This darkknight weirdo keeps insisting we gave up something... we didn't lmao
I know.
"We gave up spending billions of dollars on military presence in a country that has never lead an attack on American soil"
This is bad?
Yes, it is.
South Korea pays half the costs of the American military presence stationed there, so it's not like the US is shouldering the full costs. More importantly, Seoul represents a power bulwark that has served to check China and North Korea's militaristic ambitions.
People seem to be forgetting that China is increasingly trying to lay claim to international waters that surround its territory, which are vital shipping lanes for the rest of the world (including America) and which would have significant economic effects if China were allowed to extend its influence into them. Or that North Korea, just a few years ago, torpedoed and sunk a fishing boat in South Korean waters. These sorts of actions absolutely justify a military presence in the region.
Far East Asia is a centre of power for the US, including America's own pacific territories as well as allies in Japan, Australia,New Zealand, and South Korea. I get that America is all about abdicating its international power these days, but surely at least someone on the conservative side of the political spectrum understands the inherent risks in this?
Not really, I mean you have people complaining that the US is too militaristic, then you have the same people complaining that we are reducing our military presence in South Korea. Which is it?
Plus, like you said with the nukes thing, it is all just a gentleman's agreement anyways. We want them to stop trying to make nukes, they want us out of South Korea. So that is what we agreed to. If one side doesn't keep their end of the bargain you can bet the other side is not going to either. ---
I am a senior software engineer. If you see me post here, I am tired of writing TPS reports.