which they didn't get enough credit (except among their fellow Australians).  But this was after Pearl Harbor (7 Dec 1941).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From #12 hoju_saram:</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8230;.For 2 years prior to Pearl Harbor Australia did all the heavy lifting against Japan, inflicting the imperial army’s first defeats&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>Need to review your Aussie mil history here soju.  British Empire and its dominions did not declare war on Japan until after Pearl Harbor.  </p>
<p>It&#8217;s certainly true that the Australian Army and Air Force were heavily involved in WWII prior to Pearl Harbor, but this was as part of the British Empire forces fighting the Germans and Italians, mainly in the Mediterranean theater.  </p>
<p>After the disastrous loss of Malaya and the surrender of Singapore in Dec 41-Jan 42 (which involved some Australian forces, can&#8217;t remember how many offhand), your Prime Minister at the time (Curtin?) insisted on the return to the Australian theater of two(?) divisions of  Australian troops, from North Africa.  (Churchill wanted these divisions diverted to assist in the defense of Burma; good thing they weren&#8217;t, as Burma was also lost to the Japanese in mid-1942).  </p>
<p>These two divisions ended up doing some extremely hard fighting against the Japanese, for which they didn&#8217;t get enough credit (except among their fellow Australians).  But this was after Pearl Harbor (7 Dec 1941).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Marmot&#8217;s Hole &#187; New Balance</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-76563</link>
		<dc:creator>The Marmot&#8217;s Hole &#187; New Balance</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2007 14:31:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-76563</guid>
		<description>[...] U.S. interests have dovetailed in recent years. What&#8217;s not yet clear is whether Seoul will be left out in the cold, or whether it will manage to use its economic clout to play Washington and Beijing off each other. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] U.S. interests have dovetailed in recent years. What&#8217;s not yet clear is whether Seoul will be left out in the cold, or whether it will manage to use its economic clout to play Washington and Beijing off each other. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pawikirogi</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-74607</link>
		<dc:creator>pawikirogi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2007 00:26:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-74607</guid>
		<description>'korea is no more than after-thought...'

let's keep in mind that armitage wrote the piece, ok? armitage does not have a very good track record on predictiing the future. let's remember that he was part of the team who brought us phrases like 'it'll be a cakewalk.' 'they'll greet us as liberators.' in other words, the guy is just a washed up neocon clinging to his now defunct ideology.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8216;korea is no more than after-thought&#8230;&#8217;</p>
<p>let&#8217;s keep in mind that armitage wrote the piece, ok? armitage does not have a very good track record on predictiing the future. let&#8217;s remember that he was part of the team who brought us phrases like &#8216;it&#8217;ll be a cakewalk.&#8217; &#8216;they&#8217;ll greet us as liberators.&#8217; in other words, the guy is just a washed up neocon clinging to his now defunct ideology.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: H. Kim</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-74603</link>
		<dc:creator>H. Kim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2007 16:44:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-74603</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;When Roh declared that Korea is the “balancer of East Asia”, he, as always, didn’t think throughly before opening his mouth. &lt;/blockquote&gt;

If Roh had been thinking before he opened his mouth, he would've declared that Korea is the "whore of Asia".</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>When Roh declared that Korea is the “balancer of East Asia”, he, as always, didn’t think throughly before opening his mouth. </p></blockquote>
<p>If Roh had been thinking before he opened his mouth, he would&#8217;ve declared that Korea is the &#8220;whore of Asia&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mins0306</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-74601</link>
		<dc:creator>mins0306</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:52:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-74601</guid>
		<description>When Roh declared that Korea is the "balancer of East Asia", he, as always, didn't think throughly before opening his mouth.  By making the above declaration, Roh has implicitly stated that the ROK will not support US foreign policy and go on its own way, in order to ensure the security of the ROK and of course East Asia.  

What Roh didn't realize before the speech is that the ROK doesn't have the economic, military, and political clout to influence anybody in East Asia, and it certainly doesn't have what it takes to go on its own way.  At the same time, he helped further alienate its most important ally which isn't helping things either.

Right now, the only road the ROK can take to ensure its security while having its say in the future of East Asia is to drop its unrealistic and nationalistic dreams of being an independent power and strengthen its alliance with the US, by doing its part.  Simply mouthing ,''The alliance is important'' and/or making symbolic contributions, just for the sake of saying ''Hey, we did our part'' won't do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When Roh declared that Korea is the &#8220;balancer of East Asia&#8221;, he, as always, didn&#8217;t think throughly before opening his mouth.  By making the above declaration, Roh has implicitly stated that the ROK will not support US foreign policy and go on its own way, in order to ensure the security of the ROK and of course East Asia.  </p>
<p>What Roh didn&#8217;t realize before the speech is that the ROK doesn&#8217;t have the economic, military, and political clout to influence anybody in East Asia, and it certainly doesn&#8217;t have what it takes to go on its own way.  At the same time, he helped further alienate its most important ally which isn&#8217;t helping things either.</p>
<p>Right now, the only road the ROK can take to ensure its security while having its say in the future of East Asia is to drop its unrealistic and nationalistic dreams of being an independent power and strengthen its alliance with the US, by doing its part.  Simply mouthing ,&#8221;The alliance is important&#8221; and/or making symbolic contributions, just for the sake of saying &#8221;Hey, we did our part&#8221; won&#8217;t do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-74600</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:32:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-74600</guid>
		<description>Collective &lt;strike&gt;in&lt;/strike&gt;security.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Collective <strike>in</strike>security.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hatch SZ</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-74591</link>
		<dc:creator>Hatch SZ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2007 11:03:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-74591</guid>
		<description>Just wondering if anyone saw this news article. Yes, it's China, not Korea. I wonder how much that will help in building an East Asia Forum.

China lawmaker pitches 'Humiliation Day'
http://tinyurl.com/yveg2o</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just wondering if anyone saw this news article. Yes, it&#8217;s China, not Korea. I wonder how much that will help in building an East Asia Forum.</p>
<p>China lawmaker pitches &#8216;Humiliation Day&#8217;<br />
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/yveg2o" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/yveg2o</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dogbertt</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-74587</link>
		<dc:creator>dogbertt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2007 07:47:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/03/19/east-asias-lost-child/#comment-74587</guid>
		<description>Nye and Armitage state that "approximately 100,000 Americans are resident in Seoul".

Even including U.S. military personnel and ethnic Koreans holding U.S. citizenship is that accurate?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nye and Armitage state that &#8220;approximately 100,000 Americans are resident in Seoul&#8221;.</p>
<p>Even including U.S. military personnel and ethnic Koreans holding U.S. citizenship is that accurate?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
