Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

South Korea Prepares For the Worst ...
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 6:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oatmeal wrote:
Have a look at the topic of "American Militarism".
That might help balance the context. I don't think most people realize
here that North Korea is acting out of self-protection and they feel that
America is the one who is and always has been planning an invasion.
Unsurprisingly, America and their media machine have turned it around
and made it sound like America is being victimized and NK is being the aggressor.

Anyone remember what America did to the Marshall Islands and the people living there and their 67 nuclear tests?
Some links:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/02/bikini-atoll-nuclear-test-60-years?CMP=share_btn_fb

Prof. in University of Guam and writer from Hawaii on American Militarism as being the cause for the current problems around the world including North Korean issue:
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/09/bases-okinawa-guam-nuclear-targets-170906121731012.html


So much sunshine in this post, that I put on shades. Cool

More seriously, oatmeal has a point. The United States dropped more payloads on Korea during the war than it did on Europe during World War II.

That said, North Korea is still a rogue regime. Their conduct is still provocative. You can look beyond NATO to find condemnation of their nuclear testing.

http://indianexpress.com/article/world/north-korea-conducts-biggest-ever-nuclear-test-heres-how-international-community-reacted-4826972/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Rteacher



Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA

PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 5:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This article argues that the U.S. should have long since pressured China to stop helping NK via money-laundering through its banks (before it's reached a state where war seems at least probable if not inevitable ...)

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/war-with-north-korea-starts-to-look-inevitable/ar-AAs6MNh?li=AA4Zpp&ocid=spartandhp
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Rteacher



Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA

PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 7:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Trump's machismo speech at the UN, threatening to "totally destroy" North Korea among other ill-conceived strategies to stop "loser terrorists" did nothing to advance the cause of peace (or intelligence ...) http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-trump-united-nations-general-assembly-speech-20170919-story.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
young_clinton



Joined: 09 Sep 2009

PostPosted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 6:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rather than wipe NK off the map, they could wait till the next parade in Pyongyong and also target the border areas where the artillery are.

The games over. Nobody is going to sit back and let the North Koreans target Los Angeles if they can't have their own way with South Korea or Japan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rteacher



Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA

PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 9:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think you're probably right, but I don't think Seoul could be spared from massive casualties ... https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/trump-piles-economic-sanctions-against-north-korea-074857664--politics.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Rteacher



Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA

PostPosted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 2:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Some experts think war with NK is "more likely ... than ever" - which is really bad since we've already had a war with them ... https://www.yahoo.com/news/more-likely-war-north-korea-172606117.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Rteacher



Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA

PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 6:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

After his Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, highlighted some diplomatic channels that were still open with North Korea, Blunderer-in-Chief Trump quickly stomped out any sparks of hope along those lines ... http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/353359-trump-undermines-tillerson-with-north-korea-comments

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2017/10/trump_undermines_tillerson_on_north_korea_who_actually_speaks_for_u_s_foreign.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
geldedgoat



Joined: 05 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Trump is right on this. Negotiations may still save the peninsula from further conflict, but not with the North; the ideology keeping the Kim regime in power prevents any sort of compromise with the outside, non-Korean world. Instead, China and Russia are the ones who must be brought to the table. Trump appears to have the ability to walk his foot back out of his mouth to work with China, but I don't know if the belligerent Left has beaten the phantom horse of 'Russian election meddling' beyond any hope of reconciliation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rteacher



Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA

PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, after noting the evident failure of negotiations, Trump stated that "only one thing will work with North Korea"... Presumably, that would be the actual use of overpowering military force - which would surely result in massive casualties - or (ideally) using the credible threat of military action to pressure China to stop providing vital support to NK - which might work, but is a dangerous strategy with a (hot) head honcho like Trump, who seems inclined to quickly resort to nuclear weapons to get decisive military victory irrespective of the human costs involved ... https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/the-case-for-brinksmanship-with-north-korea/2017/10/06/f8f93da8-a958-11e7-b3aa-c0e2e1d41e38_story.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Rteacher



Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA

PostPosted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

After NK's latest missile test - which indicates it can deliver a nuclear payload to the U.S. east coast - war with North Korea looks more probable than ever ...
http://www.newsweek.com/were-headed-war-north-korea-lindsey-graham-warns-725279
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Wed Nov 29, 2017 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

geldedgoat wrote:
but I don't know if the belligerent Left has beaten the phantom horse of 'Russian election meddling' beyond any hope of reconciliation.


Do you read or watch any Leftists? I doubt it based on this remark. Most of the Russia hysteria comes from corporate Democrats or center-leftists like Rachel Maddow.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
geldedgoat



Joined: 05 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2017 8:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kuros wrote:
Do you read or watch any Leftists? I doubt it based on this remark. Most of the Russia hysteria comes from corporate Democrats or center-leftists like Rachel Maddow.

I think you would have to define the Left out of existence to defend this. It's a daily refrain for every host on Sirius XM's Progress station, including Stephanie Miller, Michaelangelo Signorile, Thom Hartmann, Dean Obeidallah, the Young Turks, and I'm guessing the others that happen to be on while I'm not in the car. As for print, even if a Slate article itself doesn't mention it, the readers in the comments are sure to bring it up if Trump is even remotely relevant to the topic of the article. If you don't consider any of these to be Leftist outlets, then I would be very interested to hear your definition.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fox



Joined: 04 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2017 3:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

geldedgoat wrote:
Kuros wrote:
Do you read or watch any Leftists? I doubt it based on this remark. Most of the Russia hysteria comes from corporate Democrats or center-leftists like Rachel Maddow.

I think you would have to define the Left out of existence to defend this. It's a daily refrain for every host on Sirius XM's Progress station, including Stephanie Miller, Michaelangelo Signorile, Thom Hartmann, Dean Obeidallah, the Young Turks, and I'm guessing the others that happen to be on while I'm not in the car. As for print, even if a Slate article itself doesn't mention it, the readers in the comments are sure to bring it up if Trump is even remotely relevant to the topic of the article. If you don't consider any of these to be Leftist outlets, then I would be very interested to hear your definition.


A notable exception might be the likes of Glen Greenwald? It seems to me that he has actively pushed back against the hysteria around Russia in a balanced fashion that rejects the method of operation without reaching dogmatic conclusions about the topic itself. Saying, "Ultimately I don't know, but the way you're going about this is wrong," is honest. I think there are a lot of people who lean "politically left" in a lot of ways who share his sentiments in that regard.

Part of me wants to say there's a kind of "civil war" going on inside of the American Left right now. On one side, you've got an alliance between the "corporate Democrats" and the "identity democrats." On the other hand, you've got the people who were excited about a hypothetical Bernie Sanders Presidency, but repulsed by the notion of a Clinton one. Those are rough categories, and they blend together, but there's a real distinction to be made I think. One could probably analyze it in terms of Blue Tribe vs Grey Tribe.

Quote:
The Red Tribe is most classically typified by conservative political beliefs, strong evangelical religious beliefs, creationism, opposing gay marriage, owning guns, eating steak, drinking Coca-Cola, driving SUVs, watching lots of TV, enjoying American football, getting conspicuously upset about terrorists and commies, marrying early, divorcing early, shouting “USA IS NUMBER ONE!!!”, and listening to country music.

The Blue Tribe is most classically typified by liberal political beliefs, vague agnosticism, supporting gay rights, thinking guns are barbaric, eating arugula, drinking fancy bottled water, driving Priuses, reading lots of books, being highly educated, mocking American football, feeling vaguely like they should like soccer but never really being able to get into it, getting conspicuously upset about sexists and bigots, marrying later, constantly pointing out how much more civilized European countries are than America, and listening to “everything except country”.

(There is a partly-formed attempt to spin off a Grey Tribe typified by libertarian political beliefs, Dawkins-style atheism, vague annoyance that the question of gay rights even comes up, eating paleo, drinking Soylent, calling in rides on Uber, reading lots of blogs, calling American football “sportsball”, getting conspicuously upset about the War on Drugs and the NSA, and listening to filk – but for our current purposes this is a distraction and they can safely be considered part of the Blue Tribe most of the time)


It's a point made somewhat in passing in a long essay, but no less the useful for it. Some in the comments section seem to treat "Grey Tribe" as if it reduces to "Libertarians," but I don't think that's the case. Libertarians are probably better classified as "Red Greys," while if anything, "Blue Greys" that would have just thought of themselves as "Blues" while I was growing up, but have felt increasingly uncomfortable with the direction of "Mainstream Blues" over time, are likely more common: people who share a lot of the same impulses as the "Mainstream Blues," but want to approach matters in a more systematic, principled fashion, which forces them to defect when a "the ends justify the means" approach is adopted by people with whom they otherwise might have found common ground.

In the context of this forum, I might hold up Leon ("Mainstream Blue") and myself ("Blue Grey") as examples. If we took a questionnaire, we'd agree on a lot -- in fact, we did take such a political questionnaire once, and had a huge amount of common ground if memory serves -- but he was happy to go along with things I simply can't, and likewise, I find myself open to possibilities to which he found himself objecting, and as a result, he's probably the poster with whom I have the most individual posts discussing disagreements. Expand that to a national level, and you've got the "Mainstream Blue"/"Blue Grey" divide, with all the acrimony entailed by it. Is it reasonable to turn campuses into extra-legal sex-crimes tribunals? A "Mainstream Blue" and a "Blue Grey" would probably probably disagree. Is it reasonable to try to resolve racial disparities in wealth and achievement using explicitly racial policies? A "Mainstream Blue" and a "Blue Grey" would probably probably disagree. Is it reasonable to respond to the impression that a certain police action was incorrect with massive protests and city-damaging riots? A "Mainstream Blue" and a "Blue Grey" would probably probably disagree. Is "diversity" even a legitimate, rational end in itself, rather than something it makes sense to which to be open? A "Mainstream Blue" and a "Blue Grey" would probably probably disagree. Does displacing citizens through free trade and mass immigration make sense? A "Mainstream Blue" and a "Blue Grey" would probably probably disagree. And so on and so forth. And lots of common ground as well, but even regarding that common ground, the intellectual method used to reach it probably differs enough that there's room for tensions to arise should those methods be discussed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
geldedgoat



Joined: 05 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2017 3:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fox wrote:
A notable exception might be the likes of Glen Greenwald?

Absolutely, though do you really not agree that he's notable because he is an exception? I try to be diligent about keeping a range of news sources, and with, again, the exception of Greenwald's Intercept, not only does no other "Leftish" outlet push back against the Russian hysteria, but they all have seemingly done their damnedest to make sure images of the KGB are conjured whenever Trump's name is mentioned.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fox



Joined: 04 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2017 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

geldedgoat wrote:
Fox wrote:
A notable exception might be the likes of Glen Greenwald?


Absolutely, though do you really not agree that he's notable because he is an exception? I try to be diligent about keeping a range of news sources, and with, again, the exception of Greenwald's Intercept, not only does no other "Leftish" outlet push back against the Russian hysteria, but they all have seemingly done their damnedest to make sure images of the KGB are conjured whenever Trump's name is mentioned.


Jacobin Magazine also seemed willing to push back against the Russian narrative, and they're both extremely "Left," fairly "belligerent," and at least somewhat "identitarian." Their motivations do seem less honest and more self-interested to me than those of Mr. Greenwald, though. Perhaps Kuros can provide some more examples; I keep the list of political news sources to which I refer fairly limited, so those two are the only ones which spring to mind for me in particular.

What I'd agree with is that the views about which you're talking are currently ascendant in the broader discourse, because it's the view of the corporate wing of the "Mainstream Blue" tribe, and that's where the money is. Perhaps the corporate/identitarian alliance specifically is what you meant by "belligerent Left," with the intention to exclude any other politically left-leaning individuals or groups?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2016 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International