North Korea is not America’s problem
The division of the Korean peninsula lies almost seven decades in the past. The circumstances which drew America into that region’s affairs are long over. The Cold War ended more than two decades ago; the struggle between the two Koreas is no longer tied to a global struggle with a dangerous hegemonic adversary. War on the peninsula would be a humanitarian tragedy, not a strategic disaster.
Washington’s ally has more than recovered from the Korean War. The ROK has sped past the North on most measures of national power. Indeed, South Korea has some 40 times the GDP and twice the population of the North. Thus, the South is capable of defending itself.
Nor do American forces on the Korean peninsula perform any larger role, such as helping to contain the People’s Republic of China. Seoul doesn’t mind being defended against unlikely contingencies involving the PRC — which has no interest in attacking the ROK, a country that would not be easy to swallow, let alone digest. But Seoul would not make a permanent enemy of its neighbor by helping America to protect, say, Taiwan. A U.S. request to use South Korean bases in a war against Beijing for such a purpose likely would lead to a collective nervous breakdown in Seoul.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Nonsense. Those troops aren’t the guarantor of US involvement.
The US Congress is. Whether or not US troops go up in smoke, if Congress says no, it is no. And if Congress says yes, they do so on the merits, not on the bodies of 30k American troops.
JohnGalt23 on March 20, 2013 at 9:20 PM
Except of course in 1948, or 1956, or 1963 or 1982-little did we know at the time….
You should stop now, Your history isn’t history it’s a glib set of notions designed to support a flawed world view.
JFKY on March 20, 2013 at 9:21 PM
And they still have weapons pointed at one another.
And they are still doing the diplomacy.
And they still haven’t gone to war with one another.
All that’s missing is the barbed wire…
JohnGalt23 on March 20, 2013 at 9:21 PM
Sorry? Were any shots fired in any of those years between NATO and Warsaw Pact?
Must have not gotten the newspaper that day…
JohnGalt23 on March 20, 2013 at 9:22 PM
You poor man, you ignore the entirety of the debate about US involvement in NATO from 1948 on…please quit now, you are just revealing your ignorance…
The reality was that the USSR was going to strike at US forces in the BRD and the POTUS was well within his rights as CinC to authorize our shooting back and defending the BRD….and the USSR understood that.
JFKY on March 20, 2013 at 9:23 PM
BUT they D@mn near were…they DIDN’T just “do diplomacy” they threatened each other and the US threatened to use the weapons…so it wasn’t all just diplomatic notes.
JFKY on March 20, 2013 at 9:24 PM
Indeed, China is already by far the ROK’s largest trading partner
DarkCurrent on March 20, 2013 at 9:27 PM
To defend Western Europe against invasion by a superpower? Yeah, Congress would go along with that.
Are you telling em you really believe Congress… especially this Congress… would give POTUS the blank check in Korea, that POTUS had in Europe during the Cold War? To risk nuclear war, possibly involving China, all on his own?
Once again, Cold War’s over man. Seoul ain’t Western Europe, and Pyongyang ain’t the USSR. And it’s time to stop using our troops as nuclear pawns, as if they were…
JohnGalt23 on March 20, 2013 at 9:31 PM
Uh the US Congress has already done just that in 1950, or have you forgotten the last Korean War and the fact that the USSR had nuclear weapons, by that time…
Every one of your posts just shows that you don’t know history but rather just keep wanting things to be a certain way in order to justify your world view.
And tell me Mr Libertarian, what did THIS CONGRESS “do” about Libya?
I’ll wait…..
JFKY on March 20, 2013 at 9:37 PM
And also tell me when has ANY Congress, actually limited a POTUS, after the shooting has started? It was in 1975, AFTER US Troop withdrawals that Congress pulled aid to S Vietnam.
JFKY on March 20, 2013 at 9:39 PM
EXCEPT that a nuclear-armed state threatens a valuable, but nuclear free US Ally…so it IS like the USSR and the BRD, isn’t it?
But please don’t let either history or the facts get in your way, here.
JFKY on March 20, 2013 at 9:41 PM
Well Good Night all….tonight is just proof, that whilst libertarians have lotsa of great ideas inside the 12 Mile Limit, they are Babes in the Woods outside the 12 Mile Limit.
JFKY on March 20, 2013 at 9:44 PM
Okay. So, by your own admission,an attack by the NoKo’s would trigger a US military response, as per the cease fire. Presumably, up to and inclusing a nuclear response.
So, what are the troops there for?
Why, they gave him unlimited authority to engage in nuclear strikes in North Africa.
Oh, wait…
JohnGalt23 on March 20, 2013 at 9:46 PM
A nuclear armed basket case threatens one relatively isolated ally, in a region where we are not the dominant player. The USSR was a world power threatening to overrun an entire continent that was integral to our existence.
Yeah. Not exactly the same. And I think Congress, and the American people, would agree.
JohnGalt23 on March 20, 2013 at 9:59 PM
Exactly. Our biggest concern is them passing of nukes to someone who is NOT an isolated basket case. The threat of land invasion (starting with their capital being shelled to the bedrock) is about the only reason we’re still babysitting them.
It is physically impossible for NK to conquer Asia, much less the world. The USSR? Very possible if we’d screwed up too badly.
MelonCollie on March 21, 2013 at 12:44 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2