http://english.chosun.com/w21data/ht...610230026.html

I think south korea is a part of north korea nuclear plobrem,but that president hadn't tried to solve this plobrem and continue Sunshine policy.
As a result,North korea developped N-weapon by the money and kim regime survived.
I　feel utterly scandalized.
Well,well
Criticizing heroes of korean war is their plobrem.
That president talked about history with japan's prime minister instead north korean nuclear plobrem is their plobrem.
But at least,they should know giving money to north korea is crime of international.

Originally Posted by sandy

http://english.chosun.com/w21data/ht...610230026.html

I think south korea is a part of north korea nuclear plobrem,but that president hadn't tried to solve this plobrem and continue Sunshine policy.
As a result,North korea developped N-weapon by the money and kim regime survived.
I　feel utterly scandalized.
Well,well
Criticizing heroes of korean war is their plobrem.
That president talked about history with japan's prime minister instead north korean nuclear plobrem is their plobrem.
But at least,they should know giving money to north korea is crime of international.

The proper syntax for speaking about the POTUS is to say the President, or President Bush. If you don't respect the man in office, at least respect the office of the country!

IF the U.S. withdraws from South Korea it will mean tha there is about to be a nuclear conflagaration beyond what our troops could survive.

Originally Posted by sandy

http://english.chosun.com/w21data/ht...610230026.html

I think south korea is a part of north korea nuclear plobrem,but that president hadn't tried to solve this plobrem and continue Sunshine policy.
As a result,North korea developped N-weapon by the money and kim regime survived.
I　feel utterly scandalized.
Well,well
Criticizing heroes of korean war is their plobrem.
That president talked about history with japan's prime minister instead north korean nuclear plobrem is their plobrem.
But at least,they should know giving money to north korea is crime of international.

I strongly doubt the US will withdraw from South Korea and if it does it has enough forces in the region to react to any North Korean agression not to mention that the South Korean military wont be a push over either.

As far as North Korea having the bomb, having it and using it are two completely separate issues and while the North Korean leadership seems somewhat "eccentric" at times I am not sure they are "eccentric" enough to get themselves irradiated.

Originally Posted by MontyB

I strongly doubt the US will withdraw from South Korea and if it does it has enough forces in the region to react to any North Korean agression not to mention that the South Korean military wont be a push over either.

As far as North Korea having the bomb, having it and using it are two completely separate issues and while the North Korean leadership seems somewhat "eccentric" at times I am not sure they are "eccentric" enough to get themselves irradiated.

I think you err in your judgement regarding the "eccentric" leader, he isn't eccentric, he is delusional and I don't think he has a grasp on the repurcussions of using a nuke. The lights are on there but there is nobody home.

Originally Posted by Senior Chief

The proper syntax for speaking about the POTUS is to say the President, or President Bush. If you don't respect the man in office, at least respect the office of the country!

IF the U.S. withdraws from South Korea it will mean tha there is about to be a
nuclear conflagaration beyond what our troops could survive.

You must took misunderstand and sorry my lack of words.
I'm speaking about Bresident of SKorea Roh Moo-hyun.
He is pro-NK supporting NK's nuclear program.

The only possible way to dismantle N. Korea's nuclear weapons is to form an accord with all nations in agreement to dismantle their nuclear arsenal including the US. Universal disarmament of Nuclear Weapons is the only best action to prevent the spread of Nuclear weapons and Nuclear Proliferation around the world.

The collapse of N. Korea is not in the best interests of anyone. If a nuclear armed state collapses, immediately their nuclear arsenal will be shipped out to an anynomous buyer, possibly to a rogue organization.

Remember South Korea was formerly a third world country and now become one of the richest nations on earth. A powerful, united, and self-reliant Korea is what President Roh Moo Hyun possibly supports.

You can critisize the South Koreans and Roh Moo Hyun all you want, because in the view of Right Wing Politicians in Japan, a powerful and united Korea is a threat and the same thing goes for China as well.

Originally Posted by CABAL

The only possible way to dismantle N. Korea's nuclear weapons is to form an accord with all nations in agreement to dismantle their nuclear arsenal including the US. Universal disarmament of Nuclear Weapons is the only best action to prevent the spread of Nuclear weapons and Nuclear Proliferation around the world.

Hmm I am not a supporter of nuclear weapons in any way shape or form but universal disarmament is as bad an idea as imposing gun control after the 200 years of not having it, only those who follow the rules will comply and you will by default transfer power to those who choose not to comply.

As much as I would like to think we could have a world without nukes it can never happen as the technology is already out there and the last thing we need is North Korea, Iran or any other country being the sole posessor of that technology.

The collapse of N. Korea is not in the best interests of anyone. If a nuclear armed state collapses, immediately their nuclear arsenal will be shipped out to an anynomous buyer, possibly to a rogue organization.

I am not so sure about that because to be perfectly honest I have no doubts that for a few sacks of rice the North Korean leadership will ship a nuke to anyone and probably already is doing so. The NK leadership has created such a paranoid state that I dont believe they can be trusted to follow a normal sane nuclear policy (if such a thing actually exists).

We all have our escape fantasies. You know: the daydream where you quit the job and tell your lousy boss to kiss off; the pause, as you write your mortgage check, where you imagine winning the lottery. Well, I have an escape fantasy about North Korea.
There are no good solutions to the problem of now-nuclear North Korea. The Bush administration is trying desperately to establish multiparty talks. The same people on the left who criticized the president for not being multilateral enough on Iraq, are now calling for America to engage the North Koreans unilaterally. And the real problem is that North Korea's dictator, Kim Jong Il, is not - how to put this delicately? - a strategic thinker. A head of state who has movie stars from neighboring countries kidnapped just for the fun of it is not a reliable negotiating partner, no matter who's on the other side of the table.
That's why the Chinese, who claim they want regional hegemony, want no part of disarming North Korea. Massive aid from China keeps North Korea afloat. The Chinese could, more or less, control Kim's father, Kim Il Sung. But the son is more of a live wire; he might very well bite the hand that feeds him. So as long as the United States is involved, the Chinese are happy to let Kim be America's problem.
And then there's our ally, South Korea. Sure, South Korea is a plucky little country that has overcome adversity. They've established a thriving democracy and a booming economy. They love baseball and make great flat-panel HD televisions.
Americans generally think well of South Korea. The feeling is not mutual. A 2003 Pew survey found that 50 percent of South Koreans (and 71 percent of those age 18 to 29) have an unfavorable view of the United States. This isn't anti-Bushism: 72 percent of those who disliked America said their hostility was toward the country in general, not just the president. The same survey found that half of South Koreans were "disappointed that the Iraqi military put up so little resistance in the war against the United States." A 2002 poll found that, by a margin of 3-1, South Koreans opposed even the idea of the war on terror. Some allies.
South Korea has a long history of anti-Americanism. In 1982, for instance, South Korean students set fire to the American Cultural Center in Pusan. At the 1988 Seoul Olympics, the undercurrent of anti-Americanism was so strong that then-president Roh Tae Woo held a special meeting of his cabinet to try to figure out how to soothe public opinion. As one student radical explained to the Associated Press in 1989, "the United States and its proxy ruling force... are primarily responsible for all our country's problems and divisions."
Writing in the Washington Quarterly in 2002, Seung-Hwan Kim explained that while anti-Americanism began in the late '40s, it was once limited to students and the leftist fringe, but "anti-American sentiments have now spread into almost all strata of Korean society." Part of the reason for this spread, Seung-Hwan says, is that "the Korean government has been sympathetic to public sentiment on this issue, providing motivational support to anti-American groups and activities."
Consider, for instance, that it's illegal to burn the North Korean flag in South Korea, but burning the U.S. flag is A-OK. The United States was a big issue in South Korea's last presidential election in 2002, with the most anti-American candidate, Roh Moo Hyun, winning.
President Roh has been less than true blue. He believes that North Korea must be appeased. He and his predecessor, Kim Dae Jung, encouraged their countrymen to forget about the North's frequent acts of provocation and extensive network of gulags. Instead, they taught South Koreans to view the North as a slow, underprivileged little brother - more of a burden than an enemy. That view has taken deep hold in the South Korean psyche: In 2004, 39 percent of South Koreans said that America was the biggest threat to their national security, while only 33 percent said North Korea was.
Just in case you keep track of these things, 54,246 American soldiers gave their lives to save the South during the Korean War. Between 1945 and 2001, the United States gave South Korea $15 billion in economic and military aid. The annual cost of maintaining our 30,000 troops on the Korean peninsula is about $3 billion. Which is a pretty hefty subsidy to be giving the world's 11th-largest economy.
So why is North Korea our problem? If South Korea wants to bet that their 500,000-man army will deter the nuclear-capable, 1.2 million soldiers from the North, why not let them put their money where their mouth is? If China wants regional hegemony, why not let them find out how unglamorous this hegemon stuff really is.
Of course, that's just the fantasy talking. In the real world, we have responsibilities we can't shirk. Japan - one of our real allies - would be in harm's way if America pulled out of Korea. So would Taiwan. And others. A nuclear North Korea destabilizes the entire region, from Australia to Vietnam. America is, for better or worse, stuck protecting the South Korean people so that they can keep making money, playing baseball, and enjoying their home-theater systems with the peace of mind that comes from knowing that no matter how much they antagonize America, we will always be there to protect them.
Still... even superpowers should be allowed their daydreams.

All one have own idea.
But,I don't agree to his idea.
US has no necessary to protect south Korea.
US should be drawn up from Korean Peninsula.
S Korea ridiculedof understanding allied countries and flattered China and North Korea.
Why presenting Korea Peninsula to China is inconvenience?
China should rule korea as last 5000years.

To be perfectly honest even if the US left South Korea I dont think the North could take it over, the South korean military is a well equiped, well trained organisation and a far cry from the South Korea of 1950.

Essentially as long as North Korean nukes can be neutralised via a nuclear umbrella agreement and assuming the Chinese dont get involved (which would bring international forces back into it) I strongly doubt that the North would do well (hell I suspect they would never get past the first supermarket they found).

Originally Posted by MontyB

To be perfectly honest even if the US left South Korea I dont think the North could take it over, the South korean military is a well equiped, well trained organisation and a far cry from the South Korea of 1950.

Essentially as long as North Korean nukes can be neutralised via a nuclear umbrella agreement and assuming the Chinese dont get involved (which would bring international forces back into it) I strongly doubt that the North would do well (hell I suspect they would never get past the first supermarket they found).

You are living in a dream world which equates to a nightmare for the rational people in the world.