<html>
<body>
Mr. Brwon<br><br>
Let me thank you for your illuminating explanation.<br>
I appreciate it.<br><br>
I also would like to agree with you to the degree that the
"you" (since you address the U.S. government as yours) have
been less bellicose with North Korea since 1953 compared to
"your" aggression against other countries challenging
"you" such as Cuba, Vietnam, Iran, Iraq, Panama, and so on.
<br><br>
I am just wondering whether it is because North Korea has been armed with
military capability to retaliate or because it does not have oil or any
other valuable natural resources.<br><br>
If the former is the case, then it seems that "you" have been
rewarding the country for its military capability by tolerating it
despite its hostility while punishing those without the same degree of
military prowess. Then who can blame Kim Jongil for developing nuclear
weapons?<br><br>
If the latter is the case, I thank God who saves the peninsular from
another war by having created it as non-oil-producing land although you,
sir do not appear to be happy with it.<br><br>
sincerely,<br><br>
serk-bae suh<br><br>
<br><br>
At 09:46 AM 9/26/2003 -0400, you wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Mr. Suh, that's a very good
question. "We" users of English should always be careful in our
use of pronouns. And I see I also misued the word "there"
instead of "their". There is some advantage in Korean
where pronouns are not used as much. [Come to think of it, Korean's do
often use the term -ooudi- in all kinds of similar situations].
<br><br>
I meant "we" in a broad sense as "we Americans" as
represented by our elected government. I don't think the US government
has really done anything to North Korea, at least since 1953, that has
been deserving of all the North Korean official acrimony. Of course, the
USG tells them (NK leadership) if they attack the South it (the USG) will
destroy them (NK leadership) but we (US) have never had to actually do
that. And I can't think of any time when we (USG) hasve actually fired a
gun or taken something of theirs (North Korea's). <br>
<br>
I don't think it makes much difference though. The "we" in my
view could be South Korea or really just about anyone outside Pyongyang's
ruling clique. NK's leadership uses any kind of excuse for maintaining
its ruthless, and yes I think evil, power over its poor citizens.
The rest of the world, for good or bad, has chosen to tolerate their (NK
leadership's) behavior.<br><br>
<br>
>From: Serk-Bae Suh <br>
>Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List <br>
>To: Korean Studies Discussion List <br>
>Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult <br>
>Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:48:43 -0700 <br>
> <br>
>To Mr. William Brown <br>
> <br>
>I am afraid I also must be missing something here. <br>
> <br>
>Who are "we" in your previous posting? <br>
> <br>
>Does this "we" refer to you and Mr. Frank Hoffmann? or Do
you mean <br>
>the U.S. government by the "we"? or the American People as
a whole? <br>
>Or, does it just include a group of people who share your view?
<br>
> <br>
>Or does it mean the holy trinity of Christian Almighty God whose
<br>
>divine power is to judge who is evil and who is good and break the
<br>
>backbone of evil? <br>
> <br>
>Maybe it is because that English is not my native language. <br>
> <br>
>I would be more than grateful if you would kindly elucidate the
"we" <br>
>you are talking about. <br>
> <br>
>Thank you very much. <br>
> <br>
>sincerely, <br>
> <br>
>serk-bae suh <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
>At 08:17 PM 9/25/2003 -0400, you wrote: <br>
> <br>
>>I must be missing something here. How can something that did not
<br>
>>happen (US recapture of the Pueblo) now be scary? Seems like the
<br>
>>fact that it was allowed to move should make you less afraid.
<br>
>>Unless your point is that perhaps the US doesn't really watch
them <br>
>>so closely after all, and that fact is scary. In truth, despite
<br>
>>all the war talk over the last 50 years, and lots of North Korean
<br>
>>provocations, its hard to say we have done anything to provoke
<br>
>>there current antagonism. <br>
>> <br>
>> >From: Frank Hoffmann <br>
>> >Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List <br>
>> >To: Korean Studies Discussion List <br>
>> >Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult <br>
>> >Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:39:29 -0700 <br>
>> > <br>
>> > <br>
>> >Professor Choe wrote: <br>
>> > <br>
>> >> I cannot imagine that the US would have allowed NK to
remove it <br>
>> >>via high sea. The only alternative must have been by
land. Is it <br>
>> >>possible to move the ship Pueblo via ground
transportation? <br>
>> > <br>
>> >You can always disassemble a 900 to 1000 ton boat like that
in a <br>
>> >week or two (which would be necessary anyway to get it
through <br>
>>all <br>
>> >the highway tunnels)..... but what I find much more
interesting <br>
>>is <br>
>> >your note that you can't imagine the US would have allowed
NK to <br>
>> >transport a spy ship that had been captured over 30 years
ago (by <br>
>> >Oct. 1999, when it was transported). That's more than
alarming if <br>
>> >so. There is a Senate Resolution (see below) from January of
this <br>
>> >year (not the first one) asking for the return of that ship,
<br>
>>which, <br>
>> >I think, speaks for itself. But the suggestion that the U.S.
<br>
>> >military would go for an armed conflict to conquer a 1944
build <br>
>>spy <br>
>> >ship that was captured three decades ago is rather ... well,
<br>
>>scary. <br>
>> > <br>
>> >Frank <br>
>> > <br>
>> >--->> <br>
>> > <br>
>> >Congressional Record: January 29, 2003 (Senate) <br>
>> >Page S1752-S1756 <br>
>> > <br>
>> > <br>
>> > STATEMENTS ON SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS <br>
>> > <br>
>> > <br>
>> > SENATE RESOLUTION 29--DEMANDING THE RETURN OF THE USS
<br>
>> >PUEBLO TO THE <br>
>> > UNITED STATES NAVY <br>
>> > <br>
>> > Mr. CAMPBELL submitted the following resolution; which was
<br>
>> >referred <br>
>> >to the Committee on Foreign Relations: <br>
>> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, which was attacked and captured by
<br>
>> > the North Korean Navy on January 23, 1968, was the first
<br>
>> > United States Navy ship to be hijacked on the high seas by
a <br>
>> > foreign military force in over 150 years; <br>
>> > Whereas 1 member of the USS Pueblo crew, Duane Hodges, was
<br>
>> > killed in the assault while the other 82 crew members were
<br>
>> > held in captivity, often under inhumane conditions, for 11
<br>
>> > months; <br>
>> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, an intelligence collection <br>
>> > auxiliary vessel, was operating in international waters at
<br>
>> > the time of the capture, and therefore did not violate
North <br>
>> > Korean territorial waters; <br>
>> > Whereas the capture of the USS Pueblo resulted in no <br>
>> > reprisals against the Government or people of North Korea
and <br>
>> > no military action at any time; and <br>
>> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, though still the property of the
<br>
>> > United States Navy, has been retained by North Korea for
more <br>
>> > than 30 years, was subjected to exhibition in the North
<br>
>> > Korean cities of Wonsan and Hungham, and is now on display
in <br>
>> > Pyongyang, the capital city of North Korea: Now, therefore,
<br>
>> > be it <br>
>> > Resolved,That the Senate-- <br>
>> > (1) demands the return of the USS Pueblo to the United
<br>
>> > States Navy; and <br>
>> > (2) directs the Secretary of the Senate to transmit copies
<br>
>> > of this resolution to the President, the Secretary of
<br>
>> > Defense, and the Secretary of State. <br>
>> > <br>
>> > Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to submit a
Senate <br>
>> >Resolution calling on North Korea to return the USS Pueblo
to the <br>
>> >United States Navy. The legislation I am reintroducing today
is <br>
>> >based <br>
>> >on a resolution I introduced last year during the 107th
Congress, <br>
>> >Senate Resolution 246. <br>
>> > On January 23, 1968, the USS Pueblo was unjustly attacked
and <br>
>> >captured by <br>
>> > <br>
>> >[[Page S1754]] <br>
>> > <br>
>> >the North Korean Navy, becoming the first United States Navy
ship <br>
>>to <br>
>> >be <br>
>> >hijacked on the high seas by a foreign military force in
over 150 <br>
>> >years. At the time of its capture, the USS Pueblo was
operating <br>
>>as <br>
>> >an <br>
>> >intelligence collection auxiliary vessel, and did not pose a
<br>
>>threat. <br>
>> > This act of aggression resulted in the USS Pueblo's 82 crew
<br>
>> >members <br>
>> >being held in captivity for eleven months, often in inhumane
<br>
>> >conditions. Another brave crew member, Duane Hodges, was
killed <br>
>> >during <br>
>> >the initial attack and several more crew members were
wounded. On <br>
>> >December 23, 1968, after nearly a year of being unjustly
detained <br>
>> >the <br>
>> >surviving USS Pueblo crew members were finally released and
<br>
>>allowed <br>
>> >to <br>
>> >return home. <br>
>> > It is interesting to note that the USS Pueblo I am calling
on <br>
>>the <br>
>> >North Koreans to return today is in fact the third ship of
the <br>
>>fleet <br>
>> >to <br>
>> >be named in honor of the city and county of Pueblo, located
in my <br>
>> >home <br>
>> >State of Colorado. The first ship of the fleet to be named
in <br>
>>honor <br>
>> >of <br>
>> >Pueblo was an armored cruiser which had previously been
named the <br>
>> >Colorado. In 1916, the USS Colorado was renamed as the USS
Pueblo <br>
>> >when <br>
>> >a new battleship named USS Colorado was authorized. The
first USS <br>
>> >Pueblo served until 1927. The second USS Pueblo was a city
class <br>
>> >frigate which served from 1944 to 1946. She was later sold
to the <br>
>> >Dominican Republic where she serves today. <br>
>> > The third USS Pueblo is the ship now wrongly held by the
North <br>
>> >Koreans. Built by the Kewaunee Shipbuilding and Engineering
<br>
>> >Corporation, Kewaunee, WI, the ship originally served as a
<br>
>>general <br>
>> >purpose supply vessel FP-344 for service in the U.S. Army
<br>
>> >Transportation Corps when she was launched on April 16,
1944. <br>
>>During <br>
>> >1966 and 1967 the ship was converted, redesignated as the
USS <br>
>>Pueblo <br>
>> >and commissioned as an environmental research vessel,
AGER-2. <br>
>> > It is important to note that even to this day the capture
of the <br>
>> >USS <br>
>> >Pueblo has resulted in no reprisal against North Korea,
<br>
>> >demonstrating <br>
>> >remarkable restraint by the United States. Even though the
USS <br>
>> >Pueblo <br>
>> >still clearly remains the legal property of the United
States <br>
>>Navy, <br>
>> >the <br>
>> >North Korean Government has kept it on display as a sort of
<br>
>> >traveling <br>
>> >propaganda museum. <br>
>> > Recent events have made it clear that many unresolved
issues <br>
>> >remain <br>
>> >regarding our Nation's relationship with North Korea. For
<br>
>>example, <br>
>> >North Korea's recent high-profile resumption of nuclear
<br>
>> >saber-rattling <br>
>> >presents a serious resurgent challenge that we, our allies
in <br>
>> >Northeast <br>
>> >Asia and the rest of the world community must take
seriously. <br>
>> > While I certainly agree that successfully resolving this
<br>
>> >situation is <br>
>> >first and foremost, I also believe that there are other
positive <br>
>> >restorative steps that the North Koreans should take in
order to <br>
>> >help <br>
>> >improve our bilateral relationship. One such action would be
to <br>
>> >return <br>
>> >the USS Pueblo to its rightful owners, the United States
Navy and <br>
>> >the <br>
>> >American people they serve and protect. <br>
>> > While returning the USS Pueblo may not necessarily remove
the 35 <br>
>> >year-old scars inflicted by the attack of January 23, 1968,
and <br>
>> >especially those suffered by the crew of the USS Pueblo and
by <br>
>>their <br>
>> >families and loved ones, it would serve as a good will
gesture, a <br>
>> >salve <br>
>> >if you will, signaling hope for a brighter future between
our two <br>
>> >nation's peoples. <br>
>> > I stand with my colleagues back home in the Colorado State
<br>
>> >General <br>
>> >Assembly in demanding the return of the USS Pueblo to the
United <br>
>> >States <br>
>> >Navy. <br>
>> > I urge my colleagues here in the U.S. Senate to join me in
<br>
>> >supporting <br>
>> >passage of this important resolution. <br>
>> > <br>
>> >-- <br>
>> >______________________________________________________
<br>
>> >Frank Hoffmann <br>
>>
><a href="http://koreaweb.ws/" eudora="autourl">http://KoreaWeb.ws</a>
* Fax: (415) 727-4792 <br>
>> <br>
>> <br>
>>---------- <br>
>>Get McAfee virus scanning and <br>
>>cleaning of incoming attachments. Get Hotmail Extra Storage!
<br><br>
<hr>
<a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMAENUS/2749??PS=">Share your photos without
swamping your Inbox. Get Hotmail Extra Storage today!
</a></blockquote></body>
</html>