Sex Among Allies reading

The part of Moon's reading that I found most troubling (though there were many parts that were upsetting ) was on pages 8-9 when she discusses the reasoning behind the Korean prostitutes being ignored and alienated from Korean culture. The reasons she discusses are political; she says that Korea does not want to acknowledge these women because doing so would remind them of the war and that these women are "living testaments of Korea's geographical and political division into North and South and of the South's military insecurity and consequent dependence on the United States" (8). It is really sad that these women are used so much for political and war-time purposes: first as prostitutes to American soldiers and then again because Korea views them not as humans, but as proof of their dependence on the US. She goes on to discuss how South Korea felt that it was necessary to have their women prostitute themselves to US soldiers to keep US soldiers in Korea; these women were sacrificed for 'national security': "Such humiliation is a price paid by the 'little brother' in the alliance for protection by the 'big brother' (9). I know that politically there needs to be clear alliances between countries if one country is fighting for or at another country, but to use people, especially people not involved in the politics of militarization, is really terrible, and the way South Korea exploited its women to US soldiers was unnecessary. To exploit their women and then alienate these women because they are an embarrassment to South Korea is hypocritical and even more insulting to these exploited women.

Navy Support Facility about Diego Garcia website

"The mission of the U.S. Navy Support Facility Diego Garcia is “To provide logistic support to operational forces forward deployed to the Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf AORs in support of national policy objectives.” NAVSUPPFAC Diego Garcia occupies a critical part on the “tip of the spear” for U.S. military forces by supporting a multitude of unique and challenging mission requirements. Our motto and mission focus is “ONE ISLAND, ONE TEAM, ONE MISSION.”

I find it really ironic that even as the US invades other countries and uses other people's land as military bases, they still use their basic recruitment slogan of "An Army of One". The slogan "ONE ISLAND, ONE TEAM, ONE MISSION.” has essentially the same message, and communicates the same idea of a group or team mentality within the US Military. I would assume that when the US Army takes over a part of a country and forces the residents of the area to either vacate or to significantly decrease their standard of living, that the US Army would try to detach themselves from this and hide what they are doing. Instead, they flaunt it by encouraging other people to take on their slogans and messages and rally behind the US Army. At first when I read these websites and the readings on Okinawa, I was angered at the US Army for what they were doing to the residents of Okinawa and Diego Garcia. But the fact that they pretend not to be aware of any negative consequences, and even worse, expect residents to support them, is disgusting. How can the US Army be so arrogant as to think that when they come in to Okinawa and Diego Garcia and ruin people's way of living, that these people should be thankful to the US Army and show their support? these residents are not part of our Army, and are not part of the "One Team" of the US Army. It is really sickening to see how the military even incorporates the island itself into their slogan: "One Island". The islands that are taken over by the US Military are not volunteering to be part of the US's expansion of military bases, so to include them in the US's slogan and suggest that they are part of the US's mission is even more insulting to the residents of the islands.

Okinawa reading/ general thoughts on political apathy

As I read the reading about America's military presence in Okinawa, I was continually angered at the negative consequences America's military has had on Okinawa. In thinking about this, I know that Okinawa is only one example of an area that has been taken over by American military forces, and that there are many other places that this is also happening. As informative as it was to read this, I wish that more would be written about other areas this is happening to. It seems that when something terrible world-wide occurs, we only focus on one area, using that area as a representation of what is happening world-wide and we forget that it is happening world-wide. Everyone recently has been eager to help Darfur, but at the same time forgetting that these things happen elsewhere as well, and focusing on the most infamous case doesn't make anything any better elsewhere.

On a somewhat related note, but more focused on the upcoming election, I've been seeing a lot of commercials lately encouraging people to make sure to vote on Tuesday. The majority of these commercials have celebrities in them, encouraging people to vote. Are we really in such an apathetic state that the only way people are encouraged to vote is by having someone famous tell them to do it? Or is it that we probably would vote but having a celebrity tell us to do it makes it even more appealing? Either way, it seems the state of apathy and ignorance is at an all-time high.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vtHwWReGU0