| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
shifdog
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:56 pm Post subject: Korean Government Pays Ransom |
 |
|
| Quote: |
Some Afghan officials say South Korea agreed to pay a ransom during negotiations with the Taliban, which one foreign diplomat said started out as a demand for $20 million.
The South Korean government was praised at home on Thursday for its part in securing the release of its nationals. But some said Seoul may have set a dangerous precedent in directly negotiating with the Taliban.
A spokesman for South Korea's president, Chon Ho-seon, was evasive in responding to questions at a news briefing in Seoul on Wednesday on whether a ransom was part of the deal, saying only South Korea had done what was needed. |
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070830/ts_nm/afghan_hostages_dc_32 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Saxiif
Joined: 15 May 2003
Location: Seongnam
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wow, what a wonderful way to paint a nice big target on the backs of all Koreans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldMember
Joined: 24 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I believe the Taliban were originaly asking for $500,000 per person.
Do the math 23 hostages times 500,000 is not $20 mil.
The mere fact that the Korean spokesman refused to deny the paying of a ransom definitely confirms a ransom was paid.
The Korean government justifies this by saying "We have to be FLEXIBLE".
How many times do you hear that in Korea!
Where's my pay? We have to be flexible!
Where's my bonus? We have to be flexible!
I'm sick. I can't work. You must work -Hey where's the flexibility all of a sudden!
When they say "flexible" what that means, is that you flex (bend over backwards) and take it up the ****
Reaching new levels of Hypocrisy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gee, paying terrorists. There definitely won't be any unintended consequences resulting from that. Nope. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spliff
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Location: Khon Kaen, Thailand
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Paying ransom is/was a mistake, IMHO. If every country made it clear that they back President Bush's "no ransom" policy than terrorists wouldn't bother kidnapping people...now they must be sitting back and pulling their beards and saying ...Hmmmmmm. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
I-am-me
Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Location: Hermit Kingdom
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Koreans better start watching their backs in the philippines. The Muslim terrorists there now have a treasure chest. Kidnapping koreans by the dozen seems to pay off handsomely! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scotticus
Joined: 18 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Saxiif wrote: |
| Wow, what a wonderful way to paint a nice big target on the backs of all Koreans. |
Oh please, if you think Koreans are going to be anywhere NEAR Afghanistan after this...
It was all well and good when they were spreading the Lord's word and having a grand ole time. Now that they've been shown that *gasp* it actually IS dangerous, I'd be willing to bet a few month's salary that there aren't going to be any Koreans left there to put the target on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alyallen
Joined: 29 Mar 2004
Location: The 4th Greatest Place on Earth = Jeonju!!!
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Scotticus wrote: |
| Saxiif wrote: |
| Wow, what a wonderful way to paint a nice big target on the backs of all Koreans. |
Oh please, if you think Koreans are going to be anywhere NEAR Afghanistan after this...
It was all well and good when they were spreading the Lord's word and having a grand ole time. Now that they've been shown that *gasp* it actually IS dangerous, I'd be willing to bet a few month's salary that there aren't going to be any Koreans left there to put the target on. |
I think I-am-me made a very good point...
| Quote: |
| Koreans better start watching their backs in the philippines. The Muslim terrorists there now have a treasure chest. Kidnapping koreans by the dozen seems to pay off handsomely! |
They may not be in Afghanistan but the threat may be emminent for those in the Philippines. They have kidnapped before, so I can see it as a possibility.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Conservative
Joined: 15 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| spliff wrote: |
| Paying ransom is/was a mistake, IMHO. If every country made it clear that they back President Bush's "no ransom" policy than terrorists wouldn't bother kidnapping people...now they must be sitting back and pulling their beards and saying ...Hmmmmmm. |
Exactly. The negotiations should have gone something like this.
"You give us back our guys and we agree to do nothing in reponse. However if you don't give them back, we will send an additional force of 50,000 soldiers over there with 'take no prisoners' orders. Any Taliban we catch will be shot out of hand. No mercy." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fresh Prince
Joined: 05 Dec 2006
Location: The glorious nation of Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The_Conservative wrote: |
| spliff wrote: |
| Paying ransom is/was a mistake, IMHO. If every country made it clear that they back President Bush's "no ransom" policy than terrorists wouldn't bother kidnapping people...now they must be sitting back and pulling their beards and saying ...Hmmmmmm. |
Exactly. The negotiations should have gone something like this.
"You give us back our guys and we agree to do nothing in reponse. However if you don't give them back, we will send an additional force of 50,000 soldiers over there with 'take no prisoners' orders. Any Taliban we catch will be shot out of hand. No mercy." |
Exactly. I shudder to think what the Taliban will be doing with the money. I'm glad that the hostages were released but at what cost was it to the regular people there that have been standing up to the Taliban, if they are now faced with a larger, wealthier group of soldiers to fight.
If the day after the kidnappers announced the hostage takings, Korea announced to the world that they are sending in 50,000 soldiers in response, that would almost guarantee no more kidnappings in the future. In fact, it the additional troops would help secure the area and the kidnappings would have been a good way to get more troops there without looking like they are pandering to Bush or the U.S.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Typhoon
Joined: 29 May 2007
Location: Daejeon
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Come on everyone! The hostages were out of the news over the past week. There should have been no doubt that the gov't was pressuring the Korean media to keep it quiet so that when the ransom was paid it would be less of an issue. No would should be surprised that Korea paid a ransom to the Taliban. It was a mortal lock that they would the minute the Taliban demanded it. Korea is known internationally as having no backbone (see interactions with the Norks) and everyone should have seen this coming a mile away. The moral of this. If you need money to buy weapons find some Koreans, kidnap them and you will get paid. I think I just found a way to retire early!!!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scotticus
Joined: 18 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The_Conservative wrote: |
"You give us back our guys and we agree to do nothing in reponse. However if you don't give them back, we will send an additional force of 50,000 soldiers over there with 'take no prisoners' orders. Any Taliban we catch will be shot out of hand. No mercy." |
While I agree that money was a TERRIBLE way to get them back, I don't think your above scenario would work. Do you really think the UN would give the okay for a nation to send in tens of thousands of troops to commit what would degenerate into genocide? The RoK's biggest problem in these negotiations is that they had no power and no leverage. They couldn't do a damn thing for the Taliban besides giving them money.
Not like they could tell the US to back off. Not like they could threaten them (oh noes, the SK military!). These guys have been dealing with experienced US and UK forces for 6 years now. A military threat from the SK would have been met with, initially, a hearty laugh, then more dead hostages. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spliff
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Location: Khon Kaen, Thailand
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Errrrr, don't think it's the Useless Nitwits over at Turtle bay's decision. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Conservative
Joined: 15 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Scotticus wrote: |
| The_Conservative wrote: |
"You give us back our guys and we agree to do nothing in reponse. However if you don't give them back, we will send an additional force of 50,000 soldiers over there with 'take no prisoners' orders. Any Taliban we catch will be shot out of hand. No mercy." |
While I agree that money was a TERRIBLE way to get them back, I don't think your above scenario would work. Do you really think the UN would give the okay for a nation to send in tens of thousands of troops to commit what would degenerate into genocide?
The U.N. couldn't stop the U.S. In fact the U.S would probably send in it's aircraft carriers and transport ships to help the South Koreans come over. They've (the U.S) have been pressuring their allies to send more...they'd be delighted to help and to heck with the U.N. The U.S. has only been playing nice with the U.N. in the hope that they will eventually help. With an additional 50 thousand troops they don't need the U.N.
The RoK's biggest problem in these negotiations is that they had no power and no leverage. They couldn't do a damn thing for the Taliban besides giving them money.
Not like they could tell the US to back off. Not like they could threaten them (oh noes, the SK military!).
In the Vietnam war the Viet Cong were more afraid of the South Korean forces then the U.S troops. The South Koreans didn't exactly practise the Geneva conventions...
These guys have been dealing with experienced US and UK forces for 6 years now. A military threat from the SK would have been met with, initially, a hearty laugh, then more dead hostages.
You think they want reinforcements over there? Not likely. Dead hostages should have been met with getting as many troops over there as possible and killing Talibans and anyone affliated with them.
FYI basic training in the S.K army (I know I have a BIL in there) is just as tough as in the U.S army...and in some cases tougher. Do some reading about some recent scandals.
|
Last edited by The_Conservative on Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:25 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mack4289
Joined: 06 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The_Conservative wrote: |
| spliff wrote: |
| Paying ransom is/was a mistake, IMHO. If every country made it clear that they back President Bush's "no ransom" policy than terrorists wouldn't bother kidnapping people...now they must be sitting back and pulling their beards and saying ...Hmmmmmm. |
Exactly. The negotiations should have gone something like this.
"You give us back our guys and we agree to do nothing in reponse. However if you don't give them back, we will send an additional force of 50,000 soldiers over there with 'take no prisoners' orders. Any Taliban we catch will be shot out of hand. No mercy." |
The logistics of this would be a nightmare. You might get the hostages back but not without killing a lot of civilians and taking more than a few casualties in the process.
Plus I know the Taliban aren't suicide bombers, but how much do you think threats on their life count for? They'd probably prefer to be shot dead rather than rot in a prison for the rest of their lives.
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2878973
"First of all, we must carry out a clandestine operation like the one Israeli special forces performed in Uganda, because there is no chance that the government of Afghanistan would permit such a mission. It is not possible at all.
... Unlike the Entebbe operation, [Koreans] do not have information on the accurate location of the Koreans in the hands of Taliban."
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2878827
"One of the major obstacles, said a Foreign Ministry official who declined to be named, is the sovereignty of Afghanistan. �The incident is not in our jurisdiction,� the official said. �We would need permission from Kabul. Otherwise it�s an invasion. There is a need by Kabul to demonstrate that it can handle this situation. It also has to consider public sentiment.�
Even with a green light from the administration of President Hamid Karzai, Seoul would need to get permission from the National Assembly while it gauges public support. The actual operation, whether a rescue mission or retaliatory in nature, would then require cooperation from the United States and other international forces in Afghanistan.
�We have to operate in a foreign country. Intelligence and logistic support such as airlifting our forces are crucial,� said a retired official who was instrumental in setting up the country�s first counter-terrorist unit. �But even with full support we would need sufficient time to practice any mission.�
The official, who declined to be named, said the �political will� to accept casualties was also crucial."
Since they are held scattered around in civilian houses, it is difficult to carry out raids on multiple targets simultaneously." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
