Rumsfeld wants to move troops out of S. Korea!

[Dis]

OK it really didn't warrant an exclamation point. And I almost typed in N. Korea in the thread title .

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,80495,00.html

I'm actually inclined to agree with him. But I do find this shocking stuff coming from a republican presidency.

In fact much of Bush's actions towards N. Korea seem pecurliar. He wants to shift the burden of N. Korean nukes to Japan, S. Korea, and China. Which only makes sense of course. But I'm used to republicans sticking their noses in everything. So I found this strange.

Does the white house not care about N. Korea anymore?

Will N. Korea attack if we remove our troops?

I have been thinking we should remove our troops since the 90's. But now doesn't seem like the time.

[TheStinger]

Well if North Koreas nukes Tokyo there is gonna be a financial meltdown on wall street so it s pretty stuoid

[Dis]

they would be insane to do that!

I think they would only use nukes if they attacked S. Korea, and discovered they were going to lose. They would then nuke Seaul (damn if I can spell that right)

[Datajack Franit]

It was about time that they realized nobody wants them to be there anymore- go back to the US and enjoy the N. Korean nukes toasting Seoul

[Urban Ranger]

DPRK isn't going to launch a nuclear weapon at somebody soon.

I think he is trying to test the reactions of the new SK government.

[Drake Tungsten]

East Asians can take care of themselves, so there's no need for US troops to stay in that tinderbox. Bring 'em home.

[monkspider]

I agree that they should be brought back to the US.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Datajack Franit
It was about time that they realized nobody wants them to be there anymore- go back to the US and enjoy the N. Korean nukes toasting Seoul

Why would they realize something that isn't true?

[Guardian]

Actually, with the current tension and all, this is not a good time to talk about withdrawal. Perhaps later...

(I was a little surprised to find that so far, I'm the only one who's voted for the "Stay put" option...)

[Dis]

actually I should have included a stay put for 6 months or so option.

Because I would have voted for that. I just think it's too dangerous to remove them until we are finished with iraq. Because N. Korea's best chance to attacks, is when we are busy with Iraq.

After that we can start a process of relocation.

[MRT144]

thank the lord, thank the lord

[Datajack Franit]

Sikander- are you familiar with S. Koreans' feelings toward the US gov?

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Datajack Franit
Sikander- are you familiar with S. Koreans' feelings toward the US gov?

Familiar enough to know that they vary quite a bit from person to person.

[Richard Bruns]

If the South Koreans want us out, then we should leave. They know more about their security situation than we do. If they trust a psychopathic dictator with a huge military not to attack them, we have no right to disagree with that assesment.

I still can´t figure out how Pyongyang managed to get the world to believe that we somehow provoked North Korea and are responsible for the current mess. We agreed to ship fuel to them if they stopped building nukes. They start building nukes again, we stop shipping the oil, and then we get blamed for breaking the treaty because of the stopped shipments. Unreal.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Richard Bruns
If the South Koreans want us out, then we should leave. They know more about their security situation than we do. If they trust a psychopathic dictator with a huge military not to attack them, we have no right to disagree with that assesment.

I still can´t figure out how Pyongyang managed to get the world to believe that we somehow provoked North Korea and are responsible for the current mess. We agreed to ship fuel to them if they stopped building nukes. They start building nukes again, we stop shipping the oil, and then we get blamed for breaking the treaty because of the stopped shipments. Unreal.

I agree with everything here. I voted to pull out of SK, and hold to that unless and until we can come up with a mutual agreement on how to handle the situation where the presence of U.S. troops play a useful role. Currently this does not seem to be the case.