Continue reading "Korean Government Warns USFK Commander Over "Undiplomatic" Remarks "

It is because he is pissing off the Korean government which is a sure sign that he is not about maintaining the status quo, business as usual USFK relationship in Korea and the Foreign Ministry knows it. Remember the Korean government is all about maintaining the status quo for reasons I have listed before here. Apparently the Foreign Ministry doesn't have the courage to tell General Bell what they think about him themselves, so in order to under cut him, the ministry has decided to complain to the State Department representative visiting Seoul about him. I hope the State Department won't entertain this crap from the Korean Foreign Ministry, but the State Department has a track record for entertaining characters that they shouldn't. Need I bring up Madeline Albright toasting Kim Jong-il for one obvious example?

If the Foreign Ministry wants to talk about being "undiplomatic" let's discuss it. First of all, isn't unilaterally declaring that the Camp Humphreys relocation is going to be delayed by 5 years from the agreed upon date between the US and Korean governments and then the USFK commander first finding out about this by reading the newspaper just a bit undiplomatic? Isn't unilaterally cutting agreed upon money for the upkeep of the US-ROK alliance only weeks after making the agreement undiplomatic? Isn't giving over a billion dollars this year to North Korea while denying USFK the agreed upon money for the upkeep of the US-ROK alliance, which is no where near as much money as the Korean government is sending to North Korea, undiplomatic? Isn't the fact that US pilots had to fly to Thailand to conduct pilot training because the Korean government closed USFK's only bombing range in Korea due to anti-US protesters and then denied the US Air Force co-use of a Korean Air Force bombing range undiplomatic? Isn't the fact that the commanding general of the US Air Force in Korea had to threaten to pull the Air Force from Korea just to get co-use of a Korean Air Force bombing range that the Korean government continued to deny him undiplomatic?

You want more undiplomatic? How about this classic post from One Free Korea listing the undiplomatic comments that leading figures in the Korean government have made towards the US:

* Kim Won Ung, the unmedicated nutcase who holds a senior foreign policy post in the National Assembly, and who threatened to throw our Ambassador out of Korea, railed at Bell for suggesting that North Korean missiles could be viewed as a threat to the South, and even asserted territorial claims on Manchuria;

* Kim Dae Jung, who blamed America for North Korean nuke tests and urged other poliiticians to adopt the same fraudulent spin;

* Current Foreign Minister Song Min Soon: ”[The United States] has fought more wars than any other nation in the history of its establishment and survival ….”;

* “Comrade” Chung Dong-Young, who as UnFiction Minister, published this rambling, illogical, error-riddled screed accusing the U.S. of responsibility for Japan’s occupation of Korea, over a peace treaty it helped broker in 1904, and which won Teddy Roosevelt one of the first Nobel Peace Prizes;

* Chang Yong-Dal, the Uri representative and standing committee member who praised the 9/11/05 thugs who tried to tear down a statue of General MacArthur for their “deep ethnic purity” (the lead thug is now under arrest as a North Korean agent);

* Jung Chung-Rae, the pervy Uri rep who compared the USFK to unclean sperm;

* Presidential Candidate and Uri Leader Kim Geun Tae, who dances for the amusement of the North Koreans the week after they test a nuke; but declares an insult to national pride when the U.S. declares that it will actually implement UN Security Council Resolution 1718;

* Ex-Unification Minister Lee Jong-Seok: “The Bush administration of the U.S. is fundamentalist in nature, and it has been raising questions about drugs and human rights abuses since it took office.”

Read the rest of OFK's post for more great commentary about the demagoguery by the South Korean government towards the US government.

If anything the only one being diplomatic in Korea is General Bell.

The drive by diplomats from the US State Department don't have to put up with the daily demagoguery and anti-US maneuvering by the Korean government that General Bell has had to deal with. General Bell was able to create momentum for the USFK transformation in the past because he had strong backing from former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in Washington. Once Rumsfeld was replaced last December the Korean government immediately took this as an opportunity to back out of all USFK transformation and alliance cost sharing agreements.

So far the only one speaking out on the South Korean governmental betrayal of the US troops sent to Korea to help protect the country is General Bell. The Pentagon is so blinded by Iraq that it appears they don't want to even be bothered with USFK related issues. The drive by diplomats from the State Department have been of even less help. American politicians have been just as worthless. Once Congressman Henry Hyde retired from office, the lone voice in Congress that understood what was going in Korea was gone. Why isn't Hillary, Pelosi, Murtha, and the rest of the crew not visiting the 30,000 soldiers helping keep the peace in Korea? Could it be because they care more about being seen by the media in the Green Zone then having any real concern about the welfare of US soldiers, especially ones being betrayed by the US's so called blood allies? The media is no where to be seen in Korea unless Kim Jong-il is launching a missile or testing a nuclear bomb. The inattention to the plight of the USFK commander by the US military brass, political leaders, and media is disgraceful. It appears General Bell truly is a lone voice and the Korean government knows it.

All done!

Continue reading "Treason "

Asked on a television show if he believed American victory in Iraq was possible, Gordon replied:

“So I think, you know, as a purely personal view, I think it’s worth it [sic] one last effort for sure to try to get this right, because my personal view is we’ve never really tried to win. We’ve simply been managing our way to defeat. And I think that if it’s done right, I think that there is the chance to accomplish something.”

Mr Gordon has promised to never so dishonor his paper or profession again.

All done!

Continue reading "The Shining Path "

You're forgetting that the military has lowered its standards to keep recruitment up. The Army now accepts Neo-nazis and psychiatric patients fresh out of the ward as recruits. This is the result of "people who don't trust their leaders anymore" deciding the military is a bad choice.

Back to that in a moment. First, link two - from the NY Times:

There were a few tense moments, however, including an encounter involving Joshua Sparling, 25, who was on crutches and who said he was a corporal with the 82nd Airborne Division and lost his right leg below the knee in Ramadi, Iraq. Mr. Sparling spoke at a smaller rally held earlier in the day at the United States Navy Memorial, and voiced his support for the administration’s policies in Iraq.

Later, as antiwar protesters passed where he and his group were standing, words were exchanged and one of the antiwar protestors spit at the ground near Mr. Sparling; he spit back.

Capitol police made the antiwar protestors walk farther away from the counterprotesters.

“These are not Americans as far as I’m concerned,” Mr. Sparling said.

Sad that the Times reporter didn't have time to confirm that Sparling was indeed an Iraq vet, not just a guy who "said he was". And he is recovering from wounds he recieved "over there". Here are two pictures (linked to sources) from the day of the protests.

In the counter-protest:

...and signing an autograph:

Link three includes an email from an Instapundit reader who had wandered through the protest crowds - the whole thing is well worth a read (and appeared in an update that you too may have missed) but here's a quick clip:

I saw three groups of counter protesters. One in front of the National Art Gallery, one just north of the Capitol, and a small group of young Marines standing with a life-size cutout of President Bush. The Marines were taking quite a beating from the crowd, and were definitely keeping their cool quite well.

The conclusion is one I draw from more than just these three isolated incidents. I hate to see this, but we're witnessing the ongoing evolution of a trend I spotted almost a year go

...most low ranking military members currently serving joined after the invasion of Iraq, virtually all people serving at this time have either enlisted or re-enlisted in a military at war. One obvious conclusion from this that I didn't put in writing is that this eliminates the "anti-war" crowd's treasured canard that the troops are victims who thought they were signing up for a college financial aid program and were shocked to be handed a weapon and taught how to shoot.

The death of this claim necessitates a new attack - a predictable evolution of the old. To put it in simplest and honest terms it goes like this: the folks that are joining now are lowlifes...

Believing that makes it much easier to spit at wounded GIs. The "support the troops - not the war" line can only work for so long. Yes, organized attempts to perpetuate the GI as victim myth (and thus "supportable" for some) are ongoing - but their "success" is nowhere near what was hoped. And yes, deceptive attempts to portray the GIs themselves as admitting they've been handed their asses in Iraq are also ongoing. But eventualy people will notice that when you've got to "fly Iraq veterans to the home states of Republican senators" in order to lend credibility to your protest it might indicate a shortage thereof.

But there must be a reason for that, and it must be that these are lowlifes and Nazis! And the spitting begins.

Is this behavior pervasive in America? Of course not. It is becomming more common - for reasons I state above, and will become more so with time. And there are well meaning people out there who have convinced themselves the troops in Iraq simply lack the benefit of deep knowledge the average American has gained of the situation from headlines and soundbites, and that these poor troops need to be brought out of there for their own good. But eventually these folks (perhaps aided by accurate reports like NBC's above) might realize the absurdity of that position. And while those who really do give a damn about the troops might actually come to support us (beyond the bumper-sticker level) as a result of that epiphany, those whose motives are purely political will find themselves forced to follow the path to the dark side illustrated above.

A path that seems increasingly well travelled.

Update: A travel agent speaks.

All done!