|
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 |
Troll_Bait
Joined: 04 Jan 2006
Location: [T]eaching experience doesn't matter much. -Lee Young-chan (pictured)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lastat06513
Joined: 18 Mar 2003
Location: Sensus amo Caesar , etiamnunc victus amo uni plebian
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 9:35 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Good, if China was to take over the northern half of the country, that would mean the people would be more nicer and more open to foreigners than if the southern half took control of it......
And they would be less xenophobic than their southern brothren too..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
philipjames
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 11:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I have often thought about that. It's not in China's interests to have a strong, united, US-allied country on its border. A few years ago China basically let the cat out of the bag when it produced maps showing north Korea as historically part of China. I don't think China will permit a united Korea - unless, that it, it becomes a united Korea as part of a greater China. Once the US pulls out of Korea I think we'll see a return to the old order; that of Korea falling seriously under the sway of China. It may even become, in some degree, a part of China. As China goes from strength to strength this is a real and serious possibility. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mercury
Joined: 05 Dec 2004
Location: Pusan
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| korea is like a skinny hogwan teacher with a big mouth at a bar that is yelling at everyone and showing off and telling everyone how 'cool' he is, flashing some money, talking, talking, challenging guys, but WITH his co-worker, a big crazy hair lined trigger street fighter, who for some strange reason, promised the skinny guy he would protect him. But the fighter is getting more annoyed as the minutes pass and he is about ready to leave. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
indiercj
Joined: 30 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
earthbound14
Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Location: seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not one for waging a war, but this is one country I would love to pull a massive amount of troops into, slaughter Kim Jong-il, put his head on a pike and feed the people of NK. Screw China and their growing industrial economy and their need for cheap metal. I'm not a hater of Chinese people or culture, but I have very little faith in their political system. But then, G Bushee hasn't exactly been spending much time polishing what has become a tarnished reputation. If the UN had a single testicle, this would be the time to use it. I don't really see why anyone would want top make peace with a dictator who starves his people. Rather than using terror tactics as in the past (i.e the massive bombing of Japan, Korea, Vietnam and Iraq). This would be a good opportunity for tactical slaughtering of some severely shitty people. With the people freed from the camps and starvation, it wouldn't take too long to turn it around. People are fleeing the country now, dieing to do so. There is no reason they wouldn't be quick to support a new ruler who could offer them the freedom that south Korea has.
I say, kill Kim Jong-il and tell China to take a hike. NK is clearly Korean and the only country that has a right to control it is Korea. At the moment the North Korean rulers suck.....
For that matter, Tibet should be attacked and released. Perhaps Taiwan should be given greater protection. As for Hong Kong, it was a really nice gesture for the Brits to give it back, but why exactly give it back to a dictatorship?
My two cents. F*ck China, they have a bad reputation, and f*ck Kim Jong-il. Both countries have demonstrated the willingness to carry out atrocities on their people and the people around them. Yes the Americans have done some bad things in the name of oil, but at least they haven't used concentration camps on their own people or taken over their northerly friends in Canada. For the most part, the Yanks have bombed the crap out of countries, captured and killed whatever dictators have been there and allowed countries to flourish (Korea, Japan, and they were part of the Allied forces that allowed the Germans to keep making such nice cars....I wouldn't have been so merciful).
I wish the UN had balls!!! Hell, South K has enough military gadgetry to seriously do damage to Pyongyang. I hate the current political *beep* footing by Pres. NO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Woden
Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Location: Eurasia
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 1:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| earthbound14 wrote: |
I'm not one for waging a war, but this is one country I would love to pull a massive amount of troops into, slaughter Kim Jong-il, put his head on a pike and feed the people of NK. Screw China and their growing industrial economy and their need for cheap metal. I'm not a hater of Chinese people or culture, but I have very little faith in their political system. But then, G Bushee hasn't exactly been spending much time polishing what has become a tarnished reputation. If the UN had a single testicle, this would be the time to use it. I don't really see why anyone would want top make peace with a dictator who starves his people. Rather than using terror tactics as in the past (i.e the massive bombing of Japan, Korea, Vietnam and Iraq). This would be a good opportunity for tactical slaughtering of some severely *beep* people. With the people freed from the camps and starvation, it wouldn't take too long to turn it around. People are fleeing the country now, dieing to do so. There is no reason they wouldn't be quick to support a new ruler who could offer them the freedom that south Korea has.
I say, kill Kim Jong-il and tell China to take a hike. NK is clearly Korean and the only country that has a right to control it is Korea. At the moment the North Korean rulers suck.....
For that matter, Tibet should be attacked and released. Perhaps Taiwan should be given greater protection. As for Hong Kong, it was a really nice gesture for the Brits to give it back, but why exactly give it back to a dictatorship?
My two cents. F*ck China, they have a bad reputation, and f*ck Kim Jong-il. Both countries have demonstrated the willingness to carry out atrocities on their people and the people around them. Yes the Americans have done some bad things in the name of oil, but at least they haven't used concentration camps on their own people or taken over their northerly friends in Canada. For the most part, the Yanks have bombed the crap out of countries, captured and killed whatever dictators have been there and allowed countries to flourish (Korea, Japan, and they were part of the Allied forces that allowed the Germans to keep making such nice cars....I wouldn't have been so merciful).
I wish the UN had balls!!! Hell, South K has enough military gadgetry to seriously do damage to Pyongyang. I hate the current political *beep* footing by Pres. NO. |
You clearly are completely clueless as to how the world works.
As for your faith in the US and how it liberates countries, why don't you say that to the oppressed of South America, or the oppressed of Saudi Arabia, or Palestine, or Iran under the Shah, or Iraq under Saddam Hussein, or Indonesia under Suharto. The one and only reason Germany and Japan were allowed to 'flourish' was because allowing them to remain unstable would pose a threat to US interests, the US also needed a strong trading partner post-WWII. It has nothing to do with goodness or fairness or justice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endo
Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul...my home
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Woden wrote: |
| earthbound14 wrote: |
I'm not one for waging a war, but this is one country I would love to pull a massive amount of troops into, slaughter Kim Jong-il, put his head on a pike and feed the people of NK. Screw China and their growing industrial economy and their need for cheap metal. I'm not a hater of Chinese people or culture, but I have very little faith in their political system. But then, G Bushee hasn't exactly been spending much time polishing what has become a tarnished reputation. If the UN had a single testicle, this would be the time to use it. I don't really see why anyone would want top make peace with a dictator who starves his people. Rather than using terror tactics as in the past (i.e the massive bombing of Japan, Korea, Vietnam and Iraq). This would be a good opportunity for tactical slaughtering of some severely *beep* people. With the people freed from the camps and starvation, it wouldn't take too long to turn it around. People are fleeing the country now, dieing to do so. There is no reason they wouldn't be quick to support a new ruler who could offer them the freedom that south Korea has.
I say, kill Kim Jong-il and tell China to take a hike. NK is clearly Korean and the only country that has a right to control it is Korea. At the moment the North Korean rulers suck.....
For that matter, Tibet should be attacked and released. Perhaps Taiwan should be given greater protection. As for Hong Kong, it was a really nice gesture for the Brits to give it back, but why exactly give it back to a dictatorship?
My two cents. F*ck China, they have a bad reputation, and f*ck Kim Jong-il. Both countries have demonstrated the willingness to carry out atrocities on their people and the people around them. Yes the Americans have done some bad things in the name of oil, but at least they haven't used concentration camps on their own people or taken over their northerly friends in Canada. For the most part, the Yanks have bombed the crap out of countries, captured and killed whatever dictators have been there and allowed countries to flourish (Korea, Japan, and they were part of the Allied forces that allowed the Germans to keep making such nice cars....I wouldn't have been so merciful).
I wish the UN had balls!!! Hell, South K has enough military gadgetry to seriously do damage to Pyongyang. I hate the current political *beep* footing by Pres. NO. |
You clearly are completely clueless as to how the world works.
As for your faith in the US and how it liberates countries, why don't you say that to the oppressed of South America, or the oppressed of Saudi Arabia, or Palestine, or Iran under the Shah, or Iraq under Saddam Hussein, or Indonesia under Suharto. The one and only reason Germany and Japan were allowed to 'flourish' was because allowing them to remain unstable would pose a threat to US interests, the US also needed a strong trading partner post-WWII. It has nothing to do with goodness or fairness or justice. |
I agree with just about everything you said, but I do think you were a little too cynical at the end of your post.
Yes, economic self interests played a major factor in the development of Japan and West Germany after the war.
But with this development also came the values of democracy and freedom.
Those are fantastic ideals and because of American intervention certain nations in this world are now much better off and owe a debt of gratitude to the United States.
However (like you stated) American foreign policy diring the last century and into this one has also been extremely hypocritical and waged a lot of misery and distruction as well.
South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and Western Europe should say thank you.
Iran, Vietnam, Argentina, ect.... shoud say f*ck you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Location: Nearly in NK
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 1:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
The US of all of the great powers, presently the only great power, has been more benign than any before it.
Lets look at some of the so called mistakes the US has made.
Latin America:
Chile was better off under Pinochet than it would ever have been under Allende, who would like have turned CHile into another Cuba.
Venezuala:
The US should have finished the job in the coup against Chavez.
Nicaragua:
The Sandanistas lost to the contras. Good! They hung in and won an election as born again conservatives.
There might be a couple of others to mention. Now what about Iran under the Shah. He made a good start and Mossadeg would have been another Marxist disaster. The Shah got carried away with his power instead of improving Iran. That was the Shah's fault not the US.
Then Iraq, Saddam the insane needed removing and killing. That he may have been a fromer ally of the US just means that the US fixed a mistake. When everything settle out Iraq will make three nice countries none of which will be a threat to its neighbors.
Pllestine: Wow! They are the authors of their own misfortune. Israel has been more forebearing than most would have been. Anybody but Isreal and they Palestinians would have been ehtnically cleansed long ago, as the were in Jordan and Lebanon.
I get thoroughly sick of whining lefties who find the US an impediment to their collectivist dreams. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Woden
Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Location: Eurasia
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 2:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| contrarian wrote: |
The US of all of the great powers, presently the only great power, has been more benign than any before it.
Lets look at some of the so called mistakes the US has made.
Latin America:
Chile was better off under Pinochet than it would ever have been under Allende, who would like have turned CHile into another Cuba.
Venezuala:
The US should have finished the job in the coup against Chavez.
Nicaragua:
The Sandanistas lost to the contras. Good! They hung in and won an election as born again conservatives.
There might be a couple of others to mention. Now what about Iran under the Shah. He made a good start and Mossadeg would have been another Marxist disaster. The Shah got carried away with his power instead of improving Iran. That was the Shah's fault not the US.
Then Iraq, Saddam the insane needed removing and killing. That he may have been a fromer ally of the US just means that the US fixed a mistake. When everything settle out Iraq will make three nice countries none of which will be a threat to its neighbors.
Pllestine: Wow! They are the authors of their own misfortune. Israel has been more forebearing than most would have been. Anybody but Isreal and they Palestinians would have been ehtnically cleansed long ago, as the were in Jordan and Lebanon.
I get thoroughly sick of whining lefties who find the US an impediment to their collectivist dreams. |
And this bloke is a teacher...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Woden
Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Location: Eurasia
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 2:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| endo wrote: |
| Woden wrote: |
| earthbound14 wrote: |
I'm not one for waging a war, but this is one country I would love to pull a massive amount of troops into, slaughter Kim Jong-il, put his head on a pike and feed the people of NK. Screw China and their growing industrial economy and their need for cheap metal. I'm not a hater of Chinese people or culture, but I have very little faith in their political system. But then, G Bushee hasn't exactly been spending much time polishing what has become a tarnished reputation. If the UN had a single testicle, this would be the time to use it. I don't really see why anyone would want top make peace with a dictator who starves his people. Rather than using terror tactics as in the past (i.e the massive bombing of Japan, Korea, Vietnam and Iraq). This would be a good opportunity for tactical slaughtering of some severely *beep* people. With the people freed from the camps and starvation, it wouldn't take too long to turn it around. People are fleeing the country now, dieing to do so. There is no reason they wouldn't be quick to support a new ruler who could offer them the freedom that south Korea has.
I say, kill Kim Jong-il and tell China to take a hike. NK is clearly Korean and the only country that has a right to control it is Korea. At the moment the North Korean rulers suck.....
For that matter, Tibet should be attacked and released. Perhaps Taiwan should be given greater protection. As for Hong Kong, it was a really nice gesture for the Brits to give it back, but why exactly give it back to a dictatorship?
My two cents. F*ck China, they have a bad reputation, and f*ck Kim Jong-il. Both countries have demonstrated the willingness to carry out atrocities on their people and the people around them. Yes the Americans have done some bad things in the name of oil, but at least they haven't used concentration camps on their own people or taken over their northerly friends in Canada. For the most part, the Yanks have bombed the crap out of countries, captured and killed whatever dictators have been there and allowed countries to flourish (Korea, Japan, and they were part of the Allied forces that allowed the Germans to keep making such nice cars....I wouldn't have been so merciful).
I wish the UN had balls!!! Hell, South K has enough military gadgetry to seriously do damage to Pyongyang. I hate the current political *beep* footing by Pres. NO. |
You clearly are completely clueless as to how the world works.
As for your faith in the US and how it liberates countries, why don't you say that to the oppressed of South America, or the oppressed of Saudi Arabia, or Palestine, or Iran under the Shah, or Iraq under Saddam Hussein, or Indonesia under Suharto. The one and only reason Germany and Japan were allowed to 'flourish' was because allowing them to remain unstable would pose a threat to US interests, the US also needed a strong trading partner post-WWII. It has nothing to do with goodness or fairness or justice. |
I agree with just about everything you said, but I do think you were a little too cynical at the end of your post.
Yes, economic self interests played a major factor in the development of Japan and West Germany after the war.
But with this development also came the values of democracy and freedom.
Those are fantastic ideals and because of American intervention certain nations in this world are now much better off and owe a debt of gratitude to the United States.
However (like you stated) American foreign policy diring the last century and into this one has also been extremely hypocritical and waged a lot of misery and distruction as well.
South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and Western Europe should say thank you.
Iran, Vietnam, Argentina, ect.... shoud say f*ck you! |
You are right, I am too cynical.
But, when you look at the history it shows time and time again that the bottom line is profit and power. After that comes freedoms; they are a luxury.
It isn't freedom the US stands for, it is freedom for dominant class interests. When a state can offer the US nothing, freedoms mean nothing. When a state is a threat, with interests, it is exploited. The thing that is shocking about this type of thinking is the fact that innocent people sacrifice their lives so middle class Americans (and other Westerners) can enjoy a comfortable standard of living. It is shown in the way earthbound can nonchalantly talk about mass murder and war as if the US holds an arbitrary right above all other nations to define firstly the rules, and secondly who has broken them...
...the irony is, of the truly universal laws on human rights, it is the US who routinely breaks them more than any other nation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endo
Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul...my home
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 2:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| contrarian wrote: |
The US of all of the great powers, presently the only great power, has been more benign than any before it.
Lets look at some of the so called mistakes the US has made.
Latin America:
Chile was better off under Pinochet than it would ever have been under Allende, who would like have turned CHile into another Cuba. |
Yeah, try convincing that to the families of those who went "missing" under Pinochet's dictatorship.
Way to brush off a horrible regime which did absolutely savage things to thousands of it's own people.
As bad as Castro has been in regards to the human rights violations in his own country, it's nothing compared with the levels of state murder that Chilea did.
| Quote: |
Venezuala:
The US should have finished the job in the coup against Chavez. |
Like him or not chavez was democratically elected twice and has the overwealming support of his people.
In fact his elections were much more fair and desisive than George W's win in 2000.
| Quote: |
Nicaragua:
The Sandanistas lost to the contras. Good! They hung in and won an election as born again conservatives. |
After the death of thousands of people.
Funded in large part by CIA weapons and money obtained from the Iranians!
Give me a fuckin break!
The contras were a terrorist organization in every sence of the word.
| Quote: |
| There might be a couple of others to mention. Now what about Iran under the Shah. He made a good start and Mossadeg would have been another Marxist disaster. |
And the regime under the Shah wasn't a disaster?
| Quote: |
| The Shah got carried away with his power instead of improving Iran. That was the Shah's fault not the US. |
Or so supporting the Shah's victory during the coup and funding his regime for over twenty years leaves the Americans hands absolutely clean on this one? please!
| Quote: |
| Then Iraq, Saddam the insane needed removing and killing. That he may have been a fromer ally of the US just means that the US fixed a mistake. When everything settle out Iraq will make three nice countries none of which will be a threat to its neighbors. |
If you break it you own it, and the Americans have done a shitty job with this reponsibility.
So after all the bloodshead and sectarian violence we'll have this nice and peaceful three state solution in which all three newly formed states will live happily ever after?
Try tellling that to Ishmael in Bagrdad who had Shia thugs break into his house and put a drill into his father's skull.
The violence under Sadam was absolutely sickening. But it was controlled. Iraq now is far worse off.
And it's ignorant people like you who simple try to brush it off. Try living there with your family and I think your tune will change quite quickly.
| Quote: |
| Pllestine: Wow! They are the authors of their own misfortune. Israel has been more forebearing than most would have been. Anybody but Isreal and they Palestinians would have been ehtnically cleansed long ago, as the were in Jordan and Lebanon. |
The Israelis have a historical connection to these lands. But why should the Palestinians bear the burden of Germany's holocaust or the western powers guilt?
But I'm not even going to go further with this one.
Anyways, Contrarian, your narrow minded outlook on the miserable and violent realities of certain aspects of American foreign policy leaves me to question your own intelligence and even more so your humanity.
Your inabilty to concede to any faults reveals a very selective and closed thinking, and as a result I question your ability to even be a teacher.
And Contrarian, I'm being damn real with that comment.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
It's perfectly fine to have a different viewpoint. But to support something without acknowledging any of the obvious misgivings poses a lot of questions.
And I don't like the answers and nor should you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Location: Nearly in NK
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 2:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
>>> In the early days of the Cuban revolution Che Guevara and Castro killed over 5000 in a basball stadium. Castro imported missles and nukes is till oppressing his people. Allende would likely have done worse to consolidate his power - remember he was elected with only about 35% of the cote.
>>> Bush's win in the 2000 election was done prusuant to the constitution of the US. Gore wanted a recount [because of the less than 500 vote edge of Bush] and a consortium of Newspapers counted the votes later and put Bush's victory at around double that. Chavez is a pain in the @ss and is nationalizing US owned interests.
>>> The Contra's and Sandanistas were the opposite sides of the same coin. The right side won after a lot of killing by both sides. The Iran Contra deal is very old news.
Give you a break? Because I disagree with you. Just a couple of points. I am probably over double your age. I am a Canadian and a hard right conservative.
>>> As I said the Shah was preferable to a Marxist government. The US did not fund the Shah but it sold him a big pile of weapons.
>>> As to being a teacher, in my eight years in Korea all but 1 were in universities. One of them for five years.
You question my humanity and I have touble with your one sided "progrssive" view of the world. As I said. Grow up! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endo
Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul...my home
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 4:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| contrarian wrote: |
>>> In the early days of the Cuban revolution Che Guevara and Castro killed over 5000 in a basball stadium. Castro imported missles and nukes is till oppressing his people. Allende would likely have done worse to consolidate his power - remember he was elected with only about 35% of the cote.
>>> Bush's win in the 2000 election was done prusuant to the constitution of the US. Gore wanted a recount [because of the less than 500 vote edge of Bush] and a consortium of Newspapers counted the votes later and put Bush's victory at around double that. Chavez is a pain in the @ss and is nationalizing US owned interests.
>>> The Contra's and Sandanistas were the opposite sides of the same coin. The right side won after a lot of killing by both sides. The Iran Contra deal is very old news.
Give you a break? Because I disagree with you. Just a couple of points. I am probably over double your age. I am a Canadian and a hard right conservative.
>>> As I said the Shah was preferable to a Marxist government. The US did not fund the Shah but it sold him a big pile of weapons.
>>> As to being a teacher, in my eight years in Korea all but 1 were in universities. One of them for five years.
You question my humanity and I have touble with your one sided "progrssive" view of the world. As I said. Grow up! |
I definately don't have a one sided view. Just look at my earlier post in this thread.
Unlike you, I emancipate myself from that narrow minded and ignorant right vs. left logic and at least attempt to see things from other angles.
Without sounding too pompus, that's the sign of a healthy mind.
I'm also aware of the realness of international affairs, and I know it is an extremely distrustful and dangerous environment.
I wouldn't consider myself a progressive, but more of a realist.
And being all of 27 seven years old I guess I'm a bit of an idealist too. I sure hope that I don't loose this with age 
And finally, are you a fu%king fortune teller?
If not, then how do you make these assmptions that so and so regimes would have been much better off if Shah didn't stop the marxists or Pinochet didn't do the same?
I've heard that argument before by certain individuals, but what exactly do they have to back it up?
Nothing! But it sounds good..... right?
The fact is you don't know how the Marxists would have handeled Iran. Remember they had popular support. And also remember that the Shah is one of the primary reasons why Islamic fundamentalism grew in the 60s and 70s in Iran, eventually erupting into the revolution in '79.
Vietnam as well. Millions of peoples lives would have been saved if the Americans simple realized the war was more about the nationalist aspirations of the Vietnamese people and not about the communist expansion into southeast Asia. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yingwenlaoshi
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: ... location, location!
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 4:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Might as well be. Take South Korea right along with it. |
|
| 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
