General Synod resolution asks church to advocate for unifying Korean peninsula

[Correll]

The possibility is there but the OP was calling for a shift in the US policy as a step in achieving this. That is not really a possibility unless the region is surrendered to the northern government.
Again, I ask what shift in policy do they want to happen? North Korea is not really open to reasonable peace considering they are the most militarized nation on earth.

2. Furthermore, we commit ourselves to take actions to:

• a) Work with our governments to mandate the United Nations Security Council to initiate new efforts for peace-building across the Korean Peninsula and to lift the existing economic and financial sanctions imposed on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea;

• b) Embark upon a universal campaign for a Peace Treaty to replace the Armistice Agreement of 1953, bringing an end to the state of war;

• c) Call upon all foreign powers in the region to participate in a creative process for building peace on the Korean peninsula by halting all military exercises on the Korean peninsula, by ceasing their interventions and reducing military expenditures;

• d) Ensure the complete, verifiable and irreversible elimination of all nuclear weapons and power plants in -North East Asia, by taking steps to establish a Nuclear-Free World and simultaneously joining the emerging international consensus for a humanitarian ban on nuclear weapons in all regions of the world, so that life is no longer threatened by nuclear dangers anywhere on earth;

• e) Urge the governments in both North and South Korea to restore human community with justice and human dignity by overcoming injustice and confrontation, and to heal human community by urgently addressing the humanitarian issue of separated families, by establishing a sustainable process allowing confirmation of the whereabouts of family members and free exchanges of letters and visits, and by offering the support of international agencies where necessary; and
• f) Work with the governments of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Republic of Korea in providing international cooperation to maintain a truly Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) and transform it into a zone of peace.
• Statement on Korean Reunification by the World Council of Churches

Lots of platitude no real points. Lift the economic sanctions? IN an attempt to accomplish what? Do you really think that the north will be more open to the world when there is less pressure to do so?

Nuclear de-arming of North East Asia? WTF does that have to do with normalizing relations with Korea? How does that help with the nuclear situation there where the button is controlled by a dictator?

This list contains no real solutions other than removing the sanctions and to be frank, I don't see how that is a step forward when the north is not willing to change anything.

First of all, I'm not sure why you would expect more from this group. The vast majority of their writings contain bible verses as justification.

By the same token, I'm not sure what you think economic sanctions have accomplished or why you think you have the right to force a country to be more "open to the world". If ever there was a platitude that would be it.

The people didn't ask for this. The US have any real need of South Korea. It's a buffer state.

The fact that "the vast majority of their writings contain bible verses as justification" is not reason to expect their stated goals to be the crap we saw here.

THat is nothing but your negative opinion of religious people.

THe US has no need of South Korea at this point. Our alliance with them is a relic of the Cold War.

Correll, I appreciate that you want to go 'round. But, you need to really get an argument together. I'm not the one demonstrating a negative opinion of religious people here. That's you.

I have no negative opinion of religious people.

If your statement regarding citing the bible as reason to not expect "more" from this group was not a slam on them for being religious, what was it?

 

[Disir]

2. Furthermore, we commit ourselves to take actions to:

• a) Work with our governments to mandate the United Nations Security Council to initiate new efforts for peace-building across the Korean Peninsula and to lift the existing economic and financial sanctions imposed on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea;

• b) Embark upon a universal campaign for a Peace Treaty to replace the Armistice Agreement of 1953, bringing an end to the state of war;

• c) Call upon all foreign powers in the region to participate in a creative process for building peace on the Korean peninsula by halting all military exercises on the Korean peninsula, by ceasing their interventions and reducing military expenditures;

• d) Ensure the complete, verifiable and irreversible elimination of all nuclear weapons and power plants in -North East Asia, by taking steps to establish a Nuclear-Free World and simultaneously joining the emerging international consensus for a humanitarian ban on nuclear weapons in all regions of the world, so that life is no longer threatened by nuclear dangers anywhere on earth;

• e) Urge the governments in both North and South Korea to restore human community with justice and human dignity by overcoming injustice and confrontation, and to heal human community by urgently addressing the humanitarian issue of separated families, by establishing a sustainable process allowing confirmation of the whereabouts of family members and free exchanges of letters and visits, and by offering the support of international agencies where necessary; and
• f) Work with the governments of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Republic of Korea in providing international cooperation to maintain a truly Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) and transform it into a zone of peace.
• Statement on Korean Reunification by the World Council of Churches

Lots of platitude no real points. Lift the economic sanctions? IN an attempt to accomplish what? Do you really think that the north will be more open to the world when there is less pressure to do so?

Nuclear de-arming of North East Asia? WTF does that have to do with normalizing relations with Korea? How does that help with the nuclear situation there where the button is controlled by a dictator?

This list contains no real solutions other than removing the sanctions and to be frank, I don't see how that is a step forward when the north is not willing to change anything.

First of all, I'm not sure why you would expect more from this group. The vast majority of their writings contain bible verses as justification.

By the same token, I'm not sure what you think economic sanctions have accomplished or why you think you have the right to force a country to be more "open to the world". If ever there was a platitude that would be it.

The people didn't ask for this. The US have any real need of South Korea. It's a buffer state.

The fact that "the vast majority of their writings contain bible verses as justification" is not reason to expect their stated goals to be the crap we saw here.

THat is nothing but your negative opinion of religious people.

THe US has no need of South Korea at this point. Our alliance with them is a relic of the Cold War.

Correll, I appreciate that you want to go 'round. But, you need to really get an argument together. I'm not the one demonstrating a negative opinion of religious people here. That's you.

I have no negative opinion of religious people.

If your statement regarding citing the bible as reason to not expect "more" from this group was not a slam on them for being religious, what was it?

Their target group at the moment, and the agreements were formed with, other Christians. You don't use bible verses as a justification for change in any policy when your target audience are those that develop or maintain existing policy.

 

[Correll]

Lots of platitude no real points. Lift the economic sanctions? IN an attempt to accomplish what? Do you really think that the north will be more open to the world when there is less pressure to do so?

Nuclear de-arming of North East Asia? WTF does that have to do with normalizing relations with Korea? How does that help with the nuclear situation there where the button is controlled by a dictator?

This list contains no real solutions other than removing the sanctions and to be frank, I don't see how that is a step forward when the north is not willing to change anything.

First of all, I'm not sure why you would expect more from this group. The vast majority of their writings contain bible verses as justification.

By the same token, I'm not sure what you think economic sanctions have accomplished or why you think you have the right to force a country to be more "open to the world". If ever there was a platitude that would be it.

The people didn't ask for this. The US have any real need of South Korea. It's a buffer state.

The fact that "the vast majority of their writings contain bible verses as justification" is not reason to expect their stated goals to be the crap we saw here.

THat is nothing but your negative opinion of religious people.

THe US has no need of South Korea at this point. Our alliance with them is a relic of the Cold War.

Correll, I appreciate that you want to go 'round. But, you need to really get an argument together. I'm not the one demonstrating a negative opinion of religious people here. That's you.

I have no negative opinion of religious people.

If your statement regarding citing the bible as reason to not expect "more" from this group was not a slam on them for being religious, what was it?

Their target group at the moment, and the agreements were formed with, other Christians. You don't use bible verses as a justification for change in any policy when your target audience are those that develop or maintain existing policy.

Such public statements are meant to get the public to pressure policy makers to develop policy.

As the majority of this nation, and most of their demands were US centered, are Christian, why should you NOT use bible verses as a justification?

 

[Disir]

First of all, I'm not sure why you would expect more from this group. The vast majority of their writings contain bible verses as justification.

By the same token, I'm not sure what you think economic sanctions have accomplished or why you think you have the right to force a country to be more "open to the world". If ever there was a platitude that would be it.

The people didn't ask for this. The US have any real need of South Korea. It's a buffer state.

The fact that "the vast majority of their writings contain bible verses as justification" is not reason to expect their stated goals to be the crap we saw here.

THat is nothing but your negative opinion of religious people.

THe US has no need of South Korea at this point. Our alliance with them is a relic of the Cold War.

Correll, I appreciate that you want to go 'round. But, you need to really get an argument together. I'm not the one demonstrating a negative opinion of religious people here. That's you.

I have no negative opinion of religious people.

If your statement regarding citing the bible as reason to not expect "more" from this group was not a slam on them for being religious, what was it?

Their target group at the moment, and the agreements were formed with, other Christians. You don't use bible verses as a justification for change in any policy when your target audience are those that develop or maintain existing policy.

Such public statements are meant to get the public to pressure policy makers to develop policy.

As the majority of this nation, and most of their demands were US centered, are Christian, why should you NOT use bible verses as a justification?

Because they aren't considered justifications in that realm.

First, most of their pressure is US centered because..........they are primarily from the US. They can't very well go to another country and pressure their leaders. Secondly, the Sanctions are in place from the US. South Korea is not pleased the US is there.

 

[Correll]

The fact that "the vast majority of their writings contain bible verses as justification" is not reason to expect their stated goals to be the crap we saw here.

THat is nothing but your negative opinion of religious people.

THe US has no need of South Korea at this point. Our alliance with them is a relic of the Cold War.

Correll, I appreciate that you want to go 'round. But, you need to really get an argument together. I'm not the one demonstrating a negative opinion of religious people here. That's you.

I have no negative opinion of religious people.

If your statement regarding citing the bible as reason to not expect "more" from this group was not a slam on them for being religious, what was it?

Their target group at the moment, and the agreements were formed with, other Christians. You don't use bible verses as a justification for change in any policy when your target audience are those that develop or maintain existing policy.

Such public statements are meant to get the public to pressure policy makers to develop policy.

As the majority of this nation, and most of their demands were US centered, are Christian, why should you NOT use bible verses as a justification?

Because they aren't considered justifications in that realm.

First, most of their pressure is US centered because..........they are primarily from the US. They can't very well go to another country and pressure their leaders. Secondly, the Sanctions are in place from the US. South Korea is not pleased the US is there.

1. Other Christians might consider them justifications. Which is the majority of this nation's voters and leaders. Hell, Obama claims to be quite religious.

2. Their pressure is US centered because they have accepted the meme that the US is the problem.

3. Sure, they can pressure other countries. Plenty of Christians around the world, it is the largest religion in the world.

4. SOuth Korea can ask US to leave anytime they want.

 

[Disir]

Correll, I appreciate that you want to go 'round. But, you need to really get an argument together. I'm not the one demonstrating a negative opinion of religious people here. That's you.

I have no negative opinion of religious people.

If your statement regarding citing the bible as reason to not expect "more" from this group was not a slam on them for being religious, what was it?

Their target group at the moment, and the agreements were formed with, other Christians. You don't use bible verses as a justification for change in any policy when your target audience are those that develop or maintain existing policy.

Such public statements are meant to get the public to pressure policy makers to develop policy.

As the majority of this nation, and most of their demands were US centered, are Christian, why should you NOT use bible verses as a justification?

Because they aren't considered justifications in that realm.

First, most of their pressure is US centered because..........they are primarily from the US. They can't very well go to another country and pressure their leaders. Secondly, the Sanctions are in place from the US. South Korea is not pleased the US is there.

1. Other Christians might consider them justifications. Which is the majority of this nation's voters and leaders. Hell, Obama claims to be quite religious.

2. Their pressure is US centered because they have accepted the meme that the US is the problem.

3. Sure, they can pressure other countries. Plenty of Christians around the world, it is the largest religion in the world.

4. SOuth Korea can ask US to leave anytime they want.

1. That's nice and that is the primary audience of the OP. The bible is not a legitimate source in international relations or political science.

2. The US is still there because South Korea is a buffer state. Location and strategic interests.

3. The synod from the OP is meeting in the US.

4. Only trying to be arranged since 2006.

 

[Correll]

I have no negative opinion of religious people.

If your statement regarding citing the bible as reason to not expect "more" from this group was not a slam on them for being religious, what was it?

Their target group at the moment, and the agreements were formed with, other Christians. You don't use bible verses as a justification for change in any policy when your target audience are those that develop or maintain existing policy.

Such public statements are meant to get the public to pressure policy makers to develop policy.

As the majority of this nation, and most of their demands were US centered, are Christian, why should you NOT use bible verses as a justification?

Because they aren't considered justifications in that realm.

First, most of their pressure is US centered because..........they are primarily from the US. They can't very well go to another country and pressure their leaders. Secondly, the Sanctions are in place from the US. South Korea is not pleased the US is there.

1. Other Christians might consider them justifications. Which is the majority of this nation's voters and leaders. Hell, Obama claims to be quite religious.

2. Their pressure is US centered because they have accepted the meme that the US is the problem.

3. Sure, they can pressure other countries. Plenty of Christians around the world, it is the largest religion in the world.

4. SOuth Korea can ask US to leave anytime they want.

1. That's nice and that is the primary audience of the OP. The bible is not a legitimate source in international relations or political science.

2. The US is still there because South Korea is a buffer state. Location and strategic interests.

3. The synod from the OP is meeting in the US.

4. Only trying to be arranged since 2006.

1. Really? What do you base that on?

2. Buffer State? It is the worst place to try to balance China. The ONE PLACE where the Massive Chinese army can be brought against US troops.

3. And from the US they can communicate to Christians all over the World.

4. What's hold them up? TEll US to get out, if that's what they want. We aren't going to stay against their will.

 

[Manonthestreet]

why cant Obama just declare peace, pull our troops out and then dump on the South because they prefer to be free which really shouldnt factor in or get in the way of feel good stupidity

 

[Disir]

Their target group at the moment, and the agreements were formed with, other Christians. You don't use bible verses as a justification for change in any policy when your target audience are those that develop or maintain existing policy.

Such public statements are meant to get the public to pressure policy makers to develop policy.

As the majority of this nation, and most of their demands were US centered, are Christian, why should you NOT use bible verses as a justification?

Because they aren't considered justifications in that realm.

First, most of their pressure is US centered because..........they are primarily from the US. They can't very well go to another country and pressure their leaders. Secondly, the Sanctions are in place from the US. South Korea is not pleased the US is there.

1. Other Christians might consider them justifications. Which is the majority of this nation's voters and leaders. Hell, Obama claims to be quite religious.

2. Their pressure is US centered because they have accepted the meme that the US is the problem.

3. Sure, they can pressure other countries. Plenty of Christians around the world, it is the largest religion in the world.

4. SOuth Korea can ask US to leave anytime they want.

1. That's nice and that is the primary audience of the OP. The bible is not a legitimate source in international relations or political science.

2. The US is still there because South Korea is a buffer state. Location and strategic interests.

3. The synod from the OP is meeting in the US.

4. Only trying to be arranged since 2006.

1. Really? What do you base that on?

2. Buffer State? It is the worst place to try to balance China. The ONE PLACE where the Massive Chinese army can be brought against US troops.

3. And from the US they can communicate to Christians all over the World.

4. What's hold them up? TEll US to get out, if that's what they want. We aren't going to stay against their will.

1. Foreign Policy
Historical Documents - Office of the Historian
The National Security Archive

2. So you say. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to have been the case leading up to now.

3. Acknowledged in the OP. Not relevant here.

4. Never ending delays.
Young South Koreans want U.S. to get out Presence of GIs American influence there rankle youth - SFGate

IMF policies leading to foreign control of Asian countries

North Korea refuses to come to the table unless the US leaves. South Korea wants the same nuclear capabilities as North Korea but cannot. Every time the date is set, amazingly enough a new threat comes to the fore.

 

[Picaro]

Yes, well, it's very fashionista and trendy to pretend the U.S. is some Big Giant Evil on the planet and young people, being especially gullible, are nearly all about fashion. Pulling out of Korea will just end up like we pulled out of the Philippines; within in year or so they're jumping up and down demanding we come back, because of the Chinese threats. The same would happen with S. Korea.

The North breaks off negotiations as a matter of routine. The South won't do any better on its own; those Koreans are just delusional if they believe they can. There is only one factor that will cause the North to fold its tent, and that is the Chinese withholding their aid and refusing to tale in any more N. Korean refugees.

It would be nice if the U.S. could just abandon these asshats to their usual fates, but both attempts at neutrality and isolationist fantasia in the last century ended up with war being declared and foreign gunboats off our shores sinking ships, so it's still much cheaper and safer for the U.S. to play the main role as a hegemon; we've seen the results of a weak response to aggression many times over.

 

[Picaro]

2. Buffer State? It is the worst place to try to balance China. The ONE PLACE where the Massive Chinese army can be brought against US troops.

Well, it's important because it sits across a narrow strait from Japan, and is also handy for monitoring the naval bases at Vladivostok as well. China may sabre rattle a lot, especially with such a weak President, but it will stop short of attacking U.S. military assets.

3. And from the US they can communicate to Christians all over the World.

4. What's hold them up? TEll US to get out, if that's what they want. We aren't going to stay against their will.

Pretty much spot on.

 

[Correll]

Such public statements are meant to get the public to pressure policy makers to develop policy.

As the majority of this nation, and most of their demands were US centered, are Christian, why should you NOT use bible verses as a justification?

Because they aren't considered justifications in that realm.

First, most of their pressure is US centered because..........they are primarily from the US. They can't very well go to another country and pressure their leaders. Secondly, the Sanctions are in place from the US. South Korea is not pleased the US is there.

1. Other Christians might consider them justifications. Which is the majority of this nation's voters and leaders. Hell, Obama claims to be quite religious.

2. Their pressure is US centered because they have accepted the meme that the US is the problem.

3. Sure, they can pressure other countries. Plenty of Christians around the world, it is the largest religion in the world.

4. SOuth Korea can ask US to leave anytime they want.

1. That's nice and that is the primary audience of the OP. The bible is not a legitimate source in international relations or political science.

2. The US is still there because South Korea is a buffer state. Location and strategic interests.

3. The synod from the OP is meeting in the US.

4. Only trying to be arranged since 2006.

1. Really? What do you base that on?

2. Buffer State? It is the worst place to try to balance China. The ONE PLACE where the Massive Chinese army can be brought against US troops.

3. And from the US they can communicate to Christians all over the World.

4. What's hold them up? TEll US to get out, if that's what they want. We aren't going to stay against their will.

1. Foreign Policy
Historical Documents - Office of the Historian
The National Security Archive

2. So you say. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to have been the case leading up to now.

3. Acknowledged in the OP. Not relevant here.

4. Never ending delays.
Young South Koreans want U.S. to get out Presence of GIs American influence there rankle youth - SFGate

IMF policies leading to foreign control of Asian countries

North Korea refuses to come to the table unless the US leaves. South Korea wants the same nuclear capabilities as North Korea but cannot. Every time the date is set, amazingly enough a new threat comes to the fore.

1. NOt very convincing. Were any of them not Christians?

2. The COld War policy of Containment was the reason for our involvement. Cold War is over.

3. You stated the reason they were focused on America policy was because they were here. THat fact that they can call out to their fellow Christians in other nations is relevant to that.

4. As I expected. Younger Koreans want the US out, not Korea. Any time that they manage to get the rest of South Korea to craft policy to their liking they can ask US to leave and we will ASAP. It's called democracy. Older Koreans count too.

 

[Disir]

Yes, well, it's very fashionista and trendy to pretend the U.S. is some Big Giant Evil on the planet and young people, being especially gullible, are nearly all about fashion. Pulling out of Korea will just end up like we pulled out of the Philippines; within in year or so they're jumping up and down demanding we come back, because of the Chinese threats. The same would happen with S. Korea.

The North breaks off negotiations as a matter of routine. The South won't do any better on its own; those Koreans are just delusional if they believe they can. There is only one factor that will cause the North to fold its tent, and that is the Chinese withholding their aid and refusing to tale in any more N. Korean refugees.

It would be nice if the U.S. could just abandon these asshats to their usual fates, but both attempts at neutrality and isolationist fantasia in the last century ended up with war being declared and foreign gunboats off our shores sinking ships, so it's still much cheaper and safer for the U.S. to play the main role as a hegemon; we've seen the results of a weak response to aggression many times over.

Sovereignty is fashonista? Who knew?

 

[Disir]

Because they aren't considered justifications in that realm.

First, most of their pressure is US centered because..........they are primarily from the US. They can't very well go to another country and pressure their leaders. Secondly, the Sanctions are in place from the US. South Korea is not pleased the US is there.

1. Other Christians might consider them justifications. Which is the majority of this nation's voters and leaders. Hell, Obama claims to be quite religious.

2. Their pressure is US centered because they have accepted the meme that the US is the problem.

3. Sure, they can pressure other countries. Plenty of Christians around the world, it is the largest religion in the world.

4. SOuth Korea can ask US to leave anytime they want.

1. That's nice and that is the primary audience of the OP. The bible is not a legitimate source in international relations or political science.

2. The US is still there because South Korea is a buffer state. Location and strategic interests.

3. The synod from the OP is meeting in the US.

4. Only trying to be arranged since 2006.

1. Really? What do you base that on?

2. Buffer State? It is the worst place to try to balance China. The ONE PLACE where the Massive Chinese army can be brought against US troops.

3. And from the US they can communicate to Christians all over the World.

4. What's hold them up? TEll US to get out, if that's what they want. We aren't going to stay against their will.

1. Foreign Policy
Historical Documents - Office of the Historian
The National Security Archive

2. So you say. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to have been the case leading up to now.

3. Acknowledged in the OP. Not relevant here.

4. Never ending delays.
Young South Koreans want U.S. to get out Presence of GIs American influence there rankle youth - SFGate

IMF policies leading to foreign control of Asian countries

North Korea refuses to come to the table unless the US leaves. South Korea wants the same nuclear capabilities as North Korea but cannot. Every time the date is set, amazingly enough a new threat comes to the fore.

1. NOt very convincing. Were any of them not Christians?

2. The COld War policy of Containment was the reason for our involvement. Cold War is over.

3. You stated the reason they were focused on America policy was because they were here. THat fact that they can call out to their fellow Christians in other nations is relevant to that.

4. As I expected. Younger Koreans want the US out, not Korea. Any time that they manage to get the rest of South Korea to craft policy to their liking they can ask US to leave and we will ASAP. It's called democracy. Older Koreans count too.

Then start studying foreign policy.

There are older ones that are calling for unification or at the very least a peace treaty.

 

[Picaro]

Yes, well, it's very fashionista and trendy to pretend the U.S. is some Big Giant Evil on the planet and young people, being especially gullible, are nearly all about fashion. Pulling out of Korea will just end up like we pulled out of the Philippines; within in year or so they're jumping up and down demanding we come back, because of the Chinese threats. The same would happen with S. Korea.

The North breaks off negotiations as a matter of routine. The South won't do any better on its own; those Koreans are just delusional if they believe they can. There is only one factor that will cause the North to fold its tent, and that is the Chinese withholding their aid and refusing to tale in any more N. Korean refugees.

It would be nice if the U.S. could just abandon these asshats to their usual fates, but both attempts at neutrality and isolationist fantasia in the last century ended up with war being declared and foreign gunboats off our shores sinking ships, so it's still much cheaper and safer for the U.S. to play the main role as a hegemon; we've seen the results of a weak response to aggression many times over.

Sovereignty is fashonista? Who knew?

Babbling baseless memes that the U.S. is violating their sovereignty is indeed fashionable, and not just in Korea. It's also rather ridiculous to complain about it when the the backing of the U.S. is the only reason S. Korea exists as a country in the first place, instead of a Chinese colony.

 

[Disir]

Yes, well, it's very fashionista and trendy to pretend the U.S. is some Big Giant Evil on the planet and young people, being especially gullible, are nearly all about fashion. Pulling out of Korea will just end up like we pulled out of the Philippines; within in year or so they're jumping up and down demanding we come back, because of the Chinese threats. The same would happen with S. Korea.

The North breaks off negotiations as a matter of routine. The South won't do any better on its own; those Koreans are just delusional if they believe they can. There is only one factor that will cause the North to fold its tent, and that is the Chinese withholding their aid and refusing to tale in any more N. Korean refugees.

It would be nice if the U.S. could just abandon these asshats to their usual fates, but both attempts at neutrality and isolationist fantasia in the last century ended up with war being declared and foreign gunboats off our shores sinking ships, so it's still much cheaper and safer for the U.S. to play the main role as a hegemon; we've seen the results of a weak response to aggression many times over.

Sovereignty is fashonista? Who knew?

Babbling baseless memes that the U.S. is violating their sovereignty is indeed fashionable, and not just in Korea. It's also rather ridiculous to complain about it when the the backing of the U.S. is the only reason S. Korea exists as a country in the first place, instead of a Chinese colony.

Seriously? Yep, I can see how people that have been disconnected from their families is all about fashionable.

 

[Correll]

1. Other Christians might consider them justifications. Which is the majority of this nation's voters and leaders. Hell, Obama claims to be quite religious.

2. Their pressure is US centered because they have accepted the meme that the US is the problem.

3. Sure, they can pressure other countries. Plenty of Christians around the world, it is the largest religion in the world.

4. SOuth Korea can ask US to leave anytime they want.

1. That's nice and that is the primary audience of the OP. The bible is not a legitimate source in international relations or political science.

2. The US is still there because South Korea is a buffer state. Location and strategic interests.

3. The synod from the OP is meeting in the US.

4. Only trying to be arranged since 2006.

1. Really? What do you base that on?

2. Buffer State? It is the worst place to try to balance China. The ONE PLACE where the Massive Chinese army can be brought against US troops.

3. And from the US they can communicate to Christians all over the World.

4. What's hold them up? TEll US to get out, if that's what they want. We aren't going to stay against their will.

1. Foreign Policy
Historical Documents - Office of the Historian
The National Security Archive

2. So you say. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to have been the case leading up to now.

3. Acknowledged in the OP. Not relevant here.

4. Never ending delays.
Young South Koreans want U.S. to get out Presence of GIs American influence there rankle youth - SFGate

IMF policies leading to foreign control of Asian countries

North Korea refuses to come to the table unless the US leaves. South Korea wants the same nuclear capabilities as North Korea but cannot. Every time the date is set, amazingly enough a new threat comes to the fore.

1. NOt very convincing. Were any of them not Christians?

2. The COld War policy of Containment was the reason for our involvement. Cold War is over.

3. You stated the reason they were focused on America policy was because they were here. THat fact that they can call out to their fellow Christians in other nations is relevant to that.

4. As I expected. Younger Koreans want the US out, not Korea. Any time that they manage to get the rest of South Korea to craft policy to their liking they can ask US to leave and we will ASAP. It's called democracy. Older Koreans count too.

Then start studying foreign policy.

There are older ones that are calling for unification or at the very least a peace treaty.

In a country of almost 50 million? I'm sure there is some.

South Korea is a democracy. Have the democratically elected leaders of South Korean ever asked US to leave?

 

[Disir]

1. That's nice and that is the primary audience of the OP. The bible is not a legitimate source in international relations or political science.

2. The US is still there because South Korea is a buffer state. Location and strategic interests.

3. The synod from the OP is meeting in the US.

4. Only trying to be arranged since 2006.

1. Really? What do you base that on?

2. Buffer State? It is the worst place to try to balance China. The ONE PLACE where the Massive Chinese army can be brought against US troops.

3. And from the US they can communicate to Christians all over the World.

4. What's hold them up? TEll US to get out, if that's what they want. We aren't going to stay against their will.

1. Foreign Policy
Historical Documents - Office of the Historian
The National Security Archive

2. So you say. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to have been the case leading up to now.

3. Acknowledged in the OP. Not relevant here.

4. Never ending delays.
Young South Koreans want U.S. to get out Presence of GIs American influence there rankle youth - SFGate

IMF policies leading to foreign control of Asian countries

North Korea refuses to come to the table unless the US leaves. South Korea wants the same nuclear capabilities as North Korea but cannot. Every time the date is set, amazingly enough a new threat comes to the fore.

1. NOt very convincing. Were any of them not Christians?

2. The COld War policy of Containment was the reason for our involvement. Cold War is over.

3. You stated the reason they were focused on America policy was because they were here. THat fact that they can call out to their fellow Christians in other nations is relevant to that.

4. As I expected. Younger Koreans want the US out, not Korea. Any time that they manage to get the rest of South Korea to craft policy to their liking they can ask US to leave and we will ASAP. It's called democracy. Older Koreans count too.

Then start studying foreign policy.

There are older ones that are calling for unification or at the very least a peace treaty.

In a country of almost 50 million? I'm sure there is some.

South Korea is a democracy. Have the democratically elected leaders of South Korean ever asked US to leave?

Again. Delays.

 

[Correll]

1. Really? What do you base that on?

2. Buffer State? It is the worst place to try to balance China. The ONE PLACE where the Massive Chinese army can be brought against US troops.

3. And from the US they can communicate to Christians all over the World.

4. What's hold them up? TEll US to get out, if that's what they want. We aren't going to stay against their will.

1. Foreign Policy
Historical Documents - Office of the Historian
The National Security Archive

2. So you say. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to have been the case leading up to now.

3. Acknowledged in the OP. Not relevant here.

4. Never ending delays.
Young South Koreans want U.S. to get out Presence of GIs American influence there rankle youth - SFGate

IMF policies leading to foreign control of Asian countries

North Korea refuses to come to the table unless the US leaves. South Korea wants the same nuclear capabilities as North Korea but cannot. Every time the date is set, amazingly enough a new threat comes to the fore.

1. NOt very convincing. Were any of them not Christians?

2. The COld War policy of Containment was the reason for our involvement. Cold War is over.

3. You stated the reason they were focused on America policy was because they were here. THat fact that they can call out to their fellow Christians in other nations is relevant to that.

4. As I expected. Younger Koreans want the US out, not Korea. Any time that they manage to get the rest of South Korea to craft policy to their liking they can ask US to leave and we will ASAP. It's called democracy. Older Koreans count too.

Then start studying foreign policy.

There are older ones that are calling for unification or at the very least a peace treaty.

In a country of almost 50 million? I'm sure there is some.

South Korea is a democracy. Have the democratically elected leaders of South Korean ever asked US to leave?

Again. Delays.

RIght, so their democratically elected government has NOT asked US to leave, and is still formally allied with US.


Democracy. IT's the Will of the People.

 

[Disir]

1. Foreign Policy
Historical Documents - Office of the Historian
The National Security Archive

2. So you say. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to have been the case leading up to now.

3. Acknowledged in the OP. Not relevant here.

4. Never ending delays.
Young South Koreans want U.S. to get out Presence of GIs American influence there rankle youth - SFGate

IMF policies leading to foreign control of Asian countries

North Korea refuses to come to the table unless the US leaves. South Korea wants the same nuclear capabilities as North Korea but cannot. Every time the date is set, amazingly enough a new threat comes to the fore.

1. NOt very convincing. Were any of them not Christians?

2. The COld War policy of Containment was the reason for our involvement. Cold War is over.

3. You stated the reason they were focused on America policy was because they were here. THat fact that they can call out to their fellow Christians in other nations is relevant to that.

4. As I expected. Younger Koreans want the US out, not Korea. Any time that they manage to get the rest of South Korea to craft policy to their liking they can ask US to leave and we will ASAP. It's called democracy. Older Koreans count too.

Then start studying foreign policy.

There are older ones that are calling for unification or at the very least a peace treaty.

In a country of almost 50 million? I'm sure there is some.

South Korea is a democracy. Have the democratically elected leaders of South Korean ever asked US to leave?

Again. Delays.

RIght, so their democratically elected government has NOT asked US to leave, and is still formally allied with US.


Democracy. IT's the Will of the People.

South Korea is controlled by the US. Nice try though.