Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Eric in the Ozarks
I still have not heard why the US needs to defend SK in 2006 when SK has its own army

=====================================

OK, I'll try it one more time....there are reasons beyond first line defense of SK for keeping troops there. The two Koreas will unite, it is just a matter of time. The form and political tone of the new country will be of significant importance to us. If we are not there we will have little influence.

Our force on the peninsula is our only mainland Asia presence. You want to surrender that. Others think we should keep it as a balance against China and as assurance for Taiwan and Japan. I agree with that position but I am willing to hear the wisdom behind your position of abandonment of our last ground position in Asia.

36 posted on 02/27/2006 9:01:12 AM PST by wtc911 (You can't get there from here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]


To: wtc911

If the SKs don't want us there, why stay ? 35,000 troops won't make a difference to the NKs and we've signaled as much by pulling the bulk of the troops back from the DMZ. We exited Japan for the most part and it didn't self destruct. SK is sending dollars to NK to feed their army, so which side are they on ? We're not surrendering anything we own. I can see a point where we will repeat the PI experience if we overstay our welcome.


37 posted on 02/27/2006 9:14:27 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (BTUs are my Beat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson