Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Not the South Korea we thought we knew

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Not the South Korea we thought we knew
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

butlerian

Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Location: Korea

Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 2:06 am Post subject:

BJWD wrote:

Anti-America vs Anti-American eh? Should you, if you fancy yourself a thinking individual, be a tad more careful?

Are you saying that "America", meaning the governmental institutions must be opposed always due to them being American? A bit simplistic, isn't it?

Of course it is overly-simplistic, but this is hardly the place to develop academic rigour. This is a public thread for anyone to use, and so the language should be similarly appropriate. For those wanting to go into more detail, there are more specific places to engage in these kinds of issues.

thepeel

Joined: 08 Aug 2004

Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 2:07 am Post subject:

That wasn't much of an answer.

butlerian

Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Location: Korea

Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 2:13 am Post subject:

BJWD wrote:

That wasn't much of an answer.

My apologies. I'm currently in Bangkok during my vacation and having too much fun doing terribly unproductive things. That'll change next week when I go back to work. I hope to be much more focused then and ready for battle.

thepeel

Joined: 08 Aug 2004

Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 2:18 am Post subject:

Nobody wants to battle. I just thought it was simplistic. Now head over to KSR and get your jiggy on with the legions of unemployable yet globally mobile hords. Always a good time!

butlerian

Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Location: Korea

Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 2:25 am Post subject:

BJWD wrote:

Nobody wants to battle. I just thought it was simplistic.

Now head over to KSR and get your jiggy on with the legions of unemployable yet globally mobile hords. Always a good time!

Unfortunately, I'll be heading over very soon. I love Thailand, but the money is not enough for me just yet. But, yes, Dave's is the place for the rather dubious people that call themselves teachers in Korea - including myself, of course - and so I shall soon return! I just hope that a year from now I'll be writing this as a new teacher at a good job in Thailand.

Dome Vans
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 3:25 am Post subject:

BJWD wrote:

Quote:

A bit simplistic, isn't it?

Simplistic, everything nowadays has become simplistic, summed up by the great man himself:

"You're either with us or against us"

or "Good and Evil"

Hell, it's that simple. It's even rubbed off on Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee.

Quote:

The US has all the right enemies including you.

We are all evil by that definition.

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 9:55 am Post subject:

Quote:

"You're either with us or against us"

What it means is that if a nation wants to have normal diplomatic and trade relations with the US then they ought to be willing to help out in the war on terror.

Quote:

Behind Algeria, on a score of 110.55, come North Korea, Burma, Indonesia, Libya, Colombia, Syria, Iraq, Yugoslavia and China. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan and Nigeria follow closely. The United Kingdom comes 141st; a good score on a global basis but not so admirable when compared with other rich, industrialised countries - we ar

Quote:

e seventh out of 23.

t scores 10 out of 10 on denial of majority rights because of gassing the Kurds.

A country with a wretched record of human rights abuse could score a maximum total of 190. Saddam Hussein's Iraq proves the winner of the unmodified list - which measures human rights abuses outside of their economic context - with an unadjusted score of 155.

http://www.algeria-watch.org/mrv/mrvrap/observe4.htm

Why is it that the enemies of the US have the worst human rights records in the world?

Yep the US has all the right enemies .

Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Sat Aug 25, 2007 10:11 am; edited 1 time in total

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 10:07 am Post subject:

="Dome Vans"]Quote:

Quote:

and he supported terror. (No alteration needed here)

what terror?

Abu Nidal?

And he gave money to support suicide bombings.

One of the first world trade center bombers ran away to Iraq.

Quote:

Hersh: U.S. Funds Being Secretly Funneled To Violent Al Qaeda-Linked Groups
New Yorker columnist Sy Hersh says the �single most explosive� element of his latest article involves an effort by the Bush administration to stem the growth of Shiite influence in the Middle East (specifically the Iranian government and Hezbollah in Lebanon) by funding violent Sunni groups.

Hersh says the U.S. has been �pumping money, a great deal of money, without congressional authority, without any congressional oversight� for covert operations in the Middle East where it wants to �stop the Shiite spread or the Shiite influence.� Hersh says these funds have ended up in the hands of �three Sunni jihadist groups� who are �connected to al Qaeda� but �want to take on Hezbollah.�

Hersh summed up his scoop in stark terms: �We are simply in a situation where this president is really taking his notion of executive privilege to the absolute limit here, running covert operations, using money that was not authorized by Congress, supporting groups indirectly that are involved with the same people that did 9/11.�

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/25/hersh-qaeda/

The US is fighting for a good cause anyway.

Quote:

Not really if they had stated that the reason for the war was for humanitarian reasons to start with then maybe they�d have a leg to stand on. But this was way down the list. No credibility when you hit the fifth reason to create a quagmire. Then this may not happen.

That is what many of them say and said they still not have a leg to stand on.

Quote:

Because it's really all about shutting the reality of the Middle East off from us. It's to prevent the British and American people from questioning the immoral and cruel and internationally illegal occupation of Muslim lands. And in the Land of the Free, this systematic censorship of Middle East reality continues even in the country's schools. Now the principal of a Connecticut high school has banned a play by pupils, based on the letters and words of US soldiers serving in Iraq. Entitled Voices in Conflict, Natalie Kropf, Seth Koproski, James Presson and their fellow pupils at Wilton High School compiled the reflections of soldiers and others - including a 19-year-old Wilton High graduate killed in Iraq - to create their own play. To no avail.

Robert Fisk: http://news.independent.co.uk/fisk/article2430125.ece

What is the illegal occupation?

Quote:

And it was President Bush who got us into the [Iraq] quagmire in the first place," said David Gergen, a commentator and veteran of several administrations

The mideast as it was was a threat to the US.

9-11 showed that. The Bathsts , the khomeni followers and Jihad international ought to quit.

Quote:

Military commanders tell Brown to withdraw from Iraq without delay
By Raymond Whitaker and Robert Fox
Published: 19 August 2007
Senior military commanders have told the Government that Britain can achieve "nothing more" in south-east Iraq, and that the 5,500 British troops still deployed there should move towards withdrawal without further delay.
Last month Gordon Brown said after meeting George Bush at Camp David that the decision to hand over security in Basra province � the last of the four held by the British � "will be made on the military advice of our commanders on the ground". He added: "Whatever happens, we will make a full statement to Parliament when it returns [in October]."

UK does much of what it does because of the political situation in the hom country.

Quote:

Why do you think everybody is ditching the US in Iraq? Back to thread, do you think that South Korea were waiting for the right time to get the hell out of this US created mess? I think so. This was illegal, devoid of any plan, and remains so. I may be leftist in my thinking but I would rather have the balanced opinion that maybe something is not right here, and maintain the fact everybody saw this happening except Mr Bush and and his bum buddies Cheney, Wolfowitz et al.

The war was not illegal. And Saddam's regime was illegitimate.

Your other point is valid, nevertheless

As I said before 9-11 showed that the mideast was a threat to the US.

The US never invaded Iraq to invade Iraq the US invaded Iraq to invade the middle east.

The cold war took 46 years.

Quote:

This is my opinion based on the facts and research as I see it. You have your opinion, that�s great. But to automatically assume that somebody is a knucklehead or �an enemy� of the US because they cannot see or predicted that this mess was gonna happen is laughable. You keep your opinions, I�ll keep mine.

What you say there is valid. At the same time the 70,000 trained in AQ camps in the 1990s that was the situation before .

Quote:

American criticism of Britain's desire to pull back in southern Iraq has recently become public, with a US intelligence official telling The Washington Post this month that "the British have basically been defeated in the south". A senior British commander countered, "That's to miss the point. It was never that kind of battle, in which we set out to defeat an enemy." Other officers said the British force was never configured to "clear and hold" Basra in the way the Americans are seeking to do in Baghdad.

Immediate American discontent is said to centre on the CIA's reluctance to leave Basra Palace, an important base for watching Iran, which may explain why Britain has held on to the complex until now. But last week it was reported that US intelligence operatives were in the process of pulling out. Further ahead, the US is concerned over the security of its vital supply line from Kuwait, with some American commanders saying that if the British withdraw, American troops will have to be sent south to replace them. As the hub of Iraq's oil industry, Basra is also a tempting prize for the Shia militias battling each other for control.

Quote:

Is it going to get any better????? Didn't we tell you so.

The US ought to move most of its forces to Kurdistan

Many propose solutions to what is going on in Iraq. Some say withdraw, some say divide Iraq up into a loose confederation. and the administration says "stay the course". Perhaps the best solution is a hybrid model of three solutions. One The US ought to withdraw from Iraq but not to the US but to Kurdistan. From there Iraq ought to be broken up into a loose confederation, Once US forces are in the Kurdish areas the US ought to " stay the course".

The only country that the US would need the approval of is Turkey.

To control Iran the US ought to keep 10,000 US troops in Kuwait at the same time.

This way the US would have a big military base in the mideast. The US would have a new muslim ally.

The US have some forces to control Iran.

The US would not be subjected to guerrilla attacks by the insurgents.

The US could help the Kurds build up a democracy. and help them beef up their military power. The US could this way get a similar outcome from the Iraq war as they got from the Korean war

MarionG

Joined: 14 Sep 2006

Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 6:55 pm Post subject:

I've come to believe that the word illegal, when relating to politics, doesn't mean anything any more. I believe these are the new meanings of illegal: Illegal election: my guy didn't win Illegal war: I'm opposed to this war (as, of course, are all "right thinking" people) Illegal campaign contribution: ya dummy, ya gave to the wrong guy! Illegal law: I'm agin it... (as, of course, are all "right thinking" people) Also, I object to the widespread use of the word stupid as a method of saying "I don't agree with you." Why, it's just stupid to say that!

On the other hand

Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue

Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 9:14 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Illegal war: I'm opposed to this war (as, of course, are all "right thinking" people)

I agree that the concept of an illegal war is problematic, because there is no international body with any power to enforce the "laws" in question.

Quote:

Illegal election: my guy didn't win

Well, if there are credible allegations of irregularity, then that goes somewhat beyond complaining that your candidate didn't win.

Quote:

Illegal campaign contribution: ya dummy, ya gave to the wrong guy!

Well, most democracies have pretty strict rules about who can give how much to parties and candidates. If the law says(for example) that a corporation can only give 500.00 dollars, but they give a thousand, then that's a pretty cut-and-dry violation of the law.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

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

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe