Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - South Korean workers riot in Seoul

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

South Korean workers riot in Seoul
Goto page Previous 1, 2

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

matthewwoodford

Joined: 01 Oct 2003
Location: Location, location, location.

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 12:48 pm Post subject:

rapier wrote:

Koreans don't want their soldiers contributing to an international effort. Why does that not surprise me?
One day they will have to realise they are part of homo sapiens too, the international community, and as a rich developed nation, must play their part in responsibly helping peacekeep troubled regions beyond their own borders.
Instead, they want the US to do everything to maintain world security, and their own (against NK), while doing little to contribute, and backstabbing the US the whole way.
They basically want a free ride, and everything their own way.
Sounds like your average hakwon boss mentality.

You are so far from living on this planet it's scary.

Are you saying the US was maintaining world security by invading Iraq? Are you saying that was an international effort? The South Korean government is, like the so-called 'coalition of the willing', capitulating to US pressure against the wishes of the majority of it's own citizens by sending Korean troops into the mess in Iraq, caused by the US, which now wants the UN to come and help clean it up. Seems from the reaction on this board that having Roh as a puppet doesn't satisfy you at all....you'd like a little more ***-kissing?

You can't have it both ways. Are you here to defend freedom and democracy? Then allow public opinion to carry some weight with the government (and I am *not* suggesting an elected government should automatically bow to public opinion merely that it ought to listen to it). 'Korea owes the US' does not mean the US owns Korea. A lot of people don't think they owe you anything or think it's not so simple anyway: but they must all be ungrateful or stupid like your hagwon boss.

Oh I really love the way you criticise Korea for not realising that they "as a rich developed nation, must play their part in responsibly helping peacekeep troubled regions beyond their own borders". Laughing

Oh, it's a troll, right?? Please tell me it's a troll, I took you seriously for a while there, that *has* to be comedy right????????!!!!!!!!

Matt

Derrek

Joined: 15 Jan 2003

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 2:32 pm Post subject:

Matt: Please answer the following questions, since you seem to know everything about this topic: 1. How much does SK pay the US to keep troops here? 2. How much does it cost the US to keep troops here? 3. What advantage does it serve the USA to keep troops here? 4. Adding all of these figures up, how much money per year do you figure the USA makes off of staying in SK? 5. What would happen to the Korean economy (and your job) if the US left?

Joe Thanks

Joined: 01 Oct 2003
Location: Dudleyville

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 3:26 pm Post subject:

Derrek wrote:

Matt:

Please answer the following questions, since you seem to know everything about this topic:

1. How much does SK pay the US to keep troops here?
2. How much does it cost the US to keep troops here?
3. What advantage does it serve the USA to keep troops here?
4. Adding all of these figures up, how much money per year do you figure the USA makes off of staying in SK?
5. What would happen to the Korean economy (and your job) if the US left?

Derek, Matt's the guy who assumes when a critic rallies against SK and NK bullying Japan that he thinks it's okay for the Koreas to do it and imediately dismisses the critics for not seeing the supposed injustices Koreans endured under Japan when they critique such rabid jingoism!

With Matt dealing with someone opperating on less than "all fours."

Cheers,

Joe

indiercj

Joined: 30 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:26 pm Post subject:

Derrek wrote:

From what i have found in the web.

1. SK paid about 490 million US$ in 2002. It was a 10.4% increase from the year before. Kyunhyang News(Korean)

2. SK pays about 42% of the total expences(personnel expences excluded).

3. influencing it's power on Korean government, Selling exclusiverly US made weaponry.

4. It does not seem to be a losing business.

5. See #3.

rapier

Joined: 16 Feb 2003

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:48 pm Post subject:

Woodford: Promoting world security and defending freedom and democracy: The U.S invaded Iraq for just this. Taking out an extremist dictatorship that threatened several countries with chemical and other weapons, a govt that oppressed its own people to a horrific degree. Other countries helped in the mission. SK is a prosperous developed nation that should play its part in the bigger picture, instead of seeing themselves as a master race beamed down from heaven that is separate and above the rest of us. Lets just see how enthusiastically SK helps to support future peacekeeping/ other operations. I doubt if they will contribute anything without being forced to do so bt extreme political pressure. Having their ass saved and supported by the US for so long, and then hating Americans simply because they need them so much, is hardly sentient behavior.

indiercj

Joined: 30 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:30 pm Post subject:

rapier wrote:

Lets just see how enthusiastically SK helps to support future peacekeeping/ other operations. I doubt if they will contribute anything without being forced to do so bt extreme political pressure.
Having their ass saved and supported by the US for so long, and then hating Americans simply because they need them so much, is hardly sentient behavior.

Koreans played mercenary in Viet Nam. 310,000 were sent there and more than 5000 died.

Hey, we recently sent a troop of 3200 in East Timor. Wink

weatherman

Joined: 14 Jan 2003
Location: Korea

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:56 pm Post subject:

matthewwoodford wrote:

Joe Thanks wrote:

I think we should pull out ALL US troops and then let the Koreans 'defend" themselves.

A lot of Koreans would agree with you.

Bull s h i t they would. When they realized how much they would have to do for themselves and their own standing in the world to maintain the 'Korean dream' the vote would be 'stay' and they will still b i t c h. And if you look at the real numbers, in the polls thesedays, you are plain wrong. Sure the unification at all costs, the the international (read US) order pays for this, crowd wants them out, but really not many others when you give them the realities of what happens after a pull out. That said, I want the US forces out. Their is one a one way street in this alliance, and it all goes to Korea.

On the other hand

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

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 8:43 pm Post subject:

Joe Thanks wrote:

Quote:

Joe: So far as I can tell, there has been no Japan-bashing on this particular thread; in fact, I don't think anyone besides you has even mentioned the country. Maybe Matt has been anti-Japanese somewhere else, but how is that relevant to this topic? This reminds you of that other thread where you accused me of being anti-Japanese despite a total lack of evidence for the accusation.

Joe, this seems to be a real issue for you. Why don't you just start your own thread, call it I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO BASH MY BELOVED JAPAN, and see how many posts you get?

Derrek

Joined: 15 Jan 2003

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:36 pm Post subject:

indiercj wrote:

Derrek wrote:

1. and 2. : My point EXACTLY! Thank-you for making it, indiercj! It's nice to see someone admit that the US pays a large chunk of cash to help the Koreans keep their freedom. A full 58% worth of it! What's that come out to be? 600 million or so? And before this year, according to your figures, it was costing the US a lot more.

3. Selling exclusively US-made weaponry? Please read the following, and pay attention to quotes from such reputable newspapers as "The Wall Street Journal", which said, "A December 1993 Wall Street Journal article said that, since the late 1980's, arms purchases have been designed for the "transfer of high technology to local industry" rather than military preparedness."

This article is found at: http://www.fas.org/asmp/profiles/south_korea.htm

"High military expenditures led Seoul during the 1970s to establish indigenous military industries. In 1973, arms imports were 4.9% of all ROK imports; by 1990, this figure dropped to 0.8%, according to the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (World Military Expenditures and Arms Transfers, various years). Domestic arms production, while driving up overall costs, keeps more money in the country, employs more citizens, results in the acquisition of technological and production know-how for foreign partners and provides export opportunities.

Nearly all of South Korea's arms purchases appear to have objectives in addition to national defense. A December 1993 Wall Street Journal article said that, since the late 1980's, arms purchases have been designed for the "transfer of high technology to local industry" rather than military preparedness. Incorporation of Korean components, for example, is a high priority.

As a result, South Korea is emerging as an important second-tier arms exporter. During 1994-1998, according to the Stockholm Peace Research Institute, the ROK exported more than $100 million worth of arms. This figure may include illegal exports of as many as 300,000 M-16s built under license in Korea. Korea is also offering its version of the U.S.-designed Armored Infantry Fighting Vehicle (AIFV), dubbed the Korean Infantry Fighting Vehicle. Malaysia has bought 64 and is expected to co-produce several hundred more under license. [Primary competition came from Turkey, which was offering its own version of the same vehicle built under license in Turkey.]

Like Taiwan, South Korea also hopes to use co-production projects to decrease its dependence on foreign suppliers and to enter new markets. South Korea is the leading recipient of offset agreements with American defense manufacturers in the Pacific Rim, and among the top ten recipients worldwide. For example, as part of an offset connected to the 1991 sale of F-16 fighter-bombers, Lockheed Martin will help South Korea build an indigenous trainer/light attack aircraft. According to the U.S. Commerce Department, during 1993-96, South Korea entered in to twelve new offsets, half of which were direct investments in the Korean defense industry.

4. Yes, it is a losing business. The US definately loses money by being here. The US government keeps the Korean government, which can't find it's butt from a hole in the ground at the local Room Salon, from totally falling apart economically and socially.

5. In a best-case scenario, if the US left and stayed away for good, and North Korea fell on it's own, for example -- it would just be the prelude to another war. After the token outpouring of help by the South, the locals will suddenly realize that it costs too much of their own precious money to revitalize the North. Those from the North would be treated 10x worse than those from Chollamdo, and taken advantage of by the South, and it wouldn't be long before another war would start -- or at the very least -- lots of unrest and turmoil. Probably lots of stealing and terrorism by Northern folks who feel they deserve more than their selfish SK "brothers" are willing to give.

South Korea needs the US because it can't control itself. The US doesn't want instability in the region. That's why they stay.

Joe Thanks

Joined: 01 Oct 2003
Location: Dudleyville

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:53 pm Post subject:

indiercj wrote:

Koreans played mercenary in Viet Nam. 310,000 were sent there and more than 5000 died.

Hey, we recently sent a troop of 3200 in East Timor. Wink

And what some of them did while in 'nam was on par with Nogun-ri.

Food for thought,

Joe

Joe Thanks

Joined: 01 Oct 2003
Location: Dudleyville

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:54 pm Post subject:

rapier wrote:

I think that SK should hold a general referendum on wether the U.S should stay or go. It might put a stop to anti US demos and the general anti waegook sentiments going on here.
Maybe its time they found out how life is on their own two feet.

Dream the impossible dream, companero.

Cheers,

Joe

Joe Thanks

Joined: 01 Oct 2003
Location: Dudleyville

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:59 pm Post subject:

weatherman wrote:

I agree. SK will beeotch if the forces are there or if they leave.

You can't have it both ways.

Even though I am retunring and truly wish no ill will on SK, I think the US should save its dough and soldiers and spend more time developing n alliance with China and Japan and let SK fend for itself.

Sk is full of mantras but how many are genuine. Most people actually want the troops there 'until reunification'. They will just voice it gruffly or say it in confidence. In public it's "get them out."

The US saved SK's arse tiem and time again. Most of the time by being there.

The clock is ticking and I think it's against them.

It's so ugly...

Cheers,

Joe

jacktar

Joined: 04 Jun 2003
Location: ��

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 10:16 pm Post subject:

Derrek wrote:

These are incredibly naive questions. Give me a break.

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Tue Nov 04, 2003 2:43 pm Post subject:

indiercj wrote:

Derrek wrote:

so what ? What Korea buys from the US in weapons is small pickings to what the US spends on Korea. Either 3 Billion NY Times, 10.6 Billion Time/ Global Security . or 15-20 Billion Cato Institute.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb105-49.html

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Tue Nov 04, 2003 2:46 pm Post subject:

matthewwoodford wrote:

rapier wrote:

Oh, it's a troll, right?? Please tell me it's a troll, I took you seriously for a while there, that *has* to be comedy right????????!!!!!!!!

Matt

If South Korea doesn't send Soldiers the US should withdraw her forces from South Korea. Then South Koreans would have to pay taxes like Americans do. They would have less disposable income and that means some room cafes would close down.

Quote:

Speaking of 'paying their dues' who has been paying for the US to have it's big fat military base over in the middle of Seoul for 50 years?

Small pickings.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb105-49.html

See for yourself.

Display posts from previous:

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

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