But the Korean National Police have surrounded the parliament building.
"The South Korean act on martial law states that if the assembly demands an end to it, the president must lift it 'without delay.'"
But the President has defied that. So it depends on what the military does. If we had the same situation in this country I think a signifiant number of generals would refuse to submit to an illegal order. But that does not seem to be the case (yet) in South Korea.
The other big question is what, if anything, Kim Jong Un does.
The Gwangju Uprising, known in Korean as May 18 (Korean: 오일팔; Hanja: 五一八; RR: Oilpal; lit. Five One Eight), were student-led demonstrations that took place in Gwangju, South Korea, in May 1980, against the dictatorship of Chun Doo-hwan. The uprising was violently suppressed by the South Korean military with the approval and logistical support of the United States under the Carter administration, which feared the uprising might spread to other cities and tempt North Korea to interfere.
Number
Initially:
3,000 paratroopers
Gwangju Blockade:
23,000 troops
200,000 demonstrators
(estimated combined strength)
Casualties and losses
GOVERNMENT:
22 soldiers killed
(including 13 by friendly fire)
4 policemen killed
(several more killed by the army after the uprising ended)
109 soldiers wounded
144 policemen wounded
Total:
26 killed
253 wounded
165 killed (confirmed casualties only)
76 missing (presumed dead)
3,515 wounded
1,394 arrested
CIVILIANS OF GWANGJU:
Up to 600–2,300 killed
The residents of Gwangju protested and raised the police stations, arming themselves. This went down in 1980. Authoritarianism is part of the DNA of South Korean politics, even today.
Something like this can’t happen. No Army ever devised could take out 150 million gun owners. No country is more protected against tyranny than the USA.
The "150 million gun owners" are largely Trump supporters. They are also useless, being fat, out-of-shape beer guzzlers. I'm probably one of a very few liberal gun owners.
I know a lot of gun owners, like myself - who know filthy maga traitors are fully complicit traitors to the USA
Here are the latest developments, from the NYU Times.
"President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea said he would lift the emergency declaration of martial law he imposed on Tuesday as soon as he could convene his cabinet, bowing to pressure after the National Assembly passed a resolution demanding it end. By law, Mr. Yoon needs to convene his cabinet to lift martial law.
The announcement by Mr. Yoon early Wednesday in South Korea came five hours after he declared martial law late Tuesday night in an unannounced televised address, and soon after the assembly unanimously voted to rescind it, a swift rebuke of the president’s response to the political deadlock that has hobbled his tenure.
Mr. Yoon’s declaration of martial law had banned “all political activities” and enabled him to take command of the news media, and drew thousands of protesters outside the assembly complex in what were largely peaceful demonstrations.
Mr. Yoon, who is deeply unpopular, accused the opposition of plotting an “insurgency” and “trying to overthrow the free democracy.” But his declaration, in an unannounced speech to the nation, was a dramatic escalation of a simmering political feud, and within hours had drawn protesters, tanks and military vehicles onto streets.
The South Korean act on martial law states that if the assembly demands an end to it, the president must lift it “without delay.” It was the first time a South Korean president had declared martial law since military dictatorship ended in the country in the late 1980s."
NOTE: There is no provision in US law for the Congress to reject martial law once it's declared by the President or a Governor. See below.
Posted By: inicky46
You've gotta wonder if Trump is watching this to see if it's a blueprint for his own moves later on. Like right before he's supposed to leave office. Or any time Congress doesn't do what he wants.
Why do you continue with your idiotic beliefs that Trump is going to become a tyrant when he didn’t the first go round?
Oh wait I know, Blue 🥶 kookaide 🙄
Trump didn't try "to. become a tyrant" in "the first go round?"'
What the fuck do you think Jan. 6 was? It was a failed coup, dimwit. He failed because he was incompetent. Now he and those around him know how to get it right.
And have you done any research on how martial law works in the US compared to South Korea?
In the latter country, a declaration of martial law can be over-ridden by the legislature.
Not here. All the President has to do is declare it and there's no recourse at all.
Then there's Trump's worship of "strongmen" like Orban, Xi, Putin, Un and Erdogan.
He's a dictator wannabe.
And you don't care, you Red Goo-chugging, anti-democratic, traitorous moron.
And fake.
The filthy head maga traitor tried to get the delusional hoard of filthy maga traitors to 'hang Mike Pence'. REMEMBER?
Then why wasn’t Trump arrested, charged with insurrection and jailed? Riddle me that idiot man.
Posted By: BigPapasan
Re: Because Merrick Garland is a nebbish. E
Oh ok 3rd rate legal secretary, charts circles and arrrows time, what evidence was/is there that Donald Trump planned and then acted upon that plan to commit said insurrection? Time to showcase that brilliant legal mind of yours.
But Trump's delaying tactics worked and his hole card did, too, i.e. winning the Presidency which caused Smith to have to drop the cases. So Trump dodged a conviction for insurrection. What a guy.
And Loooooser, as usual, knows no facts and hates the ones he sees.
The head filthy maga traitor was arrested at least four times. A few of them specifically for trying to overturn the 2020 election. Don't worry, intelligent people know filthy maga traitors are delusional and dumb.
Show me, where Jack Smith had an indictmentfor the charge of insurrection against Donald J Trump…
Cause the second revised indictment only had 4 bull shit charges…
From
The article
The 36-page revised indictment, released on Tuesday afternoon, responds to the court’s ruling last month. Like the original 45-page indictment, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Aug. 1, 2023, it charges Trump with four different violations of federal criminal law –
conspiracy to defraud the United States,
conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding,
obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding,
and conspiracy against rights.
We’re is insurrection?
"conspiracy to defraud the United States,
conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding,
obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding,
and conspiracy against rights.'
Is in context the textbook DEFINITION of an insurrection. But you are too stupid to know that.
The voters knew it was bullshit and that’s why they re-elected Trump. Now Biden is looking to pardon every Democrat under moon to protect them from the monumental amount of law breaking and corruption they did on his behalf.
Posted By: inicky46
Re: You pathetic, ignorant dumbfuck
"conspiracy to defraud the United States,
conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding,
obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding,
and conspiracy against rights.'
Is in context the textbook DEFINITION of an insurrection. But you are too stupid to know that.
The charge of insurrection is a federal crime that involves violent acts against the United States government or its officers:
Definition: Insurrection is a violent uprising or organized resistance against the government or its regulations. It can also include acts intended to overthrow, disrupt, or challenge the authority of the United States.
Punishment: The punishment for insurrection includes:
A fine of up to $250,000
Imprisonment for up to 10 years
Permanent disqualification from holding any government office in the United States
Related laws: 18 U.S. Code § 2383 covers insurrection and rebellion.
It’s a completely separate charge that JACKASS SMITH couldn’t even remotely make stick so he had dream up that other bullshit.
Are you and big poppa flop done for the night cause I’m about to throw a rager in your hippocampus.
Sorry NOT SORRY 🖕🏻🖕🏻🖕🏻
is EXACTLY what happened on Jan. 6. Why Garland/Smith did not resort to it is puzzling.
Sorry, not sorry you're so out of touch with reality.
is EXACTLY what happened on Jan. 6.
Not quite, Nicky. It’s EXACTLY what the TDS/BlueAnon crowd thought happened. Now I don’t see you as far gone as the BlueAnon crowd, but you’re in the same boat with them on this point.
Why Garland/Smith did not resort to it is puzzling.
They didn’t charge insurrection because they didn’t have the evidence. It wasn’t an insurrection. I do agree, as politicized as Garland’s DOJ was, that it’s puzzling they just didn’t throw those charges at him as well.
He made a guess, at best. Garland was renowned for his caution. He waited so long to get things moving against Trump's Jan. 6 plot he played right into Trump's hands. Trump should give Garland a medal.
I’m going to play along with Nicky’s hypothesis here, that there were DOJ lawyers on Smith’s team that believed they had enough evidence to charge insurrection. That there were attorneys and investigators pushing for insurrection charges.
What follows from that? First a question as to why Garland/Smith didn’t press insurrection charges. Nicky thinks it’s because of timidity of Garland. If that’s true, was Garland being timid legally (would a jury convict) or politically (bad optics)?
Dude, you’re the one saying it was an insurrection but Garland/Smith too timid too charge. I’m asking why timid? Legal considerations? Political considerations? Both?
You are starting to sound like the REAL Officer Carmen with you demands that I answer every hypothetical question of yours. Stop playing Board Cop.
You’re complaining about hypotheticals?
Fact: Trump wasn’t charged with insurrection.
Nicky’s hypothetical: Because Garland/Smith were timid.
My question (not a demand 🤣): What considerations do you think made them timid? Legal? Political?
As an aside, you characterizing me a the board cop here? Puh-leeze! I see what you did there. 😉
As for hypotheticals, I simply made a guess. And it was not in the form of a question to you, ChicKie. YOURS was.
Does ChicKie get the difference?
You righties seem to think you can come on here and demand we answer your questions. Good luck with that.
It seems you will continue to need help from our brain-damaged SPOAT.
Sad.
That the 2 "reach around" buddies, TATL and bigP have their asses handed to them every single day by nearly everyone here.
What an embarrassment these two are. And they don't even know it... shame I tell ya. 😕
Posted By: inicky46
Re: When you need The SPOAT to WK for you, you're in trouble.
As for hypotheticals, I simply made a guess. And it was not in the form of a question to you, ChicKie. YOURS was.
Does ChicKie get the difference?
You righties seem to think you can come on here and demand we answer your questions. Good luck with that.
It seems you will continue to need help from our brain-damaged SPOAT.
Sad.
You and the flop do this alllllll the time…
The SPOAT is the stupidest poster on this board and you are a close second.
You’re complaining about hypotheticals?
Fact: Trump wasn’t charged with insurrection.
Nicky’s hypothetical: Because Garland/Smith were timid.
My question (not a demand 🤣): What considerations do you think made them timid? Legal? Political?
OK, for argument’s sake, we’ll say it was just a guess:
Nicky’s “GUESS”: Because Garland/Smith were timid.
My question (not a demand 🤣): What considerations do you think made them timid?
Curious why Nicky guessed timidity? Legal considerations or political considerations?
He is an overly-cautious man and has demonstrated that time and again.
I agree that Garland is timid. Where I differ with you is whether or not the timidity in this instance gives insight into whether the prosecution believed they had evidence to move forward with an insurrection charge.
If Smith’s team believed they had evidence, it could be Garland feared it wasn’t enough to bring back a guilty verdict from the jury. That would be timidity based on legal concerns. However if he believed there was enough evidence to convict, but still paused, I think that points to a political timidity.
"lawfare." Another made-up righty term for something that doesn't exist.
*rubs ChicKie on his tummy*
What the fuck do filthy maga traitors to the USA think "SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY" is? It's INSURRECTION only by a different name. Fucking idiots.
These people are mentally challenged in so many ways. Not to mention morally challenged.
Garland did not charge Trump with insurrection because he knew he didn’t have the evidence to convict be use it wasn’t Simple as that.
Calling him timid is lefty blue 🥶 goooo that icky D consumes soooo much of each day. Btw icky, I know your one of 12 people that are still watching PMSNBC. IF MUSK buys it and turns it into right wing news? Are you going to be heart broken?
