What's new

Deployment of THAAD: News & Discussions

DPRK was betrayed by the US before, to gain their trust again is hard, very hard. I don't see Kim would want to be part of any 6 party talks or directly with US.
 
.
DPRK was betrayed by the US before, to gain their trust again is hard, very hard. I don't see Kim would want to be part of any 6 party talks or directly with US.

No, North Korea broke their promise.

http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/north-korea-demands-direct-talks-with-us/

North Korea demands direct talks with US
Originally published November 2, 2009 at 1:11 am Updated November 2, 2009 at 9:09 am


North Korea pressed the United States to accept its demand for direct talks on the communist regime's nuclear program, warning Monday that Pyongyang "will go our own way" unless Washington agrees.

North Korea pressed the United States to accept its demand for direct talks on the communist regime’s nuclear program, warning Monday that Pyongyang “will go our own way” unless Washington agrees.

North Korea’s Foreign Ministry did not elaborate in the statement carried by state media, which appeared to be a threat to enlarge its nuclear arsenal.

The statement came as North Korea’s No. 2 nuclear negotiator, Ri Gun, wrapped up a rare trip to the U.S., where he met with the chief American nuclear negotiator, Sung Kim, amid media speculation the two discussed bilateral negotiations.

North Korea has demanded direct talks with Washington since conducting a series of nuclear and missile tests and quitting six-party nuclear negotiations involving China, Japan, the two Koreas, Russia and the U.S. earlier this year.

North Korea agreed in 2007 to disable its nuclear facilities – as a step toward its ultimate dismantlement – in exchange for energy aid and political concessions. Pyongyang halted the process and later abandoned the pact after receiving most of the promised energy aid and concessions.

The standoff led to Pyongyang conducting its second nuclear test and banned missile tests earlier this year.


However, North Korea said Monday that “meaningful progress” on a nuclear-free Korean peninsula is possible “if the hostile relations between the (North) and the U.S. are settled and confidence is built between them.”


The North has warned in recent months it is enlarging its nuclear stockpile, saying it is “weaponizing” plutonium and has succeeded in enriching uranium, a second way of building atomic bombs, in an apparent attempt to pressure Washington to agree to one-on-one talks.


North Korea has long called for direct talks with the U.S. to resolve the nuclear standoff, and maintains it is compelled to develop atomic bombs to cope with what it calls “U.S. nuclear threats.”

Washington has denied it has any intention of attacking the North, but Defense Secretary Robert Gates assured South Korea last month it would use all military capabilities – including its nuclear might – to defend the longtime ally.

Pyongyang’s main Rodong Sinmun newspaper blasted Gates’ remarks, saying the U.S. “boldly unveiled its design to invade” the North and is trying to provoke a nuclear war on the Korean peninsula.
 
. .
North Korea agreed in 2007 to disable its nuclear facilities – as a step toward its ultimate dismantlement – in exchange for energy aid and political concessions. Pyongyang halted the process and later abandoned the pact after receiving most of the promised energy aid and concessions.


The North has warned in recent months it is enlarging its nuclear stockpile, saying it is “weaponizing” plutonium and has succeeded in enriching uranium, a second way of building atomic bombs, in an apparent attempt to pressure Washington to agree to one-on-one talks.


North Korea has long called for direct talks with the U.S. to resolve the nuclear standoff, and maintains it is compelled to develop atomic bombs to cope with what it calls “U.S. nuclear threats.”

Washington has denied it has any intention of attacking the North, but Defense Secretary Robert Gates assured South Korea last month it would use all military capabilities – including its nuclear might – to defend the longtime ally.
 
.
.
How about this.
1. North Korea recognize South Korea and don't try to attempt to invade South Korea again under unification by force.
2. Complete denuclearization like North Korea was suppose to promise on.
3. A peace treaty between the U.S. and North Korea to end the war and complete normalization.
4. Pulling THAAD out in response to end of nuclear weapons and ballistic missile tests in the Korean peninsula.




We got a submarine to send about a hundred nuclear warheads into North Korea. Not to mention some BMD tools.

NO, budy, as to your opinion, you seem to be still interested in negociating with North Korea. Stop negociating with Koreas. U.S. and China decide, ask Koreas to implement the decision. Now the problem is how to define the roles of Russia and Japan.
You read East Asia news recently, Japan is always pouring oil on the issue, it hopes the Korean War II break out tomorrow. I think China should rise up the conflict on East China Sea disputes to restrict ambitious Japan. Russia was creator of NK, obviously Russia don't easily give up its uinque benefits in NK, it has been moving its army nearby. America need to attract Russian attentions to other places.
This is cooperation, otherwise, the issue will be hardly dissovled.
 
.
Anger Grows in South Korea Over US Anti-Missile System

thaad-golf-course-1500-03-may-2017-ts600.jpeg

In this May 2, 2017 file photo, a U.S. missile defense system called Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, is installed at a golf course in Seongju, South Korea. (Kim Jun-beom/Yonhap via AP)
Associated Press | 3 May 2017 | by Kim Tong-Hyung
SEONGJU, South Korea — The anger is palpable on a narrow road that cuts through a South Korean village where about 170 people live between green hills dotted with cottages and melon fields. It's an unlikely trouble spot in the world's last Cold War standoff.

Aging farmers in this corner of Seongju county, more than 200 kilometers (125 miles) south of the capital Seoul, spend the day sitting by the asphalt in tents or on plastic stools, watching vehicles coming and going from a former golf course where military workers are setting up an advanced U.S. missile-defense system.

"Just suddenly one day, Seongju has become the frontline," said a tearful Park Soo-gyu, a 54-year-old strawberry farmer. "Wars today aren't just fought with guns. Missiles will be flying and where would they aim first? Right here, where the THAAD radar is."

THAAD is shorthand for Terminal High Altitude Defense, which the South Korean and U.S. governments say is critical to cope with a growing missile threat from North Korea. When completed, the battery will consist of six truck-mounted launchers that can fire up to 48 interceptors at incoming missiles detected by the system's x-band radar.

Anger has boiled over in Seosongri village since last week when U.S. and South Korean military workers used the early-morning hours to rush key parts of THAAD into place. The system had been scheduled to enter operation by the end of the year, but South Korea's Defense Ministry said Tuesday that it is already capable of defending against North Korean missiles. The ministry didn't say when the deployment would be completed.

Hundreds of banners hang on trees and fences along a kilometer (half-mile) stretch of the road up to where police have cut off access. They say "Withdraw the illegal THAAD immediately" and "Stop US militarism," slogans that would feel familiar in a leftist rally but are unusual in the country's traditionally conservative southeast.

"Yankee, go home!" a man yelled as he banged his fist on a car apparently carrying American soldiers, before dozens of police officers peeled him and other protesters away from the vehicle.

The local anger highlights what has arguably become the most explosive issue ahead of a presidential election next week. The May 9 vote will likely end a decadelong conservative rule that maintained a hard line against North Korea and agreed to the THAAD installation.

Front-runner Moon Jae-in, who calls for engagement with the North, has said the deployment of THAAD should be reconsidered. Some media have questioned whether the United States and a caretaker government that took over for ousted former President Park Geun-hye are rushing to complete THAAD before the election.

Earlier polls had showed overwhelming public support for THAAD following North Korean nuclear tests and a long-range rocket launch last year. But public opinion has become more divided amid the corruption scandal that led to Park's downfall and criticism that the government was pushing ahead without seeking the consent of Seongju residents.

Opposition was further inflamed after President Donald Trump said he would make South Korea pay $1 billion for THAAD.

Seongju residents say comments by Trump show the United States may be preparing for a pre-emptive strike against North Korea. They worry that if the North retaliates, THAAD would make their county a main target.

There's also frustration about an increasingly heavy police and military presence in an area where outsiders had been mostly limited to small groups of weekend golfers. Residents are also concerned about the rumored harmful effects the electromagnetic waves from THAAD's radar might have on them and their crops. Seoul's Defense Ministry calls such worries groundless.

"We have been living very peacefully as farmers, but our daily lives have been shattered after the arrival of this weapon; we can't rest comfortably for a day and can't work without worrying," said Kim Yoon--seong, a 60-year-old melon farmer. He says many younger residents with children are considering leaving Seongju.

Residents say at least 13 people were treated at hospitals for injuries including broken bones and teeth after a violent clash last week between dozens of villagers and supporters and some 8,000 police officers who were mobilized to remove them from the road.

Three days later, more than a hundred police officers ended an hourslong standoff by swarming a handful of people who had been blocking a mountain path with a tractor to prevent construction equipment from entering the THAAD site. Police detained a man and drove away the tractor as villagers showered them with insults, including "dogs" and "Americans' slaves."

"We won't allow any U.S. military and construction vehicles to pass through the two roads," said Rev. Kang Hyun-wook, a minister of Won Buddhism, an indigenous form of the religion. The grounds include a site Won Buddhists consider as sacred and are no longer allowed to visit. "If they fly in (the THAAD parts) with helicopters, then fine, it's their money to spend and we can't do anything about that."

Several people were hurt in another clash on Sunday as police tried to remove protesters blocking two U.S. military oil trucks from entering the THAAD site. Residents said the trucks turned away because cars protesters had parked to block the road couldn't be towed.

Moon, the presidential front-runner, says THAAD's security benefits would be offset by deteriorating relations with China, which sees THAAD's powerful radar as a threat to its own defense. South Korea's largest trade partner, China has taken several recent actions such as limiting tour group visits to South Korea that are seen as retaliation.

Other major presidential candidates have supported THAAD, but their stances grew complicated after Trump said he would make South Korea pay for it. Ahn Cheol-soo, the No. 2 candidate in polls, says he would seek parliamentary ratification over the THAAD deployment if the United States demands such payment.

The Trump administration has backed off the demand, but not before it frayed nerves.

"How can he smack an ally in the back of the head when he very well knows the difficulties South Korea is going through over the THAAD deployment," the Maeil Business newspaper said in an editorial Saturday. "The reason South Korea decided to deploy THAAD despite strong opposition from China is because it considered the importance of the U.S.-South Korea alliance in addition to realistic needs to defend North Korean missile attacks ... What does Trump think the U.S.-South Korea alliance is about, anyway?"
 
.
Another Japan in the making. SK has taken the bait. They have issues with NK, but need to sort it out without outside intervention. We know why the US is so eager to "help". It is funny how Trump made the payment jibe after installing the missile system. The orange man just cannot refrain from his antics.

China won't like the deployment one bit and understandably so. The Americans are in the business of killing many birds with one stone. Even though this often comes at a high price in hindsight. This deployment should be seen not only in the context of NK, but also China. China will make sure it has an adequate answer to these threats. No doubt.
 
Last edited:
.
Liberal Moon Jae-in wins South Korean election: exit polls

Landslide victory.
 
. . .
First Korean president who can truly say no to US

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2017/05/713_229188.html

By Oh Young-jin

Few Korean presidents have said no to their U.S. counterparts.

Roh Moo-hyun tried with little success.

Would the new president, Moon Jae-in, be different? Likely.

Moon we know is often taken in the context of Roh, his friend, partner and mentor.

Roh got elected thanks to anti-American sentiment after two girls were crushed to death by a U.S. military vehicle. Roh was a believer in Korea becoming an honest broker between the U.S. and China, and achieving unification on inter-Korean terms. Roh's plan didn't go well as Washington suspected his intentions, China was not strong enough and the North didn't take Seoul seriously.

Moon is picking up where Roh left off, although it is not necessarily turning the clock back.

He has a higher chance of deviating from the U.S. and getting his way than his former boss.

Roh was an adopted son by the party whose ticket he was on. He also went out to ally himself with a chaebol scion to strengthen his appeal. He earned disdain from the wealthy for his humble beginnings.

Moon got elected on his own merit. His Democratic Party of Korea, the largest party, is under his control and he won more than 40 percent of the votes cast in a five-way election, a lofty achievement.

The driving force for his election stems from the people power of the candlelit protests that helped to expel Park Geun-hye, the conservative former president. Moon's mandate, earned through this outpouring of popular support, may enable him to paint conservatives into a corner at an early stage of his presidency.

Besides, the two conservative parties, which split from the same party ahead of the election, are likely to have an internal dispute among themselves for some time, between the supporters of the disgraced Park and reformists.

Moon has a strong political infrastructure, much of it inherited from Roh.

He was bold enough to appoint a former student activist, who was jailed, as his chief of staff. Roh had to settle for a politico for the job.

Roh led a "palace coup" of sorts to separate him from his adopted party and created a new party with his supporters. Moon controls the largest party and is in a position to absorb the People's Party.

Besides, Roh cadres are now with Moon. They have had the experience of running the nation and they have been fully integrated with Moon, who lost to Park by a close margin in the previous election and has won this time on a comfortable margin.

In terms of personality, Moon may prove to be more a fundamental believer than Roh on liberal values. Roh proved to be a pragmatist when he pressed on with the free trade agreement with the United States, knowing his supporters would turn their backs on him.

In the memorable joint news conference after a summit with U.S. President Bush two months after his inauguration, Roh got tripped up in his speech. He called a halt in the translation, got excused and restarted his answer. Such is not expected from Moon, a better organizer. As Roh's chief of staff and in other capacities, he would speak in a measured and calm voice.

All this ― strong popular support, experienced staff and his personality ― could mean Moon would prove to be less pliable than even Roh, not to mention any of his other predecessors.

On the deployment of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery, Moon will not likely be as acceptable as U.S. President Donald Trump would like. It could turn out to be an either/or situation because Moon as he said sees Trump's demand for payment doesn't make sense because it goes against the deal they already have. Trump may well have to pull out the THAAD battery that is already partially operational. Moon would stick to it.

Regarding the two countries' FTA, Moon may go a step ahead of Trump, who prefers to undo it, considering Moon's reservations about it.

The chance is that we may see the first Korean president who can truly say no to the U.S. Of course, Moon as we have known prior to becoming president may prove to be a flexible pragmatist we don't know about. We will soon find out, though.
 
.
NO, budy, as to your opinion, you seem to be still interested in negociating with North Korea. Stop negociating with Koreas. U.S. and China decide, ask Koreas to implement the decision. Now the problem is how to define the roles of Russia and Japan.
You read East Asia news recently, Japan is always pouring oil on the issue, it hopes the Korean War II break out tomorrow. I think China should rise up the conflict on East China Sea disputes to restrict ambitious Japan. Russia was creator of NK, obviously Russia don't easily give up its uinque benefits in NK, it has been moving its army nearby. America need to attract Russian attentions to other places.
This is cooperation, otherwise, the issue will be hardly dissovled.

To the part I made bold in your post..

I know the two of us follow completely different narratives, but my impression has been that Japan wants the comfort women deal to finally get resolved. And Japan wants ROK to respect its sovereignty regarding Takeshima. Both of these issues have become issues because of the makings of ROK, not because of the makings of Japan. If ROK does their part to resolve these two issues, then relations between ROK and Japan can improve to satisfactory levels. There is no reason for Japan to concede to ROK demands regarding these two issues because ROK is wrong on both. ROK does not have honest discussion about the comfort women. They treat it as something that is equal to holocaust. They do it partially because of a brotherly sort of bond they have among themselves, so emotions are taking priority over critical thinking and comprehensive understanding on the issues and how they fit into history as a whole. So they can never emotionally reconcile with it. I suspect there are other factors to it. One may be that it is easy for Korean politicians to use to drum up political support on their camp, so they might intentionally be aggravating the issue in order to win over political rivals. There could be a number of other factors as well. But about the comfort women system itself..

The comfort women system was no where near that bad, and the Koreans themselves were a part of that system, and the Japanese soldiers didn't bang on the doors and steal the women and girls. Rather they were recruited, although many were recruited thinking that there were going to work at some factory, and to their surprise, they ended up in a brothel instead. But many got paid, often paid better than soldiers, certainly some cases were more barbaric, but that wasn't the whole case, and because money was made, they were able to quit after sometime. Some of the girls were very poor and sold by their parents. Many of them were recruited not by Japanese but by Koreans that were part of the brothel business. Prostitution was legal, that's just the way it was. So of course, the whole situation is bad, and it violates what we could call women's rights and dignity, but it has to be treated as what it is. Even Abe called it human trafficking when talking about the comfort women issue. That is a fair way to put it. It was a large human trafficking business that went a long with regular legal prostitution recruitment. But slavery is too strong of a word because they still made money, often made good money. Some even got into relationship with Japanese soldiers. The whole thing is really mixed, not the alleged "Japanese army forced 200,000 into sexual slavery" This claim is just simply wrong and is a terrible simplification of it, and quite honestly, the history of the comfort women becoming a politicized issue is the most offensive thing that can be done to that history, and is ROK politicizing it, not Japan. Japan wants the issue to just end already. It's been going on for more than two decades. Numerous apologies have already been made about it and money has already been dispatched to it. But Japan still has to be fair to itself and shouldn't have to apologies to level of cock sucking as no such conditions are applied onto any other nation for bad history. Japan has apologized for it enough. It is up to ROK to put it to rest or to continue using the issue for different agenda.

The US wants to create stronger trilateral relations between the US, ROK, and Japan. The US often tries to organize joint-training with the three of them, and always gives positive feedback on any news about the resolution of the comfort women issue. Japan is ready to join the US in trilateral relations, but it is up to ROK.
 
.
To the part I made bold in your post..

I know the two of us follow completely different narratives, but my impression has been that Japan wants the comfort women deal to finally get resolved. And Japan wants ROK to respect its sovereignty regarding Takeshima. Both of these issues have become issues because of the makings of ROK, not because of the makings of Japan. If ROK does their part to resolve these two issues, then relations between ROK and Japan can improve to satisfactory levels. There is no reason for Japan to concede to ROK demands regarding these two issues because ROK is wrong on both. ROK does not have honest discussion about the comfort women. They treat it as something that is equal to holocaust. They do it partially because of a brotherly sort of bond they have among themselves, so emotions are taking priority over critical thinking and comprehensive understanding on the issues and how they fit into history as a whole. So they can never emotionally reconcile with it. I suspect there are other factors to it. One may be that it is easy for Korean politicians to use to drum up political support on their camp, so they might intentionally be aggravating the issue in order to win over political rivals. There could be a number of other factors as well. But about the comfort women system itself..

The comfort women system was no where near that bad, and the Koreans themselves were a part of that system, and the Japanese soldiers didn't bang on the doors and steal the women and girls. Rather they were recruited, although many were recruited thinking that there were going to work at some factory, and to their surprise, they ended up in a brothel instead. But many got paid, often paid better than soldiers, certainly some cases were more barbaric, but that wasn't the whole case, and because money was made, they were able to quit after sometime. Some of the girls were very poor and sold by their parents. Many of them were recruited not by Japanese but by Koreans that were part of the brothel business. Prostitution was legal, that's just the way it was. So of course, the whole situation is bad, and it violates what we could call women's rights and dignity, but it has to be treated as what it is. Even Abe called it human trafficking when talking about the comfort women issue. That is a fair way to put it. It was a large human trafficking business that went a long with regular legal prostitution recruitment. But slavery is too strong of a word because they still made money, often made good money. Some even got into relationship with Japanese soldiers. The whole thing is really mixed, not the alleged "Japanese army forced 200,000 into sexual slavery" This claim is just simply wrong and is a terrible simplification of it, and quite honestly, the history of the comfort women becoming a politicized issue is the most offensive thing that can be done to that history, and is ROK politicizing it, not Japan. Japan wants the issue to just end already. It's been going on for more than two decades. Numerous apologies have already been made about it and money has already been dispatched to it. But Japan still has to be fair to itself and shouldn't have to apologies to level of cock sucking as no such conditions are applied onto any other nation for bad history. Japan has apologized for it enough. It is up to ROK to put it to rest or to continue using the issue for different agenda.

The US wants to create stronger trilateral relations between the US, ROK, and Japan. The US often tries to organize joint-training with the three of them, and always gives positive feedback on any news about the resolution of the comfort women issue. Japan is ready to join the US in trilateral relations, but it is up to ROK.

The more you explain, the deeper Korean hate you. Crime is crime.

You are loser of WWII...Comparing to another battlefield in Europe, Japan is punished too slightly. So you think it is not a big deal, and explain winners again and again, even complain the treatment / punishment upon on you.
 
.
The more you explain, the deeper Korean hate you. Crime is crime.

You are loser of WWII...Comparing to another battlefield in Europe, Japan is punished too slightly. So you think it is not a big deal, and explain winners again and again, even complain the treatment / punishment upon on you.

dude, he's not even japanese, he's some expat living in japan.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom