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

A Korean's viewpoint
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 10, 11, 12  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
komerican



Joined: 17 Dec 2006

PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 10:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Squire wrote:
I do believe it's time for US troops to pull out of Korea. If they aren't going to go in and topple KJI they may aswell not be here.



The quid pro quo for any pull out would have to be a nuclear armed SK. And since the devil you know is better than the one you don't know the US is willing to muddle on with the status quo. SK actually thought about getting nukes in the 90s but Carter put the kibosh on that. As long as non-proliferation is the policy in NE Asia I don’t see the US going anywhere.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ajosshi



Joined: 17 Jan 2011
Location: ajosshi.com

PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 10:43 pm    Post subject: Re: A Korean's viewpoint Reply with quote

nate1983 wrote:
ajosshi wrote:
nate1983 wrote:
PeteJB wrote:
Foreign influence has had a history of not benefiting Korea.


Then why would she travel thousands of miles and spend a boatload of money to be influenced by foreign education?

And talking about "her country" giving Americans jobs? At least that's the free market at work. Presumably, she is not working in my country, but reaping the benefits of its infrastructure and education system, both heavily supported by US taxpayer dollars.

Not getting any thing for free. Foreign students pay full price. Their fees partly offset fees charged to residents. Also, the "infrastructure" is paid by taxed spending. Foreigners spend just like any other citizen. They don't get jack for free.


I'm guessing you're not American, because then you would know that U.S. education, even at nominally "private" schools, is heavily supported through state and federal tax money. And whose taxes are paying for the nice clean streets and policemen to keep her safe at night? Not hers. And you could argue that her place in that school is taking away a spot for us to educate one of our own.

I don't have any issue with our government using its money to support our foreign guests - what I don't like is the double standard this girl applies, as in it's okay for her to come over here and study in these nice schools, but she then criticizes people actually making a contribution to Korean society are "relying on her country."

Quote:

[color=green]The girl is 17. The U.S. Army private is 21.


I had read somewhere the girl was 18 or, and I remembered the guy was 20 or 21. Perhaps the girl's Korean age was given, as I first read a Korean article about it - if you say she was 17, I'll take your word for it, and I'll admit it makes it more serious.


I'm a U.S. citizen and familiar with how schools work. I used to teach graduate students at an engineering school. I also concentrated on taxation during law school, so I'm familiar with the concept.

Let's take UCs, for example. A California resident would pay about 12. A foreigner would pay about 35. That's about triple the resident tuition. Yes, you can argue that the foreigner is taking a spot away, but the opposite can also be true. Because of the foreigner, a school has the needed funds to accommodate more of their residents.

Street sweepers? A city's DOT would derive their funding from several sources. They would include general funds, state and federal subsidies from fuel taxes, state registration fees, and sales and business taxes. If a foreign student drives (registration fees, sales tax on vehicle, fuel taxes, etc.), then they are a contributor.

Police protection? That's paid by property taxes, sales tax, and any special assessments by the city, a.k.a., more taxes. Assuming that foreign students live any place under a roof, they directly or indirectly pay property taxes. They also pay sales tax and contribute to the economy by buying things needed to live.

As for the age of the Korean girl, yea, they were reporting her Korean age as 18.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ajosshi



Joined: 17 Jan 2011
Location: ajosshi.com

PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 10:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

komerican wrote:
Squire wrote:
I do believe it's time for US troops to pull out of Korea. If they aren't going to go in and topple KJI they may aswell not be here.



The quid pro quo for any pull out would have to be a nuclear armed SK. And since the devil you know is better than the one you don't know the US is willing to muddle on with the status quo. SK actually thought about getting nukes in the 90s but Carter put the kibosh on that. As long as non-proliferation is the policy in NE Asia I don’t see the US going anywhere.


I'd bet my last dime that SK is already nuclear.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Weigookin74



Joined: 26 Oct 2009

PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 11:28 pm    Post subject: Re: A Korean's viewpoint Reply with quote

highstreet wrote:
Weigookin74 wrote:
ajosshi wrote:
nate1983 wrote:
PeteJB wrote:
Foreign influence has had a history of not benefiting Korea.


Then why would she travel thousands of miles and spend a boatload of money to be influenced by foreign education?

And talking about "her country" giving Americans jobs? At least that's the free market at work. Presumably, she is not working in my country, but reaping the benefits of its infrastructure and education system, both heavily supported by US taxpayer dollars.

Not getting any thing for free. Foreign students pay full price. Their fees partly offset fees charged to residents. Also, the "infrastructure" is paid by taxed spending. Foreigners spend just like any other citizen. They don't get jack for free.

Furthermore, she twists her words very neatly - the "young girl" and "US soldier" from what I hear were only a year or two apart in age, and while I'm certainly neither condoning nor defending his malfeasance, I don't see how she's trying to make it out as some abomination that Korean college guys never try with similar-aged girls.

The girl is 17. The U.S. Army private is 21.

The U.S. Army private has admitted to the following:

1. Stalking females
2. Checked for female shoes before breaking in
3. Used an instrument to break in
4. Holding the female against her will
5. Beating the girl with the instrument used to break in with (causing severe lacerations)
6. Raping her for 4 hours
7. Claimed he was too drunk to remember what happened

Based on the facts, I don't see any bias.


She sounds like some typical college student who has a sudden epiphany that she's figured out all that's wrong with the world - only now, thanks to this blogging phenomenon, she exposes others to her drivel.

Those are merely her opinions. I'd say several of them are valid.


Let me also add, there is a lot of rape here of college girls. The Korean guys who do it, rarely get prosecuted. Korean guys tell the girls, I'm your senior, you have to drink more and more. I'm your senior professor, you must have coffee with me, etc. You get the idea. I have a Korean speaking foriegn friend who works high up in the university world here (not an English teacher) who has filled me in some of this stuff.

What the soldier did was wrong, but would a Korean be equally prosecuted? Many a Korean female are scared of rape here at night where it's considered ok and cops don't always take it seriously. How many ajossis used the "drunk" excuse. It's an outrage if a Western person does it, but not for Koreans?

I've heard stories of female high school students having sex with their male teachers and it's the girl who has to change schools. Male teacher doesn't really get punished. Again, my Korean speaking foriegn friend who knows many people, including many Korean friends has filled me in on this stuff. But if a foriegner did that, well, our ^&&** would be cut off and thrown into the East sea.


Doesn't matter that Korean guys also do it. He's a US soldier in a foreign country. That's why it's such a big deal.


I'm not defending the soldiers behavior. But maybe people ought to be punished equally. Maybe Koreans should get as outraged when it comes from a Korean guy too. Why can they use the "drunk" excuse and get away with it? Just seems kind of racist to me. For the record, I do hope the soldier goes to jail for this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rollo



Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China

PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 11:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

U.S troops will remain as long as China, Russia, and Japan want them to remain! As far as North Korea's military it is a joke. No food no fuel, really no defese against air strikes. As long as Korea is devided and U.S. troops are here Japan fees safe and will not bulk up its military. So China and Russia feel safer and do not have to spend as much on defese in the region. A united Korea without U.s. troops would be dominated by either China, Japan or Russia and who ever controls kOREA CONTROLS THE SEA AND AIR LANES IN THE REGION. Look at a map. When the U.S leaves or Korea unites a war is coming.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Leon



Joined: 31 May 2010

PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:03 am    Post subject: Re: A Korean's viewpoint Reply with quote

Weigookin74 wrote:
highstreet wrote:
Weigookin74 wrote:
ajosshi wrote:
nate1983 wrote:
PeteJB wrote:
Foreign influence has had a history of not benefiting Korea.


Then why would she travel thousands of miles and spend a boatload of money to be influenced by foreign education?

And talking about "her country" giving Americans jobs? At least that's the free market at work. Presumably, she is not working in my country, but reaping the benefits of its infrastructure and education system, both heavily supported by US taxpayer dollars.

Not getting any thing for free. Foreign students pay full price. Their fees partly offset fees charged to residents. Also, the "infrastructure" is paid by taxed spending. Foreigners spend just like any other citizen. They don't get jack for free.

Furthermore, she twists her words very neatly - the "young girl" and "US soldier" from what I hear were only a year or two apart in age, and while I'm certainly neither condoning nor defending his malfeasance, I don't see how she's trying to make it out as some abomination that Korean college guys never try with similar-aged girls.

The girl is 17. The U.S. Army private is 21.

The U.S. Army private has admitted to the following:

1. Stalking females
2. Checked for female shoes before breaking in
3. Used an instrument to break in
4. Holding the female against her will
5. Beating the girl with the instrument used to break in with (causing severe lacerations)
6. Raping her for 4 hours
7. Claimed he was too drunk to remember what happened

Based on the facts, I don't see any bias.


She sounds like some typical college student who has a sudden epiphany that she's figured out all that's wrong with the world - only now, thanks to this blogging phenomenon, she exposes others to her drivel.

Those are merely her opinions. I'd say several of them are valid.


Let me also add, there is a lot of rape here of college girls. The Korean guys who do it, rarely get prosecuted. Korean guys tell the girls, I'm your senior, you have to drink more and more. I'm your senior professor, you must have coffee with me, etc. You get the idea. I have a Korean speaking foriegn friend who works high up in the university world here (not an English teacher) who has filled me in some of this stuff.

What the soldier did was wrong, but would a Korean be equally prosecuted? Many a Korean female are scared of rape here at night where it's considered ok and cops don't always take it seriously. How many ajossis used the "drunk" excuse. It's an outrage if a Western person does it, but not for Koreans?

I've heard stories of female high school students having sex with their male teachers and it's the girl who has to change schools. Male teacher doesn't really get punished. Again, my Korean speaking foriegn friend who knows many people, including many Korean friends has filled me in on this stuff. But if a foriegner did that, well, our ^&&** would be cut off and thrown into the East sea.


Doesn't matter that Korean guys also do it. He's a US soldier in a foreign country. That's why it's such a big deal.


I'm not defending the soldiers behavior. But maybe people ought to be punished equally. Maybe Koreans should get as outraged when it comes from a Korean guy too. Why can they use the "drunk" excuse and get away with it? Just seems kind of racist to me. For the record, I do hope the soldier goes to jail for this.


It's not really racist as much as it is nationalist. Imagine the uproar if there were foreign soldiers in America.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Captain Corea



Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul

PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fermentation wrote:
Yay, an argument that's interesting to me.

Steelrails wrote:
South Korean military is "advanced".
Are we sure about this? From the guys that I've talked to that recently finished their service, "advanced" would not be the word they'd use to describe it.


1. I wouldn't say lightyears ahead like Steelrails but compared to the NK, definitely advanced. Especially the Air Force. Compared to the US, no, but thank god the US is on our side. Our tanks and self-propelled artillery have automated reloading systems and laser range finders, which is rare in NK equipment. ROK Army standard K1A1 can accurately hit targets at 1-2km, while moving. Older tanks can't do that. Our F15Ks are much, much more advanced than anything in the NKAF's arsenal. ROK Army units have radios down to the squad level (even to teams in SO units) but even regular NKA squads don't. Which means squads have to run to eachother to communicate. yeah, I think we're more advanced than the NK.

Quote:
North Korea equipment is antiquated.
A gun is a gun. If it shoots, it can kill. They may not have precision bombing, but they've proven time and time again that their 'antiquated weapons' are able to take on "newer" foes. Need I post links to recent fights?


2. Which fights are referring to? If you're referring to the recent insurgency in Afghanistan, then you're comparing the wrong war to Korea. Weapon systems and tactics apply to the situation at hand. Insurgents and guerilla warfare have worked against more advanced foes but in the case of Korea, we're talking about a full-scare conventional war, which isn't comparable at all to Afghanistan. It'll be more comparable to the Invasion of Iraq in 2003, in which coalition forces completely defeated the larger Iraqi military in 12 days in a conventional war.

Quote:
South Korean forces are well/better trained.
Um... seriously??


3. Against North Korea, yes. I've said regarding my military experience that ROK Army training is seriously lacking but this is compared to the US military or other nations that regularly send troops to combat. I don't think the average ROK conscript is ready for combat but the same goes for the average NK conscript. We're both conscripts but at least we're better fed, and we actually get to train once in while. But a comparison of figher pilots will give you a better picture: the average ROKAF pilot gets 500 hours of flight per year. The average NKAF pilot gets four due to the lack of fuel.
[/quote]

1. The problems with words like using 'Advanced' is that we are comparing it to different things. Are the ROK's forces 'advanced' compared to North Korea's? Sure, in most ways. Are they 'Advanced' in general terms? Well, and someone who just ini shed serving, why don't you answer that. You had radios down to the squad level (as an example)... how does that compare to the US, and how effectively were they used?

2. I was referring to the North's repeated attacks on the South, and their ability to cause damage.... even with 'antiquated systems'.

3. In another thread you went on for some time talking about ... pathetic the training was. Now you are saying it is better than that of the North. When it comes to piloting hours, I have no doubt you are correct, but when it comes to humping over hills... would you really say that the ROK's forces are so much better trained?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steelrails



Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System

PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So whose military and infrastructure would you rather have? The Norks or the SKs?

If you choose NKs, that's just laughable. There is a SERIOUS gap in capability.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nate1983



Joined: 30 Mar 2008

PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 2:57 am    Post subject: Re: A Korean's viewpoint Reply with quote

ajosshi wrote:

I'm a U.S. citizen and familiar with how schools work. I used to teach graduate students at an engineering school. I also concentrated on taxation during law school, so I'm familiar with the concept.

Let's take UCs, for example. A California resident would pay about 12. A foreigner would pay about 35. That's about triple the resident tuition. Yes, you can argue that the foreigner is taking a spot away, but the opposite can also be true. Because of the foreigner, a school has the needed funds to accommodate more of their residents.

Street sweepers? A city's DOT would derive their funding from several sources. They would include general funds, state and federal subsidies from fuel taxes, state registration fees, and sales and business taxes. If a foreign student drives (registration fees, sales tax on vehicle, fuel taxes, etc.), then they are a contributor.


Foreigners at UCs pay exactly the same as I would, and there is still a difference to be made up. Even if every student paid full ticket price, that still wouldn't cover it, and this difference comes from government sources. I had TA-ships and fellowships in grad school, and without exception similarly qualified foreigners were given the same funding. I don't know who this girl is, but she very well could be included in that group, which means she would be receiving substantial assistance. And even if she is not, part of her cohort is, and as I'm sure you know, foreigners are over-represented in [funded] graduate programs compared to undergrad. Again, I have absolutely no issues with these policies, but it's the irony of her position that it's "justifiable for Koreans to be wary of foreigners because [blah blah blah]," yet she plops herself down as a foreigner over in the states with no qualms about it at all.

I don't know where you got street-sweeper from; besides the fact that most foreign students don't drive cars, I was referring to the incredible cost needed to build and maintain our whole infrastructure, rather than some guy picking up cigarette butts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Captain Corea



Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul

PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 3:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steelrails wrote:
So whose military and infrastructure would you rather have? The Norks or the SKs?

If you choose NKs, that's just laughable. There is a SERIOUS gap in capability.


By all means, show me where I said that ANYWHERE in this thread. Heck, you could even look through my thousands of posts on this forum to see if I EVER said it.

Go ahead. Search. I'll wait.









Oh....

you were setting up a straw man. I get it.

Don't bother.

I was commenting on the post in the OP.

You remember, this quote:
Quote:
Furthermore the South Korean defense forces are well trained and advanced, while the North relies on antiquated weaponry from China and Russia. In terms of equipment the North wouldn’t be able to stand up to the South. Secondly, given the opportunity a large amount of North Korean soldiers would defect to the South’s ranks.


The North wouldn't be able to stand up to the South and a large amount of Nork soldiers would switch sides.

Those are the points I took issue with. No need to insert your own into my mouth.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hsaeoa



Joined: 13 Jan 2010
Location: Daegu

PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 3:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The South Korean government would never want the US military to pull out. Let's forget about the security concerns and think about the economical impact the troops leaving. First thousands and thousands of Korean citizens work on the military bases. Second all the soldiers, contractors, dependents spend loads and loads of money on the local economies. Third all of the base towns that exist because the military would disappear. In the bigger cities like Seoul the military would not have much impact, but the smaller towns especially north of Seoul would suffer hardships if they left.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Reggie



Joined: 21 Sep 2009

PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 4:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As an American taxpayer, I'm all for the US military to pull out of South Korea, leaving behind the rapist to face prosecution.

I don't think the North Korean military is necessarily a joke just because their equipment is antiquated. Their equipment is surely more advanced than the Taliban's and the North Koreans have many, many times more personnel than the Taliban. The Taliban don't even have shoes, but they're going to win the war in Afghanistan because they're tough. For all we know, the North Koreans could be tough too. They live hard lives, from all accounts. South Korea's forces are probably much softer than America's forces and are certainly softer than North Korea's.

If she's going to say one rapist is a reflection American soldiers in Korea, then she needs to be consistent and associate herself with the South Korean university student who went on a mass murder spree at Virginia Tech.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rollo



Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China

PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 4:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The taliban might win the war, but it is because they are backed by Pakistan. The war in Afghanistan is a proxy war fought between India and Pakistan. You are comparing apples and oranges. The North in a conventional war just has no chance at all against the South. Supply problems, equipment problems and the South would totally dominate the air. THe Norths cities , ports and suppy lines would be pounded. In Afganistan we are trying to swat mosquitos with a sledge hammer. but the sledge would be very effective against the North.

The day the U.s. troops leave , Japan would start building up its militarty. In fact they have been bulking up for the last ten years just in case that happens. China of course would respond, Russia would of course move more troops, planes, ships to the far East. Russia and Japan have been spitting at each other for the last two years and of course the Japanese and the Chinese , well there is no love lost there. The problem is that Korea is right in the middle. So despite the criminal behavior of some psychopath the U.S military is staying.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Seoulman69



Joined: 14 Dec 2009

PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Better the USA's girlfriend than China's bitch. If she thinks life with the Americans is bad then wait until her beloved China takes over.

Quote:
And remember the Korean Army has a core of combat experienced senior officers left over from the Vietnam-era, the Norks lack that.


Excellent! Senior officers of a war they lost. North Korea will never start an all out war. They are too clever. They would fight in a similar fashion to the Taliban. Most wars will be fought in this way from now on and America needs to start realising it or else they are going to keep losing.

The rapist should rot in a prison along side the many Korean rapists who all too often are given a shockingly leniant sentence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steelrails



Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System

PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Captain Corea wrote:
Steelrails wrote:
So whose military and infrastructure would you rather have? The Norks or the SKs?

If you choose NKs, that's just laughable. There is a SERIOUS gap in capability.


By all means, show me where I said that ANYWHERE in this thread. Heck, you could even look through my thousands of posts on this forum to see if I EVER said it.

Go ahead. Search. I'll wait.









Oh....

you were setting up a straw man. I get it.

Don't bother.

I was commenting on the post in the OP.

You remember, this quote:
Quote:
Furthermore the South Korean defense forces are well trained and advanced, while the North relies on antiquated weaponry from China and Russia. In terms of equipment the North wouldn’t be able to stand up to the South. Secondly, given the opportunity a large amount of North Korean soldiers would defect to the South’s ranks.


The North wouldn't be able to stand up to the South and a large amount of Nork soldiers would switch sides.

Those are the points I took issue with. No need to insert your own into my mouth.


Fair enough Cap'N.

The North WOULD be able to stand up to the North in a defensive war.

And as is clear from the record, I agree that the claim that the North would switch sides is questionable at best.

But I think the essence of the comparison between Nork and SK combat capabilities favors the assessment that the SKs would hold a significant if not decisive advantage.

Quote:
Excellent! Senior officers of a war they lost. North Korea will never start an all out war. They are too clever. They would fight in a similar fashion to the Taliban. Most wars will be fought in this way from now on and America needs to start realising it or else they are going to keep losing.


Two parts

1)The record of ROK Army/Marine performance in Vietnam is quite good. The SKs excelled at COIN operations in Vietnam, precisely the type of operations they would have to carry out in an 'anti-Taliban' operation.

I would gladly have my SK troops trained by the officers and NCOs of the Vietnam era. Combat experience is combat experience. To add to that you have SKs limited involvement in Afghanistan engaging in, yes, COIN and nation-building operations.

But yes, blah blah blah, Million man Army and they lost Vietnam, blah blah blah. I know this kind of poster, it reminds me of the guy who said "watch out for their million men and JEEPS storming across the DMZ" or "their artillery can pulverize them", ignoring the history of indiscriminate mass bombardments for the past 300 years of warfare...

Seriously, where is mc_jc, rest his soul. For all the hate he got on this forum, anyone with half a clue about military operations could realize that he knew what he was talking about.

Instead we have the "million man storm" crowd.... Rolling Eyes
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 -> General Discussion Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 3 of 12

 
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 © 2013 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