It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should the U.S.Increase Troop Level In S.Korea?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 02:02 PM
link   
In light of china's latest suggestion of"encouraging n.k.back to the negotiation table""instead of any real punitive measure,should the u.s.and s.j.and japan be sending a stronger signal?Thoughts?



Edn

posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Wouldn't that just have a more negative effect? I know that if foreign troops were massing on my borders I would put everyone on stand by and have every possible weapon pointing to the forces that may invade my country.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 02:18 PM
link   
A fair point of course.But after recent statements of war by n.k. maniac buoyed by chinese lack of even a slight rebuke 2 their nuke test,i fear this man MAY carry thru on this threat if nothing is done.The status quo is changed now.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Its already being done...My best freind who is a E-7 just got sent to S. Korea and he told me by phone that tons of new recruits are showing up daily !!

Like I said.....the U.S. is on the move.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 02:52 PM
link   
I think kim and the chinese played poker on the u.s.NOT sending any additional troops 2 the asian theatre in light of iraq/iran.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Escalation would be a bad idea. Half-hearted escalation would be a worse idea.

If someone proposed raising US troop levels in North Korea, I'm not sure I'd like it, but I suppose I could understand the argument.

Raising troop levels in South Korea merely as a threat would invite a war by miscalculation. The best case scenario for such a miscalculation would be that the North makes good progress without using nukes and we decide to back down. The worst case, and most likely scenario once we have made mistakes which result in them seizing the initiative, is that they nuke our boys the minute we start to turn the tide and within a two weeks of the whole mess starting there won't be an inch of soil on the whole peninsula worth fighting over for about a hundred years.


I think a big part of the problem with North Korea is a fear of stepping outside the box. They're too scared to change and we're afraid anything positive we try to do will only make things worse.

I think it's time for the US to reevaluate the risks associated with using a bigger carrot, because the fundamental rule of conflict is that at least one side must want something bad enough to fight for it. I say give the mouse a cookie- nothing fancy, just one of those cheap little minis to hold him over, and a dixie cup of milk, because the little rodent will definately bite you over food. But will he be willing to fight to trade the dixie cup for a real glass? I don't think so, particularly if it means no more cookies.

I'd encourage the US, Japan, and South Korea to get together with China and Russia and arrange a program to absolutely heap the right kind of incentives on North Korea with minimal strings attatched.

Power plants for a nuclear freeze was way way too ambitious for the relationship between the US and North Korea. That level of trust does not exist between our nations. We need to build that over time, and the way things are going we should probably get started. It's not too late really, because we're in a stalemate that will last until either there is a war or the North Korean government decays and falls.

So make some small trades and cultural exchanges to build trust.
We'll train your doctors if you'll start sendin them on UN humanitarian efforts.
We'll give you some farm equipment and advisors to help your prisons produce food for you, if you'll let the Red Cross in.
We'll let KIA move some of its parts department into the North if you'll let a handful of South Korean workers commute across the border to work there too.

You run little things like that for a while, then you start upping the ante with bigger offers:
Reduce your conscription rate this year and we'll allow a few student visas and work permits for some of them.

Let's each pull 10% of our forces on the 38th back about 10 miles, and 6 months after thap happens, the 10% we pulled out will leave the peninsula entirely.

How about a mutually defensive posture between you and Japan? We'll get you some Russian SS-22s and S-300s if you'll hand over half of your Taepo Dong 1s.

more later. gotta work.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Those are very well thought out and logical proposals Vagabond!Yet when has the leader north of the 38th been accused of acting logically?



posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 08:50 PM
link   
I'll give you that, most definately, but I'd give it a shot anyway.

Frankly, if all else failed, I'd be happy to just give the Koreans a butt load of food with no strings attached and let them think that it came from China.

Why? Because it gives us leverage. If we improve the lot of the Korean people, then Kim Jong Il eventually becomes obligated to maintain our support, at the risk of facing an uprising. It's one thing to have been in ruin for 50 years, it's totally another to have your population experience the good life and suddenly have it stop.

I figure dang near anything beats letting the situation stew for another couple of administrations with policies that neither give us meaningful leverage nor improve our relationship.




top topics



 
0

log in

join