(News Focus) S. Korea, U.S. stuck in nonproliferation dilemma

[Ambassador]

Ambassador, I also support sending koreans soldiers to USA should they need our help .... we have a debt with them and want to pay it ASAP, that's why I always supported the idea of sending fighting troops to Afghanistan and Iraq to fight alongside with the USA soldiers ...

It's also our declared responsibility to reduce the burden on US troops when we are fighting in our own country. Hence why we are developing weapon systems such as this with our own initiative and US troops are never involved in any of our skirmishes with NK since several decades ago as our military develops. Without crisscrossing and sometimes contradicting interests between us and other countries our relationship would have been perfect.

[Ambassador]

Yeah its just that once Koreans get behind something they are LOUD.

Exactly. It's just our national culture to love massive demonstrations compared to other countries over just the same issue. For example the Okinawans may hate US presence much worse than we do but their way of expressing anger is much more soft spoken. We achieved democracy and overthrew a 4-decade old line of dictatorship a mere 25 years ago through nationwide demonstration and we continue to develop our democracy through such protests. When we happen to complain loudly to certain US acts its often an indicator that there is something that we want about the US to improve, to which the US often complies.

[dbamil]

Think we are confusing 2 different issues.

The restriction on nuclear weapon is, well, ok maybe it's understandable. It is the nuke we are talking about.

However S Korea cannot field ballistic missiles that have range of more than 1000km (not sure about the actual#). This was put in place when S Korea was under the rule of the military dictators in 1980's. Using the illegitimacy of the S Korean govt as a leverage, US govt was able to push this through. And this is why S Korea put their money in cruise missiles with longer range.

However US is making a mistake when using the rule to attempt to restrict the type of UAV's S Korea is trying to design. US is apparently demanding that S Korea treat 500lbs of fuel onboard as WARHEAD, and design accordingly, severely restricting the usefulness of the UAV. Let's remember that no one really knew of UAV when the agreement was signed.

It just looks fishy on S Korea side, as this is nothing more than attempt by US govt to drum up more business for the US defense contractors.

[IconOfEvi]

Those flag eater guys tend to scare people

Personally, I have no doubt SK and Japan and Taiwan are probably our greatest allies, and the ones we hopefully can count on in this century...I feel Europe is slipping away, but that was inevitable. Thats why backstabbing on our parts irks me to no end. But I think what Americans want is to know that we are brothers and sisters. We want our bonds to be unbreakable. That no one will sell us out for money or safety. If there is an aspect of American culture that is very foreign policy oriented, its that we take betrayals rather hard here...whether it was things like 80s Japan buying everything out while demanding we leave, the SK Ono and girl-tank crushing episodes' fury, the Taiwanese flirting with moves at reunification...well take a look at the pre-2003 showdown over Iraq. What was significant about that was how average Americans, whether left or right, normally who could care less about foreign policy, took very seriously and more importantly, personally France and Germany's positions, among others. What a lot of people miss about the Second Gulf War was that a new generation was taking stock in their minds who were still their friends, their brothers/sisters, and who would be their future rivals, and future enemies. Thats another reason why somebody who was paying attention found it obvious that the US would shift focus to East Asia - Western European brotherhood was proven dead, and Eastern European relations fleeting. However, the East Asian allies stood with us.