bnmjy Posted April 27, 2017 Share Posted April 27, 2017 But, that isn't Kenny's point. He's saying that the lack of cardinal markers in the name is indication of the Kim Dynasty seeing the South as part of their domain or as them being the "one true" Korea, which is patently false. His own link even pointed out that Kim Il-Sung had an entirely different name for the eventual unified state. The difference of words for "Korea" might have a regional relevance, but it's not an indication that the use of one refutes the use of the other, especially in the absence of any explicit ethnic disparitiy. You guys really have no argument. I was just trying to introduce new info on the names because I am semi-literate in kanji. That's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobdog Posted April 27, 2017 Share Posted April 27, 2017 You guys really have no argument. I was just trying to introduce new info on the names because I am semi-literate in kanji. That's all. I know that. He's pretending to talk intelligently and failing at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts