Helping Ukraine in fact also partly helps the U.S. counter China. Supplying Ukraine is reviving U.S. defense production.
So why not revive U.S. defense production by supplying Taiwan? Why not revive U.S. defense production by supplying our own forces which no longer have the munitions required because they all got shipped to Ukraine? Countries only have so much defense production capacity before they start to cannibalize the civilian economy a la North Korean starvation. The US of today must chose who to supply, it can’t supply everyone.
Grinding down the military power of Russia, which Ukrainians are doing without risk to U.S. service personnel, weakens the overall aggressive potential of the China Bloc.
There’s a reasonable argument to be made that antagonizing Russia and attempting to destroy them is the reason why the Russians are now a part of the “China Bloc”. Prior to the State Department coup in Ukraine, and the militarization of Ukraine as a bulwark against Russia, Russia was attempting to establish cooperative, if not outright friendly, relations with the West. They had a well established uneasy relation with the Chinese dating back to outright border conflicts that almost went nuclear. Those border conflicts remain simmering.
Korea is not, however, packed with “massive amounts” of U.S. forces that would be needed in a conflict against China.
Moronic, somewhere around 30,000 us service members, not including DOD civilians and contractors, represent a massive logistical challenge that can only divert from other missions. A blockade of Taiwan would impact US supply to all forces in the region.
infantry and artillery forces that would not be relevant in Taiwan Strait or South China Sea scenarios.
I suppose when the working assumption is that the Chinese won’t be able to get on the island this is sensible…
In any case, the U.S. military can already redeploy units based in South Korea to other regions as needed, and it has done so in the past. In 2004, for example, a U.S. brigade moved from South Korea to Iraq.
Using an example of when the US had complete uncontested freedom of movement is naive at best. Somehow I got the suspicion that the Chinese with their massive arsenal of Anti-Access/Area Denial weaponry which they have developed for the sole purpose of keeping the Americans out would have an impact.
I could go on and on nitpicking every stupidity in this article, and I’ve already spent too much time. It really made me wonder who wrote this.
Denny Roy is a Senior Fellow at the East-West Center in Honolulu, specializing in Asia-Pacific strategic and security issues. He holds a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Chicago.
Christ, we’re fucked if this is the level of intellect in our “policy maker” caste, and “Dr.” Barry got his head so far up his ass he can’t see any light.
setnaffa
6 months ago
Barry is a norkophile, pro-Ukrainian genocide, and a bit of an antisemitic hack.
But other than that, he’s just no friend of South Korea.
Korean Man
6 months ago
Koreans would object to their government using any place in the country to conduct the test nuclear explosions that would be a necessary part of bomb development.
ha ha. Did Israel test detonate their bombs when they developed the nukes? I’ve heard this argument before, and it is out of pure ignorance. You don’t need to test anything, especially in the age of digital simulations, as well as the knowledge of the whole purpose of what the nukes are really for. It is not a matter of using them when the time comes. But it is a matter of giving the fear to the enemy that you have 4000 nukes in possession (unlike what the ignorant article claims, SK can produce 4000 nukes due to massive stockpiles of nuclear waste produced by the country’s sophisticated nuclear power plant industry) – which is something the enemy will think twice about before they dare to attack first. This is called deterrence through threats of mutual destruction.
80% of South Koreans, including the most staunch right-wing pro-American conservatives, are just tired of neverending US blackmail whenever a new President comes to power. If the US thinks Koreans will capitulate and grab at the US pants, to beg not to leave, they are sorely mistaken. By now, most Koreans are resigned to the fact that the only true defense is self-defense, as the US is no longer a reliable ally, and that the US troops leaving is inevitable. I think that US troops leaving will also free South Korea from being obligated to support every US policy that is against South Korean interests. There are no real allies, only self interests of nations.
Oh great, more of that current yearism lingo.
So why not revive U.S. defense production by supplying Taiwan? Why not revive U.S. defense production by supplying our own forces which no longer have the munitions required because they all got shipped to Ukraine? Countries only have so much defense production capacity before they start to cannibalize the civilian economy a la North Korean starvation. The US of today must chose who to supply, it can’t supply everyone.
There’s a reasonable argument to be made that antagonizing Russia and attempting to destroy them is the reason why the Russians are now a part of the “China Bloc”. Prior to the State Department coup in Ukraine, and the militarization of Ukraine as a bulwark against Russia, Russia was attempting to establish cooperative, if not outright friendly, relations with the West. They had a well established uneasy relation with the Chinese dating back to outright border conflicts that almost went nuclear. Those border conflicts remain simmering.
Moronic, somewhere around 30,000 us service members, not including DOD civilians and contractors, represent a massive logistical challenge that can only divert from other missions. A blockade of Taiwan would impact US supply to all forces in the region.
I suppose when the working assumption is that the Chinese won’t be able to get on the island this is sensible…
Using an example of when the US had complete uncontested freedom of movement is naive at best. Somehow I got the suspicion that the Chinese with their massive arsenal of Anti-Access/Area Denial weaponry which they have developed for the sole purpose of keeping the Americans out would have an impact.
I could go on and on nitpicking every stupidity in this article, and I’ve already spent too much time. It really made me wonder who wrote this.
Christ, we’re fucked if this is the level of intellect in our “policy maker” caste, and “Dr.” Barry got his head so far up his ass he can’t see any light.
Barry is a norkophile, pro-Ukrainian genocide, and a bit of an antisemitic hack.
But other than that, he’s just no friend of South Korea.
ha ha. Did Israel test detonate their bombs when they developed the nukes? I’ve heard this argument before, and it is out of pure ignorance. You don’t need to test anything, especially in the age of digital simulations, as well as the knowledge of the whole purpose of what the nukes are really for. It is not a matter of using them when the time comes. But it is a matter of giving the fear to the enemy that you have 4000 nukes in possession (unlike what the ignorant article claims, SK can produce 4000 nukes due to massive stockpiles of nuclear waste produced by the country’s sophisticated nuclear power plant industry) – which is something the enemy will think twice about before they dare to attack first. This is called deterrence through threats of mutual destruction.
80% of South Koreans, including the most staunch right-wing pro-American conservatives, are just tired of neverending US blackmail whenever a new President comes to power. If the US thinks Koreans will capitulate and grab at the US pants, to beg not to leave, they are sorely mistaken. By now, most Koreans are resigned to the fact that the only true defense is self-defense, as the US is no longer a reliable ally, and that the US troops leaving is inevitable. I think that US troops leaving will also free South Korea from being obligated to support every US policy that is against South Korean interests. There are no real allies, only self interests of nations.