Category: Uncategorized

I have posted before that the long term readiness of the ROK Army will be affected if the Korean government does not do more to professionalize the force.  I say this because in the past, completing your mandatory service in the ROK military was considered a gate you passed to become a man in Korean society.  People who did not do their national service were looked down upon.  Today though it is the complete opposite, mandatory service is something at best to be avoided.  What has changed this attitude so drastically over the course of only a decade?  First all living standards have increased where people don’t want to spend two years of their lives living in a cramped barracks getting beat down by superiors for a next to nothing pay check.  Secondly and most importantly in my opinion is that the youth being conscripted into the ROK military do not see the North Korean threat as a legitimate threat to the nation.  The progressives in the South Korean educational system have successfully indoctrinated an entire South Korean generation into the bogus belief that North Korea is just some misunderstood uncle that doesn’t mean any harm to South Korea.  Don’t believe me?  Then read this.

This announcement by the ROK military is at least one small baby step towards professionalizing the force if it comes to pass:

The military is considering hiring about 40,000 “salaried volunteer soldiers” between 2011 and 2020 to help overhaul the military conscription system, sources at the Defense Ministry said Monday.

Under the plan, those who volunteer to remain in the military for an additional year after their two-year mandatory service would be paid an annual salary of about 15 million won, they said.

The ministry initially announced that it would maintain about 20,000 salaried voluntary servicemen but is considering increasing the number to fill the possible manpower gap from the reduction in service period, the sources said.

The Defense Ministry needs these volunteers because of the national government’s plan to reduce national service from 24 months to 18 months for most conscriptees.  It is speculated the ruling party is doing this just to score political points in this year’s presidential election with Korea’s youth population, which is probably the case, but I like the possible unintended consequence of having the military recruit volunteers instead of relying on draftees.

The pay of approximately $15,000 for that extra year is actually pretty competitive with the pay of an American military E4 with 2 years of service which comes out to $20,976.  You consider the cheaper of cost of living in Korea and it is pretty much even.  Plus if living conditions and treatment of the soldiers improves this may be appealing to many youths.  However, a professional military requires budget increases, which many in the government don’t want to give:

“We are in close consultation with related government agencies about the increase in the salaried soldiers as an alternative to the cut in the service period,” a ministry official said on condition of anonymity. “But the budget planning agency now opposes it, citing the whopping additional budget required.”

The Ministry of Planning and Budget estimates that about 1.2 trillion won of additional budget on top of the 621 trillion of defense spending for the Defense Reform 2020 scheme would be required only for soldiers’ payment, he said.

That is why I dislike the draftee system because the politicians can keep getting away with sending over a billion dollars to North Korea while Korean youths for two years are treated no better than a Kaseong slave labor worker.  I find it ironic that the amount of money needed to fund this voluntary service program is nearly equal to the amount of money being sent to North Korea this year.  If Korean youths really wanted to make a difference in this next election they should vote for someone who is going to legitimately work to create an all volunteer military so no one will have to be conscripted in the first place instead of the demagogues looking to score cheap political points at the expensive of national security and the welfare of their citizens.

I really hope not:

South Korea recently asked the U.S. to consider selectively unfreezing at least five of North Korea’s 50 accounts with the Macau-based Banco Delta Asia, saying part of the US$24 million North Korean accounts were acquired legitimately, it emerged Monday. The issue has been the main sticking point in international efforts to resolve the North Korean nuclear crisis.

A U.S. official on Monday confirmed a Yonhap report that a senior official from Seoul explained the five accounts in detail to John Negroponte, the director of National Intelligence and deputy secretary of state-designate. As the man in charge of intelligence, Negroponte is hardly the standard diplomatic channel in the State Department. The U.S. official did not reveal who the Korean official was, but strongly hinted he was among a group who recently visited the U.S.

I have to wonder what the US will get in return for doing this?  If the US negotiators think this will lead to any breakthroughs in the nuclear talks I think they will be disappointed.  The only way I see the North Koreans working out a deal is if they do not have as much nuclear material to base a nuclear program around as everyone believes. 

If you ever wanted to debate the merits of the word "gyopo" here and here are the place to do it.

Former Clinton Administration Defense Secretary William Perry is once again advocating starting a war with North Korea by bombing it’s nuclear reactor:

Former U.S. Defense Secretary William Perry proposed Thursday that the United States should consider military action against North Korea if China and South Korea refuse to prod Pyongyang to end its nuclear weapons program, according to a report by Agence France-Presse (AFP).

Although the move is dangerous, there is no alternative left if China and South Korea, the two key economic lifelines to North Korea, do not join any U.S.-led “diplomatic coercive’’ action against Pyongyang, he told the Foreign Affairs Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives in Washington, D.C.

AFP quoted Perry, the Pentagon chief under former president Bill Clinton, as saying that the U.S. should consider destroying a large reactor under construction in North Korea capable of making about 10 nuclear bombs a year.

Remember Perry was the same guy who co-authored a Washington Post editorial before July’s North Korean missile test that advocated bombing North Korea’s missile program. I said then that it would be ridiculous to bomb the missile sites because the US had more to gain from the North Koreans firing the missiles compared to if the US attacked North Korea. By firing the missile the US was able to accurately gauge exactly how far along the North Korean missile program was, which ended up being no where near advanced as thought. The US would have never learned this by bombing North Korea. Plus the test continued the isolation of the Kim regime with additional sanctions put on the country and Kim becoming even more of an international pariah.Â

Compare that to a bombing campaign that would have put Kim Jong-il in a more sympathetic light. Remember their were people who were sympathetic with Saddam Hussein, don’t think Kim Jong-il won’t get the same treatment. Cindy Sheehan and her ilk would be toasting Kim Jong-il in no time. The media would show images of killed civilians from the bombing campaign over and over again while ignoring all the civilians dying right now in North Korea, as I type this, due to the Kim regime’s systematic starvation program. Even more dangerous than the political and diplomatic consequences would be the military consequences of a full scale war breaking out on the Korean peninsula. Any war on the Korean peninsula would cause casualties that would dwarf the Iraq War. Especially US casualties with the 2nd Infantry Division continuing to remain located near the DMZ.Â

The consequences of bombing Kim’s nuclear program today would be the same as what I listed above for bombing Kim’s missile program. However, fear not, there will not be a bombing campaign on North Korea and Perry knows it. Remember he was the guy in charge of the Pentagon during the 1994 nuclear crisis when the Clinton Administration decided not to bomb North Korea. He knows President Bush cannot attack North Korea for the very same reasons President Clinton didn’t, which makes it easy for him to come out looking like a hawk on this issue. The Democrats have long been viewed as weak on defense so in order to build their defense credentials, they are looking to take hawkish positions on issues that they know President Bush cannot act upon. North Korea is the best example. Notice you see no one from the Democratic Party advocating bombing Iran which is a much greater danger to the US than North Korea. What’s the difference between advocating bombing Iran compared to North Korea? The only difference is that there is a very real possibility that President Bush may bomb Iran in the future compared to North Korea.Â

Many Democrats are only hawkish when they know they don’t need to act on it. Another example of this was for the past two years the Democrats have been all over TV advocating for more troops in Iraq and made sure to keep bringing up General Shinseki’s name every time they did. They did this to bolster their defense credentials because they didn’t think President Bush would ever actually act upon it. However, Bush did act and sent more troops to Iraq and what did the Democrats do? Condemn Bush for sending more troops to Iraq and threaten to cut funding for the soldiers there. Perry’s latest article is just another example of a long line of Democratic demagoguery of national security issues.

HT: Nomad

Anyone want to sign up for this contest?:

How many U.S. troops will be killed in Iraq in the next year?

Submit your best estimate here…

I’ll keep track–our memories are long–and we’ll notify the "winner" one year from today.
<…>
Our collective prognostications might just serve as a public declaration that the Commander-in-Chief cannot make Iraq into a crapshoot with our kids.

So submit your estimate here. Put a number to it. On January 10, 2008, how many additional men and women in the U.S. services, do you think, will be dead for this cause?

What is wrong with these people?  This is a perfect example of how detached people are from what is going on in Iraq.  It sickens me when I saw people in the media almost giddy when the Iraq casualty number hit 3,000 right before New Year’s.  Then the constant updates of troop casualties is treated like a basketball score and that is all this war has become; a game to most people.  It is that attitude that causes behavior like what you see above.

HT: Greyhawk

The Korean government has begun to respond to USFK commander General Bell’s criticism of the South Korean foot dragging over the USFK relocation to Camp Humphreys:

Seoul is determined to seek a quick relocation of U.S. military installations, Foreign Minister Song Min-soon assured reporters yesterday. He was speaking a day after the senior U.S. military commander here warned that he would fight any delay in the relocation regardless of the reason for the delay.
Asked at a regular press briefing, whether there had been any change in the scheduled relocation date, originally agreed to be in 2008, the foreign minister said that during his visit to Washington last week he had told U.S. officials that Seoul had a strong desire to see the relocation proceed as quickly as possible.
But he ducked a direct answer about whether the target date of 2008 was still possible.

If Seoul is so committed to a quick relocation how does Minister Song explain the delays in removing the protesters at Camp Humphreys?  How does he explain the attempt to stop the hand over of closed out USFK bases with the fraudulent pollution issue?  How does he explain the cutting of the agreed amount of relocation money from this year’s budget.  When South Korea signs an agreement promising $886 million to fund USFK next year and unilaterally decides to only deliver $772 million, how can Minister Song go on record saying the Korean government remains committed to a "quick" relocation of USFK. 

The charade continues:

Last month, defense officials said the project could be held up until 2011 or even later because of delays in acquiring the land necessary for the new U.S. base.
"The issue of the timing of the relocation is not one that is being negotiated between South Korea and the United States," Mr. Song said yesterday, "but a matter that will be determined by the technical realities."
He said there was no friction between the United States and Korea over the issue. "This is a matter in which one side cannot say the other side is responsible. The defense ministries from both sides will consult on the timing of the relocation," he concluded.

Like the technical reality of not moving the protesters out in a timely manner or providing the agreed amount of funding?  Then to say the Korean government is not responsible for the delay is utterly ridiculous when the Korean government’s foot dragging has been utterly predictable and totally obvious to all of us that have been following this issue.  The Korean government for all their talk about wanting self reliance and the Yongsan move to happen are becoming increasingly exposed as the frauds and demagogues that they are. 

It is clear that General Bell’s criticism has had little effect in the decision making process in Seoul yet.  He may need to up the ante at some point.  Is it to late to bring General Trexler out of retirement yet?

UPDATE: One Free Korea has great posting that provides further background information concerning the South Korean governmental policy of total indifference to the kidnapping and forced inprisonment of their own citizens in North Korea.  I have to agree with OFK that this man married very well that his wife after 31 years never forgot about him and did all she did to bring him home while her own government just wished he didn’t exist.

___________________________________________________________

When I read stories like this it just makes me wonder how many more South Korean citizens are stuck inside of North Korea just waiting for their chance to get out while their own government ignores them:

A crewmember of the squid trawler Cheonwangho abducted by North Korea while fishing in the East Sea in August 1975 has escaped the communist state after 31 years. Choi Wook-il (67) is waiting for help from Seoul while hiding at an undisclosed location in China, but the government here is dragging its feet. Choi told the Chosun Ilbo he left Kimchaek City in North Hamgyeong Province on Dec. 22, arrived at Hyesan on Dec. 24 and crossed the Yalu River the next day. On the arduous trip, he sustained a cut to his forehead after a car accident on the way to Yanbian in China. He was finally reunited with his wife Yang Jeong-ja (66) there.

Read the whole thing because it is just amazing that this guy’s wife he hadn’t seen in 31 years did more to free him from going back to North Korea and it’s gulags than the South Korean government.  It is situations like this that I wish the US government could do more to help these people who were abducted.  It could be through funding more NGOs to help North Korean defectors escape North Korea through China possibly.  This would be a way of shaming the South Korean government into taking actions to protect their own citizens. 

If President Roh is so determined to have a 2nd Inter-Korean summit the first item on the agenda should be the demand that all South Korean citizens abducted by North Korea be returned to South Korea.  It would be a disgrace for the South Korean president to be toasting Kim Jong-il during Inter-Korean summit while his own citizens are trapped in slavery in North Korea.

From the BBC, the violent murder rate in Columbia last year:

Police chief Gen Jorge Daniel Castro said that a total of 17,206 people suffered violent deaths in 2006, 517 fewer than in 2005.  Kidnappings also fell from 329 in 2005 to 200 in 2006, he said.

Colombia continues to have one of the highest murder rates in the world, but observers say security has been gradually improving in recent years.

Now compare that to Iraq’s violent murder rate, from the AP:

Iraq reported Tuesday that about 12,000 civilians were killed last year – the third full year since the U.S.-led invasion – with a dramatic rise in the last three months, when 5,000 died. Only about half as many Iraqi soldiers died in 2006 as American troops.

But the number of Iraqi security forces killed jumps to 1,543, nearly double the American death count of 823 for the year, when the deaths of police, who conduct paramilitary operations, are added to the number of slain Iraqi soldiers.

In all, the Iraqi ministries of Health, Defense and Interior reported a total of 13,896 Iraqi civilians, police and soldiers died last year, 162 more than the tally kept by The Associated Press.

So how come the media is not talking about troop surges in Columbia?  Actually better how come they aren’t talking about Columbia at all?  There are US soldiers there on the ground and Columbia is the third largest recipient of US foreign aid.  Plus I think a very strong argument could be mad that drugs coming from Columbia are more dangerous to the US than Al Qaida terrorists.  Think about it, Al Qaida may be able to kill more US citizens in one strike like they did during 9/11, but compare that to the loss of life from drug overdoses and the violent crime related to drug abuse.  I was able to find this statistic on total drug overdoses from 2000, which put the number at 17,000 that year,  while this statistic from the US Department of Justice, said that 14,860 homicides occurred in 2005 that were drug related.  Both numbers are higher than the total number of violent deaths in Iraq.  Drugs have effected the lives of more Americans than any terrorist ever has and yet it is back burner issue not considered news worthy. 

I’m not saying Iraq isn’t a news worthy event but very little perspective is given by the media on what is going on there compared to other similar situations around the world.  Take for example the media glee over the 3,000th US military death happened recently.  Yes the death is tragic, but just like the media glee over the civilian deaths in Iraq, no perspective is given that US military deaths are down from last year and that the total number is no where near the casualties the US military took during World War II, the Korean War, or Vietnam.  Yet the media will come out and tell you that the Iraq War has gone on longer than World War II.  Comparing the Iraq War to World War II is utterly ridiculous but this is the perspective the media is giving the American people.

The Iraq War is almost treated as a reality TV show by the media.  If you ever watch interviews from Survivor contestants after they finish competing on the show they always say that the footage from the island is always manipulated to create better storylines when it is edited for TV.  Talk to an Iraq veteran and most will tell you the same thing about the US media. 

If the US can turn Iraq into a Middle Eastern version of Columbia that should be considered a success, but will the media ever give the American people that kind of perspective?  I seriously doubt it.

HT: Milblogs

So not only can the taxi driver watch TV while driving, but now the passengers can as well:

Taxis equipped with video screens showing local news features and advertisements made their debut ithis week — after the screens were adjusted to allow passengers to turn them off.

Five hundred taxis, each with a liquid crystal display screen in the back of the headrest on the front passenger seat, have begun service in Seoul and the surrounding area, company officials said.

The screens automatically turn on when a customer gets into the back seat and initially could not be turned off, although the sound volume could be reduced or muted.

So with the passengers watching TV now as well who will tell the driver to watch out for that red light while he is busy watching his TV? 

I really wish someone would make a final decision on this:

Mandatory anthrax vaccinations for some troops are expected to resume in late January, said Defense Department spokesman Maj. Stewart Upton on Friday.

Meanwhile, an attorney representing six Defense Department employees who refuse to take the vaccine has vowed that he will try to stop the mandatory vaccination program.

In October, the Defense Department announced it was making anthrax vaccinations mandatory for U.S. troops on the Korean peninsula and in the U.S. Central Command area of operations.

(…)

But Mark Zaid, a Washington, D.C., attorney who filed a class-action lawsuit against the DOD over the program, has vowed to try to block mandatory shots in court.

“We are well-prepared to challenge the Defense Department each time it exercises poor judgment involving AVIP (Anthrax Vaccine and Immunization Program), and will file a Temporary Restraining Order in January to attempt to prevent any unlawful inoculations,” Zaid said in a Friday e-mail to Stripes.

Here is how the anthrax injection schedule works:

I started taking anthrax injections in 2000 when I went to Korea and I received up to four out of the six required shots before the DOD ran out of vaccine. Then I went back to the states and there the program restarted again.  My division deployed to Kuwait to fight in Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003 and I had to restart from shot number one again due to the time in between my first injections in Korea. Once again I made it up to four shots when the court ruling came out that the DOD could not give anthrax shots anymore. So now I am hoping my unit doesn’t have to take anthrax shots until the court decision is made.  I would hate to have to take more anthrax shots without having to.  If they do uphold the ruling for people to take anthrax shots, let me complete the cycle so I don’t have to keep taking unnecessary anthrax shots.  I have had eight anthrax injections total and will have to take 6 more again if the court allows anthrax shots again.   That would mean that by the time I get done with the next cycle of anthrax shots, I would have taken 14 anthrax shots in 4 years. 

Maybe that explains my receding hair line?