I think we need to stay out of everyone else s problems. We already have most of the World Pissed off at us ,from our interference.
Its somewhat naive to expect the US to standby as hugely important strategic ally become embroiled in what would be a hugely costly war against a Chinese backed state ..so yes they would / should
I think that north korea should not be allowed to win. But I think the USA should hold back unless they are really needed.
As I understand the situation - we are still technically at a state of war with North Korea - if Obama wanted to, he could reopen the conflict without even going back to the congress to approve the action.<br />
As for whether we would, of course we would. We have a decent size cities worth of soldiers in South korea and Korea makes a lot of the parts we use in industry here. The loss of them as an ally would be very destructive to our economy.
When will you lot learn to stop interfering in everyone's else's business ?? Try sorting out some of the problems you have on your own doorstep for a change !!
Correct, but it is no different here in the UK. We have lots of problems here, social, immigration, financial, etc, and yet we go charging into other countries for one reason or another, we give billions to foreign aid, yet there are many deserving people here that need help first ! It wasn't meant as a dig at the USA, just everyone seems to want to interfere all the time !
What about them ?
South Korea is more than capable of dealing with north korea if it came to it. The problem would be where the other nations sympathies would lie. China and Russia have shown themselves to be sympathetic to N Korea mostly because of historical ties. Russia would probably stand back China would probably protest and keep a distance unless the US got involved and that is the problem. IF the US stayed out of it (in this hypothetical context) the regional countries would be able to sort it out easily and well. After all they are the ones wit the shared history, background and culture. The USA would be well advised to keep out of it and simply offer aide and assistance IF requested. As far as I know this is NATOs stance as well.
US troops shouldn't be there. What justification is there for an American presence there aside from the usual cold war hangovers which America seems to be very reluctant to let go of. If a war broke out I'd expect the American troops to render aid and assistance if requested, if the American military was willing to provide that assistance then fine otherwise the American government would remove their troops from the combat arena just as they would remove staff from their embassy. America does not have a mandate to provide security for the world or had you forgotten?
good question, I'm not sure whether it was part of the DMZ agreement or not. I'd have to look it up. Possibly..? Either way, in the event of an attack and only in my opinion, America for all it's good intentions would be better served by not getting involved. It's a no win situation for America and if S Korea, japan, china etc use that possible situation to settle their differences by uniting against N Korea WITHOUT American assistance it's a big win win for them and the rest of the World.
Why bother? These pacifists wouldn't even come to the aid of their own grandmother being beat up by a street thug, much less understand or even care about anything such as the UN Charter, how the Korean War started or our obligations under standing treatries, including the Mutual Defense Treaty we signed with South Korea in 1953.
Take it to a more recent question or post your own Becky, this question is nearly a year old. I'm sure a lot of people would be happy to discuss it with you.
North Korea has a problem with SOuth Korea because of the United states