Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 739 posts

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#551

Post by s1artibartfast »

cogman10 wrote: post #535
s1artibartfast wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely incorrect. The state militias consisted of private citizens with their own arms who would organize when needed, not standing state armies with government issued arms. Also, private gun ownership was the norm at the time. Heller draws it's decision from historical reality and originalist philosophy

> The state militias consisted of private citizens with their own arms who would organize when needed The founders, in 1808, appropriated funding for arms to state militias. [1]. Previously the arming of militias was up to the individual states. Some would have chosen to just have private citizens bring their own arms. Others would have actually set aside a fund to bring those arms. And that's blatantly apparent when…

Washington had a good point in my opinion, but it was a strategic one, and one that that the authors of the 2nd amendment disagreed with.

The author is absolutely hated the idea of a standing army, and I think the Bill of Rights reflects this ideal over more practical concerns.

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#553

Post by johnny22 »

foxglacier wrote: post #426
zelon88 wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The paradox is; Society should benefit everyone equally. If it doesn't, then the ones who are not benefiting have a social responsibility to adjust it until it does. By hook or by crook, for better or worse. Equity is usually pretty difficult to swallow for those who are benefiting inequitably. But the thing is, if it's not working for everyone, it isn't working at all and it should probably be broken the rest of the…

What if there's no solution that has both equity and survival of the society? I don't think we have any known solution yet. Of course if the society collapses, the equity goes with it. By the way, how is women being housewives them at the bottom? Housewives have an equal share of their husbands' income, so they're just as wealthy as men. They also traditionally control what it's spent on. It's just that their job is…

if that's how you wanna put it, then yes. Women should have the same rights to choose which machine's buttons they push.

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#554

Post by hyeonwho4 »

wesselbindt wrote: post #221
meepmorp wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SK has been at war with a hostile, communist neighbor for about 75 years. It's not really "red scare stuff." Edit: I'm not sure what I was getting at, so ignore me

There's no pro north Korean elements in the opposition. This is using a very real foreign adversary as a boogeyman to demonize political opponents. That's exactly what "red scare stuff" was back then in the United States, and that's exactly how it's being used right now by the president of Korea.

Ten to fifteen years ago a Korean opposition assemblyman was tried for being part of a conspiracy with plans to bomb train stations in the event of a conflict with North Korea. He was aquitted on the argument that he was ordered to by the opposition leaders. So the largest opposition party was found to be pro-communist and forced to be dissolved.

Not that this justifies any of the recent coup, but actual communist conspiracies were still happening in recent memory.

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#555

Post by rawgabbit »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #480
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is there an impeachment process for a constitutional violations There's an impeachment process. Creating a separate, faster one for constitutional violations is just inviting trouble.

If I recall correctly, I thought there was some legal provision in the US for the military to disobey unconstitutional orders. If it doesn't exist de jure , I suppose it always exists de facto , both in the US and elsewhere. I think it is always interesting when the curtain gets pulled back to reveal how all of our political systems and norms simply overlay the fact that power is the ultimate law of the land.

This article addresses the issue. The stumbling block is something called the Insurrection Act.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2024/07/12/what-happens-...

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#556

Post by vundercind »

psunavy03 wrote: post #483
s1artibartfast wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I recall correctly, I thought there was some legal provision in the US for the military to disobey unconstitutional orders. If it doesn't exist de jure , I suppose it always exists de facto , both in the US and elsewhere. I think it is always interesting when the curtain gets pulled back to reveal how all of our political systems and norms simply overlay the fact that power is the ultimate law of the land.

As a retired military officer, disobeying illegal orders is expected. An order to commit a war crime is itself a crime, not a lawful order. The sticky part comes in when the venue for determining the legality of the order often then becomes one's own court-martial and resulting appeals. I'm not sure how much case law there is on the subject.

This is further complicated by a history (yes, in the US) of not just failing to prosecute obvious war criminals, and of pardoning many who do somehow manage to get convicted, but wide swaths of the population treating them as heroes. There are recent examples, but look at how we treated those with the most direct culpability for the My Lai massacre, and further, how the guy who took direct action to stop it got treated—this stuff goes back quite a bit, we pretty consistently don't just tolerate but coddle war criminals, so... risk disobeying the illegal order and maybe get treated like a villain, or become an actual villain but good odds you get hero treatment?

The law is arguably not what's written, but what actually happens, and analyzed that way our laws about war crime are complicated.

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#557

Post by lesuorac »

mschuster91 wrote: post #103
dtquad wrote: post #60

Earlier 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…

Trump would've won even if his platform had "lets add fluoride to the water to turn the frogs gay".

Pretty much every "Western" election voted out the incumbent due to their either poor economy or poor messaging about the economy. The swing-PA voter didn't vote out Biden because their daughter was dominating trans-kids in sports; they want grocery prices down.

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#558

Post by t-3 »

onemoresoop wrote: post #165
tacheiordache wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Yes, Putin meddling in North Korea should be alarming to South Korea.

Russia having better relationships with NK should have been expected by everyone since the start of sanctions rather than treated like a horrific surprise that nobody could have ever imagined. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" and so on.

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#559

Post by pc86 »

cyberlimerence wrote: post #386

Yonhap (Korea state news) : The National Assembly voted Wednesday to demand President Yoon Suk Yeol lift emergency martial law. Under the Constitution, martial law must be lifted when a parliamentary majority demands it. Of the 300 members of parliament, 190 were present and all 190 voted in favor of a motion demanding the lifting of martial law. With the motion's passage, the martial law declaration is void, accordi…

The President has said he will stand down martial law through the cabinet meeting.

My understanding is that the parliamentary vote itself is not binding, but requires essentially a rubber stamp by the cabinet. They can decline to do so and the President wouldn't be legally required to stand down. Regardless, 190-0 is an overwhelming statement and if I was represented by one of the 110 absent members I would have a lot of very serious questions for them.

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#560

Post by tw1984 »

ronsor wrote: post #404
sneak wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rest of the replies here seem to be personal attitudes and opinions. Objectively, the state-promoted bogeymen in the USA are consistently Iran, China, DPRK, and increasingly Russia. I just spent a month in China and the disparity between what we are told in western media and what is actually going on is substantial, but not in the ways I expected.

Based on how I've seen people describe China, they have a lot of "vertical slicing" going on: the parts that are good look really good and impressive, but the parts that are bad are extremely bad. They will do whatever is possible to hide the latter. Remember that China is not a "free country" (even as much as Western nations have started to make a mockery of that word) like those of the US or Western Europe. Your ex…

> Remember that China is not a "free country"

indeed, none of them had the freedom to get a full unconditional pardon by their father with terminal stage dementia.

I mean freedom of what? unlimited number of genders? fat dude wearing a dress competing sports against young girls? or maybe you are talking about the freedom to avoid jail time for convicted felony by being elected the leader of your free world?

Post reply on HN