Comments on: Korean Government Cuts Funds for USFK Relocation

By: jaku

jaku — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 01:40:53 +0000

HOW MUCH MONEY DOES KOREA’S GOVERNMENT HOLD!!!!!!!!!!

By: A Profile of USFK Camps in Seoul

A Profile of USFK Camps in Seoul — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:33:00 +0000

[...] original plan was to have the base relocated by 2008. However, technical problems and South Korean governmental delay games pushed the date of the relocation back to 2010, then 2013 and then finally back to 2012. Now there [...]

By: Operational Control Delay Game Begins at ROK Drop

Operational Control Delay Game Begins at ROK Drop — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 03:15:24 +0000

[...] Rumsfeld resigned the Korean government took advantage of the change in the Pentagon in order to cancel the USFK funding deal that had been reached just weeks before, delay the Camp Humphreys relocation, and most importantly [...]

By: MilBlogs (Daily Archive)

MilBlogs (Daily Archive) — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 02:31:34 +0000

[...] had some hints before that USFK was not happy about the announced Camp Humphreys delay and cutting of funds by the South Korean government and finally, the USFK commander has come out [...]

By: The Policy of Irrelevancy at ROK Drop

The Policy of Irrelevancy at ROK Drop — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 19:51:01 +0000

[...] If the Korean government cherished the US-ROK alliance so much then why did the Korean government unilaterally declare that the Camp Humphreys relocation is going to be delayed by 5 years from the agreed upon date and then not notify the USFK commander?Â General Bell first found out about the decision by reading the newspaper.Â If the Korean government cared about the US-ROK alliance why did they cut the agreed upon money for the upkeep of the US-ROK alliance only weeks after making a cost sharing agreement?Â [...]

By: Korea’s Looking to Add to UNESCO Sites, Is Dokdo Next? at ROK Drop

Korea’s Looking to Add to UNESCO Sites, Is Dokdo Next? at ROK Drop — Fri, 05 Jan 2007 23:10:20 +0000

[...] This wouldn’t be the first time an area has been given UNESCO recognition that was controversial.Â Look no further than the ancient Korean kingdom of Koguryo enshrined by China in 2004.Â The claiming of the Koguryo kingdom by China has been hotly contested by Korean scholars and UNESCO enshrined it anyway in the name of China.Â What better way than UNESCO recognition to settle the Dokdo dispute?Â No more talk about old, inaccurate maps, no more ex-pats losing their jobs over disputing Dokdo ownership, no more people chopping off their fingers, no more bee man, no more disrespecting Japanese flags by Korean politicians, just generally no more wackiness over Dokdo.Â However, I don’t see it happening because Korean politicians don’t want to settle the Dokdo issue just like they don’t want to settle the Yongsan Garrison issue either, because it provides them an issue that is easy to manipulate to promote nationalism within the general Korean population to their own political advantage.Â [...]

By: usinkorea

usinkorea — Mon, 01 Jan 2007 06:07:59 +0000

"This all very similar with what the Pentagon wants to do in Korea. Decrease soldiers, close down camps, and consolidate what is left."

1st – thanks for the info.

I was interested in how this would shape up when it all began a decade ago, but dragging out as it inevitably would, I can't find the interest enough to keep up with it.

You knew from the very start, there would be pressure from all sides to drag the thing out as long as possible.

Whether it is a community in the US or Germany or South Korea, when the reality of the economic hit an area will take when it loses a US base, and people start contemplating that big chunk of money flowing into the commuity, and jobs are lost, and shops have to think about business with no GI and family customers —- the idea of NIBY quickly goes out the window….

By: GI Korea

GI Korea — Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:44:31 +0000

Units from the 1st Infantry Division and the 1st Armored Division have either already moved or currently in the middle of moving from Germany to CONUS and were replaced with the 2ACR from Ft. Lewis, WA which arrived in Germany this past summer. Removing two divisions of soldiers and replacing them with just one cavalry regiment is huge decrease in soldiers. The huge decrease allowed a number of military installations to be shut down in Germany. This all very similar with what the Pentagon wants to do in Korea. Decrease soldiers, close down camps, and consolidate what is left.

Italy is home to the 173rd Airborne brigade and Spain is home to a small naval base at Rota which neither is going to close.

By: usinkorea

usinkorea — Sun, 31 Dec 2006 08:12:57 +0000

What transformation did he do in Europe?

I have no idea, really.

I don't think we downsized in a major way in Germany.

Are we still in Italy? I'm pretty sure we're still in Spain since I had an uncle by marriage who was a reservist and frequently went to Spain.

I remember hearing some talk by Rumsfeld and others about downsizing in Europe and shifting troops to places like Poland, but I never heard anything about any of it really coming about.

That is another aspect of the whole USFK thing:

there was that commission that took a decade-long look at US bases all over the world and was supposed to lead to a large amount of base closings everywhere including the US –

—but the only news I remember hearing about it concerned Plans. I can't think off the top of my head of a single instance of a big base closing that I caught in the news.

By: GI Korea

GI Korea — Sun, 31 Dec 2006 05:25:52 +0000

I know General Bell was specifically brought in to conduct USFK transformation because Rumsfeld was impressed with his efforts in Europe in transforming US forces there. General Bell has been determined on shaking things up in Korea but now it appears the Pentagon has put USFK on the back burner and it is 24/7 Iraq again.