US and South Korea

| November 22, 2019

NORK Missiles

There is a discussion going on between South Korea and the US on keeping US troops in South Korea.

From the article:  HANOI, Vietnam — U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper ended an Asia tour Thursday with the same trio of troubles on the Korean Peninsula that he found on arrival last week. Together they pose risks to U.S. national security and to the future of Washington’s alliance with South Korea.

The toughest of these problems, and arguably the most consequential, is North Korea’s refusal to restart negotiations with Washington on eliminating its nuclear weapons.

Esper has no direct role in nuclear diplomacy, but he had hoped that his decision to postpone a military flying exercise with South Korea — which North Korea had criticized as provocative — would help nudge the North back to the negotiating table.

In announcing the postponement in the Thai capital last weekend, Esper called it an “act of goodwill” that would not degrade the combat readiness of U.S. and South Korean air forces. But the North quickly rejected the gesture, insisting the United States end its “hostile policy,” which it sees as the root cause of the tensions that prompted the North to go nuclear in the first place. – article

In addition to this, the US is looking for a raise in the payment by the South to keep US troops stationed there.  There are also issues with Japan’s relationship with South Korea, which need to be addressed and ironed out. They were likely there in the past but ignored by the press.  However, as long as the North demands attention from the USA and fires off “test rockets” to show us how powerful they are when ND:tBF can’t have his way, there is little likelihood things will be settled.

Category: Foreign Policy, Korea, North Korea

Comments (17)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Ret_25X says:

    It is long past time for the ROK to stand on its own.

    Time to come home from Korea

    • Slow Joe says:

      Agreed. If the ROK decided to invade the North, they would completely crush the norks.

      The only thing keeping needle dick safe are those little nukes his father got courtesy of the Clintons.

      Never forget who made it possible for the norks to become nuclear-capable.

      • Ret_25X says:

        Perhaps, I don’t know how they stack up. Quality and Quantity both have their merits.

        But….The only reason US troops are in the ROK is to communicate “resolve” to China.

        I am not convinced that “resolve” is the message anyone receives from an almost 70 year long deployment.

        While forward basing makes sense, commitments in 150+ nations does not. Time to radically reexamine our defense posture overseas and determine what is, and is not, actually in our interests.

        For my money, forces based in the Western Pacific are likely deterrence enough already.

        Not that forward based forces in Korea are actually available for anything else….

        I think our basing strategy for the Army is largely still Cold War based and no longer relevant to the global environment. This includes–perhaps mostly–our continued emphasis on NATO. A treaty that frankly should also be on the table for complete overhaul.

        • 11B-Mailclerk says:

          Our Pacific deployments failed to deter the Empire of Japan. They dealt themselves a winning hand, but misplayed it.

          China is attempting to do the same. They will deploy in such a way as to convince us to shrug and acquiesce. The problem is that they cannot prevent us from wrecking their economy.

          That is the real strategic issue. Their best road is to divorce their economy from ours, or, so minimize it as to render it non-essential. That, however, means forgoing a great deal of wealth, especially for those currently on top. “Belt and Road” is meant to address that. But they cannot currently survive Congress repudiating the bonds they hold. We have done so before in war. Just a publicly-spoken hint of that possibility, by the right persons, would induce disaster. This also wrecks us, not nearly as badly, but we do not tend to genocidal mania when our economy freaks out.

          The maneuvering in the Pacific is face-building, and keeping us off balance while they address their central strategic goals. Essentially, they will keep us focused on a potential Pacific war, and not on the actual ongoing economic war. The ratification of USMDA would be a negative for China. You can rely on them to continue puppet-stringing their dupes to do anything to prevent it.

    • Martinjmpr says:

      I concur a brazillian percent. 😀

      Even when I was there – more than 25 years ago – it was pretty apparent that South Korea was more than capable of handling itself and it’s pesky sibling to the North.

      In the quarter century since then, ROK has only gotten stronger and the DPRK has only gotten weaker.

      Yes, they have a few squib nukes and a lot of chemical weapons which are probably the only things that would keep the ROK from squashing them like a bug, but as an OFFENSIVE power, the NorKs are all bark and no bite.

      There is zero reason for us to have anything other than a token presence on the peninsula.

      Yes, the bar girls in Tongducheon and Toko-Ri will be heartbroken and the Ajima’s in the commissary buying US rice to sell on the black market will have to find other work, but our forces in the ROK need to go home.

      • Martinjmpr says:

        Oh, I forgot: And the spoiled college boys who go into the Katusa program will have to go into the REAL Korean Army.

        Have fun with that, guys!

        • A Proud Infidel®™️ says:

          I remember when my Unit in Korea cross trained with a ROK Unit, the ROK Army Troops looked at the KATUSAs like they wanted to kick KATUSA asses just for shits and giggles!

  2. 5th/77th FA says:

    If the North Korean People could actually see the difference between how they live and how the South Koreans live, I’m sure that fatty kim da cheese would find himself hanging from the FIRST convient lamp post. I am of the opinion that this continued burr under the saddle of the American Taxpayer will continue until the Chinese get tired of propping kimmy up. And that won’t happen in our lifetime.

    He’s doing his BS cause…well…he can. Thanks for nothing UN.

    • A Proud Infidel®™️ says:

      What have we ever gotten from the United Nothing other than incompetence, failure, graft and corruption?

  3. Slow Joe says:

    Why do keep doing “acts of goodwill”?
    Every concession we do to the Norks will be perceived by them as proof of our weakness. Canceling/postponing that flying exercise was a mistake that its more likely to keep needle dick from the negotiating table than to bring him in.

    • Ex-PH2 says:

      So far, Joe, we have not made any real concessions to the Norks, and that is why Fatty Kim da T’ird is stamping his little feet again.

      It should be interesting to see how this works out, but it’s really more important for the US and South Korea to remain allies, and work on the issues between them and Japan.

    • 11B-Mailclerk says:

      More likely those acts are more for our domestic consumption. “See? Being reasonable here. No worries.” They also tend to down-play a DPRK threat. “If they were a real and impending threat, would we cancel?” Also, “off again on again” is simple Judo off-balance the other guy work.

  4. A Proud Infidel®™ says:

    I think the main source of fatty ‘lil Kim-Cheese’s hissyfits is that we no longer have either a muslim commie or an “aw shucks” Good Ole Boy in the White House, the ones that handed him things every time he tried to stir shit up!

  5. SteeleyI says:

    The guy that signed this seems to think North Korea is a big threat:

    He gets pretty specific on page 47.

    • Slow Joe says:

      Well, what does it say?

      Oh wait. You expected me to read all that?

      *laughs his ass off as he opens another Bud light*

      • SteeleyI says:

        Upon reflection, it is a lot to ask of a guy with ‘slow’ right there in his name.

        To be fair, I doubt if the signatory read it either…

    • timactual says:

      I read page 47. I didn’t see anything that says NK is a “big threat”. Could you be a little more specific?