General Synod resolution asks church to advocate for unifying Korean peninsula

[Correll]

1. NOt very convincing. Were any of them not Christians?

2. The COld War policy of Containment was the reason for our involvement. Cold War is over.

3. You stated the reason they were focused on America policy was because they were here. THat fact that they can call out to their fellow Christians in other nations is relevant to that.

4. As I expected. Younger Koreans want the US out, not Korea. Any time that they manage to get the rest of South Korea to craft policy to their liking they can ask US to leave and we will ASAP. It's called democracy. Older Koreans count too.

Then start studying foreign policy.

There are older ones that are calling for unification or at the very least a peace treaty.

In a country of almost 50 million? I'm sure there is some.

South Korea is a democracy. Have the democratically elected leaders of South Korean ever asked US to leave?

Again. Delays.

RIght, so their democratically elected government has NOT asked US to leave, and is still formally allied with US.


Democracy. IT's the Will of the People.

South Korea is controlled by the US. Nice try though.

Nonsense. What are the delays you mentioned? Were any of them threats or force from the US?

There are less than 30k US forces in South Korea, a nation of 50 million.

If US soldiers were that kick ass, the world would be a lot different.

 

[Disir]

Then start studying foreign policy.

There are older ones that are calling for unification or at the very least a peace treaty.

In a country of almost 50 million? I'm sure there is some.

South Korea is a democracy. Have the democratically elected leaders of South Korean ever asked US to leave?

Again. Delays.

RIght, so their democratically elected government has NOT asked US to leave, and is still formally allied with US.


Democracy. IT's the Will of the People.

South Korea is controlled by the US. Nice try though.

Nonsense. What are the delays you mentioned? Were any of them threats or force from the US?

There are less than 30k US forces in South Korea, a nation of 50 million.

If US soldiers were that kick ass, the world would be a lot different.

Only since Syngman Rhee. They were supposed to hand over war time control in 2015. You should probably go back and reread that little snippet on the IMF.

 

[Correll]

In a country of almost 50 million? I'm sure there is some.

South Korea is a democracy. Have the democratically elected leaders of South Korean ever asked US to leave?

Again. Delays.

RIght, so their democratically elected government has NOT asked US to leave, and is still formally allied with US.


Democracy. IT's the Will of the People.

South Korea is controlled by the US. Nice try though.

Nonsense. What are the delays you mentioned? Were any of them threats or force from the US?

There are less than 30k US forces in South Korea, a nation of 50 million.

If US soldiers were that kick ass, the world would be a lot different.

Only since Syngman Rhee. They were supposed to hand over war time control in 2015. You should probably go back and reread that little snippet on the IMF.

War time control?

That's control of military forces during a possible future war. NOt the whole country, and not now or since the Korean War.

Big freaking deal.

 

[Disir]

Again. Delays.

RIght, so their democratically elected government has NOT asked US to leave, and is still formally allied with US.


Democracy. IT's the Will of the People.

South Korea is controlled by the US. Nice try though.

Nonsense. What are the delays you mentioned? Were any of them threats or force from the US?

There are less than 30k US forces in South Korea, a nation of 50 million.

If US soldiers were that kick ass, the world would be a lot different.

Only since Syngman Rhee. They were supposed to hand over war time control in 2015. You should probably go back and reread that little snippet on the IMF.

War time control?

That's control of military forces during a possible future war. NOt the whole country, and not now or since the Korean War.

Big freaking deal.

Again. Only since Syngman Rhee. You should go back and reread the snippet on the IMF. Pretending that none of that exists does not make your argument stronger.

 

[Correll]

RIght, so their democratically elected government has NOT asked US to leave, and is still formally allied with US.


Democracy. IT's the Will of the People.

South Korea is controlled by the US. Nice try though.

Nonsense. What are the delays you mentioned? Were any of them threats or force from the US?

There are less than 30k US forces in South Korea, a nation of 50 million.

If US soldiers were that kick ass, the world would be a lot different.

Only since Syngman Rhee. They were supposed to hand over war time control in 2015. You should probably go back and reread that little snippet on the IMF.

War time control?

That's control of military forces during a possible future war. NOt the whole country, and not now or since the Korean War.

Big freaking deal.

Again. Only since Syngman Rhee. You should go back and reread the snippet on the IMF.

Rhee? What about him? Are you claiming that he didn't have free and fair elections?

THat's nice or to bad. He was a South Korean Leader. I'm sorry they didn't liberalize fast enough for you.

THe US does not control South Korea.

NOt now, not for a long time. Occupation ended back in 1948.


YOu remember who ran Korea before the US?

 

[Disir]

South Korea is controlled by the US. Nice try though.

Nonsense. What are the delays you mentioned? Were any of them threats or force from the US?

There are less than 30k US forces in South Korea, a nation of 50 million.

If US soldiers were that kick ass, the world would be a lot different.

Only since Syngman Rhee. They were supposed to hand over war time control in 2015. You should probably go back and reread that little snippet on the IMF.

War time control?

That's control of military forces during a possible future war. NOt the whole country, and not now or since the Korean War.

Big freaking deal.

Again. Only since Syngman Rhee. You should go back and reread the snippet on the IMF.

Rhee? What about him? Are you claiming that he didn't have free and fair elections?

THat's nice or to bad. He was a South Korean Leader. I'm sorry they didn't liberalize fast enough for you.

THe US does not control South Korea.

NOt now, not for a long time. Occupation ended back in 1948.


YOu remember who ran Korea before the US?

You have conflicting statements. Ok. You don't know who Rhee is or what occurred. You're done. At least until you can come up with any type of argument. You are either totally ignorant or trolling. I don't have the patience for either.

 

[Correll]

Nonsense. What are the delays you mentioned? Were any of them threats or force from the US?

There are less than 30k US forces in South Korea, a nation of 50 million.

If US soldiers were that kick ass, the world would be a lot different.

Only since Syngman Rhee. They were supposed to hand over war time control in 2015. You should probably go back and reread that little snippet on the IMF.

War time control?

That's control of military forces during a possible future war. NOt the whole country, and not now or since the Korean War.

Big freaking deal.

Again. Only since Syngman Rhee. You should go back and reread the snippet on the IMF.

Rhee? What about him? Are you claiming that he didn't have free and fair elections?

THat's nice or to bad. He was a South Korean Leader. I'm sorry they didn't liberalize fast enough for you.

THe US does not control South Korea.

NOt now, not for a long time. Occupation ended back in 1948.


YOu remember who ran Korea before the US?

You have conflicting statements. Ok. You don't know who Rhee is or what occurred. You're done. At least until you can come up with any type of argument. You are either totally ignorant or trolling. I don't have the patience for either.

Rhee was the leader of South Korea back before I was born. And I'm not a young guy.

I don't see how this supports your claim that the US controls South Korea TODAY.

Hence the "conflicting statements", because it doesn't matter, "nice or to bad", either way, it's long past and SOuth Korea is an independent nation with elections and a democratic government and has been for quite some time.

But if you WANT TO talk history, how did that Japanese Occupation work out?

Let's take a couple minutes to talk about how great my father's generation was to free South Korea from THAT!

Really, really great.

Ever visit the WWII memorial in DC? Someday I plan to take my daughter there and tell her about how proud she should be of her grandfather, who she never met.

If I can do it without choking up.

 

[Disir]

Only since Syngman Rhee. They were supposed to hand over war time control in 2015. You should probably go back and reread that little snippet on the IMF.

War time control?

That's control of military forces during a possible future war. NOt the whole country, and not now or since the Korean War.

Big freaking deal.

Again. Only since Syngman Rhee. You should go back and reread the snippet on the IMF.

Rhee? What about him? Are you claiming that he didn't have free and fair elections?

THat's nice or to bad. He was a South Korean Leader. I'm sorry they didn't liberalize fast enough for you.

THe US does not control South Korea.

NOt now, not for a long time. Occupation ended back in 1948.


YOu remember who ran Korea before the US?

You have conflicting statements. Ok. You don't know who Rhee is or what occurred. You're done. At least until you can come up with any type of argument. You are either totally ignorant or trolling. I don't have the patience for either.

Rhee was the leader of South Korea back before I was born. And I'm not a young guy.

I don't see how this supports your claim that the US controls South Korea TODAY.

Hence the "conflicting statements", because it doesn't matter, "nice or to bad", either way, it's long past and SOuth Korea is an independent nation with elections and a democratic government and has been for quite some time.

But if you WANT TO talk history, how did that Japanese Occupation work out?

Let's take a couple minutes to talk about how great my father's generation was to free South Korea from THAT!

Really, really great.

Ever visit the WWII memorial in DC? Someday I plan to take my daughter there and tell her about how proud she should be of her grandfather, who she never met.

If I can do it without choking up.

Both of my grandfathers were in WWII. So, what you have to say here is not relevant.

Without a peace treaty, they are still at war. Hence, the US War Time military control. You should take a damn good look at your "democracy" in South Korea.

 

[Correll]

War time control?

That's control of military forces during a possible future war. NOt the whole country, and not now or since the Korean War.

Big freaking deal.

Again. Only since Syngman Rhee. You should go back and reread the snippet on the IMF.

Rhee? What about him? Are you claiming that he didn't have free and fair elections?

THat's nice or to bad. He was a South Korean Leader. I'm sorry they didn't liberalize fast enough for you.

THe US does not control South Korea.

NOt now, not for a long time. Occupation ended back in 1948.


YOu remember who ran Korea before the US?

You have conflicting statements. Ok. You don't know who Rhee is or what occurred. You're done. At least until you can come up with any type of argument. You are either totally ignorant or trolling. I don't have the patience for either.

Rhee was the leader of South Korea back before I was born. And I'm not a young guy.

I don't see how this supports your claim that the US controls South Korea TODAY.

Hence the "conflicting statements", because it doesn't matter, "nice or to bad", either way, it's long past and SOuth Korea is an independent nation with elections and a democratic government and has been for quite some time.

But if you WANT TO talk history, how did that Japanese Occupation work out?

Let's take a couple minutes to talk about how great my father's generation was to free South Korea from THAT!

Really, really great.

Ever visit the WWII memorial in DC? Someday I plan to take my daughter there and tell her about how proud she should be of her grandfather, who she never met.

If I can do it without choking up.

Both of my grandfathers were in WWII. So, what you have to say here is not relevant.

Without a peace treaty, they are still at war. Hence, the US War Time military control. You should take a damn good look at your "democracy" in South Korea.

SUre it's relevant. If you want to talk history, then the fact that the US freed South Korea from the genocidal Imperial Japaneses is relevant.

Are you implying the a US general is right now in charge of all South Korean forces?

 

[FA_Q2]

1. NOt very convincing. Were any of them not Christians?

2. The COld War policy of Containment was the reason for our involvement. Cold War is over.

3. You stated the reason they were focused on America policy was because they were here. THat fact that they can call out to their fellow Christians in other nations is relevant to that.

4. As I expected. Younger Koreans want the US out, not Korea. Any time that they manage to get the rest of South Korea to craft policy to their liking they can ask US to leave and we will ASAP. It's called democracy. Older Koreans count too.

Then start studying foreign policy.

There are older ones that are calling for unification or at the very least a peace treaty.

In a country of almost 50 million? I'm sure there is some.

South Korea is a democracy. Have the democratically elected leaders of South Korean ever asked US to leave?

Again. Delays.

RIght, so their democratically elected government has NOT asked US to leave, and is still formally allied with US.


Democracy. IT's the Will of the People.

South Korea is controlled by the US. Nice try though.

Garbage. The US exerts a LOT of influence in South Korea but they most certainly do NOT control the government there. It is a sovereign nation and, at any time, can force the US out. It would be VERY easy for them to do so. The reality is that they most certainly do not want the US gone though.

You point to the PEOPLE and state silly things like they want us gone. What an article or poll states about public opinion does not equate to the governments positions or policies. There are a LOT of asinine and idiotic things that the American people want/support/oppose that the actual government does not go along with in its foreign policy because it is not a simple matter. There is a lot of nuance and ‘hidden’ reasoning behind those decisions.

The government of South Korea is likely well aware of the fact that they have absolutely ZERO defense against North Korea and I highly doubt NK is simply going to become peaceful because the Americans left leaving SK wide open for pillaging. The very idea is asinine.

NK is the most militarized nation on earth – they have the largest military and bombardment capabilities even outpacing our own. They are also far less economically stable – the south has far more wealth. You really think NK would be peaceable without any real barriers to invasion?

The only real reason that NK stays in check is that our presence means that they cannot win a ground war with the south – the technology and military might that they US has would halt that entirely. We do NOT have bases in South Korea to actually fight – they are there because they would have to be targeted by the North prior top invasion (and make no mistake about it – every American soldier there would be dead within hours of an invasion) and that would give the US legitimacy in retaliating.

 

[FA_Q2]

Such public statements are meant to get the public to pressure policy makers to develop policy.

As the majority of this nation, and most of their demands were US centered, are Christian, why should you NOT use bible verses as a justification?

Because they aren't considered justifications in that realm.

First, most of their pressure is US centered because..........they are primarily from the US. They can't very well go to another country and pressure their leaders. Secondly, the Sanctions are in place from the US. South Korea is not pleased the US is there.

1. Other Christians might consider them justifications. Which is the majority of this nation's voters and leaders. Hell, Obama claims to be quite religious.

2. Their pressure is US centered because they have accepted the meme that the US is the problem.

3. Sure, they can pressure other countries. Plenty of Christians around the world, it is the largest religion in the world.

4. SOuth Korea can ask US to leave anytime they want.

1. That's nice and that is the primary audience of the OP. The bible is not a legitimate source in international relations or political science.

2. The US is still there because South Korea is a buffer state. Location and strategic interests.

3. The synod from the OP is meeting in the US.

4. Only trying to be arranged since 2006.

1. Really? What do you base that on?

2. Buffer State? It is the worst place to try to balance China. The ONE PLACE where the Massive Chinese army can be brought against US troops.

3. And from the US they can communicate to Christians all over the World.

4. What's hold them up? TEll US to get out, if that's what they want. We aren't going to stay against their will.

1. Foreign Policy
Historical Documents - Office of the Historian
The National Security Archive

2. So you say. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to have been the case leading up to now.

3. Acknowledged in the OP. Not relevant here.

4. Never ending delays.
Young South Koreans want U.S. to get out Presence of GIs American influence there rankle youth - SFGate

IMF policies leading to foreign control of Asian countries

North Korea refuses to come to the table unless the US leaves. South Korea wants the same nuclear capabilities as North Korea but cannot. Every time the date is set, amazingly enough a new threat comes to the fore.

And?

Surface issues – if SK wanted the US out they would simply demand that we leave.

 

[FA_Q2]

No one expected east and west Germany to reunite in their lifetime a year before the Berlin wall fell. With God all things are possible.

My question is what does the church calling for this intend to do to make it happen?

The possibility is there but the OP was calling for a shift in the US policy as a step in achieving this. That is not really a possibility unless the region is surrendered to the northern government.
Again, I ask what shift in policy do they want to happen? North Korea is not really open to reasonable peace considering they are the most militarized nation on earth.

2. Furthermore, we commit ourselves to take actions to:

• a) Work with our governments to mandate the United Nations Security Council to initiate new efforts for peace-building across the Korean Peninsula and to lift the existing economic and financial sanctions imposed on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea;

• b) Embark upon a universal campaign for a Peace Treaty to replace the Armistice Agreement of 1953, bringing an end to the state of war;

• c) Call upon all foreign powers in the region to participate in a creative process for building peace on the Korean peninsula by halting all military exercises on the Korean peninsula, by ceasing their interventions and reducing military expenditures;

• d) Ensure the complete, verifiable and irreversible elimination of all nuclear weapons and power plants in -North East Asia, by taking steps to establish a Nuclear-Free World and simultaneously joining the emerging international consensus for a humanitarian ban on nuclear weapons in all regions of the world, so that life is no longer threatened by nuclear dangers anywhere on earth;

• e) Urge the governments in both North and South Korea to restore human community with justice and human dignity by overcoming injustice and confrontation, and to heal human community by urgently addressing the humanitarian issue of separated families, by establishing a sustainable process allowing confirmation of the whereabouts of family members and free exchanges of letters and visits, and by offering the support of international agencies where necessary; and
• f) Work with the governments of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Republic of Korea in providing international cooperation to maintain a truly Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) and transform it into a zone of peace.
• Statement on Korean Reunification by the World Council of Churches

Lots of platitude no real points. Lift the economic sanctions? IN an attempt to accomplish what? Do you really think that the north will be more open to the world when there is less pressure to do so?

Nuclear de-arming of North East Asia? WTF does that have to do with normalizing relations with Korea? How does that help with the nuclear situation there where the button is controlled by a dictator?

This list contains no real solutions other than removing the sanctions and to be frank, I don't see how that is a step forward when the north is not willing to change anything.

First of all, I'm not sure why you would expect more from this group. The vast majority of their writings contain bible verses as justification.

By the same token, I'm not sure what you think economic sanctions have accomplished or why you think you have the right to force a country to be more "open to the world". If ever there was a platitude that would be it.

The people didn't ask for this. The US have any real need of South Korea. It's a buffer state.

I don’t really expect more from them but YOU made this a debate topic and that meant, to me at least, that you were taking their goals and statements seriously.

That means YOU are setting the bar far higher than what we have here. If that is not the case then why start a thread on it?

As far as the economic sanctions, they accomplish weakening an extremely militant and unpredictable nation. That is what they are supposed to do until the nation in question becomes less militant and threatening to stability in the area.

I don’t think that we have a right to force them to be more open to the world nor is that a platitude. Those against economic sanctions always come at it from an asinine angle as though we are limiting their rights through some means we don’t have a right to. That is asinine – we have a right to choose our trade partners. We have a right to do so as a block with other nations as well. If a nation does not want to play ball with us they are welcome to go play without us. That is OUR right. If they want the benefits of a world stage then they better be willing to take on the responsibilities and temperament that comes with it. Don’t do so and suffer the consequences of being a militant and horrific totalitarian state.

What possible reason do WE have to normalize relations with a nation like this? What benefits are there? Why should we simply accept the horrors that nations like NK visit on their own people and support that?

They chose that path and they get to deal with the consequences of it.

 

[Disir]

SUre it's relevant. If you want to talk history, then the fact that the US freed South Korea from the genocidal Imperial Japaneses is relevant.

Are you implying the a US general is right now in charge of all South Korean forces?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/03/world/asia/03korea.html?pagewanted=all

Summer of Terror At least 100 000 said executed by Korean ally of US in 1950 with interactive video The Asia-Pacific Journal

^^^That's relevant.

A research institute specializing in studies of modern Korean history has released a Japanese newspaper's historic article showing that the late former President Park Chung-hee (1917-1979) made a pledge of allegiance written in blood to the Japanese army in 1939.

The release of the report by the Institute for Research in Collaborationist Activities came just several days after Park Ji-man, the only son of the late President, filed for an injunction with a Seoul court to get his father's name removed from a new list of collaborators with the Japanese colonial government. The court, however, turned down the injunction, Friday.

The institute plans to release on Sunday three books containing the names of about 4,300 Koreans who the institute says cooperated with Japan before and during the colonial period (1910-1945).

According to the released copy of the newspaper named the"Manchurian Daily," published on March, 31, 1939, in the Chinese area, which was also occupied by Japan at that time, Park filed an application to become an officer of the Manchurian military unit controlled by the Japanese army while he was working as a teacher at a provincial school in Korea.

After his first failure to join the army because of his age, he filed a second application bearing a pledge of allegiance written in his own blood ― "I pledge allegiance with my own life, Park Chung-hee."
Data Show Park Chung-hee Pledged Allegiance to Japanese Army

One of the more theatrical acts of Kim Young-sam’s presidency (1993–98) was the demolition of the dome of the old Japanese General Government building on 15 August 1995 — the 50th anniversary of liberation. Japan had built its colonial capital right in front of the Korean royal palace and Kim made great play out of obliterating this vestige of colonialism.

Bitterness towards Japan was strongest during the 2003–2008 presidency of Roh Moo-hyun, a former labour and human rights lawyer. Under a special law enacted in 2005, an investigative commission listed 452 Koreans who had collaborated with Japanese colonisation. In 2007 the property of descendants of nine of those collaborators was confiscated. The crackdown was highly divisive — most of South Korea’s social elite can trace their family privileges and fortunes back to cooperation with Japanese colonisers.

South Korean NGOs compiled their own lists of collaborators. A directory published in 2008 by the Institute for Research into Collaborationist Activities named 4776 individuals, including Park Chung-hee.

Under Park Geun-hye the word collaborator has again become taboo in ruling circles, and government websites related to the 2005 law have been removed. A once vigorous campaign to seek compensation for Korean forced labourers at Mitsubishi and other zaibatsu during the Pacific War has also been wound down and relegated to an obscure corner of the prime minister’s office.

Why history is a problem for Park Geun-hye in confronting Japan East Asia Forum

^^^So is that.

No. That isn't how it works. In conflict, General Curtis Scaparrotti will take control over South Korea's military.

 

[Disir]

Garbage. The US exerts a LOT of influence in South Korea but they most certainly do NOT control the government there. It is a sovereign nation and, at any time, can force the US out. It would be VERY easy for them to do so. The reality is that they most certainly do not want the US gone though.

You point to the PEOPLE and state silly things like they want us gone. What an article or poll states about public opinion does not equate to the governments positions or policies. There are a LOT of asinine and idiotic things that the American people want/support/oppose that the actual government does not go along with in its foreign policy because it is not a simple matter. There is a lot of nuance and ‘hidden’ reasoning behind those decisions.

Hmmm............let's think about that imaginary line between a LOT and CONTROL.

The government of South Korea is likely well aware of the fact that they have absolutely ZERO defense against North Korea and I highly doubt NK is simply going to become peaceful because the Americans left leaving SK wide open for pillaging. The very idea is asinine.

NK is the most militarized nation on earth – they have the largest military and bombardment capabilities even outpacing our own. They are also far less economically stable – the south has far more wealth. You really think NK would be peaceable without any real barriers to invasion?

The only real reason that NK stays in check is that our presence means that they cannot win a ground war with the south – the technology and military might that they US has would halt that entirely. We do NOT have bases in South Korea to actually fight – they are there because they would have to be targeted by the North prior top invasion (and make no mistake about it – every American soldier there would be dead within hours of an invasion) and that would give the US legitimacy in retaliating.

South Korea Asia s New Powerhouse Arms Exporter The Diplomat

Riiigght. I don't think that you have any real proof of what North Korea is doing or what they have. I don't say that to be a meanie. I am pointing out that there is a high level of propaganda.

 

[Disir]

I don’t really expect more from them but YOU made this a debate topic and that meant, to me at least, that you were taking their goals and statements seriously.

That means YOU are setting the bar far higher than what we have here. If that is not the case then why start a thread on it?

I regularly post different religious perspectives in this forum because the here-are-the-99-reasons-you-suck threads are boring. My bar in dealing with international relations is rather high.

As far as the economic sanctions, they accomplish weakening an extremely militant and unpredictable nation. That is what they are supposed to do until the nation in question becomes less militant and threatening to stability in the area.

I don’t think that we have a right to force them to be more open to the world nor is that a platitude. Those against economic sanctions always come at it from an asinine angle as though we are limiting their rights through some means we don’t have a right to. That is asinine – we have a right to choose our trade partners. We have a right to do so as a block with other nations as well. If a nation does not want to play ball with us they are welcome to go play without us. That is OUR right. If they want the benefits of a world stage then they better be willing to take on the responsibilities and temperament that comes with it. Don’t do so and suffer the consequences of being a militant and horrific totalitarian state.

There is nothing asinine about looking at economic sanctions and their results. You are telling me on the one hand that the people don't have a right to food or medicine or any number of things and then tell me below how the NK is visiting horrors on it's own people. I have yet to see where sanctions have worked. They are supposed to set the stage for the people to overthrow the government. That isn't how it plays out...........ever.

What possible reason do WE have to normalize relations with a nation like this? What benefits are there? Why should we simply accept the horrors that nations like NK visit on their own people and support that?

They chose that path and they get to deal with the consequences of it.

The only reason to "open it up" is for profit.

 

[Disir]

Because they aren't considered justifications in that realm.

First, most of their pressure is US centered because..........they are primarily from the US. They can't very well go to another country and pressure their leaders. Secondly, the Sanctions are in place from the US. South Korea is not pleased the US is there.

1. Other Christians might consider them justifications. Which is the majority of this nation's voters and leaders. Hell, Obama claims to be quite religious.

2. Their pressure is US centered because they have accepted the meme that the US is the problem.

3. Sure, they can pressure other countries. Plenty of Christians around the world, it is the largest religion in the world.

4. SOuth Korea can ask US to leave anytime they want.

1. That's nice and that is the primary audience of the OP. The bible is not a legitimate source in international relations or political science.

2. The US is still there because South Korea is a buffer state. Location and strategic interests.

3. The synod from the OP is meeting in the US.

4. Only trying to be arranged since 2006.

1. Really? What do you base that on?

2. Buffer State? It is the worst place to try to balance China. The ONE PLACE where the Massive Chinese army can be brought against US troops.

3. And from the US they can communicate to Christians all over the World.

4. What's hold them up? TEll US to get out, if that's what they want. We aren't going to stay against their will.

1. Foreign Policy
Historical Documents - Office of the Historian
The National Security Archive

2. So you say. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to have been the case leading up to now.

3. Acknowledged in the OP. Not relevant here.

4. Never ending delays.
Young South Koreans want U.S. to get out Presence of GIs American influence there rankle youth - SFGate

IMF policies leading to foreign control of Asian countries

North Korea refuses to come to the table unless the US leaves. South Korea wants the same nuclear capabilities as North Korea but cannot. Every time the date is set, amazingly enough a new threat comes to the fore.

And?

Surface issues – if SK wanted the US out they would simply demand that we leave.

Korean Reunification and U.S. Interests Preparing for One Korea Brookings Institution

You might want to see where those interests are aligned.

 

[amrchaos]

If only SK was also a military dictatorship, I could see Korea uniting--after a really bloody war.

I don't see it happening--the NK can get whatever it wants through threat to the South. If the two were to unite, the North would demand all the power---thats bs considering the North has demonstrated an inability to govern.

PS
The North and South already have talks about unification. Those talks has produced little agreements but not much

 

[Disir]

Sure, this was the going one until a few years ago and then it bit the dust.
http://www.usip.org/sites/default/f...ections/peace_agreements/n_skorea06152000.pdf

Park never used the intelligence agency for her election.
The UPP was never dissolved by the Korean court. Good thing South Korea is the bastion of freedom and democracy.

 

[Correll]

SUre it's relevant. If you want to talk history, then the fact that the US freed South Korea from the genocidal Imperial Japaneses is relevant.

Are you implying the a US general is right now in charge of all South Korean forces?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/03/world/asia/03korea.html?pagewanted=all

Summer of Terror At least 100 000 said executed by Korean ally of US in 1950 with interactive video The Asia-Pacific Journal

^^^That's relevant.

A research institute specializing in studies of modern Korean history has released a Japanese newspaper's historic article showing that the late former President Park Chung-hee (1917-1979) made a pledge of allegiance written in blood to the Japanese army in 1939.

The release of the report by the Institute for Research in Collaborationist Activities came just several days after Park Ji-man, the only son of the late President, filed for an injunction with a Seoul court to get his father's name removed from a new list of collaborators with the Japanese colonial government. The court, however, turned down the injunction, Friday.

The institute plans to release on Sunday three books containing the names of about 4,300 Koreans who the institute says cooperated with Japan before and during the colonial period (1910-1945).

According to the released copy of the newspaper named the"Manchurian Daily," published on March, 31, 1939, in the Chinese area, which was also occupied by Japan at that time, Park filed an application to become an officer of the Manchurian military unit controlled by the Japanese army while he was working as a teacher at a provincial school in Korea.

After his first failure to join the army because of his age, he filed a second application bearing a pledge of allegiance written in his own blood ― "I pledge allegiance with my own life, Park Chung-hee."
Data Show Park Chung-hee Pledged Allegiance to Japanese Army

One of the more theatrical acts of Kim Young-sam’s presidency (1993–98) was the demolition of the dome of the old Japanese General Government building on 15 August 1995 — the 50th anniversary of liberation. Japan had built its colonial capital right in front of the Korean royal palace and Kim made great play out of obliterating this vestige of colonialism.

Bitterness towards Japan was strongest during the 2003–2008 presidency of Roh Moo-hyun, a former labour and human rights lawyer. Under a special law enacted in 2005, an investigative commission listed 452 Koreans who had collaborated with Japanese colonisation. In 2007 the property of descendants of nine of those collaborators was confiscated. The crackdown was highly divisive — most of South Korea’s social elite can trace their family privileges and fortunes back to cooperation with Japanese colonisers.

South Korean NGOs compiled their own lists of collaborators. A directory published in 2008 by the Institute for Research into Collaborationist Activities named 4776 individuals, including Park Chung-hee.

Under Park Geun-hye the word collaborator has again become taboo in ruling circles, and government websites related to the 2005 law have been removed. A once vigorous campaign to seek compensation for Korean forced labourers at Mitsubishi and other zaibatsu during the Pacific War has also been wound down and relegated to an obscure corner of the prime minister’s office.

Why history is a problem for Park Geun-hye in confronting Japan East Asia Forum

^^^So is that.

No. That isn't how it works. In conflict, General Curtis Scaparrotti will take control over South Korea's military.

1. Interesting. NOt much to do with the US.

2. And yes. In a potential conflict there will be an Unified Command with the Senor Partner, the one who lots of global experience in war fighting, the one with the power to actually take on China, will be in charge. Makes sense to me.

And that does NOT make the US in control of South Korea. NOt even close. Not even a little.

 

[Disir]

SUre it's relevant. If you want to talk history, then the fact that the US freed South Korea from the genocidal Imperial Japaneses is relevant.

Are you implying the a US general is right now in charge of all South Korean forces?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/03/world/asia/03korea.html?pagewanted=all

Summer of Terror At least 100 000 said executed by Korean ally of US in 1950 with interactive video The Asia-Pacific Journal

^^^That's relevant.

A research institute specializing in studies of modern Korean history has released a Japanese newspaper's historic article showing that the late former President Park Chung-hee (1917-1979) made a pledge of allegiance written in blood to the Japanese army in 1939.

The release of the report by the Institute for Research in Collaborationist Activities came just several days after Park Ji-man, the only son of the late President, filed for an injunction with a Seoul court to get his father's name removed from a new list of collaborators with the Japanese colonial government. The court, however, turned down the injunction, Friday.

The institute plans to release on Sunday three books containing the names of about 4,300 Koreans who the institute says cooperated with Japan before and during the colonial period (1910-1945).

According to the released copy of the newspaper named the"Manchurian Daily," published on March, 31, 1939, in the Chinese area, which was also occupied by Japan at that time, Park filed an application to become an officer of the Manchurian military unit controlled by the Japanese army while he was working as a teacher at a provincial school in Korea.

After his first failure to join the army because of his age, he filed a second application bearing a pledge of allegiance written in his own blood ― "I pledge allegiance with my own life, Park Chung-hee."
Data Show Park Chung-hee Pledged Allegiance to Japanese Army

One of the more theatrical acts of Kim Young-sam’s presidency (1993–98) was the demolition of the dome of the old Japanese General Government building on 15 August 1995 — the 50th anniversary of liberation. Japan had built its colonial capital right in front of the Korean royal palace and Kim made great play out of obliterating this vestige of colonialism.

Bitterness towards Japan was strongest during the 2003–2008 presidency of Roh Moo-hyun, a former labour and human rights lawyer. Under a special law enacted in 2005, an investigative commission listed 452 Koreans who had collaborated with Japanese colonisation. In 2007 the property of descendants of nine of those collaborators was confiscated. The crackdown was highly divisive — most of South Korea’s social elite can trace their family privileges and fortunes back to cooperation with Japanese colonisers.

South Korean NGOs compiled their own lists of collaborators. A directory published in 2008 by the Institute for Research into Collaborationist Activities named 4776 individuals, including Park Chung-hee.

Under Park Geun-hye the word collaborator has again become taboo in ruling circles, and government websites related to the 2005 law have been removed. A once vigorous campaign to seek compensation for Korean forced labourers at Mitsubishi and other zaibatsu during the Pacific War has also been wound down and relegated to an obscure corner of the prime minister’s office.

Why history is a problem for Park Geun-hye in confronting Japan East Asia Forum

^^^So is that.

No. That isn't how it works. In conflict, General Curtis Scaparrotti will take control over South Korea's military.

1. Interesting. NOt much to do with the US.

2. And yes. In a potential conflict there will be an Unified Command with the Senor Partner, the one who lots of global experience in war fighting, the one with the power to actually take on China, will be in charge. Makes sense to me.

And that does NOT make the US in control of South Korea. NOt even close. Not even a little.

Clinton Regrets Doesn t Apologize for No Gun Ri - latimes
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/24/w...expose-us-killings-of-south-koreans.html?_r=0

That isn't how the Koreans see it. Locate the imaginary line between a lot and control. Sovereign nations have control over their military. Syngman Rhee was supported by the US and had an atrocious human rights record. Complete with re-education camps, imprisonment and death to any opposition. At least until he had to flee with the aid of the US.

Park Chung-hee came to power via a military coup and was also supported by the US. He was known for his human rights abuses, dissolution of political parties, suppression, imprisonment etc. Total authoritarian.

It is his daughter that is in power now. She used the Korean secret service to get elected, the courts dissolved a political party that was her competition alleging that they were aligned with North Korea when there was absolutely no evidence that they were and jailed leaders for a lengthy sentence. Suppression, dissolution of political parties--just like dear old dad. Supported by the US.

China is South Korea's largest trading partner. South Korea is China's third largest trading partner.