"There are rumours that I am in a cult, or that there was a performance of a ritual in the Blue House, but this is not true at all.”
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/12/14/south-korea-parlia...
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/10/29/499864915...
Few denies President Park was grossly incompetent in how she behaved during and after the Sewol ferry disaster. Also, the ferry was illegally and unsafely modified and then overloaded. It was a ticking time bomb: its sinking is a classic example of "everything that can go wrong went wrong."
But some people aren't satisfied with that, they think it's impossible that such a big ship would turn over by accident, so they need a villain with a human face. Ergo the conspiracy theory of somebody intentionally killing hundreds of people. And because nobody can explain why anybody would gain anything from such a heinous act, they invent a story of a human-sacrificing cult.
Imagine being a parent who just lost a child to something like that, and being told by people that there is a villain who murdered their child, and the only way to uncover the truth is to fight and protest on streets. For years. Forever. Until the "truth" is uncovered, which will never happen.
It's truly one of the most reprehensible mind viruses I've seen in Korea.
nodesocket•3w ago
smt88•3w ago
add-sub-mul-div•3w ago
yongjik•3w ago
Also, Yoon is very unpopular, and he's a moron, so he has zero use for America even if he somehow magically teleported there. Besides, Trump somehow seems rather infatuated with SK's current president Lee, after he was gifted a golden crown, so I don't think Trump would want to piss off Lee for some useless dude - he probably doesn't even remember who is Yoon.
impossiblefork•3w ago
If this happened in Sweden, we'd have been shooting at the participating soldiers while it went on with machine guns, seeking out people associated with the coup and killing them in their homes etc.
If someone is committing a coup, you go 100%, because if they succeed you don't have a country any more.
This guy invited this in a democratic, orderly country. What crime is worse? If it were me I'd have wanted the death penalty for any participating soldiers too.
nodesocket•3w ago
impossiblefork•3w ago
Lots of people have access to weapons (mostly for hunting, but still) and lots of people have done their mandatory military service and know that coups are illegal. They would certainly fight.
My point is that inviting that-- i.e. creating the situation where people have to fight and kill the coup plotters and anyone who sides with them, is a very extreme thing where killing only the plotters themselves is the mildest outcome.
This would happen as soon as a government said 'we're blocking the riksdag from meeting'. No one in Sweden from any political party in the Riksdag would ever do that though, it's of course unthinkable.
nodesocket•3w ago
anonnon•3w ago
But his posts describing his fellow countrymen as if some "berserker" spirit lies dormant within, are so credulity-straining that I initially assumed they were ironic, but then I remembered what site I was on (orange reddit), and how irony unqualified by "/s" is swiftly met with downvotes or flags, so he must be serious.
anonnon•3w ago
Yeah, that's exactly the kind of resolve one associates with a nation that rolled over, even to the point of active collaboration, when the Soviets invaded one democratic neighbor and annexed chunks of their territory, and when the Nazis subsequently invaded and occupied the other. The "Captain Sweden" meme exists for a reason.
impossiblefork•3w ago
Norwegians who fled to Sweden were organized into military forces intended to eventually retake Norway. My own grandfather fled to Sweden after the Nazi occupation of Norway, but was for some reason not part of this (he was sent to university instead). We even warned the Soviet Union of Operation Barbarossa after breaking the Geheimschreiber code.
rsynnott•3w ago
Can't even do a bit of light treason without being executed these days! It's political correctness gone mad.
I'm not in favour of the death penalty. I live in a country which hasn't executed anyone since 1954, and the death penalty has been unconstitutional since 2001. However, South Korea has the death penalty. If you're not going to use it for this, what _are_ you going to use it for?
krapp•3w ago
I don't know, ask my fellow Americans. Our President committed light treason and we not only re-elected him, our Supreme Court gave him absolute immunity from all future crimes while in office as a treat. He's a pedophile and a tyrant, blatantly ignoring Congress and the courts, colonizing and threatening foreign countries, sending masked thugs into the streets, targeted universities and protestors for political oppression and censorship, destroying America's regulatory and scientific infrastructure in the name of purging it of wrongthink (etc etc etc) and neither our government nor 300 million Americans armed to the teeth and ready to water the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants seem capable of doing anything about it.
I'm vehemently against the death penalty because I don't believe the state's monopoly on violence should extend that far (assuming for the sake of argument that it must exist at all) but I have to credit South Korea for having a system that can stand up to pressure. Wish I could say the same for us. We coasted until the civil war then collapsed then stumbled still half-wounded until 9/11 then folded like a paper cup.
rsynnott•3w ago
krapp•3w ago
I don't think so. Indicted and investigated, certainly, but never prosecuted.
It is weird that this was always a possibility with other presidents but with Trump it became such an existential crisis that we decided to make it illegal to even try, rather than establish that even sitting presidents aren't above the law.
Which to me seems like a no-brainer but judging from how many people claimed that either presidents had to be above the law or else the US would descend into a hell spiral of recrimination with every sitting president being arrested on fake charges by the opposition party, I must just be naive. I guess it's good that Nixon was right and nothing a president does is illegal. I guess that's what the founding fathers intended.
But again, it's still weird that it was always possible for a sitting president to be prosecuting in office until the supreme court stepped in, yet the absolutely certain slippery slope and worst case scenario never happened. I guess we were just lucky.
rsynnott•3w ago
This... seems unlikely. It had already been established that _kings_ could be removed for doing crimes (see Charles I, who, ah, lost his head) by the time the US was founded; it seems unlikely that they'd have intended the US president be less accountable than a king.
Tadpole9181•3w ago