Posted on 02/10/2019 7:39:28 AM PST by BenLurkin
South Korea and the United States struck a new deal Sunday on how much Seoul should pay for the U.S. military presence on its soil, official said, after previous rounds of failed negotiations caused worries about their decades-long alliance.
Last year, South Korea provided about $830 million, roughly 40 percent of the cost of the deployment of 28,500 U.S. soldiers whose presence is meant to deter aggression from North Korea. President Donald Trump has said South Korea should pay more.
Yonhap news agency reported that South Korea will provide about 1.04 trillion won ($924 million) in 2019. Yonhap said the U.S. had previously demanded 1.13 trillion won ($1 billion) from South Korea. The U.S. military arrived in South Korea to disarm Japan, which colonized the Korean Peninsula from 1910-45, following its World War II defeat. Most U.S. troops were withdrawn in 1949 but they returned the next year to fight alongside South Korea in the 1950-53 Korean War.
South Korea began paying for the U.S. military deployment in the early 1990s, after rebuilding its war-devastated economy.
(Excerpt) Read more at ktla.com ...
Thanks to President Trump.....
Will someone please tell me why we’re still in SK, Germany....
More winning
Good news - would be nice to also change the SOFA agreements which require us to hire x-amount of locals for gate guard duties and construction ... when I was at Osan, I saw my first 3-man shovels...one guy would hold the handle and two guys would hold each end of a rope tied by the head to help lift and empty the shovelful of dirt/debris. Also had mandatory payments to the barracks house Odashis (not sure of the spelling) who did our laundry and other maid type services...the laundry room was locked so only they had access.
Winning would actually involve us leaving and the Koreans defending their own sovereignty for once.
On the other hand if S Korea is made to pay for some of the expenses of stationing our soldiers there, it kills 2 birds with one stone.
1. It defrays costs of maintaining a military presence near hostile communist regimes
2. It avoids laying off the soldiers there, assuming we have enough soldiers serving in homeland already.
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.