Does "[t]hat's what I am told by my Korean friends anyway" not count as a qualifying comment in your book, then?
It isn't that hard to qualify the generalization "Koreans want a peaceful re-unification..," by saying the more accurate, "[Many/Most/Some] Koreans want a peaceful re-unification..." And it really
is a necessary qualification to make, otherwise it is a generalization, and certainly Koreans who don't want reunification wouldn't like to be characterized otherwise.
I honestly think, after a long while of reading Drifterwood's posts, that he's simply unaware that by forgetting to qualify statements, he ends up stating generalizations, even if they're not what he means. I think that's a lot of the reason myself and others interpret a lot of what he says as "Anti-Americanism" as well, because he uses the blanket term "Americans" whenever he's talking about an issue of that ilk, as opposed to qualifying precisely which group of the 300 million people in the United States he's talking about. It's an unfortunate habit because I think, in retrospect, Drifterwood has some good points to make, but they're often shrouded by the fact that they come across as generalizations.
Anyway, I realize I'm the peanut gallery, but I've come to like Drifterwood more recently after coming to realize this, and I'd love if he'd be willing to try to qualify his statements properly because then I'd understand them better. And sorry for using the third person when you're obviously present, DW, but there you have it. :tongue:
To be less off-topic, I'll say having a couple of friends in the South Korean government myself, the country's government's policy certainly is towards reunification in the future, and
most of the people see reunification as inevitable and desirable. On that point, nobody who knows the issue would argue.