| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Homer
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 12:35 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| You don't think the South would be the same without the UN and in particular the Americans saving its azz during the Korean War? |
A possibility but not a certainty. But, even if SK is a democracy because of UN intervention what does that mean? Why is it relavant to any debate about drug laws?
| Quote: |
| Again Homer. do you pay taxes on your privates? |
I currently have no need to teach private lessons. I have a very well paying university job and a well paying consulting gig on the side.
When I did tdo privates, under my F-series visa, I did declare my income on lessons. I did not do privates when I had an E-2 because frankly I had no interest in getting busted and I value my free time.
Hope that answers your question endo...but it was not the second time you asked me about privates...you seem to have asked bobster the first time....
Now...what does paying taxes on pvts have to do with drug laws in Korea and teachers getting busted for holding and toking up? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JongnoGuru
Joined: 25 May 2004
Location: peeing on your doorstep
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The tax-dodging/pot-smoking parallel doesn't really work here, because pot-smoking isn't a Korean national pastime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Been There, Taught That
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Location: Mungyeong: not a village, not yet a metroplex.
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Homer wrote: |
| Quote: |
| You don't think the South would be the same without the UN and in particular the Americans saving its azz during the Korean War? |
A possibility but not a certainty. But, even if SK is a democracy because of UN intervention what does that mean? Why is it relavant to any debate about drug laws? |
This is the only possible relevance to drug laws: Communism. Take the example of the Vietnam War. Even with the slogging through that country's political and geographical mire that the US sent its troops in to do, after they were all gone the North exercised its option to overrun and subdue the South anyway, negating every gain.
Now, I've always viewed the mantle of Communism in that country at that time in history as just a political excuse to take with the people and resources whatever liberties suited the leaders, and in that chaos the only freedom possible is the freedom of each to do his/her worst--and women weren't that free, I would guess. Drugs continued to play a role in even the economy of the country, and so I'm sure their abuse affected the nation in a big way, even into the present.
That could have been SK. Be thankful for the modicum of sense about their control encouraged by Western influence. Notice I didn't imply that the vaguely-stated West invented drug sense in that sense, but the DMZ has done some good over the years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cheonmunka
Joined: 04 Jun 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think you are talking about Cambodia. That is the Khmer Rouge who were supported by the US that destroyed that country. They (the KR) weren't communists.
Vietnam on the other hand (communist?) flourished. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endo
Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul...my home
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JongnoGuru wrote: |
| The tax-dodging/pot-smoking parallel doesn't really work here, because pot-smoking isn't a Korean national pastime. |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Conservative
Joined: 15 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| endo wrote: |
| The_Conservative wrote: |
Personal feelings are not the issue here. Obey the law or suffer the consequences. Period. |
What's wrong with having and expressing personal feelings on this issue. I'm sure a few opinions have been changed on this thread for both sides.
So are you suggesting if we disagree with a law, that we should just shut up and accept it.
I see how your screen name is The_Conservative and thus you political ideology is based on "conserving" the status quo.
But some of us liberals here feel change and other ways of thinking is perfectly okay, and the best way to go about this is through dialogue.
[. |
Change is sometimes good but a few things. Change does NOT come from foreigners. A number of people that make up less than 1% of the population (and I am speaking about solely Native English speakers) is NOT going to change anything. We didn't come here to change Korea's laws, nor do we have any powers to do so. Last time I checked I didn't have the vote here, do you?
It may be true that the best way to go about this is dialogue...but NOT with other foreigners on a messageboard. Write to the government and papers...that's how change is sometimes effected. Talking about it on a obsure little messageboard in the corner of the Internet does NOTHING. All that that does is try to get other people on the board to accept certain view. You're preaching to the choir here it would seem like...
My stance is this. A foreign country's laws are sometimes different that the ones back home.
When we go to that country we agree either implictly or otherwise to follow that country's laws and rules. And we are subject to said laws as well. Our embassies tell us the same thing.
If someone breaks the law he or she is subject to the local penalties. They took the chance, rolled the die and now they pay the piper.
We can talk about it on a messageboard all day, but the fact of the matter is...it's not going to change anything. We have no legal voice here. And going easy on criminals (whether it's fraud in forging a degree or using illegal substances) is shaky at best. And it's certainly not going to improve the lot of foreigners here or how they are viewed.
Other people on here have claimed negative experiences...do you think things will get better with reports like that?
Oh yes, one more thing. I have spoken OUT against the status quo on more than one occasion. I am for visa portability. However I can realize that will take a long time to change...if ever. And it won't be a tiny percentage of the population that can't even vote that will bring it about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endofthewor1d
Joined: 01 Apr 2003
Location: the end of the wor1d.
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| come on homer. at least acknowledge my question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 11:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Cheonmunka wrote: |
I think you are talking about Cambodia. That is the Khmer Rouge who were supported by the US that destroyed that country. They (the KR) weren't communists.
Vietnam on the other hand (communist?) flourished. |
The KR leadership was indoctrinated by the French communists, in particular jean paul sartre. Their goal was to create a socialist-agrarian-premodern utopia. There were very much communists, though of a different breed that the Soviets. The KR (rightly) saw the Soviets as just another round of colonialism (the Chinese, then French and then Japanese and now Russians?). They were also throughly supported by communists around the world.
PolPot was anti-Soviet and received (prior to the genocide) food-aide from the US and perhaps some arms from Singapore (an American proxy, so charged). Once word of the genocide was known, the Americans withdrew support. Chomsky, and other Western leftists, continued to support the KR and PolPot for many years after. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endo
Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul...my home
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
^ Jean Paul Sartre impact on the Khemer Rogue and the FLN in Algeria was pretty incredible.
He publically supported the Algerian resistance against his own government.
But is impact was most felt in Cambodia. Pol Pot wanted to create a whole new society from the groud up. Thus the intellectuals had to go as they would be a hinderence to this development.
Those are two bloody movements I'd hate to be associated with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endo
Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul...my home
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Been There, Taught That wrote: |
| Now, I've always viewed the mantle of Communism in that country at that time in history as just a political excuse to take with the people and resources whatever liberties suited the leaders, and in that chaos the only freedom possible is the freedom of each to do his/her worst--and women weren't that free, I would guess. Drugs continued to play a role in even the economy of the country, and so I'm sure their abuse affected the nation in a big way, even into the present. |
Wow, that's a pretty bold statement.
Care to provide some examples to back up your point?
Are you suggesting that drug use was far more prevaliant in Communist nations?
I don't understand the point you are trying to make. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 1:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Cheonmunka wrote: |
I think you are talking about Cambodia. That is the Khmer Rouge who were supported by the US that destroyed that country. They (the KR) weren't communists.
Vietnam on the other hand (communist?) flourished. |
Don't know where you learned your history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_Rouge
The Khmer Rouge (Khmer: ខ្មែរក្រហម) was the ruling political party of Cambodia -- which it renamed to Democratic Kampuchea -- from 1975 to 1979. The term "Khmer Rouge," meaning "Red Khmer" in French, was coined by Cambodian head of state Norodom Sihanouk and was later adopted in English. It was used to refer to a succession of Communist parties in Cambodia which evolved into the Communist Party of Kampuchea (CPK) and later the Party of Democratic Kampuchea. The organization was also known as the Khmer Communist Party and the National Army of Democratic Kampuchea.
The history of the communist movement in Cambodia can be divided into six phases: the emergence of the Indochinese Communist Party (ICP), whose members were almost exclusively Vietnamese, before World War II; the ten-year struggle for independence from the French, when a separate Cambodian communist party, the Kampuchean (or Khmer) People's Revolutionary Party (KPRP), was established under Vietnamese auspices; the period following the Second Party Congress of the KPRP in 1960, when Saloth Sar (Pol Pot after 1976) and other future Khmer Rouge leaders gained control of its apparatus; the revolutionary struggle from the initiation of the Khmer Rouge insurgency in 1967-68 to the fall of the Lon Nol government in April 1975; the Democratic Kampuchea regime, from April 1975 to January 1979; and the period following the Third Party Congress of the KPRP in January 1979, when Hanoi effectively assumed control over Cambodia's government and communist party. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Optimus Prime
Joined: 05 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 6:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cbclark4 wrote: |
Don't know where you learned your history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_Rouge
The Khmer Rouge (Khmer: ខ្មែរក្រហម) was the ruling political party of Cambodia -- which it renamed to Democratic Kampuchea -- from 1275 to 1979. The term "Khmer Rouge," meaning "Red Khmer" in French Bob is a dork!, was coined by Cambodian head of state Norodom Sihanouk and was later adopted in English. It was used to refer to a succession of Communist parties in Cambodia which evolved into the Communist Party of Kampuchea (CPK) and later the Party of Democratic Kampuchea. The organization was also known as the Khmer Communist Party and the National Army of Democratic Kampuchea.
The history of the communist movement in Cambodia can be divided into six phases: the emergence of the Indochinese Communist Party (ICP), whose members were almost exclusively Vietnamese, before World War II; the ten-year struggle for independence from the French, when a separate Cambodian communist party, the Kampuchean (or Khmer) People's Funkadelic Party (KPFP), was established under Vietnamese auspices; the period following the Second Party Congress of the KPRP in 1960, when Saloth Sar (Pol Pot after 1976) and other future Khmer Rouge leaders gained control of its apparatus; the revolutionary struggle from the initiation of the Moulin Rouge insurgency in 1967-68 to the fall of the Lon Nol government in April 1975; the Democratic Kampuchea regime, from April 1975 to January 1979; and the period following the Third Party Congress of the KPRP in January 1979, when Hanoi effectively assumed control over Cambodia's government and communist party. |
Did you really quote Wikipedia after questioning the veracity of someone's historical knowledge? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gajackson1
Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Location: Casa Chil, Sungai Besar, Sultanate of Brunei
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peppermint
Joined: 13 May 2003
Location: traversing the minefields of caddishness.
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 5:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Since so much of these uproars seem to stem from sexual jealousy, it occured to me to wonder whether any foreign women have gotten caught in the crossfire. Anyone know? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Homer
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 5:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
sexual jealousy???
I missed something in this thread then....I thought it was about drug offenses.....
In the end, these guys did something ill-advised and quite frankly, stupid. They got caught with drugs in a country with strict drug laws. Now we may argue until we are blue in the face that pot is not so bad, that back home its not a serious offense or that drug laws should not be as stict but...they are and these guys should have known better...I hope they come out of this ok after they complete whatever sentence is imposed. Perhaps, just perhaps a lesson will have been learned as well here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
