Talk:Syngman Rhee/Archive 1

Disgrace
Like so much involving the Korean War this article is a disgrace. It sounds like it was written by a 6th grader in Beijing. All citations from sources not directly related to scholarship on Rhee need to be removed. There are too many ancillary references from political works concerned with broader issues; rather than the man. Rhee was a huge figure in South Korean history and deserves a detailed English language wiki page.

I do not know enough about Rhee to contribute content. I do know enough to reject large parts of this article as partisan hackery. I would assume the Korean language version of the wiki article on Rhee is better. Maybe someone could translate that and use it as a starting point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.209.90 (talk) 01:05, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

U.S. Backed Dictator
As far as I have known, Syngman Rhee was a US backed dictator who was only ousted after he did "unfavorable" things. Anyone have more on this? Also, I'm a Korean, so people don't dispute my "outsider" status. Anarkial 16:50, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I read that he was removed by the Korean people after they gained power. Anarkial 17:07, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes and no - certainly the protests of the 4-19 movement were the main cause of his departure, but he left only after a visit from the US ambassador - within a couple of hours. --Dan (talk) 19:01, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Dictator? Sure, there are many that would call President Rhee a dictator. Pro-communists, pro-North Koreans, pro-President Park, et al. Yet, Wikipedia isn't pro-communist, nor pro-north korean, or pro-Park Chung Hee, Wikipedia is pro-Knowledge. It is a sacred forum for knowledge of which is "our shared treasure." The use of charged pejoratives that aren't universally accepted do more harm than good, as does politically motivated propaganda.Buryatrider (talk) 05:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Syngman Rhee used totalitarian methods to control his country's people, including arbitrary change of the law so he can stay in power, and ordering the murder or incarceration of anyone suspected of opposing him.

Why is it relevant in any way that 'communists' see him as dictator? How is in any way relevant whether or not something is accepted by certain political group? Facts state he was a mass murdering, dictator. It is not a 'charged pejorative', it is fact. (Ioan) (91.209.61.94 (talk) 11:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC))
 * Syngman Rhee was absolutely a dictator. He killed at least one hundred thousand political opponents in his own country to retain power and oversaw a massively corrupt system where him and his close associates lived comfortably while the average South Korean foraged the land for food. Kurtis (talk) 21:54, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Name Question
Question. Isn't his last name spelled Lee, officially? I mean, I am used to see "Dr.Lee" as his offcial title. idkim 11:05, 22 Aug 2005(UTC)


 * Origin of his surname . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cehihin (talk • contribs) 21:56, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


 * As far as I know, Syngman Rhee is the officialy accepted name: every media employ this form, and you can check that out by simple googling. Probably Rhee himself used this name during his stay in the U.S. noirum 15:09, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

As a Korea who grew up during the Korean War, I feel your article "Syng-man Rhee" could use more information, especially during the time the armistice was considered by the Chinese and UN leaders in 1953. Many articles describe our former president as a crazy old man deranged with power to rule the unified Korea, but to me, his bold action against the world leaders at the time of the armistice was heroic. Who is at fault for dividing Korea in two, any way?
 * In 1905, after Japan won the Russo-Japanese War,the American president Thedore Roosevelt "handed" Korea to Japan, and as the result, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. In 1941, Japan launched war against the United States.
 * On August 10, 1945, even before Emperor Hirohito's surrender speech was delivered, two young American officers, Dean Rusk and Charles Bonesteel who knew nothing about Korea, drew a pencil mark on the National Geographic map along the 38th Parallel as a dividing line between the US territory and Russian territory in our country. Two days earlier, the Russians had entered the major cities in the North, calling themselves "liberators", and the Americans were nervous about losing the entire Korea.
 * in 1953, three long years of intense bettle and millions of lost lives later, the world leaders wanted to end the war, completely ignoring how we Koreans felt about it. It took courage for President Rhee to stand up and tell the GIANTS "enough is enough." Our country's fate had been decided by OUTSIDERS too many times already, and he was sick and tired of it.
 * The Korean historians recognize that Syng-man's Rhee's courage awakened people conscience with a message that: although we were poor and powerless and were depending on other nations, we had pride, too, and that we shouldn't be stepped on like worms.
 * As a politician, President Rhee made many serious mistakes, but as a man, he loved his country and understood the pain of his countrymen who suffered 40 long years of Japanese colonial ruling, the humiliation of the division, and three years of devastating war against our own. Had he obediently signed the armistice as the world leaders wanted him to do, the people of South Koreans would not have regained their self-respect and and strength to rebuild South Korea the way she is now.  Today South Korea is one of the strongest nation that boasts its people's skills, its modern cities, and its stable economy.


 * I agree that outsiders often paint a simplistic portrait of Rhee as a crazy old man. And as you say, maybe his stance regarding the armistice really was heroic. However, I think many Koreans tend to overemphasise the role of outsiders in the division of the peninsula and the war. Kim Il-sung, who was responsible for the war, was Korean, as was Rhee, who has to take at least some blame for the division. Yes, it was the rivalry between Kim and Rhee that made the division into something permanent. It was the outsiders who imposed the initial division, but that does not absolve the Koreans of the blame for the fratricidal war. Rhee on the other hand has to be commended that he was no Kim Il-sung. He had basic respect for the democratic system (although this didn't keep him from abusing power through the National Security Law and rigging elections), and the press was freer under him than under the subsequent military regimes. The commitment to at least the idea (if not the actual practise) of liberal democracy alone was crucial in that it created the conditions for the democratic South Korea we have today. --Iceager 06:05, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Many nations, unfortunately, were responsible for the division of Korea. Following World War II, the global political climate was under the influence of Containment. The UN and the United States were trying to contain communism which was appearing world-wide. The civil war in Turkey just before the Korean War was one example. When WW2 ended, Korea was divided just as Germany and Berlin were. As is Germany and Berlin, the division was not well thought out nor in the best interest of the regions. This division allowed Communist ideas to take hold in North Korea under Kim Il-Sung and American ideas to take hold in the South under the American-educated Syngman Rhee. Both North Korea (with it's allies China and Russia) and South Korea (allied with the UN) sought total victory and unification of Korea. Neither side received it.
 * Although I can sympathize with Syngman Rhee's desire to have a whole, unified Korea, there was much more at stake. If the Korean War had not ended, Nuclear Warfare most likely would have broken out between the United States and Russia who both had MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) programs in place. The US even showed it's capability of using Nuclear warheads in Korea in Operation Hudson Harbor. The US dropped very large conventional bombs at low altitudes to show that they were capable of using a Nuke. Syngman Rhee is often looked at as a "crazy old man" because his actions in the face of what many feared to be the beginning of the end of the world, did not make sense. Throughout the years of armistace talks the issue of voluntary vs. forced repatriation of POWs became the foremost issue. Each side was using POWs as bargaining chips. In June 1953, Rhee freed over 28,000 POWs without authorization from the UN. This upset the superpowers on both sides who saw Rhee's actions as trying to ruin the peace talks. The UN Command even had a plan called Operation Everready that was designed to remove Rhee from power if necessary.
 * Yes, from the scope of the Korean penninsula, Rhee was a patriot desperately trying to unify his motherland, but from the perspective of the other nations involved, he did seem like a "crazy old man." --Hedgefighter 20:29, 14 Mar 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't forget that the 38th parallel was the line used by Russia and Japan much earlier when they were bickering over Korea, and they in fact used that as the boundary between their spheres of influence until Japan defeated Russia in the Russo-Japan war. Prior to the Korean war (6-25) Rhee was confident enough of US support that he engaged in a lot of saber-rattling towards the north, threatening invasions and forceful reunification. He must take some blame for the war. --Dan (talk) 19:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

If I'm reading it correctly, the section about his exile refers to him as both Pee and Lee. Since I don't know if there's an actual guy named Pee, I'll let someone else change it. Jlygrnmigt (talk) 04:11, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality dispute
This article has prompted little discussion, but has prompted revert wars. It has also prompted additions that could supplant previous assertions, but do not. The odd result is a page that does not present all sides of an argument, but actually takes all sides of an argument. It actually contradicts itself. The shifts in point of view are disorienting; the inability of its editors to agree on a neutral presentation of the facts discredits the encyclopedia. I don’t care to join a revert war with both sides; but clearly the opposing attempts either to condemn or to excuse Rhee are not going to stand without objection. Can we not drop them both? Ford 17:23, 2004 Oct 16 (UTC)
 * Is it possible to clear this page to a neutral standpoint? The article initially was heavily pro-Communist and clearly biased. Tlaktan 06:05, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I would add a new note about the neutrality dispute on this page, but it would be exactly what I said before. Anyone who wants to wade into the thick of this leftist-rightist brawl over the legacy of this controversial ruler is welcome to take a crack at the article and remove the contradictory points of view. Until that happens, it is obviously disputed, so do not remove the tag.&mdash; Ford 11:44, 2004 Dec 20 (UTC)

Page move
This article was moved to Rhee Syng Man despite an explicit policy at Naming conventions (Korean), to keep pages, and specifically this page, under names where they would most likely be sought. I have therefore moved it back. Anyone wishing to change the policy should discuss it on the policy’s talk page.&mdash; Ford 23:35, 2004 Dec 28 (UTC)

I would like to add, as I move the page back to Syngman Rhee again, that moving it to Rhee Syng-man is selective. Why put his name in the proper Korean order, but not transliterate it properly? The Korean names table makes clear what his name was in Korean, and the article remains under the name that he is commonly known by in English. &mdash; Ford 11:26, 2005 Feb 7 (UTC)

Wiki Novice's Attempt to Restore NPOV
I tried restoring the article back to a NPOV. The newer version was simply atrocious and quite biased. The former President (and I'm an American) Rhee doesn't deserve such tarnishment.Tlaktan 06:31, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Can somebody explain the NPOV tag? It'd be helpful (as always with this tag). Kokiri 8 July 2005 07:45 (UTC)

NEEDS Major Renovation
I'm currently heavily revising the Myeongseong article but this as well needs major renovation. Syngman Rhee was a major Korean political figure and is a major part of Korean history. He wasn't some minor King or a small politician. He was a leader that revitalized (despite the negative aspects of his career as a politician) South Korea and whether you like him or not, his life story needs to be written with careful consideration to sources other than the internet. - the powederoom

What does this mean?
"Also, his child became a famous college professor and the child of his child born, was named Young Rhee"
 * probably someone trying to say his grandchild. my best guess. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.164.53.89 (talk) 05:22, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

1st, 2nd and 3rd president?
I edit quite a few translations from Korean and this is a common error. He held the 1st, 2nd and 3rd terms as ROK president but obviously as only one man he cannot be the 1st, 2nd and 3rd presidents. (For example, Franklin D. Roosevelt is the 32nd president of the United States despite being elected four times.) When I have time I will go through each president page and correct this, but I just wanted to note it here. --Ben Applegate (talk) 07:03, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

PhD
In what subject did he obtain a PhD?--80.133.91.114 (talk) 09:30, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

propaganda against right politicians
President Rhee is not regarded as another Hitler of Koera as the article consitently implies. Because of the fact that current government of right political party steeemmed from President Rhee, left political extemist consistently try to depict him as a brutal dictator, and this perspective might be more dangerous than other because this propaganda probably stemmed from North Korean Communist since President Rhee was a major foe of Kim Jong-il. Additionaly, one of the major reasonings supporting is dictatorship is that he caused the split of Korea by being hostile agaisnt communists. Whether his presidency was successful is disputable, but this article certainly does not deserve to be in Wikipedia and support the claim of North Korean Communist. In case admins did not know, South Korea is still at war against North Korea and this conflict is coming to online. So Wikipedia, at least be neutral!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.98.99.184 (talk) 04:23, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry but Rhee was a right-wing dictator whether you like it or not. He was so right wing he was even ousted from the National Independence party before he even became President of South Korea. His four Presidential wins are certainly questionable considering the crackdowns that were undertaken by his security services preceding every election. I am certain that from your IP addreess you are therefore not old enough to know the expression "....for saying that they'll take you to Namsan" meaning to take you to the CIA-backed detention/torture centre on the mountain in Seoul (how ironic that article now describes it as a leisure park). Ask your parents/grandparents about that little unsavoury detail. Until 1988, the police in S.Korea ruled by an iron fist they still do except now they don't generally shoot unarmed protesters under the gaze of the US Military. (Sic unrest in Itaewon in the 70s, the old "Yankee go home"). Rhee's legacy was all this, he was a right-wing, Communist-hating nationalist who loved power more than he cared for Korea. To balance this I have no love for the Kims either as they do exactly the same in the North except they do it for themselves where as in ROK everyone works like an economic slave (+46 hours a week) for the chaebol. I like Koreans they are the Asian equivalent of the Latin temperament, fiery and passionate, and extremely sociable (unlike the Japanese who still think gaijin are going to invade ans take over the country - I guess Koreans got over that one the hard way. Or the Chinese who invent their moral compass as they go along). But Korean society is ruined by the Confucius principles of always doing what the old man says. It's natural that the society is therefore on the right-side of politics —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.1.184 (talk) 00:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

This article was stable when I left it but nothing I guess can be left alone on this site.
I notice this information has found its way out of this article:

When North Korea invaded the South on June 25, 1950. Rhee ordered the ROK radio to tell people to stay in their homes to avoid panic. Instead he and his European wife jumped in the Presidential limo and went South on empty roads unclogged by refugees. References: 1 and 2

He knew what he was doing. All these right wing supporter want to say he was a great man. But he used his own people to get out. He was half way to Busan when the order to retreat was given but by then it was too late and thousand died trying to get across the bridges of the Han. I believe some were crossings were blown up with civilians on them when the NK T-34s were seen on the far banks.

It's shame people who don't even bother to read books can call themselves editors and make such a half-cocked-up job as this! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.1.184 (talk) 00:35, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

This article is in severe need of cleanup
I've seen that the neutrality of this article has been disputed in the past; I'd really like to take a crack at editing this article to make it sound and seem more neutral. It's full of weasel words and all sorts of point of view issues. In addition to that, the flow of it is really bad in places, so I'm going to try and clean up some of the punctuation to try and improve its readability. I really don't want to jump into the neutrality dispute (which seems to have been resolved), but I think some of the material in this article is in dire need of reliable citations. Feel free to review and improve my changes. Sleddog116 (talk) 16:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Addition to previous note - I have been working on cleaning up this article, but it could still use significant improvements, especially concerning its references. I have tagged where I think citations are especially necessary, but I think a general tag on the article would also be apropos. Sleddog116 (talk) 03:25, 26 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I'll be rewriting the article over the next few days with better sourcing and prose. — Ed! (talk) 14:19, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Political Repression
Hello,

I removed the following from the "Political Repression" section: ''According to historian Max Hastings, however, "To this day not a shred of evidence has been discovered of crimes by the Seoul regime on the scale the North Koreans committed during their rule in the south." ''

While the above may or may not be true depending on the way you calculate "crimes" and civilian casualties, it seems a bit irrelevant to include it in a subsection about repression under Syngnam Rhee's leadership. Also, it is already established in the sub-sesction that North Koreans were responsible for a certain percentage of political murders. Jflynniv (talk) 09:24, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Syngnam Rhee is the descedant of Vietnamese prince
"Saigon Press before 1975 reported Korean president at that time Ly Thua Van (Syngman Rhee) coming to South Viet Nam on 6 November 11, 1958 has stated that his ancestor is from Vietnam.

The Vietnamese-Korean Ly family admited that former Korean president Ly Thua Van is the 25th descendant of Prince Ly Long Tuong of Vietnam." (Báo chí Sài Gòn trước năm 1975 đã đưa tin tổng thống Đại Hàn dân quốc lúc bấy giờ là Lý Thừa Vãn (Syngman Rhee) khi sang Nam VN (ngày 6-11-1958) đã tuyên bố rằng tổ tiên ông là người Việt. Dòng họ Lý gốc Việt tại Hàn Quốc thừa nhận cựu tổng thống Lý Thừa Vãn là hậu duệ đời thứ 25 của hoàng thân Lý Long Tường.) Source: Tuoi Tre newspaper http://tuoitre.vn/Pages/Printview.aspx?ArticleID=172417  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Future ahead (talk • contribs) 15:08, 4 June 2013 (UTC)