|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
Posted on 06/26/2005 5:32:32 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
/begin my translation
|
|
||
|
[Exclusive] AEI, Influential to Bush Admin., Proposes 'Ending Alliance with S. Korea'
|
||
| American Enterprise Institute... If N. Korea refuses to return to 6-party talk, it recommends a preemptive strike. It is confirmed that S. Korean government is anti-American...argues for the withdrawal of American troops |
||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
The July-August issue of 'The American Enterprise,' a bimonthly AEI magazine featured the Current Issue Highlights, 'Nip It Now: Avoiding a nightmare in N. Korea,' in which its five senior research fellows, including James Lilly, the former U.S. Ambassador to S. Korea, and Nicholas Eberstadt, proposed the solution to N. Korean problem from Neocon perspective, in the form of policy recommendations for S. Korea-U.S. alliance and N. Korean nuclear problem.
This push from AEI could reflect that hawks in U.S. make it official that they are preparing for the response to N. Korean refusal to return to 6-party talk and its nuclear armament.
Writing on S. Korea-U.S. alliance, Daniel Kennelly, the Editor of American Interest, started with the title, 'It is Time for Amicable Divorce from S. Korea,' and proposed the end of the alliance, by arguing, "The current S. Korea-U.S. alliance has become a diplomatic straight jacket. S. Korea opposes any military action against N. Korea."
He says, "S. Koreans should be responsible for S. Korean defense," arguing for the withdrawal of American troops in S. Korea, and goes on to say, "With realignment of American forces and creative diplomacy, we should find military options to cope with all possible contingencies."
Gordon Cucullu, a former DoD official, outlined a military strike plan against N. Korea, by arguing, "N. Korean has outdated military system and strategy, and their troop morale is highly suspect. After a couple of weeks, N. Korean military will be completely wasted away. Since China is expected to stay neutral, and S. Korean alone could defeat N. Korea in a war, with some luck and determination, we could have a long-awaited moment of another liberation looming over the horizon, as we have had in Afghanistan and Iraq."
Victor Hanson, a military historian at Hoover Institute of Stanford University, argued, "If N. Korea tests nuclear-tipped missiles, U.S. can launch a preemptive strike, followed by a blockade against N. Korea, which would end Kim Jong-il regime."
Senior research fellow Eberstadt argues, "The inner circle of S. Korean government has turned out to be unforgivably anti-American, and S. Korea is now a run-away ally. Diplomacy will fail to solve N. Korean problem. We have to prepare for tough sanctions and military options."
Senior research fellow Lilly also urged the independent American policy against N. Korea, saying, "Do not rely on China and S. Korea."
Kuk Ki-yon, reporting from Washington D.C.
|
|
| 2005.06.24(Fri. )18:50 |
/end my translation
I hope some of you can check the following link to 'The American Enterprise.' Somehow it is down for a while. I want to find out if this is due to the problem at the source website or my connection problem.
"If N. Korea tests nuclear-tipped missiles, U.S. can launch a preemptive strike, followed by a blockade against N. Korea, which would end Kim Jong-il regime."
Good.
It will not load for me as well, right now.
"Connection refused"
BTW, I find the article's thesis interesting: Let the ungrateful Leftists in South Korea go their own way and concentrate (with a free-hand) on Kimmy-Kim.
Just when Hyundai was starting to get their act together.
AE is holding a big world conference in Colorado now.(Cheney, among others is/was supposedly there)
I don't know if that has anything to do with the problem or not.
Oh, sure, that'll work -- Fat Teddy, Shrillery, Hollyweird, Kooks on Kampuses, the MSM -- they'll be on board for that. LOL
You think the hippies are screeching now?
Having said that, I don't have a solution that's any better. I honestly think we need to solve some "traitor" problems here in the US -- and do it quickly.
You are correct. There are people, Hillary, most visibly, who have the purpose of destroying this nation. They were educated in Marxist Leninism. They never renounced their early beliefs. They seek power over all you have and all your thoughts.
Also, not all of these people are Leftists. There are the Republicans who want the same thing, only with more deodorant and less sex.
It is a move that will get us out of stalemate. Iran and Korea know we are tied down.
We must end the war with them, esepcially Iran, before they can build a true nuclear arsenal, even if they already have a few bombs.
I agree with only half of the AEI report.
It might be time we took our troops out of S. Korea and reduced our "security guarantees" for them as well.
However, the second part should be to encourage and aid S. Korea and Japan to start establishing their own Nuke deterrant. They key here is "encourage" and "start". I believe that path will not have to proceed to "production" before it gets results.
The North is not developing Nukes to use them, they know their use would be suicidal and the one and only thing that Kim Jong Il wants to do is survive. They are developing them for their value in international political blackmail and that blackmail is directed mostly at the south.
Let Japan and S. Korea call their bluff and let's (US) push them (Japan and SKorea) into a position (loss of U.S. security blanket) where they will be more inclined to call the bluff.
A nuke armed Japan and S.Korea is the last thing the Chi-coms want.
With Japan and S.Korea prepared to go nuclear, the North's blackmail ability is greatly reduced and the suicidal nature of their Nukes is manifestly clear.
China will be pressed by those events to end its support for the north.
The north will collapse.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiigghhhhtt...
This is in essence a threat, not a bluff. If S. Korea and China fold due to this pronouncement, that is good. However, if they don't, it will be followed through.
I am not sure if U.S. is ready for encouraging S. Korea and Japan to go nuclear 'now,' even if that remain as a viable path when things further deteriorate.
With U.S. recruiting Viet Nam and India against China, China must be feeling real pressure by now.
A good compromise would be to encourage Japan, and leave the ungrateful South Koreans to their own devices. May be a decade or so in a "Glorious Labor Camp and Reeducation Facility" run by the Glorious Leader, Kimmy-Kim will lead to a change in their selfish anti-Americanism.
One would imagine there exists somewhere in the bowels of DC, a plan that covers going it alone if necessary.
I agree.
So you are OK with "Republicans" who went in the tank on the eminent domain case due to pressure from real estate developers?
"If N. Korea tests nuclear-tipped missiles, U.S. can launch a preemptive strike, followed by a blockade against N. Korea, which would end Kim Jong-il regime."
North Korea would unleash everything it had, figuring it had nothing to lose. It's not exactly like Iraq.
"A good compromise would be to encourage Japan, and leave the ungrateful South Koreans to their own devices"
While there are indeed many ungrateful people there, the older ones have not forgotten. It's too strategic of an area to abandon the South. The last time we did that, a little conflict happened.
Just when Hyundai was starting to get their act together.
It means modern in Korean. I've never heard it pronounced right in English. It should sound more like Hyun-day.
I just ran a trace route on taemag.com. Site is down. Not your connection.
ping
No doubt, but a few years in one of those Glorious Reducation Facilities would realign their thinking to appreciate how all good things come from the beneficence of the Glorious Leader.
The liberal young South Korean that was hired into my group, and that I have to work with, that stated upon starting his new job here in America that "Americans steal all the good land in South Korea for their military facilities", that "American interventionism is the cause of the problems for the Korean people" and, upon my questioning about the Korean situation, that "Kim Jung-Il is not so bad", might rejoice over the withdrawal of Americans from the peninsula, though.
Thanks, I'll have to ask him.
The young do indeed express their opinions as you stated. Though I would say, the difference between what you hear and see might be different. I can understand his comment about land because it is so much at a premium there. The land at Yongsan was snatched up really quick after it was closed.
We fail to realize that N and S Korea are STILL at war. There was no peace treaty signed and you still have firefights that erupt every so often. In fact, over 1,500 troops have been killed over the years (I think that is both sides combined). In the late 40's we publicly stated that Korea was no longer strategically important to us and pulled out our troops. You know what happened next.
Korea is smack dab in between Japan, China, and Russia. It is a strategic place.
Many Koreans I knew were good down-to-earth people. I made many friends there.
Koreans do blame the US and Russia for dividing their country. After the war, they did just that. BUT Russia was supposed to hold elections and eventually relinquish control so that the country could be unified. That didn't happen and it became Communist. I think time has blurred the reality of history for a lot of the younger South Koreans.
I remember a talk I had with a lady. She said some of those same things. I pointed out a few things from the American point of view and more realistic assessments and she got a whole different perspective.
I don't know how you blockade North Korea when it has a border with China.
Remember Viet Nam and India Rummy is recruiting? And a host of punitive trade measures Congress is ready to slap at China. Plus, potential Japanese nuke + full militarization....
No doubt. However, we have enough anti-American Leftists of the domestic-type, without having to import them.
The same would be true for many other countries. We seem to import them from other countries too. The last I checked, about 37,000 Koreans a year came to the US, but I think that was the early 90's. I have no idea now.
>>>Remember Viet Nam and India Rummy is recruiting?
Maybe Vietnam. They still have to comply with accounting for our POWs.
Yes, I agree! Our immigration policies do allow people into the US that don't share our values nor any affection for our civilization and society. Current thinking is that this is only fair since creating a Multicultural and diverse society, irregardless of belief, is of paramount importance. I assume you agree with these policies. FYI, there are a number of FReepers here at FR that endorse unrestricted immigration.
".......The last I checked, about 37,000 Koreans a year came to the US, but I think that was the early 90's. I have no idea now......."
I don't either.
Nonetheless, it doesn't seem fair to allow just South Koreans into the United States. All peoples of the world should have access to the US. I just haven't figured out how you tell the difference between a bad Wahabi Cleric from Saudi Arabia and a good Wahabi Cleric from Saudi Arabia.
1st statement--I do believe that immigrants should realize they are in a different country and that they should make efforts to become part of it. One thing that people do fail to realize though, is that by the second generation, that is pretty much the case, especially with Koreans. Even earlier immigrants such as Italians and the Irish often took some time to get adjusted to our society, often living in segregated housing.
I grew up in a very diverse area. Now, my hometown is about 60% Hispanic, 10% black, and has large groups of different Asians and Eastern Europeans as well. It is the MOST conservative area in the state and has one of the lowest crime rates around. It is because the people think of themselves as part of the community that helps that be possible.
Learning the language does take time, especially for older immigrants. We Americans expect everyone to speak English when we go visit a country and often when we move to a country. But the effort should still be made.
Satement 2--No I don't support unrestricted immigration. We are overburdened in some areas. Some immigrants do come with the notion that many things should be provided by the government for them. When I was teaching night English classes, many of the Bosnians never payed and rarely came. They were required to come though. They did come when the person in charge of checking to see if they did would come. I did have some very good Bosnian students, though, who really tried hard to learn the language.
A wahabiist who is on some terror watch list should not be let in. I just feel, that in these different days, we do need to be careful. No, immigration should be allowed from many countries, but somehow, those who are legitimate (e.g. uniting legal families) should be the ones to come. How we determine that is another discussion entirely and not a point I'm prepared to make.
Many Koreans are among a "model minority." Koreans are not usually involved in crime, are very sincere in their beliefs, work hard, and contribute to society rather than take from it.
The nationalities, generally, that I saw that learned the language the fastest were the Vietnamese, Koreans, Chinese, and some South American countries. The Hispanics were a little slower to learn the language, though there were many who did. Much of it depended upon individual effort, time, and attitude.
We are all products of immigrants. I am thankful for my forebears who settled and worked hard on large farms to provide a living for their families.
If you're talking about my long-windedness, well.... I'll try to warn you next time.:)
Precisely where, at this point, do we get the troops to take on the 5th largest military in the world?
Nowhere can we get the needed troops for the time being unless there was some kind of draft. We would have to watch out for China too who would intervene if it felt threatened.
Not an issue where I live. One of the reasons why I voted with my feet to leave a socialist craphole and get mine in a state that has a few liberties left. Notice the state that Kelo originated in; a "true blue" socialist craphole, where the voters, it appears, did'nt have enough objections to turn out the scoundrels in City Hall that wanted to eliminate some urban blight.
And while we are on the subject of liberty, just how do you proprose to "deal with our traitor problem, and quickly"?
Re-educate them?
Deportation?
Blacklisting?
Expand Gitmo to the entire island of Cuba and turn that into a giant Liberal Concentration Camp?
Good 'ole American values there, from what I am sure is a true patriot.
Under the Bill of Rights, our "traitors" have a right to be complete jackasses. They even have the right, if they ever get enough votes to do it, to implement programs that in this day and age, would amount to national suicide pact.
Kind of like what the ROK has been doing over the last 20 years.
I'm familiar with that. But all the men still have to be 'accounted' for. IOW, they have to release the information, remains, or any live ones back to us. This was the terms set by the Bush Administration.
I know, emotionally, where you are coming from; and I often feel that way too, but, from a policy perspective I do not agree.
In spite of the attitude of the current S.Korean government, I have hope that circumstances may yet, with future elections, restore a less "appeasing" national government in Seoul. I even have some belief that N.Korea itself may yet provide the impetus for such a change.
And, on a personal level, I cannot yet "abandon" S. Korea, so I would include S. Korea with Japan in "starting" a process of aiding them in developing their own Nuclear deterrents.
Again, my belief is that the process may only need to be started in order to move others, like China, to help rein in N. Korea.
Re # 14:
I humbly disagree.
From a public perception (which is more than one/half of its affectiveness) it is only a threat because the idea of its use is so threatening - that is most of the actual threat, the very idea of its use. This has been made clear in the now available cold-war documents of both the U.S. and the USSR. Most of its value is in its psychological value as a deterrent and both U.S. and USSR planners came to the same conclusion; that its use - first, next or last - would in the end be suicidal. There were times, even into the 1980s, where either side had to consider the possibility of "victory" through a nuclear first strike or nuclear retaliation and it never was allowed to pass from "consideration" to possibility.
The USSR did not fold because it lacked the Nuclear armament to tell the Poles and the East Germans they could not rebel. It fell because it knew that conventional forces could not by themsleves keep the Poles and the East Germans in line and in reality they would not use their Nuclear arms, short of national suicide, which they would not commit.
I believe that Kim Jong Il is evil, machievellian, very smart but not, as some believe, insane.
I believe that the only true value N.Korea has now and has ever had is in the psychological threat of his nukes and that is what he is counting on; that he can use that "threat" alone, to achieve his aims and so far that is what he has done; he has bought more time for his regime.
I believe that, just as Reagan called the bluff of the USSR, and upped the nuclear and conventional thresh-hold, that we need to do the same with N.Korea. The non-stop maintenance of increasing conditions that call his bluff, I believe, will reveal it as the non-suicidal bluff that it is. His government will implode.
His only chance of success is that we do the opposite and continue to let him shape the diplomatic battlefield in his favor.
We need to say, in 100s of ways. O.K., you think Nukes give you some advantage, well here is why they don't and then we say again, here is another reason why they don't, and again and again and again. He cannot compete he can only drive his nation to its implosion. If he is even "borderline" insane then there will probably be no "nation" (normal life and economic production) left inside the North except him and his military.
Ping/Bump.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
