The Chosun Ilbo (English) cited this poll (Korean) from the Internet media site Frontier Times suggesting that if the confrontation between the U.S. and North Korea developed into an armed clash between the two, 20 percent of South Koreans think Seoul should align with Pyongyang against Washington. Said the Chosun Ilbo:
The results, released Monday, revealed that even though 49.1 percent of respondents said South Korea should ally with the United States in the event of an armed clash between the global superpower and North Korea, 20.3 percent said the two Koreas should present a united front, while 30.6 percent were undecided on which of the two nations Seoul should align with.
Of those who favored supporting North Korea, 25.4 percent were in their 30s, 21.9 percent were in their 40s, 20.6 percent were in their 20s, 18 percent were in their 50s and the smallest fraction, 12.4 percent, were aged 60 or older.
The survey was conducted on 1001 men and women above the age of 20, and had a margin of error of 3.1 percent (at a reliability level of 95 percent).
Don’t know what to think about this — sounds rather sensationalist, and I don’t know anything about the source in which it was found other than just by looking through it, it seemed rather righty. The piece over at Frontier News quotes National Policy Research Center head Dr. Kim Gwang-dong as saying, “One could view the results as meaning the basis of the policy of friendly relations pursued continuously since the Kim Dae-jung administration has greatly influenced the public.” I’d have to see reliable opinion data from the pre-DJ period to issue an opinion on that, and I have a feeling that might be a little hard to come by — some of the previous governments were’t too high on citizens freely expressing their opinion, especially on issues like North Korea and the United States.
Anyway, I present you the graph data below, which contains how the responses broken down by region. For readers with bones to pick with the Jeolla provinces (and I know there a couple of you), here’s some ammunition for you:
You read that correctly. For the Jeolla provinces, the numbers came out:
Gwangju: support the U.S. — 35.9 percent; support N. Korea — 34.6 percent; undecided — 29.5 percent.
S. Jeolla province: support the U.S. — 37 percent; support N. Korea — 22 percent; undecided — 40 percent.
N. Jeolla province (Joel’s home): support the U.S. — 33.0 percent; support N. Korea — 36.5 percent; undecided — 30.5 percent.
Ouch. This, of course, reminds me of a joke one of my co-workers at Gwangju U told me when I first moved down there — “Gwangju was the safest place to be in case of war, as it was safely behind enemy lines.”
The survey, in fact, dealt with a lot of national issues, sometimes yielding interesting results, as was the case with favored candidates to become next president.
Meanwhile, former prime minister Goh Kun topped the list of preferred candidates for the nation’s next president with 30.3 percent of respondents naming him, followed by Grand National Party chief Park Geun-hye (22.1 percent), Unification Minister Chung Dong-young (9 percent) and Seoul Mayor Lee Myung-bak (6.4 percent).
Gee, 2ID Goh and Park top the list, with Chung not even breaking double digits. Country must really be going to the commies.
Anyway, I wouldn’t take the survey too seriously. Besides, if anyone had reason to be concerned about public opionion, it would probably be the South Koreans:
While nearly nine out of 10 South Koreans believe, however, that the US would contribute military forces to reverse North Korean aggression against the South, that assumption is not necessarily favored by the US public, two-thirds of whom say they would only support such action if the United Nations authorized it and other countries contributed forces. Absent those conditions, only 43% say they would support intervention with US troops; 51% said they would oppose it.
37 Comments
Well there it is. You don’t seem to take the data that seriously, M, and I’m certainly in no position to dispute you.
But if President Roh says that
“The use of force lacks effectiveness as a negotiation tactic…”
and that
“…Such an (embargo) [possible use of economic sanctions against NorK] will only prolong the sense of instability and threat indefinitely. The nuclear issue should be settled through the six-party talks…”
then it’s not surprising that significant pluralities of his population express these sentiments, particularly the younger ones. After all they elected him in a free & fair election.
The disparity between US and ROK interests is clear. If our forces are only a tripwire to serve against a threat that many (most?) ROK citizens believe doesn’t exist, then why are they still there? Withdraw them ASAP for use elsewhere in the world and let the ROK provide its own “catastrophic insurance policy” as it sees fit. US can support from offshore if the ROK wants it, and many ROK citizens will be much happier with us gone.
Vox populi has spoken…
BTW, M, I’d be interested in your take on general ROK reaction to today’s announced departure of Colin Powell, if you care to blog on that subject. I for one much regret his leaving.
Pretty sad commentary on what’s going in South Korea, isn’t it? The country’s going pink and then slowly red. It’s unbelievable. Even few years back, I never thought I’d see the day.
This administration and the preceeding one must be grinnin’ from ear to ear with that survey. Honestly, I think that’s been their aim all along. It’s a sad state and I feel sory for anyone who will have to live through any type of reunification.
Fascinating. I think it’s time to start being very careful about tech transfers to South Korea.
People people…its just a stupid poll. I think overwhelming majority would ever want to see such a thing ever happen.
If you know Korean people you know that a lot of them tend to let their anger get ahead of them. By whatever Western policy that they dont agree with. Very reactionary people with a lot of pepper. But I hardly think they actually mean it. I think everyone in Korea knows they owe a debt of graditude to America for what its done.
Coming from a Korean publication…this is NO DOUBT sensationalism. Theres obviously a vacuum in newsworthy items for Korea these days. Its bullshit.
Oh brother, where art thou?
I’ve never been a big fan of polls, especially if the results are printed in a Korean paper but this post by the Marmot has some interesting, if not disturbing numbers.
I actually agree with Steve. I would like to see the real nature of the questions in the poll. But I’m just frustrated at KBS, MBC, the ruling party, the trade unions, and their magnificent job of achieving their goals of educating the public into making North Korea look like the good guys. We all know about South Korea’s education system failing. This perfectly illustrates it.
That’s home sweet home. The only region to come out in majority support for the Norks. I wish I could say it surprised me, but I do live here after all so I see it sometimes. I was surprised the Chungnam and Chungbuk numbers weren’t higher though. Especially considering how they were large Uri supporters in the last election (http://gopkorea.blogs.com/flyi.....m_is_.html). I don’t see how you can support America and vote Uri. Perhaps they are having an identity crisis after the capital move failure.
well, it’s the us threatening to start wars, now, isn’t it? just look
on this board for that. you expats never cease to amaze me; you can’t see
that it’s your arrogant and flippant attitude that causes so many koreans to hate you.
if you’re not telling them how they should behave, you’re talking about killing millions of them
by either givng north korea to china or removing troops so that only koreans die
in a war initiated by those you send to war.
then, these very same people go on and on about how other americans
are defending korea. defending it so you can destroy it, i’d say.
why not try to take a step back and imaging how your posts come across to someone
with korean blood. many of you are actually calling for the murder of innocent
people in the millions. and yeah, many of you say better them than us but then,
you gotta think of your collective arrogance telling the world about how much more
civilised you are. it’s disgusting, but i shouldn’t be surprised about
a group of sideline warriors talking about killing a bunch of gooks;
they don’t even bat an eye at the idea of killing over a hundred thousand iraqis.
ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND.
so many americans like the ones who inhabit this board feel 9/11
gives them license to kill as many people as is needed. that’s why you got mr marmot trying to attack a secondary angle of my argument
a couple posts ago. he wants to talk about racism so he, like his associates,
can avoid the real issue of killing a massive number of civilians.
can anybody tell me what the difference is between an iraqi mother and her
children being blown to bits by an american bomb and that man who died in the
wtc? i’d say most of you won’t have the guts to answer.
‘i’m pro-war.’ paul h
‘yes, as long as you and yours don’t have to fight it.’ nulji
‘i’m pro-war.’ paul h
‘yes, it always nice to kill, ain’t it? specially when the wrong people get killed.
al queda and iraqis? same thing, ain’t it, country boy?’ nul
That 100,000 figure you are quoting is almost certainly wrong. The statistics for that figure from the Lancet paper indicate a 95% confidence interval of 8000-198000. Those are ridiculously high error bars. Moreover, the methodology by which they gathered data seems problematic. Frankly, it seems unreasonable to expect such high casualty figures given the use of smaller amounts of more precise ordance than in past conflicts. Unless you are dropping huge quantities of ordance onto high density population centers without taking any precautions it would be hard to achieve those casualty figures. It should be noted that the Lancet study was pushed to come out before the election by the investigator. That indicates that the study was politically motivated and leads to questions regarding all facets of the study.
First, this is about as bad a poll as can be imagined. I hated statistics class and that required course on poli sci methodology, but even I can make a better poll than this.
If this poll is useful, what does it say:
1. How can a majority of South Koreans support Pyongyang and Goh Kun simultaneously? Either South Koreans are hiding a solution to the crisis that no outsider can fathom, or South Koreans are making decisions based or incorrect information or spurious opinions.
2. South Koreans need more information, from educators and the media. Actually, based on my equally unscientific and anecdotal polling, South Koreans are sceptical, if not cynical, and have few ideological convictions. Groupthink colors the answers often. Besides, many South Koreans are voting with their feet and emigrating. I would tend to believe most polling results are untrustworthy, because many South Koreans are not thinking through the consequences of their opinions, as they dream of leaving.
3. Again, groupthink, which amplifies the significance of unification thinking. Being pro-unification is almost a cipher. The important answers are the next ones about how and when of the process.
4. My initial reaction is to advocate withdrawal, too. But, But, its not all about hurt feelings. I also believe that outsiders have less of a role in deciding what North and South Koreans do with their political destinies.
And, part of the problem, historically, is that Washington did not take the high road early on in 1945 and tell the Koreans: you have a responsibility to the region before you decide the issue of national determination. Washington will support you in regional matters, if you reciprocate, but Washington will not help you decide your local problem. If your local problem threatens regional or world security, however, Washington will deal with you in the most efficient and pragmatic way possible. Now, the world is paying the price for not laying down this law in 1945.
The sooner Washington and Seoul think like this, the earlier and better the problem will be solved. In short, Washington should label both Pyongyang and Seoul regional trouble-makers, because their selfish pre-occupation with their respective visions of unification threatens regional security. As an American, I don’t care about Korean unification. It is not a right that is denied Korean people which the world owes them. Koreans, though, owe a duty not to blow up the world. This position is consonant with American policy, and Washington should not be lectured or guilted into giving Koreans anything. Washington needs to consider the bigger picture, if the Koreans can’t and probably will not intentionally. Its clear Seoul and Washington are no longer allies or brothers (how preposterous that notion is!), so why do we continue to treat Seoul like a friend?
The 100,000 referred to in Post 12 by ATM is the estimate by The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. A few points: One, we don’t really have any idea of numbers in Iraq any more than we know how many Japanese died in bombings. NGOs and medical insitutions generally exaggerate such numbers. Second, what is a civilian in this conflict? When you pick up weapons, shoot and then melt into the population, it isn’t going to be clear who are civilians. One can imagine how many such combantants where killed and then counted as a civilian because their was no uniform. Third, make a couple comparisons. Do you think the suicide bombers, car bombs, and roadside devices that have killed Iraqis are more discriminate than US GPS bombs? Finally, those numbers would also have more comparative meaning if put along side estimates of how many deaths resulted under Saddam or how many Iraqis have been killed by IEDs and suicide bombers. It’s very convenient to forget such things, but doing so doesn’t help in making informed judgments.
Actually Nulji, I’m not an expat. Never even been to Korea.
But I’m glad you posted as it was inevitable that some “blame-America-firster” would do so. And whoever it was, I knew in advance the tenor of the answer. Your whole post is about the US. On and on and on… just like many other previous answers of the same type elsewhere on this blog. If you’re Korean I notice you don’t say one word about the plight of the millions of dead over the years in the North, or the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed by Saddam. When I say that I’m “pro-war” I mean that sometimes war is the most humanitarian choice; if Bush senior had been re-elected in 92 I think we would have done Gulf War II in the 90’s to get rid of Saddam, and a lot more Iraqis (whom you weep crocodile tears over) would be alive now (and we’d be mostly out of there by now).
I suppose I can’t blame President Roh too much, he learned his craft from the master of all triangulators Bill Clinton and now he thinks he can triangulate between the US and the North. But there was only one Bill Clinton (thank God) and I don’t think this particular piece of triangulation is going to work out for the ROK.
Whether it’s win or lose in Iraq, I don’t think we’re going to be there for the next 50 years; the Iraqi’s are soon going to have a pretty close attempt at a fair election (unlike, I gather, South Korea’s which took decades after 1953). The Iraqi’s will then have to decide whether they want to assume responsiblity for their own defense, or submit to the rule of the beheaders. I don’t think the US is going to let the citizens of Iraq emulate a significant portion of the ROK citizenry — I mean ones with views like you, who alternate kicking the US in the shins with hysterical clinging to the US lapels.
No matter what happens on the Korean Peninsula the US is going to get the blame from people like you. This particular blog entry of M’s indicates to me that the “blame America” tendency remains strong and maybe is even gaining, so I’m in favor of withdrawl of our troops now before the inevitable next crisis. That way it will unequivocally be up to the citzens of the ROK to decide their own destiny as to “who gets killed”, by calling their own shots as to what happens during a crisis. Isn’t that “self-determination” and isn’t that what you favor?
I suppose I could be a provocateur here and fulfill your expectations of being a knuckle-dragging Red Stater, eager for war all over the globe. But the very last thing I want is another war on our hands; even before the DPRK got deliverable nukes, I knew very well that North Korea would not be a pushover. I’m frankly only concerned about our troops in Korea. Tell me, what do you think is going to happen if there’s another accidental catastrophic explosion up North, and the Dear Leader decides it’s a US attack this time? Golly gee I can hardly wait to unleash our bombers and kill thousands of people, oh yeah right. My goodness what a self-pitying whiner you are.
It’s time for Koreans to assume responsibility for their own country and stop depending on the US. The ROK can go all out for reunification and send multi-millions north as “tribute”, or it can build up the ROK military and break the NPT itself (since the DPRK has already done so). Either way, just as long as our troops are out from under I don’t give a damn.
The Cold War is over and NorK is just about the last of the Stalinists. A bad deal for the ROK but that’s the fate destiny has dealt them. And now it’s time for ROK democracy to grow up and face the music.
No doubt this poll is flawed. But it does make us realize there is a healthy portion of the population that does think this way. Anyone who has ever taught adults knows this.
This is yet another reason why I think SK without the US would fall to NK. Some would welcome NK, many are apathetic, many are against NK but would run like chickens to Pusan. Only a small percent would stand and fight. While equipped better they still would not be able to repulse the North Koreans. This is how Japan took over Korea so easily. Japan took over Korea with about 3000 troops. Just think what 1 million would do.
If there is a war I plan on looking for collaborators. The fog of war is a great to to dole out justice. I am sure people like sugar shin will signing up, just as arabs all over the world signed up to fight agains the US in a Jihad.
Aren’t survey’s fun? Here’s a fun one….
74% of Koreans are critical of the US’s role as “global cop,” but 91% want to see the US-Korea alliance maintained even after reunification.
75% believe the North has nukes, but 62% don’t feel that’s an exceedingly serious threat.
81% say globalization is beneficial to the Korean economy, but 78% say the rice market has to be protected at any price.
soooooooo predictable; i just knew your response would be to argue about
numbers. that’s all you can do really. but in the hopes someone will have the
courage to answer, i’ll ask again:
what is the difference between an iraqi mother and her children being blown
up by a bush bomb and that guy in the wtc? why won’t you folks answer?
****
infidel has told us before that the korean’s ass is God. so how can he wish
for the destruction of god’s home?
****
no paul, not blame america, blame bush and patriots like you for ruining
the good name of my country.
non korean - 3000 Japanese troops? Wow.
If thats true, I think it fits the pattern in Korean history. According to Hendrick Hamel’s account of his time in Korea, he was told that more people died hiding in the forests than were killed in battle when the Machu’s invaded. Hamel calls Koreans “effeminate” and “cowardly” (writing in 1670’s).
About the mechanics of invasion: With nuclear bombs North Korea can now deter the US from shielding South Korea under its nuclear umbrella - ESPECIALLY if the US leaves the South.
If the US left the South, it would only be a few months or years before Pyongyang cooked up some pretext to invade and plunder their hapless, naive, backstabbing ethnic brothers. South Koreans really underestimate how desperate the North needs money and how weak Korea has made itself, and how fat, juicy, wealthy, and tempting South Korea is. North Korea is like a starving wolf and South Korea is a big fat, slow moving, pig tromping around the forest naively. It would be SO EASY for the North to decide to invade and fabricate an international incident as a pretext. And Kim Jong Il would LOVE to go down in his country’s history as Wang Gon #2.
The invasion would be relatively easy becase North Korea would just have to capture Seoul and then South Korea is finished - Jeolla would happily run into the Dear Leader’s embrace aand the rest of the South would not be a viable state. If the North Koreans lose a battle, they could drop a nuclear bomb on the city/army they dont like to prove that resistance is futile. End of South Korea!
The benefit to the USA would be the lesson of the matter - Anti-Americanism can get your country killed.
This sort of poll is just Koreans blowing off steam at the US… as a poster above said, it is essentially bullshit. YourAverageMr Choi gets the call one night after dinner from this pollster, and decides to make some nationalistic points and get the dislike of Anton Ohno out of his system by slamming the U.S.
This same Mr. Choi if starkly faced in the ballot box with a referendum question “Do you want American troops to completely leave over the next 2 years? Yes or No?” …well, these same Mr. Choi’s would be hitting no at about 98% I would guess.
This is all just huffing and puffing, boys. You see the ajosshi’s doing it outside every weekend, now you get to see them do it on a poll.
Oh, please. 20% of people anywhere will believe almost anything. A few years ago, what percentage of American college students said it is possible that the holocaust did not happen? How many Americans believe in Creationism? That Iraq was connected to 9/11?
I’m sure you can find equally stupid examples in every country.
Hey bedjan,
if you’re predictable but tirsome racist drivel about Koreans being “effeminate” and “cowardly” (I don’t think those were Hamel’s words) is correct, then we have nothing to worry about. North Koreans are Koreans too, and they’ll be too busy checking out their makeups, hiding out in the forest, thereby too busy to fight.
kimbob - “if you’re predictable but tiresome racist drivel…”
You predicted my comment?! Why don’t you predict the consequences of South Korea’s feeble, subservient, COWARDLY unwillingness to confront the North on the smallest of issues in light of the North’s military-first preparations to conquer the South? Predict that one for me oh great mr. Predictor of the predictable.
bedjan, I think I have done more than my sharing of rantings about the current administration’s pacifist approach to North Korea, so fuck you. Anyone who has read my posts in the past will know I am not exactly a fan of Roh or the left leaning Uri (to put it mildly). Your problem is you can’t distinguish that because you lump all Koreans into your world of one dimentional stereotypes. You’re no better than nulji maripkan in that regard, so I’m not going to waste my time on you. So go piss off!
Rubbish! The movie was excellent and Steve McQueen was so dreamy
” What is the difference between an iraqi mother and her children being blown up by a bush bomb and that guy in the wtc? why won?€™t you folks answer?”
Existential questions will get you nowhere, Nulji, but FWIW here’s my answer: None, to the individuals killed. And it’s an “American” bomb, not a “Bush” bomb — if you’re an American as you imply, you get all the blame for its being dropped, just like me (and all the benefits, if it takes out some of our enemies trying to kill our troops — as the vast majority of such bombs do).
I don’t see Al Queda types and Iraqi “insurgents” worried about how many mothers get caught in their bomb blasts — do you? They shrug it off because they assume that these mothers are “martyrs” who will immediately go to heaven. A perfect philosophy for a conqueror, down through the ages — anything they choose to do is justified. Do you really believe that this is the source of the US’s moral strength to wage war? It’s like you lefties live in a house of mirrors where all you see is yourselves.
What’s the difference between a Korean mother and her child, accidently killed by a US aerial bomb in the summer of 1950, and a US soldier killed by NorK forces in the same period?
Answer: none, to the individuals. Go up the scale to the perspective of nations and the answer is that the lack of the latter means a lot more of the former (except the deaths would occur at the hands of the woman’s Korean Communist “brethren”). And there would be no ROK today to argue about.
Maybe you take it for granted that in the past things were absolutely fated to happen the way they did? I sure don’t. If Truman had decided to not intervene the entire peninsula would have gone Communist (and about 56,000 Americans wouldn’t have died there). Make sure you weigh that in your balance when you pose these godlike questions, confident that there can be only one answer. In that quality you resemble the Islamists.
nulji, “what is the difference between an iraqi mother and her children being blown up by a bush bomb and that guy in the wtc? why won?€™t you folks answer?”
The terrorists deliberately attack unarmed civilians. U.S. forces in Iraq target the terrorists. The MNF and ING evacuated women, children, and the elderly before cleaning up Fallujah. To make U.S. forces the moral equivalent of the terrorists who blew up the WTC, you must use the logic of a kindergarder.
i can distinguish that you’re usually supportive of sk, kimbob. i also can
tell you’re an asshole!
Small comment on the “3000 Japanese” troops. I suspect that the actual numbers would depend upon a specific time period. Frankly, the numerous sources I’ve read off the internet have confused me. Kimsoft does a good job (yech, puke, I actually said that) posting a large amount of historical material (which he either makes no attempt to deconflict, misquotes, or simply discards) on his internet site. Running mostly through various western accounts, I get the impression that Japan landed somewhere near 15,000 troops in Korea between 1894 and 1895, but that after their defeat of the Tonghaks, the Righteous Army, and the Chinese under Yuan Shikai, they reduced their strength in Korea to “six and a half battalions”. That is a relatively small force in terms of numbers (possibly numbering between 4,000 and 7,000 troops). But this must be put within the context of the times: 1 - Japan was a modern Army. 2 - It had just defeated the Chinese (perhaps as great a victory as a modern defeat of the USA in 1890 Korean eyes???), and 3 - it had an ever modernizing Navy which could quickly move additional troops to Korea. Likewise, the Korea of the period was a rigidly confucian kingdom, with the mental attitudes that this implies. I suspect that fighting was considered a soldier’s duty, not the common people’s. (And, they had defeated the closest thing Korea had to a “people’s army” at that time, the Tong Haks.) Old Hong Bom Do was a tiger hunter in civilian live, and obviously trained in the use of firearms, but the majority of his fellow Korean commoners probably considered expelling the Japanese the government’s, more particularly the Army’s, job. Thus a tendency to wait events out, rather than take up arms. Bottom line: whatever the real numbers were (any Japanese-reading imperial army historians out there who can answer that?), they have to be placed within the context of their times, and the organization, training, and equipment of the various forces must be properly considered.
Aside for nulji: We all have assholes, and the more we post on the blogsphere, the easier it is to see. (to paraphrase Creighton Abrams)
Actually those were Hamel’s words Kimbob. Here’s the English translation of the original Dutch. Whether or not Hamel’s account is accurate is of course circumspect.
“On the other hand the Koreans are very gullible. We could fool them with anything. This was particularly true for the monks, who liked to listen to stories about foreign countries and their people. Furthermore they are very cowardly, as it seemed what we have heard from reliable people concerning their behavior during the Japanese invasion, when their king was killed and a great number of cities and villages were destroyed. From Jan Janse Weltevree we heard that when the Tartarians(Manchu/Qing) came over the ice and occupied the country, more soldiers hanged themselves in the wood, than had been killed during the battle against the invaders.”
Actually this was bedjan’s writing:
?€œeffeminate?€? and ?€œcowardly?€?. Hamel might have said “cowardly”, but I think Bedjan threw in the “effeminate” part in there as an extra effect. If he’s right and Koreans are genetically effiminate and genetically prone to be cowardly then we have nothing to worry about the North Koreans. They’ll just be all softies with homosexual tendencies with pink handkerchiefs who can’t possibly fight. Yes, that must be it. So I just don’t understand how those same cowardly homos can take over the entire S.Korea when we have 30,000 brave American “real men” standing in their way. Before someone flame again, I am just being sarcastic. So take it with a grain of salt.
No arguments here that Militarism has never been the culture of the Chosun dynasty, that is no secrecy. It was systematic that the military was always weak. Confuscianism made sure that the lowest common denominators were the soldiers. Many of the foot soldiers were actually conscripted slaves who were basically used as fodder - abused, ill fed, ill equipped, ill-led, and ill trained. The top most hierarchy during the Chosun dynasty were the Yangban scholars who were the commanders . Fighting in wars weren’t actually their fortes. The Chosun dynasty were never really interested in having a strong modern military as far as I could see. That was part of their downfall when Japan colonized Korea in 1905. Chosun looked upon China as the great originator of culture, and thus looked upon China as a military guarantor as well. The problem was, China was going down the tubes. Choson utterly depended upon China that they never saw how far they were being outstripped technologically by Japan who opened up their economy to the West. That dependence on a bigger foreign power in certain ways, is no different from today, when S.Korea looks upon the US as the great originator of culture, and also a military guarantor of S.Korea.
There is a mood of pacifism sweeping Korea at this current moment. Koreans are tired of 50 years of division and conflict with North Korea, and thus explains the wishful thinkings we see today. I just wish people don’t forget the lessons of Chosun dynasty, and the Korean war, when Korea’s military was woefully ill prepared. If you want to keep peace and freedom, you need a strong military to fight for it and defend it. That is the hard lesson that many Koreans are forgetting already. It is frustrating to see that learning from history and past mistakes is not taught in the public and in the schools. The text books, even the TV dramas of Chosun dynasty only idolizes all portray a fantasy. The truth was that the Chosun Korea was a horrid, primitive, and a stumped culture with very little advances in anything. It’s as if time stopped in Choson Korea.
Lirelou & others interested in military history: you might enjoy reading “The Sand Pebbles” (if you haven’t already — the novel is far superior to the movie IMO and it’s been so long since it came out that it may be unread by many now). I think it won a national book award in the early 60’s and was a bestseller, so lots of used copies around.
The author had been a sailor on the US river gunboats in China of the 20’s, and was a great observer. A fascinating portrayal in there about how the Chinese learn Western military techniques & political nationalism from the resident Western powers, and turn it against them to expel them from the interior of China. The author brings in on the incipient conflict between the Communists and the Nationalists as well.
I mention it here as I am reminded of it by the discussion of the Sino-Japanese war above. Korean culture of the time was probably similar to the Chinese, in that nationalism in the Western sense (and in the sense it exists in both Koreas today) was not a dominant factor then, until the rise of the Kuomintang.
Paul H. Thanks for the tip on the Sand Pebbles, Sad to acknowledge, I only saw the movie, but was quite impressed. Like Schoendorfer’s “Le Crabbe Tambour”, (on the Indochina riverine war) you almost have to know a little of the history to understand the nuances, but I believe that the “Sand Pebbles” captured them more successfully for a wider general audience.
If you want to try a non-US vision of the Korean War, try Larteguy’s “Les Mercenaires”, originally published as “Sang sur la coline”.
Kimbob. Good points on the Chosun dynasty and today’s pacifist mood. I would point out that the quality of the ROK army in Vietnam spoke for itself. Unlike American units, which arrived well-trained and then degenerated due to many factors, with the individual replacement system being a major one, the two Korean divisions and Marine Brigade maintained their edge. U.S. commanders often derided the ROK forces as “inflexible and unimaginative”, but in my former sector, after a year of trying to clear the NVA out of a zone using “flexible and imaginative” tactics (with admittedly inferior forces), they had to turn to the 9th ROK Division. The White Horse cleared the “Dong Bo” using a tried and true “by the book” approach in a matter of days. Small wonder that after the war, the U.S. Army went back to relearning its doctrine.
‘Long allied with U.S., S. Korea now looks to China’
The problem with talking is that people sometimes listen. When folks in the Twin Cities area of Minnesota read their morning paper yesterday, this is the headline which greeted them: ‘Long allied with U.S., S. Korea now looks to China’
WOW!! 20% OF KOREANS ARE DUMB! But hey, here’s another really interesting poll!
70% believe Saddam, 9-11 link
That’s not as worrying as it sounds — 30% of Americans believe the Nazi holocaust never happened,
?€?Long allied with U.S., S. Korea now looks to China?€™
Going back to old master.