Thank goodness! Here is the link. Now, if we can just close Ramstein...

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
Beat me to it Atty [img]smile.gif[/img] Is about time. Start closing those bases where they are not wanted. </font>

Closing bases that do not fulfill any strategic national interest is one thing; closing bases that are not wanted is something else.

In the case of those bases, I think that closing them is a mistake. Though people in the US, North Korea and South Korea oppose those bases, they do fulfill a very important national interest: they provide stability to the region (yes, even if North Korea threatens to use nukes).

You see, with US forces right there in the DMZ, nobody can fire a shot for fear of bringing the American might down on them. With US forces out of arms way, skirmishes are going to become more and more frequent along the DMZ.

Yep, the North Koreans might become even more hostile now. The South Korean army is no match for them, and the only ones capable of stopping them are packing their bags. Bad move.

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
But Raynamur, is the world right now not peeved at the US, does the "world" not want the American Empire to stand down and mind their own business? Let South Korea, Japan and China worry about the stability of their own regions..what right does the US have to impose its will in their part of the world? hey better yet...let the UN stabilize the world! [img]smile.gif[/img]

Ahem: [img]smile.gif[/img] to those who did not recognize it..Im playing devils advocate here :D </font>

OK, - breather - [img]smile.gif[/img] [img]smile.gif[/img] [img]smile.gif[/img]

You're right, the world is really annoyed about the American imperialism. However, one must recognize that even if the world hates (that might be too soft of a word) the US, the US still has to protect it's own national interest.

A large part of the US consumer economy is based on having stability in Asia. If you doubt me, which region produces the most electronic circuits in the world and how much electronics does the US use or operates in daily activities?
To the electronics, we must had cheap labor cost and production of goods at a good price.

Instability in that part of the world result in a potential increase of price for goods and services emanating from Asia. This is clearly against the best interest of Americans - and Canadians for that matter.

As for the idea of reverting to American isolationism (like prior to WW2) and let strong powers in the area look after their own problems, one must first look at the area and their standing with the US:

China: Communist, wants the US to dissapear from the face of the Earth. Their regional policies are totally opposite to that of the US. Strong military.
North Korea: see above.
Vietnam: not too fond of the US
Cambodia: not too fond of the US
Japan: Strong US ally, economy is pathetic.
South Korea: Strong US ally, economy is not strong and military is pathetic.
Singapore and Malasya: US allies, no military might.
New-Zealand: US ally, currently plagued with terrorism because of their ties with the US.
Australia: US Ally, strong military power, somewhat remote from the little dragons.

The UN: a totally worthless peace of international Kafafle (sp) who cannot seem to do anything of importance right (that's another thread all by itself).

The bottom line is that if the US want to protect their own interest in the region, nobody else but them can do it.

The bad thing about being the strongest one out there is that people don't usually like you. Now, if you use your strenght to prevent a war and bring stability and prosperity, I don't have a problem with that!

[ 06-06-2003, 11:40 AM: Message edited by: Ryanamur ]

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
Thanks Ryanamur [img]smile.gif[/img] My thoughts exactly [img]smile.gif[/img] And nicely put...I do think we need a presence in the area..but it does not have to be troops...I think that a little shift in our Navel forces deployment is in order....we should Shrink the Atlantic fleet and divert those assets to the West Pacific and IO regions. There isn't any current threat in the Atlantic now that the old Soviet navy is mostly rusting hulks. An extremely large and powerful Naval force in the westpac is all that the US should need to have. Increase the number of carriers and attack subs and we are set.</font>

Most probably. :( But who knows, perhaps they will finally come to their senses and realise that they would do much better as a united country. [img]smile.gif[/img] At least I hope so. [img]smile.gif[/img]

From a tactical viewpoint it actually makes some senese. Stationing them so close to the DMZ puts them within range of North Korean artillery fire. If the Reds did attempt to launch an invasion, US Forces would be the first to get hit and likely suffer major losses.

[ 06-06-2003, 12:29 PM: Message edited by: Rimjaw ]

From a strategic point it makes no sense. By having US Forces close to the DMZ, the reds cannot fire artillery without prompt and immediate (and excessive) repreasal from the US.

If US troops are stationed too far behind the lines: 1- they are no longer an effective immediate deterent 2- they cannot return fire effectively 3- they cannot take part in the conflict as they were not attacked (well they can, but it's going to be a much harder sell... and after Irak, the world will want clear-cut proof before it accepts US involvement) and the list goes on.

The bottom line is that US troop are like foam on top of a gazoline leak... it prevents the explosion.