Korean Job Discussion Forums

[itaewonguy]

we have all heard about the reunification dreams of the south and north
And the benefits of a reunified country. We have also discussed with Koreans and ourt students about the possibility of a war with the north and the role that USA, CHINA, and Russia will play and of course the devastating out come of the war if the north attack!
We have all heard the votes half say yes to reunification and the other half say no

But how many believe that it will be South Korea that invade North Korea?
Being here 8 years I have heard all the talk about the north this, the north that! They will attack blar blar! And the last coup[e years I changed my mind and told all my conversation business classes and classes that I believe the South will strike first!
There reactions are different..
Here is why I believe the south will attack the north!
First! They have too!! They will soon have no choice! They are running out of land already, and the fear of maybe being attacked is just a pain in the side which needs to be eliminated. South Korean conglomerates are eyeing up the north already and have been for sometime. Everyone knows that a war makes people filthy rich! And the reunification will put Samsung over the top!! Politicians will make a killing!!!
And in the end the people will all be happy!
I believe in the next 30years we can see an invasion!
I mean if anyone has seen pictures of pyungyang it��s a city which seems like a ghost town! But its well developed. The infrastructure is very good �� wouldn��t take to many years to turn it around. once the south Korean government take control it wont be a matter of 2 or 3 years before we see it flourishing.. I know South Korean politicians know this..
In 15 years from now.. seouls population alone will be close to 15million.. im thinking another 1-2 million new drivers will hit the streets just in seoul!!! The infrastructure here can not handle it.. also the prices and land for a rich over populated nation like SK cant handle it.. they will see that more positive out weight the negative for an invasion on North korea! So it will be the South that attacks the North.. but probably will fabricate it and say they are under attack from the north.. and by the time the north can say WHAT WHY WHEN HOW.. the smoke will clear and it will be over.. and it wont matter now!!
So what you guys think? IM crazy? To far fetched.. South korea will never attack?
China? Im thinking they wont get involved! They don��t want to risk their new found fortune with the G8 countries. Russia? Cant be bothered they have nothing to gain either! More to gain with a reunified nation..
I thought maybe USA will not support it, they will know it.. but for reason unknown at this time will not lead the attack for the invasion but will not stop it either..
Make it like it��s a Korean issue but support the defence!

Or they will be all guns blazing and take dibs on the contracts once the country is under Sk rule..
Anyway feels like the tokers bowl what you guys think? You guys have any theories?

South korea will invade! That��s my story and I��m sticking to it..

[SPINOZA]

My main complaint with that argument is that the NK military is twice the size of the SK - over 1 million troops vs 600k approx + the Americans (35k approx?).

Where's the propaganda going to come from to stop that 1m+ army being anything but an incredibly difficult obstacle, given that NK has no communication whatsoever with the outside world? Those 1m NK troops - unless I'm just a prejudiced bigot who believes anything the Western media tells us about NK - think Seoul is a poor city impoverished by the wicked Americans. Yes, I'd love to show them photographs of Seoul myself. NK is a country that is totally blinded by propaganda and force. War against an enemy like that isn't worth creating a few more Dongs north of the DMZ IMO and if the SKs have any sense at all they'll realize this.

[Faron]

All the esl teachers could help the south and keep them out of Seoul. Wheres my gun and helmet?

[Faron]

All the esl teachers could help the south and keep them out of Seoul. I need a gun and helmet!

[Sooke]

[Homer]

Excellent analysis Captain Crunch..errr..I mean I-guy.

Next, your paper on how the UN will end world poverty.

[Hater Depot]

The North may have a million troops, but -- how well trained are they? What is their equipment and morale like? For example the Air Force can only afford enough fuel to train 4 days a year.

[djsmnc]

The savage instinct and despair of North Korean soldiers would bring the sensitive Southern nancy boys to their knees. While North Korean soldiers would be humming communist anthems and ripping the heads off of wild animals with their bare hands to cook and survive in the mountains, the Southern boys would be singing ballads and trying to find a microwave to cook Ottogi 3 minute curry.

North Koreans would shove their bayonets deep in the belly of their Southern brothers while staring their soul down through the eyes, unmercifully navigating the blade through their intestines.

[lastat06513]

The south invading the north~ Now, that is totally unfeasible. The ROKA is too small and weak to pose any offensive threat. Plus, its weapon systems are meant for defensive means.

But from some people I've talked to, namely military historians and analysts that followed the events that lead up to the Korean War (50-53), some say it was the south that did instigate the whole matter, underestimating the preparedness of the north at the time by sending assassins and sabotuers up north to pressure them into reuniting with the south. Whether it is true or not remains to be seen. That was the policy of Sygman Rhee (1948-1960) to reunite Korea by "any means possible".

And if you were to ask someone during the 1960's and 1970's about the possibility of an invasion, some people might've said yes because of the state of readiness that the nation was under during the presidency of Park Chung Hee (Silmido training camp and the flirtation with uranium enrichment)

To say that the south could not invade the north could not be ruled out in the long run.

[ulsanchris]

[Swiss James]

I've always heard it said that when / if the two koreas do unite, the economic weight on the South will stretch it to breaking point. North Korea may have land as a resource, but they don't seem to have much else. Spending millions of dollars on a long and bitter war isn't going to help that much, nor is bombing half of the infrasctructure you want to inherit.

Individuals (arms dealers, contractors) might get rich during war time, but look at how much the US is having to spend on Iraq.

The plan at the moment seems to be that the South is like a larger company patiently trying to take over a subsidary- they'll wait until it goes bust and then come in with a generous offer (aid, some token role in the new government) and snatch the land. Makes much more economic sense to me.

Plus you'll need some incredible propoganda to make South Koreans attack their northern brothers.

Nice theory, but I don't buy it.

[fusionbarnone]

Interesting scenario.

When I was a concerned social issues student thinking that world was divided into ideological factions, I honestly believed the hype about ideology and the charismatic leaders which charactorized the 20th century.

Now, after having visited and lived in 43 countries, of which some were more often on the news rather than tourist maps, I conclude money is the driving force behind most moral/just "initiatives". If a person should want to progress from naive to informed, just follow the money trail(Who benefits and how, and the "means" most likely employed to achieve, are the questions that are then forced to be answered).

I've asked SK people about NK and empathy with their northern brethern and empathy "appears" tight(especially if a brother or sister still lives there). But, inquire if the US military should seriously up and leave and you will find most apart from the idealistic studen/30-something t population(predominantly No's mob/supporters), will object. Wasn't the US presence here once described as liken to a, "tripwire"? What does that mean?

I seriously doubt if SK people are willing to lend their sons(high-dollar future prospects for any Korean family; mum gets an life-time assistant from her son's marriage too) to a cause without proper excuse or remuneration. Getting rich doesn't include beating up long lost relatives at the cost of expending their own at a personal level. Even politicians would have a tough job pushing that one when the country has few resources(if an impoverished population without education or somewhere to "work") apart from cadging loot from the west with threats, or making dodgy business deals with undesirable nations.

No one in ROK wants to "subsidize their poor "relatives" either which unification will bring. This has/is discussed often in Korean newspapers. Job prospects are bad enough now as many would agree are further exacerberated further due to foreign English teachers taking Korean peoples jobs(some SKs actually believe this). Why would Koreans create economic problems for themselves by allowing an unrestrained migration of unskilled, unemployed NKs into a country that has a poor international record for funds collected on behalf of the disadvantaged in other countries.

In China, the "Peoples" govt. is throwing peasant farmers off their state allocated plots of land through a mandate passed to local councils enforced by corrupt police officials so that commercial initiatives can go ahead. Prior to Deng's reforms, Mao starved his population in order to sell produce to the then USSR for technology(rice for the bomb). In my opinion, the post-tiennenmen square management are ensuring China has a surplus of cheap labor in order to keep their production costs competitive(dispossessed farmers become "bang-bang' boys=carriers). And though this forced eviction, corrupt officials are determined to ride the new wave of economic reform. Hardly a "for the people" party. Not sure if the Korean govt. will ever need to be this radical. Korea is afterall, a rich nation(culturally/ethnically/socially/nationally unified).

Economically, SK is diversified enough to not have to rely on primary production(chinese rice is cheaper than Korean rice, American rice is cheaper than Chinese rice). Twenty years age(acording to K-teachers) the country did not have enough food production to feed it's population. Obviously, today's hard-pressed farmers made a significant contribution to Korea's present economic stance. As an interesting aside, the US has been pushing the Japanese for years to import "their rice" with the Japanese resisting at every turn( Japanese are very patriotic about their main staple and do not want foreign substitutes). I'm not sure how Koreans in the main "feel" about their rice purity in this respect though. Families I know subsidize 90% of their family food bill with produce from the family farm. With most members owning small business' around town(work out what you would save spending 90% less than what you spend now on consumables) this is how successful farming families supported their families who diversified/invested into local business'.

Korea's farmers are understandably miffed at the govt. for falling grain prices(Korean farmers are considered the plebians of modern Korean society) as living becomes near subsistance level according to phillippinas married to K-farmers. It does appear that the patriotic production efforts of farmers since the 1950s are no longer relied on as heavily. Thus, there could be some truth in what you say about a land shortage for more honorable economic pursuits. However, when you consider the size of the country you could also look at Koreans proven track record at managing their countries resources to the full ; high-density planning; export of population; international out-sourcing to Vietnam and China; technological domination of some high-tech industries; securing of enviable contracts(ship building), and most importantly educational mandates to pursue greater economic parity(1,000won=US$1.00 has already been achieved) through developing a highly skilled workforce(They seem to be winning admirably).

Koreans I also believe are coat-tail-riders(actually, a smart way to go; why re-invent the wheel?) , and for one example, EPIK was modelled after Japan's JET program until Koreans decided to modify details to suit their own "situation"(present/future) over time(IMF crisis). They tend/ed to observe firstly than discuss and dissect all possibilities before acting whilst, observing others as a model;namely Japan. The status que concerning the US presence, must stay in place as long as is possible in order to maintain a guarantee against possible economic instability if the North should decide to get uppity and throw a tantrum.

Is a war initiative taken by the ROK possible? I don't think so. There's no money in it and any involvement with the North will only bring personal loss, fortune reversals, and national debt. SK aid is as far as any likely future in-roads into the North.

My 2 cents.

[fusionbarnone]

Interesting scenario.

When I was a concerned social issues student thinking that world was divided into ideological factions, I honestly believed the hype about ideology and the charismatic leaders which charactorized the 20th century.

Now, after having visited and lived in 43 countries, of which some were more often on the news rather than tourist maps, I conclude money is the driving force behind most moral/just "initiatives". If a person should want to progress from naive to informed, just follow the money trail(Who benefits and how, and the "means" most likely employed to achieve, are the questions that are then forced to be answered).

I've asked SK people about NK and empathy with their northern brethern and empathy "appears" tight(especially if a brother or sister still lives there). But, inquire if the US military should seriously up and leave and you will find most apart from the idealistic studen/30-something t population(predominantly No's mob/supporters), will object. Wasn't the US presence here once described as liken to a, "tripwire"? What does that mean?

I seriously doubt if SK people are willing to lend their sons(high-dollar future prospects for any Korean family; mum gets an life-time assistant from her son's marriage too) to a cause without proper excuse or remuneration. Getting rich doesn't include beating up long lost relatives at the cost of expending their own at a personal level. Even politicians would have a tough job pushing that one when the country has few resources(if an impoverished population without education or somewhere to "work") apart from cadging loot from the west with threats, or making dodgy business deals with undesirable nations.

No one in ROK wants to "subsidize their poor "relatives" either which unification will bring. This has/is discussed often in Korean newspapers. Job prospects are bad enough now as many would agree are further exacerberated further due to foreign English teachers taking Korean peoples jobs(some SKs actually believe this). Why would Koreans create economic problems for themselves by allowing an unrestrained migration of unskilled, unemployed NKs into a country that has a poor international record for funds collected on behalf of the disadvantaged in other countries.

In China, the "Peoples" govt. is throwing peasant farmers off their state allocated plots of land through a mandate passed to local councils enforced by corrupt police officials so that commercial initiatives can go ahead. Prior to Deng's reforms, Mao starved his population in order to sell produce to the then USSR for technology(rice for the bomb). In my opinion, the post-tiennenmen square management are ensuring China has a surplus of cheap labor in order to keep their production costs competitive(dispossessed farmers become "bang-bang' boys=carriers). And though this forced eviction, corrupt officials are determined to ride the new wave of economic reform. Hardly a "for the people" party. Not sure if the Korean govt. will ever need to be this radical. Korea is afterall, a rich nation(culturally/ethnically/socially/nationally unified).

Economically, SK is diversified enough to not have to rely on primary production(chinese rice is cheaper than Korean rice, American rice is cheaper than Chinese rice). Twenty years age(acording to K-teachers) the country did not have enough food production to feed it's population. Obviously, today's hard-pressed farmers made a significant contribution to Korea's present economic stance. As an interesting aside, the US has been pushing the Japanese for years to import "their rice" with the Japanese resisting at every turn( Japanese are very patriotic about their main staple and do not want foreign substitutes). I'm not sure how Koreans in the main "feel" about their rice purity in this respect though. Families I know subsidize 90% of their family food bill with produce from the family farm. With most members owning small business' around town(work out what you would save spending 90% less than what you spend now on consumables) this is how successful farming families supported their families who diversified/invested into local business'.

Korea's farmers are understandably miffed at the govt. for falling grain prices(Korean farmers are considered the plebians of modern Korean society) as living becomes near subsistance level according to phillippinas married to K-farmers. It does appear that the patriotic production efforts of farmers since the 1950s are no longer relied on as heavily. Thus, there could be some truth in what you say about a land shortage for more honorable economic pursuits. However, when you consider the size of the country you could also look at Koreans proven track record at managing their countries resources to the full ; high-density planning; export of population; international out-sourcing to Vietnam and China; technological domination of some high-tech industries; securing of enviable contracts(ship building), and most importantly educational mandates to pursue greater economic parity(1,000won=US$1.00 has already been achieved) through developing a highly skilled workforce(They seem to be winning admirably).

Koreans I also believe are coat-tail-riders(actually, a smart way to go; why re-invent the wheel?) , and for one example, EPIK was modelled after Japan's JET program until Koreans decided to modify details to suit their own "situation"(present/future) over time(IMF crisis). They tend/ed to observe firstly than discuss and dissect all possibilities before acting whilst, observing others as a model;namely Japan. The status que concerning the US presence, would need to stay in place as long as is possible in order to maintain a guarantee against possible economic instability if, the North should decide to get uppity and throw a tantrum.

Is a war initiative taken by the ROK possible? I don't think so. There's no collective profit(apart from bankers and armament dealers) in it and any involvement with the North will only bring personal loss, fortune reversals, and national debt. SK aid is as far as any likely future in-roads into the North could possibly go.

My 2 cents.

[Swiss James]

Nothing really to add to that fusionbarnone (other than 2c certainly buys a lot of words from you!) but I think the 'tripwire' thing means that if the Norks attacked, the US soldiers here are only supposed to be sufficient to fend them off till re-inforcements from the US arrive, not to win the war outright.

[Bulsajo]