Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Are We Still in Korea?
Townhall.com ^ | November 26, 2010 | Pat Buchanan

Posted on 11/26/2010 8:45:17 AM PST by Kaslin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-120 next last
To: KevinDavis
Isolationism never worked.. If it didn’t work in 30’s it won’t work nowadays..

Maybe we should try non-interventionism before we go completely broke being the world's policeman. We are pretty close now when we have to borrow from China, a potential enemy.

21 posted on 11/26/2010 9:20:42 AM PST by ex-snook ("Above all things, truth beareth away the victory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook

Non intervention doesnt work.

Some one has do defend the south 40.
We dont need to be agressors, but...we need to have a presence to dissuade the other guy from aggression.


22 posted on 11/26/2010 9:24:50 AM PST by mylife (Opinions ~ $1 Half Baked ~ 50c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook

Wow I am sure to be flamed for this but I am surprised by the near unanimity of opinion here that the US should intervene in Korea again.

There have always been wars and always will be wars. The US protected much of the world from agressor states in the 20th Century. We’re broke now and can’t do it any more.

And to those who suggest that advocating a policy of non-intervention in foreign fueds do not understand our history - non-intervention was US policy until Wilson and FDR made it otherwise.

The founders were clearly against foriegn “entangling alliances” as expressed in Washington’s Farewell Address.


23 posted on 11/26/2010 9:33:19 AM PST by jtal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: mylife
There is a reason for the build up in Guam.

Can't have too much of a build up in Guam - remember, it might cause that island to tip over.

24 posted on 11/26/2010 9:34:40 AM PST by Graybeard58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
S.Korea needs an army, navy, air force and sub service..
It not like they do not know how to make such things..

A little LESS Hyundai's and a lot more SUBMARINES, tanks and Ships..
OH!. and some nuclear missiles, cruise missiles, and drones.. too..

25 posted on 11/26/2010 9:42:21 AM PST by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Well that is always a concern.

We have top level mathematicians running the numbers...


26 posted on 11/26/2010 9:45:45 AM PST by mylife (Opinions ~ $1 Half Baked ~ 50c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe

I believe Hyundai is the largest ship builder in the world at this point.

They have the smarts and the means.


27 posted on 11/26/2010 9:48:02 AM PST by mylife (Opinions ~ $1 Half Baked ~ 50c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

I was thinking the same thing. It didn’t take him long to jump to his usual anti-semitic rant!


28 posted on 11/26/2010 9:49:23 AM PST by Babalu ("Tracer rounds work both ways ...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jtal

We only need to have a PRESENCE to dissuade bad actors.

We dont have to attack

It worked pretty well for 50 years except when liberal idiots like clinton and Obama signaled that we wont do squat.

Want to Build nukes mr Il? How can we be of assistance?
Want to commit acts of war Mr Il?
Thats fine, I wont say a peep.

Obama emboldened these turds when he said NOTHING in response to them sinking that SK ship and taking the lives of 50 men.

Now The NORKS are at it again. Who could blame them?
Obama gave them the green light.


29 posted on 11/26/2010 9:56:43 AM PST by mylife (Opinions ~ $1 Half Baked ~ 50c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: jtal
A few observations:

(1) It did not begin with Wilson. It began with Teddy Roosevelt and his Great White Fleet in 1907 - a deliberate show of American naval strength and of the USA's ability to project military power worldwide.

(2) Roosevelt did not do this just to show off, in some kind of vacuum. He did this because The Great Race had ended and France as well as Britain had huge colonial empires - empires supported by powerful navies. Moreover, both navies had an aggressive new competitor in Imperial Germany.

America was now confronted with three proto-superpowers and could not afford to isolate itself.

(3) Wilson did not enter World War I because America was immediately threatened or because he just felt like engaging in adventurism and meddling abroad. He entered WWI because he wanted England and France to win and Germany to lose, knowing that if Germany won there would be only one power besides the US, not 3 - and that one remaining power would be a power that America had no historic alliance or ties with.

(4) Buchanan does not seem to realize that having no global presence and backing down from every confrontation invites more problems for the US in the long term than engagement.

A country that will not stand up for its friends will not stand up for itself - isolationism is weakness, not strength. It signals cowardice and vulnerability.

(5) We can afford to project power globally - it's a far more essential expenditure for our national survival than the crippling load of entitlements we pay.

We need aircraft carriers more than we need Social Security.

30 posted on 11/26/2010 9:57:21 AM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Dont be shocked if the Chicoms try to retake Taiwan on Obamas watch


31 posted on 11/26/2010 9:58:11 AM PST by mylife (Opinions ~ $1 Half Baked ~ 50c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: bert
Pat Buchanan is right on this one.

What the hell is the purpose of a "protracted cease-fire" that lasts sixty freaking years? This is really no different than a massive public-works project where those who are involved in the design and construction of the project have a vested interest in ensuring that it never gets completed.

32 posted on 11/26/2010 9:58:51 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

Most of the folks you call “the Jews” are critics of the Likud administration in Israel.


33 posted on 11/26/2010 9:59:59 AM PST by Captain Kirk (Q)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Why Are We Still in Korea?

To control the worlds Kimchi supply!


34 posted on 11/26/2010 10:01:53 AM PST by Valin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
We can afford to project power globally

It is so easy to spend other people's money isn't it? Please keep your hands out of my wallet. If you want to spend your own money to pay for policing the world on the other hand, of course, you are free to do so. Deal?

35 posted on 11/26/2010 10:02:05 AM PST by Captain Kirk (Q)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe
South Korea has fully staffed and equipped armed forces.

If it comes to war, those armed forces will shoulder 99% of the casualties and the South Korea people will undergo hardships that Americans of 2010 cannot comprehend.

South Korea is not shirking its part. But they are asking for our help.

36 posted on 11/26/2010 10:02:19 AM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

lol.... I always like to guess who wrote an article, just based on the headline. I guessed Buchanan, and I won my bet again!


37 posted on 11/26/2010 10:07:54 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Pat is right, again.

Why the hell is the US paying for the defense and spilling the blood of our boys for foreigners, foreigners that don’t even like us.

Koreans hate Americans. They are always protesting us. You just don’t ever hear about it on the US news.

I always laugh when conservatives say we need forward bases abroad when we as a country refuse to protect our territorial integrity and national sovereignty.

Get this: Cslifornia is lost and sooner or later, so will Texas, Nevada, Arizona and New Mexico because we have allowed the Mexicans to fight a war of attrition against us without firing a shot in return.

In fact, both parties support an illegal occupation of the United States that will destroy this country through the demographic shift in 30 years.

So, please explain again why we are at war for other foreigners when we don’t even defend our our territory, our law, our culture, our language, and our national sovereignty?

It is ridiculous.

We spend $600 billion for national defense and none of that goes to protect our own borders.

But hey, let us run and protect the Koreans who hate our guts because they can’t get along with their own freaking people.

Would we want foreign countries interfering in our internal affairs with carriers operating off our coasts?

I wouldn’t.


38 posted on 11/26/2010 10:09:43 AM PST by radpolis (Liberals: You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
He entered WWI because he wanted England and France to win and Germany to lose, knowing that if Germany won there would be only one power besides the US, not 3 - and that one remaining power would be a power that America had no historic alliance or ties with.

Not to mention the Germans' nearer-term provocations such as a return to unrestricted submarine warfare, and the Zimmerman note that promised aid to Mexico if they invaded the US....

39 posted on 11/26/2010 10:11:51 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Captain Kirk
It is so easy to spend other people's money isn't it?

It's my money. I am taxed at the top of the scale.

You know that commonly cited statistic from the National Taxpayers Union that 5% of citizens pay 60% of the taxes? That's me.

I'm very likely carrying you in some fashion as we speak.

Please keep your hands out of my wallet.

LOL! As long as you keep your hands of my wallet when you retire by forgoing Social Security.

If you want to spend your own money to pay for policing the world on the other hand, of course, you are free to do so. Deal?

I'd rather have my taxes used to defeat our enemies abroad as opposed to my front lawn.

Certainly more than I'd like to see them used to subsidize heathcare and education bureaucracies.

40 posted on 11/26/2010 10:11:56 AM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-120 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson