> The presence of troops does not imply an occupation. 70 years "presence" of troops does. > If you mistakenly think it does, then (among other things) you'll

> The presence of troops does not imply an occupation. 70 years "presence" of troops does. > If you mistakenly think it does, then (among other things) you'll be unable to perceive alliances. That's a nice way of saying vassalage. If it was china occupying south korea for 70 years, we'd call that occupation. If it was russia occupying south korea for 70 years, we'd call that occupation. Somehow, when we do it, it's an "alliance".