| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
duhweecher
Joined: 06 Nov 2013
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 1:34 am Post subject: US Military Scandal |
 |
|
Sorry...had to get your attention with the subject...
Can someone please explain why several sources (besides this wiki link) say that the Yongsan Garrison (I'm assuming this also means the Yongsan Military Camp) has only been active since 2006?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yongsan_Garrison |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kimchi_pizza
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Location: "Get back on the bus! Here it comes!"
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
I address this only for these reasons:
First, why resort to histrionics if you have a genuine question for simple
curiosity?
Secondly, such a question that uses such gimmicks suggests, to me, a 'writer'
hoping to cash in on making some headlines in other publications. It gets
my goat when posters pose a query simply to generate opinions, ideas or methods
to further their own agendas and pass off what is said as their own. All too
common here.... I prefer a 'troll' than such posters...
If this IS a genuine concern, why not share YOUR thoughts first, what
YOU have learned and the reason(s) for such a question.
And bottom-line, it is rather simple to find the answer still using only Wikipedia,
yet chose to be lazy and want answers without doing the 'digging'.
And I'm ALL about 'digging'~ Here's a posted spade, go to work sir~ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
duhweecher
Joined: 06 Nov 2013
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 3:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hahaha...thanks for the answer. You funny.
Oh, get off your high horse: "pose a query"; "histrionics"; ALL CAPS FOR EMPHASIS; incorrect use of single quotation marks; a subject line is now "a gimmick"; and your "all too common" clichés--all the while criticizing someone's laziness? Oh, you real funny (and you suck at writing...but nice try).  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tob55
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Got my curiosity up on the question and subsequent conversation between the two people who posted, so I went to take a look for myself. Looking at it from a purely subjective point of view, I believe that the "Active" mentioned in the sidebar may be referring to the time when the article was originally posted on Wikipedia. I say that because in the history section of the article it states that the Garrison was originally built either during or just prior to the Japanese occupation (late 1800s ~ early 1900s). The Imperial Army occupied the garrison during that time up until 1945. Around the time of the Korean war the US Army took occupancy of the garrison which was then used as an in-processing facility for Army troops. The US Army has been the resident of the garrison since that time and its close either complete or in process will thus relinquish control of the properties and land back to South Korea.
That is my best investigative guess, but one that is most likely the reason for the misleading year. Fight it out if you must, but there is no need if time was taken to read through the article. Cheers!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
duhweecher
Joined: 06 Nov 2013
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tob55 wrote: |
Got my curiosity up on the question and subsequent conversation between the two people who posted, so I went to take a look for myself. Looking at it from a purely subjective point of view, I believe that the "Active" mentioned in the sidebar may be referring to the time when the article was originally posted on Wikipedia. I say that because in the history section of the article it states that the Garrison was originally built either during or just prior to the Japanese occupation (late 1800s ~ early 1900s). The Imperial Army occupied the garrison during that time up until 1945. Around the time of the Korean war the US Army took occupancy of the garrison which was then used as an in-processing facility for Army troops. The US Army has been the resident of the garrison since that time and its close either complete or in process will thus relinquish control of the properties and land back to South Korea.
That is my best investigative guess, but one that is most likely the reason for the misleading year. Fight it out if you must, but there is no need if time was taken to read through the article. Cheers! |
Thanks. I was thinking the same. I'm actually a bit confused at why they would put the "active" there too; doesn't really seems like it's referring to the page itself.
I read the contents and was also a bit confused, because the connection between the Japanese Occupation and the garrison is not very clear. I was thinking that perhaps it was called something else before being called Yongsan Garrison and that the Yongsan Garrison was the new name given in 2006. What do you think?
I mean I know it's been a military area for nearly a 100 years, but I'm not really sure when it became Yongsan Garrison. Nothing in the article really leads itself to figuring that out. The insinuation seems to be that this happened in 1945, but that wouldn't make much sense if you consider that the Korean War didn't finish until 1953 or so. So, again, we're back at guessing what this 2006 really means; there's nothing in the article that says when the Yongsan Garrison was actually set up in central Seoul. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tob55
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| duhweecher wrote: |
| tob55 wrote: |
Got my curiosity up on the question and subsequent conversation between the two people who posted, so I went to take a look for myself. Looking at it from a purely subjective point of view, I believe that the "Active" mentioned in the sidebar may be referring to the time when the article was originally posted on Wikipedia. I say that because in the history section of the article it states that the Garrison was originally built either during or just prior to the Japanese occupation (late 1800s ~ early 1900s). The Imperial Army occupied the garrison during that time up until 1945. Around the time of the Korean war the US Army took occupancy of the garrison which was then used as an in-processing facility for Army troops. The US Army has been the resident of the garrison since that time and its close either complete or in process will thus relinquish control of the properties and land back to South Korea.
That is my best investigative guess, but one that is most likely the reason for the misleading year. Fight it out if you must, but there is no need if time was taken to read through the article. Cheers! |
Thanks. I was thinking the same. I'm actually a bit confused at why they would put the "active" there too; doesn't really seems like it's referring to the page itself.
I read the contents and was also a bit confused, because the connection between the Japanese Occupation and the garrison is not very clear. I was thinking that perhaps it was called something else before being called Yongsan Garrison and that the Yongsan Garrison was the new name given in 2006. What do you think?
I mean I know it's been a military area for nearly a 100 years, but I'm not really sure when it became Yongsan Garrison. Nothing in the article really leads itself to figuring that out. The insinuation seems to be that this happened in 1945, but that wouldn't make much sense if you consider that the Korean War didn't finish until 1953 or so. So, again, we're back at guessing what this 2006 really means; there's nothing in the article that says when the Yongsan Garrison was actually set up in central Seoul. |
Actually, the garrisons were originally established to be on the outskirts of the cities according to the article, so the name would not have been Yongsan, because in all likelihood Yongsan did not exist as it is today. So whatever the name was, it was not known by its current name. Just my thoughts again, but the article was interesting to read, albeit maybe not as historically correct as the Wikipedia version portrays it. Cheers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T-J
Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Location: Seoul EunpyungGu Yeonsinnae
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
While the Japanese garrison was established outside Seoul proper at the time (1906), Yongsanbang was established as an administrative district in 1896. The name Yongsan in reference to that area dates back to Baekje.
I don't know what the Japanese called the garrison.
Upon taking control of the facilities in September of 1945 the U.S. Army named it Camp Seobinggo. That name stuck until 1952 when the name was changed to Yongsan.
As to the OP's question about the wiki article, I've two theories. One, it's Wikipedia and is an error. Two it's referring to the activation date of the current command after the force restructuring that took place about that time.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tob55
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| T-J wrote: |
While the Japanese garrison was established outside Seoul proper at the time (1906), Yongsanbang was established as an administrative district in 1896. The name Yongsan in reference to that area dates back to Baekje.
I don't know what the Japanese called the garrison.
Upon taking control of the facilities in September of 1945 the U.S. Army named it Camp Seobinggo. That name stuck until 1952 when the name was changed to Yongsan.
As to the OP's question about the wiki article, I've two theories. One, it's Wikipedia and is an error. Two it's referring to the activation date of the current command after the force restructuring that took place about that time.
|
Thanks T-J, I knew you would have a good and reasonable answer since you were in military here for a long period of time. Both of your suggested theories about the date make sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Weigookin74
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2014 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well let's hope in the next several years when Seoul takes control of the place, they turn it into a public park and don't just use it to put in crappy high rises or businesses. (Don't need any more GS25s, Olive Youngs, or Lotterias thank you very much.) Seoul is lacking a free open park in the middle of the city (without having to climb a mountain). I'm sure there must be a lot of tall older trees there that would make it a good site as well as some historical buildings that could house museums or something else, while the barracks could be torn down.
You know, the Harajuku area of Tokyo has this amazing park right in the middle of the city with really tall trees. It's a real park and not these fake ones you usually see in much of Korea. I suspect it was an former playground for the emporer or something like that. Anyways, huge green space that feels like a real forest right in the middle of the city. Reasonably flat. Seoul could use the same type of thing. Let's hope that most of the army base could be used like that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Weigookin74
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andrewchon
Joined: 16 Nov 2008
Location: Back in Oz. Living in ISIS Aust.
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2014 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Weigookin74 wrote: |
| Let's hope that most of the army base could be used like that. |
Most of old army bases have buried bodies and ammunition. It's disrespectful to walk over graves and dangerous to walk over unused ammunition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
duhweecher
Joined: 06 Nov 2013
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2014 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| T-J wrote: |
While the Japanese garrison was established outside Seoul proper at the time (1906), Yongsanbang was established as an administrative district in 1896. The name Yongsan in reference to that area dates back to Baekje.
I don't know what the Japanese called the garrison.
Upon taking control of the facilities in September of 1945 the U.S. Army named it Camp Seobinggo. That name stuck until 1952 when the name was changed to Yongsan.
As to the OP's question about the wiki article, I've two theories. One, it's Wikipedia and is an error. Two it's referring to the activation date of the current command after the force restructuring that took place about that time.
|
Awesome answer...thanks T-J! Just for clarification, does this mean that the US Army base was there prior, during (circa 1952), and after the Korean War? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Weigookin74
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 2:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| andrewchon wrote: |
| Weigookin74 wrote: |
| Let's hope that most of the army base could be used like that. |
Most of old army bases have buried bodies and ammunition. It's disrespectful to walk over graves and dangerous to walk over unused ammunition. |
I would imagine Korea is not going to leave this whole base as a shrine to US soldiers and would want to develop as there aren't enough high rises, Olive Youngs, Paris Bagettes, etc.
A public park would, at least be more respectful and a place all could visit and some could remember. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T-J
Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Location: Seoul EunpyungGu Yeonsinnae
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 4:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| duhweecher wrote: |
| T-J wrote: |
While the Japanese garrison was established outside Seoul proper at the time (1906), Yongsanbang was established as an administrative district in 1896. The name Yongsan in reference to that area dates back to Baekje.
I don't know what the Japanese called the garrison.
Upon taking control of the facilities in September of 1945 the U.S. Army named it Camp Seobinggo. That name stuck until 1952 when the name was changed to Yongsan.
As to the OP's question about the wiki article, I've two theories. One, it's Wikipedia and is an error. Two it's referring to the activation date of the current command after the force restructuring that took place about that time.
|
Awesome answer...thanks T-J! Just for clarification, does this mean that the US Army base was there prior, during (circa 1952), and after the Korean War? |
Here's one of the best historical map of Seoul at the end of WWII that I've found. It shows the base as it was at the time of transfer from Japanese to American control.
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/ams/korea_city_plans/txu-oclc-6618626.jpg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
javis
Joined: 28 Feb 2013
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 5:54 am Post subject: Re: US Military Scandal |
|
|
| duhweecher wrote: |
Sorry...had to get your attention with the subject...
Can someone please explain why several sources (besides this wiki link) say that the Yongsan Garrison (I'm assuming this also means the Yongsan Military Camp) has only been active since 2006?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yongsan_Garrison |
Yongsan Garrison was established by Big Brother after the Great War with Eastasia in 2006. I saw it on Wikipedia, so it must be true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
