South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it
141–150 of 739 posts
Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost everyone in Korea is completely shocked, including most people who voted for him in the presedential elections. This is in a country where no one bats an eye even when sirens go off.
[flagged]
"President Yoon has taken an overwhelmingly pro-US policy compared to previous presidents," and his "PPP is fiercely anti-communist and advocates a hawkish policy against North Korea" [1]. With "many PPP politicians support[ing] South Korea having nuclear weapons on its own," this is not the man Pyongyang or Moscow want as dicator in Seoul.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_Power_Party_(South_Kore...
Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it
#143Can someone ELI5 if this is a huge deal (like declaring martial law would be in the west), or if this is the equivalent of a "government shutdown" when similar budget impasses occur in the US?
[flagged]
Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it
#144Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had not considered this. You (and others mentioning it) have a point. Though I would still have preferred a more substantial article as submission.
It's breaking news about a topic that came out of the blue for everyone. There isn't the time or knowledge of wtf is going on to write that article.
After having read the two rather strongly opinionated pieces "Amusing ourselves to death" [1] and "Avoid news" [2] they have mostly convinced me that "breaking news" is rarely of value in our everyday life, and I would rather have less of it.
[1] https://ia800101.us.archive.org/27/items/Various_PDFs/NeilPo...
[2]: https://web.archive.org/web/20130117104220if_/http://dobelli...
Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are the army likely to back him?
Unclear if it’s better if they do or they don’t. On one hand it’s clearly against the interests of the country to support him, on the other hand democracies absolutely don’t want the military taking any domestic political role
Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
And it’s always the others who are doing it. Our government would never. I mean, they did, but that was at least… dozens of years ago. And got forcibly declassified. They would never today. I guess. :-)
I am sorry I lack context. Which government took over dozens of years ago? And what got forcibly declassified? Thanks.
Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it
#148Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. Very low trust in politicians after it was revealed former president Park Geun-hye was secretly a crypto-Christian cult member despite claiming to be atheist. 2. South Korea has a bizarre large-scale "gender war" going on that extents into mainstream society. Imagine the Western online MRA/redpill/incel vs. radfem circles but as core identities in national politics. For some reason a high-trust society has decided…
> Imagine the Western online MRA/redpill/incel vs. radfem circles but as core identities in national politics. I have zero idea about SK, but ... "woke vs not woke" has become very much a core identity part in Western politics. The last US election has proven that, and what's going on here in Germany especially with Markus Söder isn't funny any more either [1], we got elections looming in about three months. [1] http…
Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
You edited your low-effort take into another still unargumented low-effort take... I see that you are not new here so you probably know what to expect for your comment, HN doesn't look kindly of flamebait. I am hijacking your comment in the hope that you and others will read the link I post here from a military historian whose articles end up regularly on the front page of HN. It adresses the question of US foreign a…
I’m not overtly critically set against it or anything in this thread, just curious what is the reasonable expectation here.