|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tjames426
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
|
 Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:26 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Lastly, the lives of archaeologists, journalists, nurses and engineers are inherently more valuable than those of missionaries. The Koreans didn't deserve protection because they were warned not to go there and were doing extremely dangerous work for no good reason at all. If they had been journalists then maybe I'd be more sensitive
___
Best not tell millions of people around the third world who get live saving medical treatment at medical clinics and go to schools run by caring missionaries.
Yes, of course the lives of people with a religious belief are worth less. Just ask Adolf Hitler, Stalin, and Mao what they thought of practicing Jews and Christians. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
indytrucks begged to differ:
| Quote: |
| The thing is, it wasn't the Korean government that set the precedent for negotiating with the Taliban. The link provided by OTOH shows that it had already been set by the West. |
Point well taken; let me clarify: the Germans did indeed provide the precedent for stepping into the quicksand of negotiations with these scum. But--and this is a big but--as Kuros points out, the sell-out involves far more than payment of cash and that is what constitutes a dangerous precedent.
[On a side note: Schroeder was in office in 2005 and was a pacifist wimp. Had Lichtenstein kidnapped a Bavarian sausage maker, he would have sent Deutschmarks by the truckload.]
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
twg
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Location: Getting some fresh air...
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You know what's really funny?
All you assholes that are railing against the Korean government for doing this would also be the first in line to shout about what callous barbarians they are if they had let the hostages die.
Pathetic |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tjames426 wrote: |
Best not tell millions of people around the third world who get live saving medical treatment at medical clinics and go to schools run by caring missionaries.
Yes, of course the lives of people with a religious belief are worth less. Just ask Adolf Hitler, Stalin, and Mao what they thought of practicing Jews and Christians. |
Exactly.
Christians have always made easy targets...
I still believe they were mostly doing aid work.
If they were evangelising on the side, I don't know what language they were doing it in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Perfect Cup of Coffee
Joined: 17 Jun 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| twg wrote: |
You know what's really funny?
All you assholes that are railing against the Korean government for doing this would also be the first in line to shout about what callous barbarians they are if they had let the hostages die.
Pathetic |
Exactly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
McGarette wrote:
| Quote: |
Point well taken; let me clarify: the Germans did indeed provide the precedent for stepping into the quicksand of negotiations with these scum. But--and this is a big but--as Kuros points out, the sell-out involves far more than payment of cash and that is what constitutes a dangerous precedent.
|
Two of those demads involved getting all Korean missionaries and NGOs out of Afghanistan, which is likely something the Korean government would have done anyway. It's certainly what all the anti-Korea people on this thread should be supporting, seeing as how for the past few weeks they've all been telling us how stupid and irresponsible it is for anyone to go to Afghanistan to begin with.
As for the third demand, the troop withdrawal...
| Quote: |
The government says troops in Afghanistan were already scheduled to return home by the year's end.
The Korean military is however speeding up preparations for the withdrawal to show Korea's commitment to the hostage agreement.
|
Hardly a major capitulation, seeing as how the troops were already on their way out anyway.
http://tinyurl.com/2ocx35 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
And it should be pointed out that other countries have also given in to non-monetary demands. Not just Korea.
| Quote: |
| Italy went a step further earlier this year when it pressured the Afghan government to release several Taliban prisoners in exchange for an Italian newspaper reporter. |
| Quote: |
| Israel has repeatedly agreed to �prisoner�s exchanges� with terrorist groups, leading both Hamas and Hezbollah to believe that they can get a similar deal when they abduct Israeli soldiers. |
| Quote: |
Still the biggest ransom ever paid by a European government was the French deal with Libya�s strongman Muammar Qaddafi to secure the release of six Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian-born doctor who were falsely accused of deliberately infecting some 400 Libyan children with HIV. Shortly after a high-profile release engineered by First Lady Cecilia Sarkozy, her husband, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, announced a million dollar deal involving arms and civilian nuclear technology.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
twg sniped:
| Quote: |
| You know what's really funny? All you assholes that are railing against the Korean government for doing this would also be the first in line to shout about what callous barbarians they are if they had let the hostages die. Pathetic |
What's more pathetic is someone who posts snide remarks without adding anything to the discussion but yet presuming to know what others' reactions will be to a hypothetical eventuality.
On the other hand wrote:
| Quote: |
| It's certainly what all the anti-Korea people on this thread should be supporting, seeing as how for the past few weeks they've all been telling us how stupid and irresponsible it is for anyone to go to Afghanistan to begin with. |
I hope you're not counting me among that number as my posts on that subject clearly indicate otherwise.
| Quote: |
| Hardly a major capitulation, seeing as how the troops were already on their way out anyway. |
I don't see how this observation is at variance with my accusation that the Korean government intended to sacrifice as little as possible from the get-go. My criticism is largely one of reciprocity among supposed allies: why should we defend Korea when the Koreans aren't even willing to make a sizable contribution to the war on terror?
I'm hardly surprised that the French or Italians wavered; neither has any spine. But we don't have bases in France and we use the bases in Italy only as forward lines of deployment, not to protect the Italians from anyone.
But we haven't even addressed the morality of paying a secret ransom to terrorists who will use the funds to finance more terrorism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I don't see how this observation is at variance with my accusation that the Korean government intended to sacrifice as little as possible from the get-go. |
Okay. So the Korean government was trying to get as much as possible, while sacrificing as little as possible. I would hate to imagine a government that practiced the opposite.
| Quote: |
why should we defend Korea when the Koreans aren't even willing to make a sizable contribution to the war on terror?
|
Well, the US presence on the peninsula long predates the war on terror, so I don't think that is the particular strategic interest the US is pursuing by being here.
| Quote: |
| But we haven't even addressed the morality of paying a secret ransom to terrorists who will use the funds to finance more terrorism. |
Well, I guess we can always consult the expert...
| Quote: |
| A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not |
http://tinyurl.com/2jomdu |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enns
Joined: 02 May 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 6:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Korean government was wrong. Italy, Germany et al. were wrong too. Supporters of the Koreans seems to justify their support on the precedents set by other nations. You cannot give Korea a free pass based on the irresponsibility of some misguided countries. If your only argument to those who condemn Korea is that other countries have done this as well, then you simply don't have much of an argument. We condemn them all. Telling me that Germany has done it, doesn't make me think it's acceptable for Korea to fund the Taliban.
THINK OF THE DAMAGE THAT WILL BE DONE
Some reports put the ransom paid at $20 million, not $2 million.
http://in.reuters.com/article/SouthAsiaNews/idINIndia-29279020070901
| Quote: |
| South Korea paid Afghanistan's Taliban more than $20 million to release 19 missionaries they were holding hostage, a senior insurgent leader said on Saturday, vowing to use the funds to buy arms and mount suicide attacks. |
HOW IS THIS OK? How many lives will now be lost for these Korean's safety? Someone try and justify this. Please.
Last edited by enns on Sat Sep 01, 2007 6:57 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 6:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
| I don't see how this observation is at variance with my accusation that the Korean government intended to sacrifice as little as possible from the get-go. |
Okay. So the Korean government was trying to get as much as possible, while sacrificing as little as possible. I would hate to imagine a government that practiced the opposite. |
The Taliban is not the only terrorist organization out there. This kind of open hostage trading deal does not happen everyday.
Its not just ideologically sound to avoid open negotiations with terrorists, its pragmatic.
As for TWG, he demonstrates that he just doesn't get it. I'm genuinely concerned for the safety of Koreans abroad. That is why I disapprove.
OTOH, I don't understand why you've brought up Reagan here. What he did in Iran-Contra was blameworthy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| If your only argument to those who condemn Korea is that other countries have done this as well, then you simply don't have much of an argument. We condemn them all. |
Really? So there have been threads here set up for the specific purpose of condemning the respective deals struck by France, Germany, Italy, and Israel? News to me.
I guess what irks me the most is that this discussion comes off not so much as a legitimate debate about the pros and cons of dealing with terrorists, but rather as a bunch of embittered ex-pats venting against Korea, with the hostages being used as a convenient issue at hand. If the thread were entitled It Is Irresponsible And Selfish To Pay Ransom To Terrorists, and if the o.p. had covered the variety of deals that have been struck(certainly including Korea's), I might be willing to grant it more legitimacy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enns
Joined: 02 May 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Other Hand, WE ARE IN KOREA!!!! So it should not shock you that we are more interested in the Korean deal than we are in those by the Italians, Germans, and others. If you've been in the current events forum for even a few weeks you'd realize that there is a disportionate number of Korean related stories. Are you being serious in your post?
My question remains, is it ok for the Taliban to be using this reported $20 million to fund suicide attacks? This is what's at stake here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OTOH wrote:
| Quote: |
| Well, the US presence on the peninsula long predates the war on terror, so I don't think that is the particular strategic interest the US is pursuing by being here. |
You missed my point: of course our presence here has nothing to do with counterterrorism. The point is that we have even less obligation to assist the ROK in its defense against the DPRK in view of their unwillingness to actively and steadfastly support the war in Afghanistan.
I think you're the one who's letting his ties to Korea get the best of him over this issue. Naturally, most posters are going to focus on Korea on a Korea forum.
Precedent not only does not exonerate the Korean government, it should make them realize that their surrender will only serve to further embolden the Taliban.
As for Reagan, it is not yet been confirmed other than by Democratic party hacks whether he was aware of the negotiations in all its detail. Even if he were and we accept this as a breach of foreign policy stance, we need to keep things in proper perspective, i.e., Iran at that time wasn't threatening the West (they were waging a border war with Iraq).
Now you have the Korean government, in quinessential Asian fashion, baldly denying any deal was made and moving toward having the hostage families and their church reimburse it. So much for helping your fellow citizens. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Other Hand, WE ARE IN KOREA!!!! So it should not shock you that we are more interested in the Korean deal than we are in those by the Italians, Germans, and others. If you've been in the current events forum for even a few weeks you'd realize that there is a disportionate number of Korean related stories. Are you being serious in your post?
|
Sure, we're in Korea. And if I started a thread about how Korea throws heroin users in jail, and someone else came on and said that was a disgrace and Korea will become an international pariah as a result, and someone else came on and connected the jailing of heroin users in Korea to Korean men acting like twelve year old boys, would you consider that a credible line of discussion?
And for those who make it a habit to miss the point: no, I'm not comparing the drug laws to ransom payments, in terms of the morality. I'm using it as an example of something that happens all over the world.
| Quote: |
| My question remains, is it ok for the Taliban to be using this reported $20 million to fund suicide attacks? |
Really? That's the topic of this thread? The pros and pros of terrorist activities? I missed have missed that in the OP.
But whatever. No, it is wrong for terrorists to use the money given them by the USA, France, Israel, Germany, Italy, Korea, and anyone else, to commit terrorist acts.
Last edited by On the other hand on Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:29 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
