|
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 |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 7:57 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Bee Positive wrote: |
| Hater Depot wrote: |
The presence of foreign troops does not, prima facie, mean military occupation. US troops have no law enforcement powers, and don't have anything to do with the political process.
|
You're kidding me, right?
You CAN'T be so naive--I truly hope.
A phone call from the US President would not have averted, or stopped in its tracks, the Kwangju massacre?
The US just sits back and lets the South Korean people do whatever they want, politically? The way they've done . . . ah . . . in Latin America, Western Europe, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, America itself?
(1) If war breaks out here, under prearranged agreements, USFK takes command of the Korean military.
Think about that.
Think about it really, really hard, if you must.
Who is commander-in-chief of SK's military?
Roh Mu-Hyun?
Not a chance--and he knows it.
(2) Objectively considered, South Korea is a US-dominated outpost with a fair degree of autonomy in DOMESTIC AFFAIRS.
It's NOT, however, a fully sovereign and independent state.
(3) Now about those Iraqi "elections" . . .
Heh, heh, heh!
BEE POSITIVE |
1. This is being changed. South Korea will soon be taking charge of its own military
2. See number 1
3. Democracy takes root in small steps. From the MAGNA CARTA to today is a huge change and happened slowly. The fact that they are having elections and the fact that some people are PEACEFULLY (so far) disputing them shows a greater degree of democracy than ever before. In fact it sounds just like some American elections.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I suppose you think that Britain is also independent?
Did you ever read a book called _The Wilson Plot_?
|
Does that book actually say that the CIA toppled Harold Wilson, in the same way that the British and Americans toppled Mossadegh in Iran? That is, turfed him from office by armed force? My understanding is that the Americans(with heavy collaboration from right-wingers in the British intelligence agencies) just tried to discredit him by revealing supposedly damaging information and whatnot. If that's what happened, then I think it's a far cry from saying "the US runs Britian".
And anyway, how did the CIA "bring down a British government"? Wilson was replaced by James Callaghan, and Labour stayed in power until being voted out in the next election. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2005 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bee Positive wrote: |
| A phone call from the US President would not have averted, or stopped in its tracks, the Kwangju massacre? |
So, which is it?
A: The U.S. President could have stopped the Gwangju Massacre, but didn't. Doesn't this mean that the President of the U.S. was allowing the events in Korea to unfold as the Korean government wanted them to. Doesn't that mean that the U.S. was staying out of the affairs of Korea?
B. The U.S. President could not have stopped the Gwangju Massacre. Therefore, the Korean government is free to act of its own accord and the U.S. has no influence in the political affairs of the SK government or society.
Either way, it kinda makes your argument shite. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seethetraffic
Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Campus Marxists Make Way for College Capitalists
Choi Seo-na, college student and CEO of an online firm with six employees.
College students are becoming more interested in the financial industry and less in the ideologies and slogans that used to enliven the campus in the past. The buzz words now are ��housing subscription deposit account�� and ��fund investment�� rather than ��down with capital.��
At Seoul Women��s University last year, it took only a couple of minutes for 350 students to sign up for Becoming and Being Rich 101, the first such course to be offered by a university in Korea. Online community ��The Rich 20s�� has already found over 60,000 members in just a year, and youngsters wearing backpacks are swarming the finance corner at Seoul��s largest bookstore, Kyobo Book Centre in Gwanghwamun.
Retirement is no longer a distant future for college students -- it is an urgent issue, and many students are already prepared. ��Even if you get a job, you never know when you��ll get fired. So I��m going to work as a stock investor after I retire since there is no age limit,�� says Kim Jeong-seok, a tender 25 and a junior at Jeonju University.
Kim had his first shot at the stock market in July last year, investing W4 million (about US$4,000) he saved from part-time jobs. His annual profit rate is over 20 percent, he says, and he is practicing to become a financial specialist in his free time. It is estimated that at least three or four stock investment clubs exist on every campus in Korea.
Choi Seo-na (24), a business administration major at Ewha Womans University, is already a CEO with six employees. Choi sells clothes, bags and shoes in her online shop I Love Pink and made sales of W100 million in October. Starting off with an old computer in her rented room near campus in September last year, Choi��s business has grown to a profit-generating machine. ��I sit in front of the computer most nights,�� she admits.
Thanks to the hard work, Choi lost about 22 pounds in a year, and she still only sleeps four hours a day. In the morning, she and her staff meet to discuss how to deal with customers�� demands, and at night she goes hunting for products at Dongdaemun Market. She hopes to launch her own brand and expand the business after graduation.
The KOSDAQ bubble in the late 1990s made stock investment popular among college students for a while. But according to Prof. Han Dong-cheol of the Business Administration Department at Seoul Women's University, there is a world of difference between the ��hasty and careless�� investment then and today��s ��careful and planned�� investment.
��While investment in the late 90s was mostly indiscreet, fueled by hopes of becoming a millionaire overnight, today��s students are making practical investments after careful consideration of the low interest rate.��
Why the sudden finance boom among 20-somethings? Seo Yun-seok, the dean of Business Administration at Ewha Womans University, explains it comes from anxiety about job security coupled with the belief that ��anyone can get rich if they try hard enough.�� It is the young people��s way of defending themselves against a harsher reality where a life-long job can no longer be guaranteed.
([email protected] )
Methinks we are still waiting for capitalism
to free South Korea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seethetraffic
Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Let me elaborate...the article is encouraging....
the fact that this is news is a sad reminder of what
an uphill battle capitalism will always have against
the simple-minded tenents of Marxism which appeals
to those whose grasps of complexities are wanting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patchy
Joined: 26 Apr 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2005 4:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| No, it will enslave them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seethetraffic
Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2005 6:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| patchy wrote: |
| No, it will enslave them. |
What will enslave who? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patchy
Joined: 26 Apr 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2005 6:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pligganease wrote: |
| Bee Positive wrote: |
| A phone call from the US President would not have averted, or stopped in its tracks, the Kwangju massacre? |
So, which is it?
A: The U.S. President could have stopped the Gwangju Massacre, but didn't. Doesn't this mean that the President of the U.S. was allowing the events in Korea to unfold as the Korean government wanted them to. Doesn't that mean that the U.S. was staying out of the affairs of Korea?
|
It means that the USA felt that stopping a massacre which was in their power to stop, was not in their interests. Not only did they let it go ahead but they encouraged it to happen in the first place by sending the army which was under US command to KwangJu.
On the other hand, if the government had done anything that had been against the US's interests, the US would have stepped in and actively intervened; and if the government had persisted in these actions, the US would have gotten rid of the government. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patchy
Joined: 26 Apr 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2005 6:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| seethetraffic wrote: |
| patchy wrote: |
| No, it will enslave them. |
What will enslave who? |
Capitalism will enslave the North Koreans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seethetraffic
Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2005 7:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| patchy wrote: |
| seethetraffic wrote: |
| patchy wrote: |
| No, it will enslave them. |
What will enslave who? |
Capitalism will enslave the North Koreans. |
Pearls before swine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2005 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| patchy wrote: |
| On the other hand, if the government had done anything that had been against the US's interests, the US would have stepped in and actively intervened; and if the government had persisted in these actions, the US would have gotten rid of the government. |
This is a mere opinion, and one which has no precedent in this situation to use as an example. What makes you think that the U.S. was in charge of the domestic army of Korea? Were American soldiers involved in the Gwangju Massacre? How did the massacre benefit the U.S.?
I'm only curious because you say it so matter-of-factly. I think that this is just an opinion of what you think might have happened in those circumstances. I just know what did happen and everything else is just speculation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2005 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It wouldn't make things any worse would it? It would dramatically transform the nation's infrastructure. Int'l investors would likely enjoy the chance to sink their capital into the region.
Kim Jong Il would likely have to relinquish some of his dictatorial powers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patchy
Joined: 26 Apr 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pligganease wrote: |
| patchy wrote: |
| On the other hand, if the government had done anything that had been against the US's interests, the US would have stepped in and actively intervened; and if the government had persisted in these actions, the US would have gotten rid of the government. |
This is a mere opinion, and one which has no precedent in this situation to use as an example. What makes you think that the U.S. was in charge of the domestic army of Korea? Were American soldiers involved in the Gwangju Massacre? How did the massacre benefit the U.S.?
I'm only curious because you say it so matter-of-factly. I think that this is just an opinion of what you think might have happened in those circumstances. I just know what did happen and everything else is just speculation. |
No opinion. Fact.
The USA is heavily implicated because the troops were under US command:
http://www.koreatruth.org/history.html
"... Movement activists assert the Carter Administration had full knowledge and complicity in the massacre since the South Korean military is under the operational control of the U.S. military command, which must approve all troop movements along the Demilitarized Zone ..."
http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?no=227277&rel_no=1
"U.S. government involvement in ordering the massacre was discussed. After the suppression of the Gwangju fight for democracy, the U.S. government could no longer be regarded as an ally by people in South Korea.
Documents and testimony have revealed that on May 22, 1980, the Carter administration approved of the movement of U.S. and South Korean troops to suppress the people's uprising. The Gwangju massacre followed on May 27, 1980. This event has left a deep impression on South Korean people."
Not only the Kwangju Massacre but also the Daejon Massacre.
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=69&ItemID=8412
"Re-writing the Past/ Re-Claiming the Future
Nationalism and the Politics of Anti-Americanism in South Korea
by Sheila Miyoshi Jager
July 31, 2005
Printer Friendly Version
EMail Article to a Friend
The outbreak of the Korean War in June 1950 led to one of history's worst atrocities. Known as the Taejon massacre, an estimated 5000 to 7500 civilian deaths have been attributed to a single incident committed by the North Korean People's Army (NKPA) in late September 1950. The incident, described as "worthy of being recorded in the annals of history along with the Rape of Nanking, the Warsaw Ghetto, and other similar mass exterminations" in the official United States Army report issued at the end of the war, received extensive coverage in the international press which touted it as evidence of North Korean barbarity. (1) .....
... In other words, what had been described as a single atrocity committed by the North Koreans was actually part of an unfolding pair of massacres that began when South Koreans forces executed thousands of suspected leftists and political prisoners just before fleeing southward in July ahead of the advancing NKPA troops. The earlier July massacre appears simply to have been erased from the annals of official U.S. and South Korean histories of the war."
Recently information uncovered which implicates them in the Daejon Massacre which before now has been blamed solely on the North Koreans. It appears the North Koreans did commit a massacre but this was in retaliation for the earlier massacre by the South Koreans and the US of leftists and other political 'undesirables'. And all this time a cover-up and the North Koreans shouldering the full blame for it receiving much bad press. The US has known about their involvement of course but has lied about it. Why are you surprised that the US is still denying its involvement in the Kwangju massacre despite the evidence revealed in testimonies and documents? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| patchy wrote: |
[
Documents and testimony have revealed that on May 22, 1980, the Carter administration approved of the movement of U.S. and South Korean troops to suppress the people's uprising. The Gwangju massacre followed on May 27, 1980. This event has left a deep impression on South Korean people..."
Why are you surprised that the US is still denying its involvement in the Kwangju massacre despite the evidence revealed in testimonies and documents...? |
What evidence? All you have shown us is a couple of newspaper articles alleging these "documents"
Show us the actual documents and testimonies. Provide a link to them and not to articles that claim documents and testimonies support them. Anyone can make this claim. Heck I could say I have read hundreds of documents and testimonies that completely deny any U.S involement in the Kwangju massacre? So show us these documents or we can dismiss this as just your opinion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
According to Don Oberdorfer in The Two Koreas, the Korean government did not need the US military's permission to mobilize the two units which were sent to Kwangju. Under treaty obligations they had only to notify US commanders of the mobilization. American diplomats, pressed by Chun to give their assent, did so thinking that their private statement would ensure that restraint would be used and special forces troops would not be sent.
Many, if not most, of the original insinuations of US complicity were created by Chun Doo-hwan's propagandists to deflect criticism away from his regime. |
|
| 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
