| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ajosshi
Joined: 17 Jan 2011
Location: ajosshi.com
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2012 1:22 pm Post subject: U.S. Military Illegally Arresting Korean Nationals |
 |
|
Osan Airbase Personnel Investigated For Illegally Arresting Korean Nationals
Video: http://ajosshi.com/?p=1410
by GI Korea in: USFK
Anyway apparently from what I can make out from the news clip the SP�s asked the shop owner to move his vehicle and refused to because he wanted to close his shop before moving his car. The shop owner went back into the store and chased out the remaining customers and then went back outside where the confrontation happened. It is unclear who started the pushing but I can definitely see the shop owner starting the pushing but that doesn�t give SP�s the right to handcuff and detain the guy.
When the guy refused to move the vehicle they should have stepped back from the guy�s shop and wait for the local police to arrive. It appears that the SP�s wanted to keep the guy there at the store until the police arrived. If someone with no law enforcement authority is trying to detain you I could understand why this guy would get pissed off if that is what happened. I�ll be interested to hear how other people interpret what happened, but that is how it initially seems to me. More video may convince me otherwise but from what I have seen, I see no reason why the SP�s could not have stepped back from the store and let the Korean police handle it. If the guy drove off so what, it is better then creating an international incident and it isn�t like the police couldn�t stop by the next day and talk to the guy about his parking habits.
So what does everyone else think?
http://rokdrop.com/2012/07/08/osan-airbase-personnel-investigated-for-illegally-arresting-korean-nationals/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Julius
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2012 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There are no parking rules in Korea...thus no case to answer.
I can't count the number of times I've had to dive out of the way of a car driving directly at me, on the sidewalk. Even trucks drive on the pavement. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PEIGUY
Joined: 28 Mar 2004
Location: Omokgyo
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2012 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If they were not MP's why did the have handcuffs? They could've simply taken down his license plate # and wait for the Korea Police to come along. If a tussle ensued then the person should've been handcuffed. However, more details need to be fleshed out before any sort of definitive opinion can be given. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Chance
Joined: 30 May 2011
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2012 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Koreans should just own up to the fact of being owned...whereas back in the day they would've been tossed into jail and maybe worse, just getting 'cuffed in comparison ain't no thang |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yodanole
Joined: 02 Mar 2003
Location: La Florida
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2012 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dave Chance wrote: |
| Koreans should just own up to the fact of being owned...whereas back in the day they would've been tossed into jail and maybe worse, just getting 'cuffed in comparison ain't no thang |
Well since we are always demanding to be treated the same and equally as Koreans and not be "different" or "outsiders" then I guess we should own up to the fact of being owned as well.
Really though, post 9-11, heck even post Marine Barracks in Lebanon, rolling around with non-descript trucks by army bases is not the brightest of ideas. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NilesQ
Joined: 27 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2012 5:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Dave Chance wrote: |
| Koreans should just own up to the fact of being owned...whereas back in the day they would've been tossed into jail and maybe worse, just getting 'cuffed in comparison ain't no thang |
Well since we are always demanding to be treated the same and equally as Koreans and not be "different" or "outsiders" then I guess we should own up to the fact of being owned as well.
Really though, post 9-11, heck even post Marine Barracks in Lebanon, rolling around with non-descript trucks by army bases is not the brightest of ideas. |
Devil's Advocate here.
Really though, post 9-11, heck even post Marine Barracks in Lebanon, maintaining large military bases in soverign nations where the locals are hostile towards your presence is not the brightest of ideas. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2012 6:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| PEIGUY wrote: |
| If they were not MP's why did the have handcuffs? They could've simply taken down his license plate # and wait for the Korea Police to come along. If a tussle ensued then the person should've been handcuffed. However, more details need to be fleshed out before any sort of definitive opinion can be given. |
An SP is an MP. MP, meaning Military Police, is the term used by the Army and the Marine Corps. SP, meaning Shore Patrol, is the term used by the Navy. SP, meaning Security Police, is the term used by the Air Force.
There are widely differing accounts of the incident in question. It'll be interesting to see what the investigation by both the Korean police and the USAF determines to actually have happened. Of course, the KT already has weighed in with an asinine comment on the situation. No link because I've long been fed up with that rag. Easy enough to find the story on your own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2012 6:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| NilesQ wrote: |
Devil's Advocate here.
Really though, post 9-11, heck even post Marine Barracks in Lebanon, maintaining large military bases in soverign nations where the locals are hostile towards your presence is not the brightest of ideas. |
By locals, you mean the guys making their money off of the military folks stationed at said bases and/or the national government who is incredibly happy to have an allied military in their territory to keep their territory from being lost to a very hostile and dangerous enemy? Or do you have a different definition of locals that only takes into account the opinion of a minority of the populace? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NilesQ
Joined: 27 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2012 6:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CentralCali wrote: |
| NilesQ wrote: |
Devil's Advocate here.
Really though, post 9-11, heck even post Marine Barracks in Lebanon, maintaining large military bases in soverign nations where the locals are hostile towards your presence is not the brightest of ideas. |
By locals, you mean the guys making their money off of the military folks stationed at said bases and/or the national government who is incredibly happy to have an allied military in their territory to keep their territory from being lost to a very hostile and dangerous enemy? Or do you have a different definition of locals that only takes into account the opinion of a minority of the populace? |
By "locals" I mean the people who see the presence as an occupation, and are motivated by it to attack American interests at home and abroad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2012 6:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| That would be a yes to the different definition, then. And your's is a very poor definition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2012 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't know what the guy's geopolitical views are, just if I was slowly rolling by an army base with a truck full of whatehaveyou I'd be sure that someone on patrol knew what I was up to and wasn't about to set off some Osan Ordinance.
After all, who knows? One of the guys might have done a tour in the Mid East and been a bit touchy about trucks and such and while not justifiably, certainly excusably might have reacted in a certain way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NilesQ
Joined: 27 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2012 8:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hey, I'm not saying the guy's in the right. But that goes with the territory of being a foreign military operating in a soverign nation. No matter what the guy was doing, it will read as US soldiers rough up Korean shopkeeper in local news. Just because the US Army and/or public think that they're helping the locals, doesn't mean they see it that way.
If there were a refferendum on US military presence in SK tomorrow and I had to bet my life savings on the outcome, I 'd bet that the Korean citizenry would vote to have them leave. That is just my impression after living in SK for 5 years. On the whole, I got the impression that the average SK citizen's attitude toward the US Army still being in Korea was negative.
This does not diminish the fact that the USA trained, equiped, and built the ROK forces as we know them today. If there was a war with the north, it would be the ROK boys sent head first into it. If peaceful unification is the goal, US persence on the peninsula ensures that won't happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Chance
Joined: 30 May 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2012 8:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Dave Chance wrote: |
| Koreans should just own up to the fact of being owned...whereas back in the day they would've been tossed into jail and maybe worse, just getting 'cuffed in comparison ain't no thang |
Well since we are always demanding to be treated the same and equally as Koreans and not be "different" or "outsiders" then I guess we should own up to the fact of being owned as well.
|
On the whole we are incredibily privileged and don't have much of a leg to stand on when we whine...'course if u end up with a bad company or school it's up to u to find a better one, same as anywhere.
And Korea stopped being a soveriegn nation about 600 years ago (the official stated policy was "sadae jui", or "serving the Great", that is, China- having already given in to another nation in 1392, the Joseon elite found it so easy to simply change allegiance to Japan in late 19th/early 20th c., and then the States, in order to maintain their position. The freedom and resistance fighters by and large came from the farmers/working class or lower rung yangban). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2012 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| NilesQ wrote: |
| Hey, I'm not saying the guy's in the right. But that goes with the territory of being a foreign military operating in a soverign nation. |
You do know it's that sovereign nation that asked for the UN forces, including the US military, to be here, do you not?
| Quote: |
| If there were a refferendum on US military presence in SK tomorrow and I had to bet my life savings on the outcome, I 'd bet that the Korean citizenry would vote to have them leave. |
You'd likely lose your life savings, then.
| Quote: |
| That is just my impression after living in SK for 5 years. On the whole, I got the impression that the average SK citizen's attitude toward the US Army still being in Korea was negative. |
You seem to be basing your opinion on just what little you've encountered in your immediate area.
| Quote: |
| If there was a war with the north, it would be the ROK boys sent head first into it. |
You do not know what you're talking about.
| Quote: |
| If peaceful unification is the goal, US persence on the peninsula ensures that won't happen. |
Again, you have no idea of what you're talking about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
