ROK Drop

Avatar of GI KoreaBy on January 13th, 2014 at 3:30 am

Cost Sharing Deal with ROK Less than US Wanted

The ROK has once again avoided equally sharing the USFK costs:

SEOUL (Reuters) – South Korea said on Sunday it had agreed to pay 920 billion won ($866.86 million) in 2014 towards the cost of the U.S. military presence in the country, a rise of 5.8 percent from a year ago.

U.S. and South Korean officials have struck a five-year cost sharing plan for 28,500 U.S. troops in the country after a series of negotiations since early last year. [Reuters]

ROK Heads may remember that USFK tried to get the ROK to pay roughly half of the upkeep costs at $1 Billion a year and once again the ROK negotiated their way out of it.

Tags: ,
- 940 views
34
  • ChickenHead
    5:03 am on January 13th, 2014 1

    Freedom isn’t free!

    But seriously…

    The key point here is, “Major sticking points include South Korea’s call to guarantee transparency of United States Forces Korea’s spending”

    After seeing the incredible fraud, waste, and abuse USFK allows (and even encourages), Korea is correct to ask exactly what the extra $200 million is going to be spent on.

    It seems USFK chose to remain secretive rather than get an extra $200 million… probably because if they were transparent in this matter, the Koreans would not only want their $200 million back but would want another couple hundred million that was leaked away on $60,000 stop signs, God-knows-how-many-thousand dollar LED lighting fixtures, stone chapels, unnecessary contracts to American relatives of officers for things GI Joe can (and should) be doing, etc.

    Combine this with the “we want $800 million so we will ask for $1 billion” mentality… and the story is probably not really “Korea Cheats America” as some would spin it.

  • King Baeksu
    6:41 am on January 13th, 2014 2

    Maybe Samsung can make up the difference? Heck, they probably piss away more than that amount every month just on lawsuits! :roll:

  • Tom
    7:30 am on January 13th, 2014 3

    #1, right on. The USFK wouldn’t come up with the answers to the valid questions, so no extra $134 million that they wanted.

    :x

  • Dr. Smith
    9:05 am on January 13th, 2014 4

    2- They probably piss away that much on soju and hookers.

  • Dr. Smith
    9:14 am on January 13th, 2014 5

    There’s nothing wrong with full accountability for public monies. No problem at all. The problem is that all of the excuses by South Korean administrations for refusing to pay 100% for their own national defense, even after stating that most of the funding is returned to the Korean economy, make little sense. They lose nothing by increasing their own payments, and, in fact, gain more independence from the “Evil waygookin.”

    Just more proof that we’re being played for suckers and it’s long past time for us to pack things up and go home.

  • Retired GI
    9:44 am on January 13th, 2014 6

    There is no reason for America to be spending any amount of money defending Korea.
    When will Korea grow up as a Nation and defend itself? Are Koreans so weak that they are unable to defend themselves? Or is it that Korea is happy to continue to use the ignorant Americans for every dollar it can get? Either way, Korea is not worth defending.

    Allow me to “fix it”.

    America says screw Korea, takes whatever of it’s equipment it deems worth taking, back to America and leave the rest to the Koreans.

    USFK reconstitutes itself into the “Southern Border Command” which has it’s Headquarters located near El Paso, TX. Zip code say at 79821.

    The hookers near El Paso are likely just as good as the Flips in Korea.

  • tbonetylr
    4:07 pm on January 13th, 2014 7

    CH, Koreans have zippo right to act like America’s mommy and daddy by asking it where and how it will spend the money it gives/owes. A mommy and daddy that can’t or won’t decide after 60+ years to defend itself.

  • flowsick
    4:17 pm on January 13th, 2014 8

    To all the people who think that USFK should just pack up and leave because they are being abused by South Korea should keep in mind that US has a vested interest in keeping troops here due to the billions of dollars in investments and trade that the US has in East Asia. US wants to keep the peace in this area. Look at the big picture people

  • Retired GI
    4:35 pm on January 13th, 2014 9

    The USFK should pick up and leave because it is past time we did so. We have been there since the end of WWII.

    When will Korea grow up? Oh wait, I forgot. It is about how much money they can suck off America.

    What “vested interest”? Keeping China out of Korea? That is not a “vested interest”. That is an Excuse. Nothing more.

  • Jake
    4:37 pm on January 13th, 2014 10

    The US will save more money if it forfeits its illegal aid to Egypt of $1 billion dollars.

    It is incredulous that the US will squeeze its allies like Japan and Korea regarding the “upkeep” of US bases in their LAND, while the US freely gives aid to terrorist producing and civilian killing Egyptian military. Japan and South Korea have stood by the US since WW2. Egpyt? They’re only there to milk the US

  • Retired GI
    4:51 pm on January 13th, 2014 11

    Oh I agree Jake. End aid to Egypt! Happy now? But end aid to Korea ALSO.

    Is that just fine with you Jake? Nice try at changing the subject also. You’re a true Liberal. ;-)

  • Jake
    5:00 pm on January 13th, 2014 12

    If you want a country that really milks the US: it is Egypt. If Egypt has no aid, it will go against Israel. If there is no USFK in South Korea, SK will not be blowing up the US

  • Jake
    5:04 pm on January 13th, 2014 13

    The US inserted itself in Korea, so why let Korea pay? The US could just pack up and South Korea will develop its own missiles, etc which the US does not permit. You might as well suggest that the US withdraw from Japan…which in turn will force Japan to abandon its pacifist constitution

    And poof! No more US influence/hegemony in the Western Pacific region

    Heh, seriously. Has the US forgotten the support that Korea gave to the US in its (failed) Vietnam intervention? Or how Korea supports the US in its illegal Iraq and Afghanistan war?

  • Retired GI
    5:06 pm on January 13th, 2014 14

    Typical Liberal. Ignores the question asked. Rambles mindlessly on their own topic.

  • Jake
    5:07 pm on January 13th, 2014 15

    It is easy for the US to squeeze countries like Korea and Japan compared to Egypt because the US is assured that neither Korea nor Japan will bomb the US. It’s pretty much the same with how the US DITCHED Taiwan aka Republic of China in favor of COMMUNIST China back in the 70s. If not for the US move, communist China will NOT have a seat at the UNSC

    Interestingly, I don’t hear people here calling for the end of aid to Israel, which is the US’ biggest recipient

  • Jake
    5:13 pm on January 13th, 2014 16

    Liberal? I am neither. I guess ultraconservatives cannot accept that what is happening right now is partly the fault of ultraconservatives.

    Why did the mullahs take over Iran? The US supported the ouster of the Shah. What happened after that? The mullahs followers seized the US Embassy and took Americans as their hostages. Who decided to have the one China policy? Ultra conservatives.

    Having the US bases in Japan and Korea is better than having that self destructive aid to Egypt. At least with US bases in Korea and Japan, the US maintain its hegemony in the region. But at least, if the aid were gone, Japan and Korea will not blow up the US.

    Meanwhile, in the case of Egypt. If the US aid stops, they will blow up the US and Israel.

    That is how South Korea is different from Egypt as an ally.

  • Retired GI
    5:14 pm on January 13th, 2014 17

    You really should have proof read comment #12

    Along with being a totally Liberal comment, it was filled with misinformation and ignorance. Oh wait, I do believe I repeated myself.

    And then on #14, you still rant mindlessly on your Liberal agenda. Which considering how well you did on #12 pretty much eliminates you as anything but a troll Jake.

    You never did answer my very simple question. Likely because you don’t have the knowledge or experience to answer.

  • Retired GI
    5:15 pm on January 13th, 2014 18

    Try harder next comment Jake. You bore me.

  • Jake
    5:16 pm on January 13th, 2014 19

    All you can say is “liberal agenda”. Now who’s being funny

  • Retired GI
    5:17 pm on January 13th, 2014 20

    I told you to try harder. You failed.

  • Jake
    5:25 pm on January 13th, 2014 21

    it is not my responsibility to convince you regarding my opinions. After all this is an open forum where people can voice out their opinions. It’s your problem if you agree with it or now.

    That being said, Japan and South Korea are not as opportunist allies as some people here make them out to be. If they are opportunists, then so is the US by trying to insert itself in almost very country in the world to watch after its “national interest” (and the interest of US businesses).

    Agreeing with having US bases in SOLID (not pretentious) allies like Japan and Korea for the US to be able to watch after its OWN interest is not liberal. It is more authentically conservative, but not the ridiculous neo-ultra-conservative.

    After all, the US will not be in Korea or Japan if not for its OWN interest. It’s just like the US having rotational troops in Thailand or Singapore. For its OWN interest. Not because it “pities” Thailand or Singapore

  • Jake
    5:28 pm on January 13th, 2014 22

    Ad hominem of the day : Your “liberal agenda”. :lol:

  • King Baeksu
    6:14 pm on January 13th, 2014 23

    Here’s how much South Korea appreciates the service and sacrifice of American military service members over the past seven decades::

    Park Geun-hye’s 2013 Presidential Address on Liberation Liberation Day:

    http://news.mofa.go.kr/enewspaper/mainview.php?mvid=1603&master=

    Lee Myung-bak’s 2012 Presidential Address on Liberation Liberation Day:

    http://www.korea.net/Government/Briefing-Room/Presidential-Speeches/view?articleId=101885

    Scandalous. Not a single mention of America in either speech, as if Korea somehow managed to liberate itself all on its own.

    Well, actually, there was one mention of America in Lee’s address — South America, that is:

    “A countless number of Koreans are putting the spirit of sharing into practice and giving selfless service in many parts of the world ranging from Africa to remote areas in Southeast Asia and South America.”

  • King Baeksu
    6:18 pm on January 13th, 2014 24

    *National Liberation Day

  • RockMarne
    6:46 pm on January 13th, 2014 25

    We provide aid to the Egyptians because it is in our national interest to do so. Specifically, we do not want yet another war between Egypt and Israel and the aid we pay helps the US by ensuring the Camp David Peace Accord is maintained. The last time the Egyptians and Israelis went to war, the price of gasoline in the USA tripled. Another war between those two nations would lead to 10-bucks-a-gallon gasoline in the USA which would put our economy into a free-fall. The billion dollars plus a year we provide Egypt is a bargain.

  • Denny
    7:09 pm on January 13th, 2014 26

    #17 almost all conservatives in the US support the US-Korea alliance.

    Back to the topic, US will never leave Korea, or Japan, for self interests.

  • Tom
    7:19 pm on January 13th, 2014 27

    In terms of payment per GDP, South Korea now leads the world in paying the Americans for their protection money.

    Germany’s payment to the US forces: $525 million or 0.016% of GDP

    Japan’s payment to the US forces: $3.5 billion or 0.064% of GDP

    South Korea’s payment to the US forces: $867 million or 0.066% of GDP

    and I think Japan hosts 3 times the number of US forces as Korea’s, while Japan hosts US marines, navy, and airforce, versus Korea’s 20,000 mostly ground forces.

    So the question is why do the Americans need so much money to host few ground troops? $43,000 per individual per mercenary soldiers not enough payment?

  • flowsick
    4:25 pm on January 14th, 2014 28

    GI retired, I am referring to the BILLIONS of dollars that the US has in trade and investments in Northeast Asia. If a war breaks out, the US economy will be severely affected.If you doubt this is true, read General Thurman’s report to Congress. It is not only keeping China out of Korea.

  • Retired GI
    4:32 pm on January 14th, 2014 29

    Thanks Flowsick. Good answer.

    However, I doubt it would be our undoing as a Nation. Obama has done more damage that whatever loss of Trade and investment would do.

  • tbonetylr
    7:52 am on January 16th, 2014 30

    Denny #26
    “never” sounds unbelievable, stupid, or both? To me, it’s both.

  • Retired GI
    8:20 am on January 16th, 2014 31

    #27 Tom, “So the question is why do the Americans need so much money to host few ground troops? $43,000 per individual per mercenary soldiers not enough payment?”

    No Tom, that is not the question.

    The question is; why does Korea need to be “defended”? From what? Then at what cost is Korea willing to pay to be protected?

    You Tom, compare the percent that one country is paying and say Korea is paying more.
    I say that all the countries you listed need to pay a solid 50% of the cost for their protection.
    After all, it is good business. Protection is a business. Korea and all countries that want America to perform a service form them need to pay for that service.

    You say Korea pays more than the rest. I say that all of you are taking advantage of America’s good nature and generosity. I also say that Korea is only a “far-weather friend, and therefore unworthy of the generosity of America. Sadly, I’m not in charge, so Korea has nothing to fear.
    If I were in charge, you would still have nothing to fear! I would make sure that all foreign service members were removed from Korea and Korea would be free to reunify with the North as soon as they wished. :lol: Then we would have zero problems about Korea’s percent of payment of “protection money.
    See, I fixed it.

  • setnaffa
    9:08 am on January 16th, 2014 32

    Retired GI still sounds fairly conservative (but wanting Korea to himself?), Tom still appears to be a shill for the PRC, Jake still appears to be a shill for the MB, and tbone is just tboning himself here. As usual. All we’re missing is someone pretending to be conservative urging swift and decisive military action against the short chubby guy in Pyongyang.

    I love the stability on this blog. :-D

  • ChickenHead
    9:10 am on January 16th, 2014 33

    Ladies and Gentlemen, step right up and get your very own American soldier.

    You can never have too much protection in a dangerous world like this and we are offering the most experienced soldiers on the market.

    How much do they cost, you ask? Just $43,000 each!

    Now you are probably thinking that is expensive but let me tell you what you get for that!

    You not only get a trained and experienced soldier with all the food he can eat, a place to live, medical care to keep him in top shape, and other benefits to keep him happy enough to give his life for whatever mischief you want to stir up…

    …but, if you buy now, we will throw in, with absolutely no additional cost, some tanks, jets, satellite infrastructure, and unlimited access to the umbrella of protection provided by some great big scary nuclear missiles buried in underground silos back at the call center.

    Is $43,000 too much? No, ladies and gentlemen, the question you should be asking yourself is just how we can provide these quality products at such a low, low price.

    * Offer only good for a limited time. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. Action figures sold separately. All models are over 18 years of age. Made in China.

  • setnaffa
    9:50 am on January 16th, 2014 34

    “Made in China.”

    I think that’s just sensitive electonics… The soldiers are typically assembled in America from a mixture of domestic and imported parts…

 

RSS feed for comments on this post | TrackBack URI

By submitting a comment here you grant this site a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution.

Bad Behavior has blocked 45492 access attempts in the last 7 days.