Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Friday's Rally to Denounce U.S. Atrocities

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

Friday's Rally to Denounce U.S. Atrocities
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Gwangjuboy

Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England

Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 2:20 am Post subject:

Butterfly wrote:

How can you possibly know that?

I never claimed that I did for sure. Tell me where I did. I asked you whether it "would be imprudent" to suggest something to that effect. You haven't answered my question. The thrust of my point is that anti-American demonstrations don't often go hand in hand with anti-North Korean protests. I think you missed that.

Quote:

Yes, we need to demonstrate more, against abuses all over the world. But we have America as a power and ally that we all trade with, learn the language of, listen to the pop music of, and have beamed into our homes every night. For the most part we are happy with that, but we want the American Government to know, that we are not complicit with what they are doing in Iraq simply because we for the most part enjoy the other aspects of what their country offers. That's not silly. It's the only way we can let them know actually, because many of our governments don't represent us where the USA is concerned.

Great. So you haven't touched any of my previous points. I never suggested that anti-American protests shouldn't take place, but rather they should take place under the banner of "anti-Americanism". Instead these protesters are suggesting that the banner reads "we care about human rights" Consequently people are duped into thinking these protests go beyond anti-Americanism. They don't.

Quote:

American people are demonstrating too. Do you see my point that we, like those Americans, deomonstrate against the American invasion of Iraq, and the consequent brutality, precisely because we don't want to be hypocrites?

Are you implying that I am unaware of such movements? The American anti-war movement can also be admonished when it starts "suddenly" caring about human rights in a bid to give it's popularity a boost. That's because I feel strongly about the human rights movement, and don't like to see it hijacked by anti-American groups for their own narrow minded gain.

On the other hand

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

Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 9:45 pm Post subject:

Gwangjuboy wrote on this thread:

Quote:

I never suggested that anti-American protests shouldn't take place

Gwangjuboy wrote on another thread:

Quote:

We need Chun Doo Han back in office. He wouldn't have messed around with these "enemies of the state".

So, Gwangjuboy. What exactly were you trying to suggest in the latter quote, if not the opinion that you deny holding in the first one?

On the other hand

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

Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 9:47 pm Post subject:

http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/korea/viewtopic.php?t=21001&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Gwangjuboy

Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England

Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 1:51 am Post subject:

On the other hand wrote:

Gwangjuboy wrote on this thread:

Quote:

I never suggested that anti-American protests shouldn't take place

Gwangjuboy wrote on another thread:

Quote:

We need Chun Doo Han back in office. He wouldn't have messed around with these "enemies of the state".

So, Gwangjuboy. What exactly were you trying to suggest in the latter quote, if not the opinion that you deny holding in the first one?

I was refering to the pro-North Korean group whose activities are illegal according to South Korean law. I never suggested that the anti-American protesters should be crushed. I think your analogy is suspect. My commments about Chun Doo Han were also "tongue in cheek." I am prepared to concede that they weren't in the best taste. Frankly, I was trolling Embarassed

The Bobster

Joined: 15 Jan 2003

Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 4:09 am Post subject:

[quote]

Quote:

Yes, because it is absurd and incorrect, not conforming to any measurable correlation with the real world. Are we clear on this yet?

Quote:

You label it incorrect, yet the Hawaii state census continues to go unmentioned. Maybe the state of Hawaii was more sensitive to the Korean perspective than you are.

The Hawaii state census is probably not measuring race. Most likely they are measuring ethnicity. Why not provide a link to your source so we can all give some thought to what they are up to with that? Do some work to show why the Hawaii census is relevant to whether Korerans ought to be protesting US torture of Iraqi prisoners, wouldja? Cuz I can't come up with that on my own.

Quote:

Don't be making conjectures about my emotional state. I have a feeling I'm far more level-headed about this thing than you are

So ignoring sources, and rubbishing the Korean language when debating whether or not the Korean people constitute a race is level-headed is it?

I'm sorry, did you provide a source?

Regardless of what Korean scholars may feel about how they want to translate the word "race" neither you nor I are Korean. When we use the term we know what it means. You are playing games, and you know it.

And that's not what the debate is about, either. You accused me of bringing race into this when I did not. Now you want to tell us why it is relevant - it isn't, but that's not going to stop you, is it?

Quote:

You have tried to make a case that Koreans are not qualified to voice a protest about this. You have also said that you find the prison scandal to be a bad thing. What is stopping you from making your voice heard on this? So far, the only sound I'm hearing is outrage that other people wish to speak out against it

If I recall correctly I said that those found guilty of participating in those acts at the prison should be severely punished. I am not sure I can go much further than that. Are you still demanding that I take to the streets before you are convinced that I mean that?

Look man, I don't care if yoiu take to the streets or not, but if you have objections when other people want to do it, why make their nation of origin an issue about it?

Quote:

My own opinion is that the rise of extremist fundamentalism in Islam is in many ways intimately connected with and a reaction to Christian fundamentalism, especially in America - more precisely, they have a common root cause in the inherent conflicts of modern pluralism vs traditionalism in a world that is rapidly shrinking. Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson rose to prominence in the US almost simultaneously with Ayatollah Khomeini and the various terror groups over there, and it's really hard to see that as mere coincidence. These are patterns of history that we can watch unraveling before us.

But your question is a pretty ridiculous one, and you know it. Protests do not happen against totalitarian structures because they are not going to be shamed by the spectacle of thousands refusing to follow them, nor are they beholden to an electorate that might march in another direction when all the facts are known.

Democracy is a superior form of social order precisely because it tolerates the kind of disorder that is dissent.

The terrorists don't want prosperity in their part of the world, because that would deny them their lifeline;poverty. I am not interested in why Islamic fundamentalism is the flavour of the month in much of the Arab world. I am more interested in it's effects. No doubt the region, and the world needs to be freed from it's shackles. I was just drawing an analogy with your absurd implication that I should protest about the prison abuses before my criticisms of it are to be believed.

Your second paragraph needs raping. While suggesting that I should take to the streets in a moral crusade against the American prisoner abuses, you "inform" me that any protests against brutal dictatorships are in vain. It's just as well that you didn't counsel Nelson Mandela. What nonsense.

What nonsense, indeed.

S Africa was a democracy - one that maintained power through apartheid and disenfranchisement of large numbers of people, but a democracy nevertheless in the sense that elections were held and people took office to make laws based on the results of those elections. You are reaching, and your arms are too short for it.

Your "flavor of the month" has been fashionable for several decades now and everything the Bush administration has done since 9/11 has served to make it more so. You say you are not interested in the reasons, but I submit to you that those reasons are very iimportant to you, and you need to find some way to get past your boredom threshold on it.

Quote:

I was just drawing an analogy with your absurd implication that I should protest about the prison abuses before my criticisms of it are to be believed

Ah, then you admit it was irrelevant to the discussion. Thought I was probably wastging my time considering it. Next time you throw a red herring herring out like like, consider changing the font color like this. It would help me know just which things we all should be paying attention to, and which are just giving yuour fingers a little exersise.

The implication was not absurd, nor was it an implication. I merely asked why, if you think it is bad, you do not protest it also ... instead of merely objecting stridently when others wish to do so. Calling it absurd does not diminish my curiosity about it - in fact, it makes me wonder why you don't wish to address the question.

(Perhaps you don't really think it's as bad as you say it is.)

Quote:

He's almost certainly a victim, but there are far too many unanswered questions to decide who he was ultimately a victim of

I'm convinced that he was a victim of Islamic extremism. However, I am not sure what these conspiracy theories have to do with the demonstrations in Korea. Again, I only mentioned it to highlight how stupid your suggestion was that I take to the streets to protests against the prisoner abuse before my criticisms of it are to be believed.

Actually, you mentioned it to highlight the idea that terrorists also do bad things. It's not anything that would ever have occurred to any of us, and so glad you took the time to do that.

Quote:

A few, but I would not say "many." You gave only one example, Russia and Chechnya and I wonder how many more you can come up with. What examples you will find will not come close to the sheer scale of the way the US has made a career out of meddling with other countries.

I view the US "meddling" in a good light. The good outweighs the bad. How any Westerner living in Korea can not acknowledge the good that has resulted from the US's involvement in Korea is well beyond my comprehension. The hope is that Iraq will take it's share in the spoils eventually. One day Bagdad will be like Seoul. Rich, modern, and free. Who on earth wouldn't want that? And one day the Americans, in partnership with the Iraqis, will deliver it. As the American partnership with Korea delivered the Seoul of today.

I see. You can't provide another example besides Russia and Chechnya, so why not change the subject ... and it appears you agree with my point about the number and scale of international meddling done by the US. You accuse Koreans of being "selective," and yet when I think of the long list of American atrocities around the world that you need to ignore in order to see American meddling ing a "good light," I have to also think you are very selective about who is allowed to be selective ...

Very little of the wealth I see when I walk around Seoul today is due to any "partnership" with America, and a good part of the reason for this is that it isn't and never was a true partnership at all. You live in a quaint fantasy if you believe the US has had any large effect on the Korean "miracle." It took nearly 40 years and 7 US presidential administrations before any of what you see here today started happening ... and yet you give the credit to Washington, eh? Well, I needed a good laugh today, and thanks for giving it to me.

Koreans did this, GB. Face it and live with it. It is true.

And thanks for bringing us full circle back to my original point that some people around here just don't seem to like Koreans very much.

Quote:

Now you are making me laugh. You have railed in the shrillest possible way at the audacity of these Korean people, doubted the sincerity of their motives with these protests, and all but denounced them as ungrateful for daring to have an opinion less than flattering of the US president.

I'm guessing you think the war is a good thing and you would be annoyed at anyone for protesting it ... so why the special anger at the fact that some Korean people are doing so?

I am happy that Koreans can enjoy the right to demonstrate. Their brothers North of the border would be eliminated for any protests against their government. Damn me if I can't question the potester's track record on human rights issues. After looking at it, how could anyone conclude that it is anything but selective, and anti-American? Perhaps the biggest example of this hypocrasy came two days ago. Next to a flattering picure of Kim Jong Ill, and Kim Dae Jung, I noticed a picture of the two corpses of the middle school students hit by the American tank. Why does my scrutiny of anti-American protests that cloak themselves as pro-human rights/anti-war demonstrations continue to bewilder you?

Wake up. The aroma of freshly brewed coffee beans awaits yours senses : people ALL over the WORLD are protesting what the US is doing right now.

We have broken international law, abrogated treaties and tossed the Geneva Convention out the window along with our own Constitution - all because we are afraid and demagogues and criminals are in charge. We are killing children - children, GB - every day, while none of our own are truly at risk.

So much more to say about the crimes ourt country is committing ... and that's what the protesters are doing - they are saying it.

What are YOU saying?

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 6:08 am Post subject:

Quote:

see. You can't provide another example besides Russia and Chechnya, so why not change the subject ... and it appears you agree with my point about the number and scale of international meddling done by the US. You accuse Koreans of being "selective," and yet when I think of the long list of American atrocities around the world that you need to ignore in order to see American meddling ing a "good light," I have to also think you are very selective about who is allowed to be selective ...

Very little of the wealth I see when I walk around Seoul today is due to any "partnership" with America, and a good part of the reason for this is that it isn't and never was a true partnership at all. You live in a quaint fantasy if you believe the US has had any large effect on the Korean "miracle." It took nearly 40 years and 7 US presidential administrations before any of what you see here today started happening ... and yet you give the credit to Washington, eh? Well, I needed a good laugh today, and thanks for giving it to me.

Koreans did this, GB. Face it and live with it. It is true.

And thanks for bringing us full circle back to my original point that some people around here just don't seem to like Koreans very much.

Yes Koreans did this but the US saved them from Japan and then North Korea after that and protected them for 40 years which allowed Korea to divert recources from their own defense and focus on their economic development.

And for a long time the US did not press Korea on trade issues because the did not want to shake up the Korean economy.

could Korea have done what it has without the help of the US? No.

And we don't see Koreans complaining about ethic cleansing in the Sudan or Checnia, or what ever other horrible things are going on in the world.

You don't see them protesting Kim Jong Il the biggest killer of Koreans.

Nor were these people to been heard from when Saddam killed the Kurds something he would have done again if the US did not contain him.

Gwangjuboy

Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England

Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 6:52 am Post subject:

[quote="The Bobster"]
The Hawaii state census is probably not measuring race. Most likely they are measuring ethnicity. Why not provide a link to your source so we can all give some thought to what they are up to with that? Do some work to show why the Hawaii census is relevant to whether Korerans ought to be protesting US torture of Iraqi prisoners, wouldja? Cuz I can't come up with that on my own.[quote]

I did provide a link. I did that on page 4. Now, get your finger out and read the bloody thing. I only refered to it because you slammed me for labeling Koreans as a race. Damn me if I can't defend myself from your broadsides.

Quote:

I did provide a source. You ignored it, as evidenced by your failure to read the census. As far as I remember you did bring race into it. "Sure are a few people around here who don't like Koreans." Is that not throwing the race (bigotry for your benefit) card around?

Quote:

Look man, I don't care if yoiu take to the streets or not, but if you have objections when other people want to do it, why make their nation of origin an issue about it?

I have explained this in depth already yet you continue to ask me why I object to it. Why don't you read? However, I will give a quick synopsis of my position,

The protests are not about human rights, or the rights of Iraqis, they are purely anti-American, and the protesters are very selective in their condemnation of those who abuse human rights. Thus, they are hypocrites.

Quote:

You argued that demonstrations against dictatorships weren't effective because despots ignored them. I rightly pointed out your stupidity. I can't understand why you are suggesting that South Africa was a democracy under white rule. Maybe you still don't know what democracy means. The white rulers in South Africa deprived a huge segment of the population the right to vote. Thus, it's undemocratic. Why are you arguing that this is democratic? Have you gone mad?

Quote:

Your "flavor of the month" has been fashionable for several decades now and everything the Bush administration has done since 9/11 has served to make it more so. You say you are not interested in the reasons, but I submit to you that those reasons are very iimportant to you, and you need to find some way to get past your boredom threshold on it.

I detect some pro-Islamist sentiment here. That in itself probably means you are not in a position to make a fair call on this subject. Anyway, I said that I wasn't interested in it because I thought we were talking about the Korean protesters. Anyway, Islamic extremism is very dangerous, and any inaction in this area could have very serious consequences.

Quote:

Please rewrite this. I don't understand what you are saying.

Quote:

The implication was not absurd, nor was it an implication.

This is perplexing. Don't you think? Especially inlight of what you wrote underneath!

Quote:

I merely asked why, if you think it is bad, you do not protest it also ... instead of merely objecting stridently when others wish to do so. Calling it absurd does not diminish my curiosity about it - in fact, it makes me wonder why you don't wish to address the question.

(Perhaps you don't really think it's as bad as you say it is.)

I have addressed this issue a few times now. I am getting tired of repeating myself. I reiterate, I think those responsible should be severely punished. I offer a final unreserved condemnation of what transpired in that prison. However, I don't feel that I need to get on the streets and protest about it just to please doubters. I also don't protest about North Korea's evil regime, but it doesn't mean that I don't hate it.

Quote:

Actually, you mentioned it to highlight the idea that terrorists also do bad things. It's not anything that would ever have occurred to any of us, and so glad you took the time to do that.

I don't understand what you attempting to say here. Stop rambling.

[quote]I see. You can't provide another example besides Russia and Chechnya, so why not change the subject ... and it appears you agree with my point about the number and scale of international meddling done by the US. You accuse Koreans of being "selective," and yet when I think of the long list of American atrocities around the world that you need to ignore in order to see American meddling ing a "good light," I have to also think you are very selective about who is allowed to be selective ... [code]

I can think of other examples, Congo has been the victim of meddling from neighbouring countries for the last decade at least. Indeed, their rich gold mines have been plundered by those other countries. China is a meddler too. Hong Kong,and Taiwan have all been the victims of an over zealous Beijing. Not to mention some of the religious minorities within their borders. No?

Quote:

Very little of the wealth I see when I walk around Seoul today is due to any "partnership" with America, and a good part of the reason for this is that it isn't and never was a true partnership at all. You live in a quaint fantasy if you believe the US has had any large effect on the Korean "miracle." It took nearly 40 years and 7 US presidential administrations before any of what you see here today started happening ... and yet you give the credit to Washington, eh? Well, I needed a good laugh today, and thanks for giving it to me.

Koreans did this, GB. Face it and live with it. It is true.

Did the Americans not open up their markets to Korean goods en masse? Did the Korean market welcome American goods? There weren't too many Ford motor cars on Korean roads in the 1980's. Did the American military presence not provide crucial foreign investors with confidence? Did the Americans not lose 50,000 men only half a century ago in a bid to force the North Koreans back? Coupled with Korea's strong work ethic, and diligence, I would say that is a partnership. No?

Quote:

And thanks for bringing us full circle back to my original point that some people around here just don't seem to like Koreans very much

Why are you trying to equate pro-American sentiment with Korea bashing? I work hard here, love the kids, the food, have a great girlfriend, and some bloody great Korean friends. I also make an effort with the language. Frankly, I don't like your insinuation. Withdraw it.

The Bobster

Joined: 15 Jan 2003

Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 10:35 am Post subject:

Quote:

No, sir, I haven��t, and you are aware of it, except insofar as I��m spending time I ought to spend on other things explaining what is obvious to a man who knows what is obvious.

I know very well what democracy means, and I know that America was a democracy even in the Deep South and even during the years before the Civil War when black people were not only denied voting rights but most other rights as well. You know it, too. And you are not stupid, and neither am I – you are, however, trying to argue a stupid position, using bravado and an arrogant tone to take the place of facts and logic.

South Africa and the road to the end of apartheid provide one of a handful of examples where civil disobedience and dissent, economic sanctions, public demonstrations in democratic nations and nonviolent resistance to an oppressive regime brought about progressive change with a minimum of bloodshed. The reason this happened the way it did was that both de Klerk and Mandela were reasonable men (not demogogues such as we have in Washington now) who had firm commitment to the ideals of democracy and to see reform take place within that process.

I do not suggest that S Africa was a democracy under white rule, I state it clearly because it is a fact of history. It was a democracy in exactly the way that the US was a democracy during the presidency of Thomas Jefferson and in the same way that Israel is a democracy today under Sharon – all three are examples of oppressive democracies, and illustrate how democracy alone does not provide social justice.

These are not radical ideas, not are they mine alone. They are simple, observable facts, and you both know and understand them. Please don��t waste our time this way again by making me show you that the top of a table is above the bottom part and that circles carry within them the characteristic of roundness.

Quote:

Quote:

This is probably not worth dignifying because it carries the germ of an ad hominem attack. What exactly was it that I said in the paragraph you quoted that indicates ��pro-Islamist sentiment��? The fact that Islamic fundamentalism has been an important force on the world scene since 1979 and the revolution against the Shah of Iran is not something about which I need to have any particular sentiment one way or another. It simply is. And if a court of inquiry were to find me guilty of ��pro-Islamist sentiment�� in the manner of the McCarthy Hearings, how would this have any bearing on my attitude toward fundamentalist extremism in both Muslim and Christian contexts?

I happen to know a little about Islam because I��ve looked into it out of curiosity, while you have stated that you are ��not interested in�� it. Now, really, between the two of us, who is in a better position to ��make a fair call��?

Islamic extremism is very dangerous, agreed, as is Christian extremism, of which our barely-elected leaders in Washington provide a very clear example.

By the way, I took another look at the sources you provided, or tried to. Unfortunately, it seems my computer lacks the software to open pdf files, so I��m going to have to assume that whatever point you were trying to make about Hawaii��s census is very likely as irrelevant as your examples about S Africa, Chechnya and the Congo. (China was a goofy example, since Hong Kong and Taiwan ARE China.) We were talking about scope and scale of foreign meddling by the US and I continue to assert that we need to go back to European Colonialism to find anything similar to the enormous extent of what the US has been involved in just since the end of WW2.

But one thing I am very interested in, since you did introduce the subject of extremism, and it is something I held back from confronting you on several days ago. At the time I felt that questioning your sources as I��m about to do is rather like someone else on these forums who once implied a racist mindset toward another user here because a web page offered as a source had a small add for David Duke placed very small near the bottom.

I felt that was very unfair of him, so I was loath to do it myself in your case. However, you are calling my credentials into question about being able to ��make a fair call,�� as you put it (because apparently I��m not sufficiently ��anti-Islamist�� enough for you) so I��m going to ask you if you are aware of and agree with the political philosophy of the quasi-religious organization that published the statistics you gave us ... because, you see, the really weird thing about this source you provided is that it argues the opposite of what you were arguing – while you wished to show indiercj that the US has performed actions in support of those who had been oppressed by Saddam, this organization wishes to do the opposite and to persuade that allowing such people safe harbor within our democracy constitutes a threat of terrorism.

Quote:

Critics of the Bush administration's immigration policies are fearful that a number of dangerous aliens may have entered the United States as a result of resettlement of refugees from the so-called war on terror in Afghanistan.

The site I��m referring to is this one, which you offered as a source of statistics regarding immigration into the US from Iraq.

http://www.denverspiritualcommunity.org/AmericanFreePress/AFPNewsDec02.htm#anchor86442

Of course, you go to their homepage, and you find a lot of things about hermetic wisdom, alchemy, feng shui, auras, even dowsing, of all things �� all in all, just about as mainstream as the Rosicrucians, I think, and I��m a little surprised they are not mentioning Roswell and the Saucer People in there. GB, is this a source that you refer to often for political guidance, and if so, should I assume that it explains a lot about your ideas regarding S Africa, Chechnya and the like? Here is their home page : http://www.denverspiritualcommunity.org/index.htm

Sorry, I would normally be asking these things except that you questioned my ability to make even-handed judgments on absolutely no evidence at all �� and so I feel it��s fair to ask you now if you have much or any affiliation with The Denver Spiritual Community. Because, you know, they are pretty weird, GB. I��m from California, so I think I know weird when I see it.

Quote:

I offer a final unreserved condemnation of what transpired in that prison. However, I don't feel that I need to get on the streets and protest about it just to please doubters. I also don't protest about North Korea's evil regime, but it doesn't mean that I don't hate it.

I think I��m getting the idea. It is the activity of protest in general that you have problems with, not just that Koreans are doing it.

And yet you spend a lot of time asserting that the motivations of these Koreans are simply anti-American and nothing else. You speak of them being ��selective�� and yet when you see torture happening, you do not care enough to raise your own voice about it. We will take your word that you hate it, but it doesn��t explain why you think silence is a proper response – more than mere silence, you criticize those who do raise their voices.

You claim to have no special animosity towards Koreans, and I hope it is true, but the attitudes you have expressed here give another picture. It��s true that there weren��t too many Fords on Korean freeways in the 80s, but there weren��t all that many on American freeways either – that was the decade the American consumer decided they liked Asian cars better, which is something Lee Iaccoca and the rest of the Detroit oligarchy need to take the hit for, as the market for small and medium-sized cars had been growing steadily in the US since the years of the oil embargo of the 70s. It��s fact of history that the Koreans and the Japanese were in position to take advantage of, and yet you seem to think it is some kind of gift (or ��partnership�� as you put it) bestowed upon them by America for the purpose of providing a boost to their economy and that Koreans are less than they should be if they are not grateful about it.

The American markets were open to many countries to just the same degree at that time, yet not all countries made the same economic strides. The wealth you see around you here today is not a gift from the US. It��s something they made for themselves.

The American military was here to protect and promote American interests, and the 50K on our side who died are a tiny fraction of the 2 million Koreans who were extinguished in that conflict (many more millions when you include all Koreans, North and South), and GB, a hefty portion of those 2 million were children, women and old people. Who made the greater sacrifice there? I think I know the answer, and I think I know who ought to be feeling the gratitude

If it seems I am insinuating that you don��t like Koreans much, well, I��m just going by the evidence of what you have said here. You think the torture is wrong but you resent Koreans for saying so. You think the economic progress is due to favorable treatment from Washington, and only now make a small noise about ��Korea��s strong work ethic�� (wrong, capitalism does not reward according to how strenuous the effort expended, much more complicated than that, and people in poor countries work just as hard if not more than in wealthy places). Finally, you assert that there is some mysterious, arcane connection between 50,000 soldiers among UN forces and the economic progress we see today, when that economic progress didn��t even start to happen until several decades had passed from the last soldier had expired from that Police Action.

Glad to hear you appreciate the work Korea is giving you and the opportunity to love the kids and the food, girlfriend and drinking buddies. Show your appreciation a little bit more by allowing the respect to protest and disagree about things that any sane person would find objectionable, like the torture of Iraqis in a Baghdada prison.

On the other hand

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

Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 11:08 am Post subject:

Quote:

On the other hand wrote:
Gwangjuboy wrote on this thread:

Quote:
I never suggested that anti-American protests shouldn't take place

Gwangjuboy wrote on another thread:

Quote:
We need Chun Doo Han back in office. He wouldn't have messed around with these "enemies of the state".

So, Gwangjuboy. What exactly were you trying to suggest in the latter quote, if not the opinion that you deny holding in the first one?

I was refering to the pro-North Korean group whose activities are illegal according to South Korean law. I never suggested that the anti-American protesters should be crushed. I think your analogy is suspect. My commments about Chun Doo Han were also "tongue in cheek." I am prepared to concede that they weren't in the best taste. Frankly, I was trolling

But of course, if Chun Doo Hwan were back in power ALL left-wing protest would be crushed, including that of the anti-American group whose right to protest you claim to defend.

I understand you were trolling, but come on. There IS a limit. Would you criticize German leftists by saying that you wish Hitler were back in power?

TheUrbanMyth

Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 3:56 pm Post subject:

[quote="The Bobster"]

Quote:

Why do you persist in reinterpreting other people's comments? This was not what he said at all. He was talking about SOME Koreans using the pretext of torture to protest against America. He is also asking where were they when Saddam was torturing and killing Iraqis. After all that was only a couple of years or so ago. That is the question.

TheUrbanMyth

Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 4:05 pm Post subject:

[quote="The Bobster"]

Quote:

If it seems I am insinuating that you don��t like Koreans much, well, I��m just going by the evidence of what you have said here. You think the torture is wrong but you resent Koreans for saying so. You think the economic progress is due to favorable treatment from Washington, and only now make a small noise about ��Korea��s strong work ethic�� (wrong, capitalism does not reward according to how strenuous the effort expended, much more complicated than that, and people in poor countries work just as hard if not more than in wealthy places). Finally, you assert that there is some mysterious, arcane connection between 50,000 soldiers among UN forces and the economic progress we see today, when that economic progress didn��t even start to happen until several decades had passed from the last soldier had expired from that Police Action.

.

So you want to continue this debate on another thread? Fine by me. I will simply just ask one question. If the U.S had not intervened in the Korea War (along with other allied countries) do you honestly believe South Korea would have the standard of living it enjoys today? I am asking for your opinion, because we don't know what would have happened had South Korea had to fight against the North alone. However based on the military evidence we can make a pretty good guess. At the time of the allies intervention, the South Korean forces had been pushed back to Busan. The North had military assistance (mostly equipment provided by Russia and China). So the most likely outcome is that the South would be under KJI's control today.

I pointed this out in another thread (and you made some feeble rebuttal about how you can't believe every country isn't asking for U.S forces to be stationed there, or something like that.

I also pointed out that West Germany (maybe the strongest economy in Europe had U.S forces stationed there) I also pointed out that Japan (the world's number two economy) has U.S forces stationed there.

I also asked you a question at the time. Can you find one country where the U.S forces have been stationed for several decades and whose quality of living has not improved?

By no means am I claiming that the U.S forces were/are the ONLY factor in South Korea's recovery. They are however a MAJOR factor. You seemed slightly confused on this in the other thread which is why I am clarifying it for you here. As I pointed out on the other thread, South Korea's hard work ethic also helped. But as you so helpfully pointed out in this thread, the success of capitalism doesn't depend just on how hard people work. There are many factors. But in three or four very successful economies the presence of U.S forces (or the understood support of said forces) are a common factor. Why is that?

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 4:37 pm Post subject:

[

Quote:

b]The American military was here to protect and promote American interests,[/b] and the 50K on our side who died are a tiny fraction of the 2 million Koreans who were extinguished in that conflict (many more millions when you include all Koreans, North and South), and GB, a hefty portion of those 2 million were children, women and old people. Who made the greater sacrifice there? I think I know the answer, and I think I know who ought to be feeling the gratitude

If it seems I am insinuating that you don��t like Koreans much, well, I��m just going by the evidence of what you have said here. You think the torture is wrong but you resent Koreans for saying so. You think the economic progress is due to favorable treatment from Washington, and only now make a small noise about ��Korea��s strong work ethic�� (wrong, capitalism does not reward according to how strenuous the effort expended, much more complicated than that, and people in poor countries work just as hard if not more than in wealthy places). Finally, you assert that there is some mysterious, arcane connection between 50,000 soldiers among UN forces and the economic progress we see today, when that economic progress didn��t even start to happen until several decades had passed from the last soldier had expired from that Police Action.

What does the US get out of keeping US forces in Korea today?

What has Korea done for the US?

Where would Korea be without the US?

mithridates

Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 5:16 pm Post subject:

If the US had never shown an interest in Korea I assume Soviet troops would have moved in all the way to the south...without anybody to fight Kim Il-Sung may not have been quite the charismatic and idolized leader that he was, and Korea likely would've been just another republic that regained its freedom in the 90s like all the others...maybe. I really have no idea what would have happened if the war hadn't occurred though. There would be a lot more buildings standing from during the Japanese occupation I suppose. Much more Russian. That would be weird!

Homer
Guest

Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 5:22 pm Post subject:

Quote:

What does the US get out of keeping US forces in Korea today?

What has Korea done for the US?

Where would Korea be without the US?

Overly simplistic questions applied to a complex situation.

The Bobster

Joined: 15 Jan 2003

Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 9:53 pm Post subject:

Quote:

I also asked you a question at the time. Can you find one country where the U.S forces have been stationed for several decades and whose quality of living has not improved?

Sure, I can think of a country that has had American troops stationed on their soil for several decades whose quality of living did not improve. South Korea.

They were dirt poor here for nearly 40 years with US troops stationed on their soil all the while. All of a sudden in the late 80s and early 90s their economy started taking off, and even though a great deal of time had passed with nothing of the sort happening you assert that the reason for it is that the American military presence.

But that��s all it is, an assertion. You are not backing it up with any coherent argument save the one about not needing to devote as many resources to defense than would be true otherwise (though S Korea still devotes a larger percentage of their economy to it than many countries their size). However, this was always true from 1953 onwards and there was nothing unique that happened in these later decades that was connected to the US involvement here.

Yeah, TUM, we��ve argued this before on another thread. I told you then that unless you had something new to bring to the table on the subject then I would succumb to boredom in your case. I wasn��t confused about your position on that other thread and I��m not confused about it now – I understand what you believe, but I don��t understand WHY you believe it, because the facts to support your case just don��t exist, or at least you haven��t presented them to us.

Mithridates is right, though. We can make a fair guess that without UN intervention the entire peninsula would have fallen under communism – BUT we cannot make any accurate surmises about what would have happened these many decades later. There just is not enough evidence to make those kinds of suppositions.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next
Page 8 of 10

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