| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Real Reality
Joined: 10 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Yu_Bum_suk
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
|
 Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 7:23 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| So why the hell don't they go home or to Iraq? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vox
Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Location: Jeollabukdo
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That may in fact have been the prelude announcement to do precisely that. I wouldn't be suprised if they're deciding they no longer need a quick access point to any Asian theatre of war at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Personally, if I was the ones in charge of America, I would secretly hire some people to really stir up some sh!t and have Korea kick out the army. Then America could say well, we wanted to stay and help, but you guys kicked us out. Whatever problems that came of it are your fault. They could then send all those troops down to Iraq. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peeping Tom
Joined: 15 Feb 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 8:34 pm Post subject: Re: Korea Capable of Defending Itself |
|
|
This may be the first time I don't disagree with Rumsfeld. Besides, if he's wrong, I'll be outta here before anything breaks out  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VanIslander
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Location: Geoje, Hadong, Tongyeong,... now in a small coastal island town outside Gyeongsangnamdo!
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's all about trade.
The Chinese want them out.
(If you don't at least understand this perspective, your history and geopolitics is deficient.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rumsfeld isn't talking about removing all troops from Korea. The plan is simply to redeploy them farther from the DMZ in a way that will provide the US greater flexibility for rapid deployments elsewhere, while still supplying the 'tripwire' function. It was recently agreed that US troops would stay even after a peaceful, Seoul-led reunification. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vox
Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Location: Jeollabukdo
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 9:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That I can buy more than them leaving simply because the Chinese want them to. I can understand the Chinese wanting them to, just not the part where US submissively pack their bags and go home for a hope at some bigger slice of the Chinese pie. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
junkmail
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Depends who they have to defend themselves against. If you ask a non Korean they would probably say North Korea. If you ask a Korean they will probably say Japan.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
itaewonguy
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 3:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
if you ask me! they will get killed by japan and slaughted by north korea!
they will be begging USA to hurry up from OKINAWA and SAVE US!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peemil
Joined: 09 Feb 2003
Location: Koowoompa
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 3:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| So why the hell don't they go home or to Iraq? |
Because the Yanks- Bless them- Never leave a country they've helped or conquered in a time of war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Beej
Joined: 05 Mar 2005
Location: Eungam Loop
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 4:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="peemil"]
| Quote: |
| Because the Yanks- Bless them- Never leave a country they've helped or conquered in a time of war. |
France, Phillipines, Mexico |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 7:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, of course they need to move them away from the DMZ. The American soldiers along the DMZ are well trained. If NK decides to attack, they will be the first ones to be targeted by their artillery. But, I guess the really reason may be that the threat of the North Korean military ever attacking is now so miniscule, they simply don't see the point in wasting any more money along the DMZ. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gypsyfish
Joined: 17 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hollywoodaction wrote: |
| Well, of course they need to move them away from the DMZ. The American soldiers along the DMZ are well trained. If NK decides to attack, they will be the first ones to be targeted by their artillery. But, I guess the really reason may be that the threat of the North Korean military ever attacking is now so miniscule, they simply don't see the point in wasting any more money along the DMZ. |
What American soldiers along the DMZ. They were moved out about a year and a half ago. The only ones there now are the guides for the DMZ tours.
Ironically the Norks saw that as a provocation, too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gypsyfish wrote: |
| Hollywoodaction wrote: |
| Well, of course they need to move them away from the DMZ. The American soldiers along the DMZ are well trained. If NK decides to attack, they will be the first ones to be targeted by their artillery. But, I guess the really reason may be that the threat of the North Korean military ever attacking is now so miniscule, they simply don't see the point in wasting any more money along the DMZ. |
What American soldiers along the DMZ. They were moved out about a year and a half ago. The only ones there now are the guides for the DMZ tours.
Ironically the Norks saw that as a provocation, too. |
Trying to make South Korean university students think that's because the US plan on nuking the DMZ, killing SK soldiers along with NK soldiers, I bet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
