Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Epik_Teacher]

Back in the days when the US$ ruled supreme and the USA could run budget deficits to hell and gone, they could afford military bases worldwide. Those days are coming to a close. The USA does need to start closing bases and worry more about themselves. We should give Koreans what they want and drastically scale back operations in Korea. Since Koreans basically sh*t on the USA every chance they get, we should let them start defending themselves! And let them start raising the cash to do so! Goodbye low taxes, hello 10% and more taxes! Enjoy!

Military Needs to Close More Bases: General
WASHINGTON
Sep 15, 2010

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68E6H420100915

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Defense Department could save "big money" by closing more military bases, the four-star general who commands U.S. air forces in Europe said on Wednesday.

General Roger Brady said closing military bases could help avert cuts to military hardware and troop levels as pressure mounts on the defense budget.

"We've got too many daggone bases," Brady told the annual Air Force Association conference, noting that base closures could save millions of dollars a year while averting more onerous personnel cuts or reductions in military missions.

"We really need to look at the real estate question again. I don't think we can afford not to," he said.

"There's big money there."

Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Tuesday unveiled 23 new measures to end years of massive cost overruns on weapons programs, saying the military needed to "do more without more."

He said the changes would affect about $400 billion of the Pentagon's total $700 billion budget, part of a larger effort to save money for new weapons programs and troops.

[Dev]

A lot of people compare the U.S. to the fall of the roman empire. The U.S. is overextending itself and may be heading toward collapse.

That is often the cause of past empires that have collapsed.

[CentralCali]

[nukeday]

[oldfatfarang]

[bucheon bum]

I don't agree with the roman empire analogy but for argument's sake let's say you're right. The Roman Empire's decline took a loooong time and it was still the #1 power and heart of western civ. durig most of that decline. There are worse things in the world to be....

[jvalmer]

The US will still be a world power, but may have to share the top spot with another country. I'd say 20-50 years when that happens. The US will be still a major power for a long long long time. A few reasons is it's huge population (3rd largest in the world) and usually very open immigration policy to keep the population high. With so many people you are bound to see the cream of the crop rise more often than not.

Large countries have a tendency to stay as world powers when they get there, even though there are blips along the way like in the case for China and possibly India.

[TheUrbanMyth]

[AsiaESLbound]

The only way to fuel an empire is if it produces and exports all the cars, machines, and equipment to the world or some major markets such as China, but fact is, America is fueling itself by borrowing from other countries such as Japan and China. The general is spot on that we need to bring the troops home. For years, I've said we need to put our resources back into America to take care of our own and let the world take care of itself. It's good to have relations, but it's not good to change the course of events by getting in the middle of other countries domestic matters such as with Korea and Iraq among many other places.

World War 2 was valid as our freedom was going to be in jeopardy if Hitler would had conquered Europe with the Japanese trying to invade other countries at the same time. When provoked, it's OK to to have war, but to have all these bases, troops, and hardware all around the world is a big white elephant producing no value for the American people.

Empires conquest are all about gaining trade advantages with the goal of making the empire and it's wealthy elite even more wealthier. This is why America wields it's military might and influence around the world; not because we are humanitarians seeking for the betterment of the world or protecting the world from Armageddon like the way they'd like people to think. Our liberal open minded appearance putting on freedom is a facade to explain to the general public why we do these things around the world. Other reasons for our military presence and wars such as in Korea was to play a war game with Russia, but it went from cold war to developing a trading partner who manufactures materials cheaper than American factories. Now that Korea has developed to become an expensive economy, it's propped up enough to fend for it's own and is already establishing it's mini empire around the world as well as outsourcing. My LG monitor was made in China and next year your Korean food may be from Madagascar.

Empires rise and fall and it's evident America's is in the process of falling which means huge disadvantages for those of us expecting the job market to be popping like it did in years past. I think it sucks, but this is where we're at in history. The 20th century was an exception; not the norm. It's time to contract our operations and budgets to focus on the home front.

[oldfatfarang]

[hellofaniceguy]

It's not Americas fault...it's the voters who elect boneheads and the idiots in congress who confirm stars on the generals.
Every election it's the same old BS and it will never change.
It's about about the money. Period.
Would the American people allow foreign troops to have bases in the US? Of course not! So why do it to other countries!
We all blame the government...it's not the government....it's the elected folks!

[CentralCali]

What's your rant about the generals? Generals don't make policy. The United States is not a "banana republic."

Oh, there are foreign military units stationed in the United States. Swing through Texas sometime and check out the military aircraft.

[hellofaniceguy]

[captain kirk]

[Epik_Teacher]