| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ohahakehte
Joined: 24 Aug 2003
Location: The State of Denial
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2003 2:25 am Post subject: protests at Rumsfeld's visit? |
 |
|
i believe he's coming sometime soon, maybe w/i the next week.
anyone know of any protests/demo's going on during his visit? if so, where? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Arthur Fonzerelli
Joined: 22 Jan 2003
Location: Suwon
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2003 3:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I would like to see rummy the dummy, the secretary of offense (..oops i mean defense) and give him a nice warm welcome.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HardyandTiny
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2003 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rumsfeld arrived on Sunday.
Who cares?
What are you going to protest about?
The girls that were killed on the "highway"?
Ohno's race?
The deployment of Korean troops to Iraq?
Morons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2003 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
IF the US pulls it soldiers from Korea then Korea's economy will take a major major hit. Then then the Koreans really have something to worry about. Koreans live too well nowadays.
Anyway the situation in Korea is burdensome for the US , the US should withdraw its soldiers and ignore Korea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rudyflyer
Joined: 26 Feb 2003
Location: pacing the cage
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2003 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| i'd be there protesting about Iraq and US military policy, forget about Korea |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2003 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
But if the US did not have forces in Korea the sec of defense would not go to Korea.
Therefore to protest policy you would have to go to the US to do it, or join (or start ) an anti US rally in front of the US embassy. Though I guess you could have one in the subway and wake up anyone who is sleeping on the train.
And more importanly if the US did not have forces in Korea than many of the protesting students would have other things to worry about like how they would get jobs in a country whose economic situation sucked.
Anyway have a nice time at the protest - but please don't set any tires on fire it pollutes the air. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arthur Fonzerelli
Joined: 22 Jan 2003
Location: Suwon
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2003 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| No use protesting here... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Butterfly
Joined: 02 Mar 2003
Location: Kuwait
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2003 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Demonstrations against Rumsfeld aren't anti-American in my view, far from it in fact. In the long term they are pro-American.
I think it's perfectly okay to believe that American troops should stay in Korea, but demonstrate against Rumsfeld. No hypocracy there, Rumsfeld has lots of other agenda besides this one, in fact Korea is fairly low on the list of people he wants to bomb the living crap out of. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alias
Joined: 24 Jan 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2003 11:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Butterfly wrote: |
Demonstrations against Rumsfeld aren't anti-American in my view, far from it in fact. In the long term they are pro-American.
I think it's perfectly okay to believe that American troops should stay in Korea, but demonstrate against Rumsfeld. No hypocracy there, Rumsfeld has lots of other agenda besides this one, in fact Korea is fairly low on the list of people he wants to bomb the living crap out of. |
I want the soliders out- unless Korea shows the US the money. I am sure you have no problem with keeping the soldiers in Korea -after all it does not help the US to keep them in Korea anyway.
Just remember that according to the observer human rights index the countries that are militarily hostile the US are the most oppressive nations in the world
www.algeria-watch.de/mrv/mrvrap/observe4.htm - 8k
Maybe Rumsfield has a point.
Since all of sudden you seem to think so highly of them :
Why don't you ask these great Korean patriots who demonstrate against the US several times a year - if they think that interracial marrige between foreigners & Koreans is ok . I know how people from these groups will answer. I will give you a hint - they will start by saying they are of one blood line... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Butterfly
Joined: 02 Mar 2003
Location: Kuwait
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2003 12:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm just saying that you don't have to be anti-everything-American to hate Rumsfeld, and demostrating against this kind of statesman is just that, demonstrating out of fear that people like Rumsfeld have a great deal of influence in what happens in our world. I love America, and I hate what him and his kind are doing to your country.
It seems that the demonstrations are principally not about US troops in Korea, rather, Korean troops in Iraq. Does the former mean that Korean people are not entitled to an opinion on the latter? Perhaps they feel, like most of the rest of the world, that Iraq is a ****-up that they want no part of. I think they are entitled to that view.
Who said anything about marriage? (rhetorical question). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2003 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Who said anything about marriage? (rhetorical question).
|
I think Joo Rip's point was that many Korean nationalists are not really left-wing or pro-Iraqi, but just object to US hegemony because they think Koreans are inherently superior to white people. Fair enough. In Korea as elsewhere, there is a particular strain of right-wing anti-Americanism which views the US as a "mongrel" nation, lacking an "organic" culture due to the constant influx of immigrants. These are people who would've objected to antebellum slavery on the grounds that blacks and whites should not live together in the same country. In my experience, some of the more nationalistic leftists are susceptible to this type of rhetoric, though usually not in such an overtly racist form.
I haven't discussed the current Iraq situation in depth with any Korean activists, so I don't know to what extent, if any, anti-war efforts are being used as a cover for chauvinistic nationalism. A good indicator would probably be how many of these activists are also involved in efforts to assist non-white migrant workers in Korea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skarp
Joined: 22 Aug 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2003 2:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Does anybody have solid answers to these questions?
1 - how big is North Korea's army and airforce?
2 - how big is South Korea's?
3 - how big are the US forces in Korea. How many ground combat troops, how many combat aircraft etc.?
4 - how much does the US military contribute to the SK economy versus how much does it take out? Does it pay full wack for intallation costs such as power etc or do they get it cheap like in Japan? I suppose they don't pay rent for their bases?
I am not a spy - just curious.
Given the low conventional threat North Korea seems to present I wonder why the US contingent is still in SK when there seems to be so much for them to do elsewhere in the world.
I have always suspected the US presence was to do with having an unsinkable aircraft carrier anchored off the coast of China, and naff all to do with security for the average South Korean civilian.
Ah well.
I sincerely wish all US military stationed overseas a safe and speedy return to their native shores. I know they meant well.
Skarp |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2003 2:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Skarp wrote: |
Does anybody have solid answers to these questions?
1 - how big is North Korea's army and airforce?
2 - how big is South Korea's?
3 - how big are the US forces in Korea. How many ground combat troops, how many combat aircraft etc.?
4 - how much does the US military contribute to the SK economy versus how much does it take out? Does it pay full wack for intallation costs such as power etc or do they get it cheap like in Japan? I suppose they don't pay rent for their bases?
I am not a spy - just curious.
Given the low conventional threat North Korea seems to present I wonder why the US contingent is still in SK when there seems to be so much for them to do elsewhere in the world.
I have always suspected the US presence was to do with having an unsinkable aircraft carrier anchored off the coast of China, and naff all to do with security for the average South Korean civilian.
Ah well.
I sincerely wish all US military stationed overseas a safe and speedy return to their native shores. I know they meant well.
Skarp |
NK forces like 1000000 SK forces like 650000
It costs the US 10 - 20 Billion dollars to defend South Korea everyyear.
If the US wants to go after China it would be better served by building more F-22 Raptors.
Read this it will put an end to this aspect of the discussion.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb105-49.html
Japan pays 50% of the cost of keeping US forces in Japan , but Korea pays 12% - NY Times Nov 11 1994 , US forces Wearing out their welcome in Asia
Korea has plenty of money to surpass NK if they so choose to but they enjoy low taxes. So they get the US to defend them. Korea only spends like 3% of their GNP on defense which is very little for a threatened country.
And my answer to you butterfly is
And talk to the protestors you will find that most of them to be nationalists - not idealistic liberals. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ohahakehte
Joined: 24 Aug 2003
Location: The State of Denial
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2003 3:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
IF the US pulls it soldiers from Korea then Korea's economy will take a major major hit. Then then the Koreans really have something to worry about. Koreans live too well nowadays.
Anyway the situation in Korea is burdensome for the US , the US should withdraw its soldiers and ignore Korea. |
you're discussing a few issues at once here, and you're wrong on most of them.
first of all, east asia in general is undertaking measures that could one day lead them to be economically separate from the US, or at least much less dependent. china, japan and south korea are moving towards some form of economic integration and the US is against this all the way because it would undermine their military and economic presence in the region. you might be right about korea's economy taking a major hit if the US left (though id like to hear noam chomsky's opinion on that), but i would be impressed w/ the resolve and democratic decision of the koreans if that happened.
the situation in korea is *not* burdensome to the US. "burden" is the entire reason they're here. they partly create the burden and feed off of it, in classic imperialist style. the north-south conflict justifies their military presence in south korea, like so many other hotspots in the world.
i fully agree that the US should get the hell out, but probably for different reasons than you.
why do you think the US wants such a big stake in the north nucelar issue? the US has never been a fan of the two koreas' attempts at reunification and "sunshine" policy. a united korea where the south unites w/ the north is a korea whose subservience to the US - embodied in the south - is diluted. a korea with no or very little military/ideological/political conflict is one where the US has no desire to be in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
