Which part was the historical fallacy? The part where I gave explicit examples of both the ROK and US massacring civilians, or the part where I mentioned that South Korea has major issues with rising fascist movements, such as under current president Yoon? The same president who has targeted women and disabled people to rile up the increasingly conservative male voterbase, similar to how Trump rose to power in the US?
North Korea isn’t a good state, not in any meaningful capacity, but neither is South Korea. Additionally, the ROK was modeled by the Americans, the Korean intelligence agency is literally the KCIA. The ROK is essentially a US puppet state, they are allowed to govern themselves until what they do goes against the US.
The decision to delay the handover of wartime control of South Korean army to the SK government is made by both parties, as recent as 2015, in which both governments are no longer ruled by the same people as by those in 1950s and 1960s. Because decision-makers in 1950s are now dead and there are new leaders. You don’t need a PhD to figure that out.
Do you think parties are the will of the people? Especially considering the aforementioned anti-democratic massacres, such as Gwang-Ju in 1980, not 1950 or 1960?
You don’t need a PhD to figure out that you clearly have a pro-American bias and don’t actually care about historical accuracy.
You’ve been routinely wrong, and keep moving goal posts. Have you been ignoring President Yoon’s flirtation with fascism, and the specific targeting of minority populations, women, and disabled people? Do you believe South Korea’s history has no bearing on modern day politics?
South Korea is fundamentally controlled by the Chaebol and the US, despite protests against it.
Is pointing out the numerous issues with South Korea and the sovereignty of its citizens akin to being pro-North Korea? I don’t think so.
You are the one who first talked about ROK having no wartime control of their army, despite the Korean government themselves, having been ruled by various different parties of different flavours of ideologies, delaying the handover. Now, you are accusing me of moving the goal post when you’re the one who set the agenda in the first place and I am merely responding. You moved the goal post with something that has zero to do with the initial agenda.
Even so, you moved the goal post, I will let you get to the finish line. You did not answer whether or not has there been any massacre in the past twenty years since South Korea’s democratisation in spite of US wartime control of ROK army and leadership changes between different South Korean political parties?
You truly don’t care to acknowledge that parties are not the people, do you? That only furthers my point, that South Korea cannot go against the US.
I never said there was constant massacring, I said South Korea has had numerous issues with massacring their population in modern history. This is factually correct, you even pretended it was limited to the 50s and 60s, and you still ignore President Yoon’s fascist practices.
Have the Korean government massacred anyone since their democratisation?
You obviously don’t live in East Asia to realise why the South Korean government delay the handover. I will give you an important hint as much as national security: it saves them money. They get more bang for the buck. Same with the EU hosting American military bases. The EU isn’t being accused for “free-riding” for a reason.
South Korea get more than they bargained for which, not only deters North Korea and China, but also save them money. Why change the status quo overnight if it serves them very well so far?
Going back to the original matter at hand; yes, South Korea still exercise agency outside of the US influence in this matter. SK uses US more than the other way around.
Which part was the historical fallacy? The part where I gave explicit examples of both the ROK and US massacring civilians, or the part where I mentioned that South Korea has major issues with rising fascist movements, such as under current president Yoon? The same president who has targeted women and disabled people to rile up the increasingly conservative male voterbase, similar to how Trump rose to power in the US?
North Korea isn’t a good state, not in any meaningful capacity, but neither is South Korea. Additionally, the ROK was modeled by the Americans, the Korean intelligence agency is literally the KCIA. The ROK is essentially a US puppet state, they are allowed to govern themselves until what they do goes against the US.
The decision to delay the handover of wartime control of South Korean army to the SK government is made by both parties, as recent as 2015, in which both governments are no longer ruled by the same people as by those in 1950s and 1960s. Because decision-makers in 1950s are now dead and there are new leaders. You don’t need a PhD to figure that out.
So yes, historical fallacy is what you’re doing.
Do you think parties are the will of the people? Especially considering the aforementioned anti-democratic massacres, such as Gwang-Ju in 1980, not 1950 or 1960?
You don’t need a PhD to figure out that you clearly have a pro-American bias and don’t actually care about historical accuracy.
What year are you in? Have the ROK and US massacred any Koreans in the past twenty years?
Sure, keep coping. You’re being a vatnik to North Koreans.
You’ve been routinely wrong, and keep moving goal posts. Have you been ignoring President Yoon’s flirtation with fascism, and the specific targeting of minority populations, women, and disabled people? Do you believe South Korea’s history has no bearing on modern day politics?
South Korea is fundamentally controlled by the Chaebol and the US, despite protests against it.
Is pointing out the numerous issues with South Korea and the sovereignty of its citizens akin to being pro-North Korea? I don’t think so.
Looks like you’re having cognitive dissonance.
You are the one who first talked about ROK having no wartime control of their army, despite the Korean government themselves, having been ruled by various different parties of different flavours of ideologies, delaying the handover. Now, you are accusing me of moving the goal post when you’re the one who set the agenda in the first place and I am merely responding. You moved the goal post with something that has zero to do with the initial agenda.
Even so, you moved the goal post, I will let you get to the finish line. You did not answer whether or not has there been any massacre in the past twenty years since South Korea’s democratisation in spite of US wartime control of ROK army and leadership changes between different South Korean political parties?
You truly don’t care to acknowledge that parties are not the people, do you? That only furthers my point, that South Korea cannot go against the US.
I never said there was constant massacring, I said South Korea has had numerous issues with massacring their population in modern history. This is factually correct, you even pretended it was limited to the 50s and 60s, and you still ignore President Yoon’s fascist practices.
You truly have nowhere to stand on.
Have the Korean government massacred anyone since their democratisation?
You obviously don’t live in East Asia to realise why the South Korean government delay the handover. I will give you an important hint as much as national security: it saves them money. They get more bang for the buck. Same with the EU hosting American military bases. The EU isn’t being accused for “free-riding” for a reason.
South Korea get more than they bargained for which, not only deters North Korea and China, but also save them money. Why change the status quo overnight if it serves them very well so far?
Going back to the original matter at hand; yes, South Korea still exercise agency outside of the US influence in this matter. SK uses US more than the other way around.
Yes. They were “democratic” before 1980.
I understand why South Korean parties bend the knee, but your original point is wrong and you’ve shifted.
you’re such an utter ignoramus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_Chung_Hee