Talk:Yi Sun-sin

Template:Korean requires |hangul= parameter.

Apart from being a naval and engineering genius,i also think he was a great miltary leader.He also deserves the credit for building one of the first ever mordern and intergrated ships. the Turtle Ship is a good example of intergrated system,as it had all the things required of a ship.--Jayanthv86 17:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing that he's such an naval battle genius, it's unfortunate that this article contains almost nothing about his tactics -- the turtle ships are obviously only one aspect of his innovations. Will someone be up to writing about this? Uly 22:41, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Turtle Ship was definitely the first ironclad ship. Japan never had ironclad atakebune. Toyotomi Hideyoshi just requested for ironclad warships during the war. The Turtle Ship was the first ironclad in the world. Don't listen to any bogus that you read in books that the "Merrimack and the Monitor" were the first ironclad ships in the war.

I also just read that someone wrote that Admiral Yi was not the reason why Japan retreated. That is not true!!!! Admiral Yi was the biggest reason why Japan retreated. His victories and the number of ships and soldiers Japan lost were too much for them. Also, Japan retreated because their supply lines were being destroyed frequently. Please do not discredit Admiral Yi because he is an extremely venerated man to Koreans.

Good friend100 20:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is Geobukseon (거북선) really the first ironclad warship?

1. Was Geobukseon an ironclad? It wasn't fully covered but roofed with iron plates. Or just the roof was thorny so that enemy soldiers were unable to take to the ship. [1] Anyway I don't know the precise definition of ironclad.
2. Around 1578, Oda Nobunaga had iron-covered Ōatakebune (大安宅船) made against Mōri's navy. It was earlier than Geobukseon.

--Nanshu

1. Oxford English Dictionary says that "ironclad" is "...[c]ased wholly or partly with thick plates of iron or steel." [emphasis added] But I doubt all readers this specific definition. The Merriam-Webster doesn't not specify this degree, for example. So for reason of clarity, I suggest that it to changed to "a partial ironclad." --Menchi 02:54 May 11, 2003 (UTC)

I changed it to "iron-roofed". What do you think? --Nanshu

It's very clear. --Menchi 04:11 May 11, 2003 (UTC)

It's very clear, but it's also kind of pointless. Is there any other such "iron-roofed" ships at all? The turtleship is very innovative and unique, but it's neither ironclad by a narrow definition, nor the first by a loose definition. As such, I think it's somewhat pointless to make such comparisons at all.

Unlike the Korean turtleship, the Japanese ship couldn't navigate in deep waters... Oct. 2005

---

Yi Sunsin wasn't the primary reason of Japan's retreat. It is because Toyotomi Hideyoshi died.--Nanshu 02:42 May 11, 2003 (UTC)

Uh-huh... sigh.... again, Japanese editors have started their discrediting of Korea in every way possible... Leonhart

Hehe, hey, the Japanese teach their kids an alternative history. It's not Nanshus fault. Some still think Pearl Harbor was a lie. An excuse for the US to invade Japan only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.94.41.89 (talk • contribs) 14:30, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In reply to Nanshu, the boats you are referring to were not warships but floating forts and never were used in the open sea, unlike the Geobukson, which I know makes you want to cry but actually did screw the Japanese badly. Haverton

Also in reply to Nanshu, there are many evidences that Geobukseon wasn't an Yi Soonshin innovation, but made in earlier period, only fully utilized by Yi Soonshin.

I find Yi Sun-Sin in sources also as Lee Sun-Sin. Is this another style of transliteration or something else ? Sorry for my english..

Alternate romanization of the Korean family name 이. See Lee (Korean name). Yi is more common for historical figures. -- Visviva 05:57, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just to say this before it is misunderstood...이 is not a romanized text. 이 is the actual Korean way to write "Yi", "Lee", "Rhee", "I" etc... Whenever something is Romanized, it has been transliterated (in other words, the sounds are converted into the texts that make it sound like the originial text) into Roman characters (a,b,c,d,e...u,v,x,y,z, etc...)

In addition, there have been some people (unmentioned, you can see for yourself) who want to play with history and suggest that Yi Sun-Shin wasn't quite the strategist as he was. Perhaps wew have to blame history, because we all learn it with different biases. However, it is very true that Admiral Yi was an excellent tactician and soundly beat the Japanese navy in every battle that he fought. If he wasn't, why would the Japanese waste their time trying to get rid of him from his post before resuming their attack? Why would the Japanese rout when he commanded in battle and soundly whip the Korean navy when he wasn't in charge? You can read most of these records from Japanese and Korean documents from the era (unfortunately, I have only read Yi Sun-Shin's Diary and the Yi Court's summation of the Imjin War), and most of them agree on Admiral Yi's greatness. I cannot dispute the fact that Hideyoshi's death did precipitate the hasty retreat from Korea. However, considering Yi's talent on the seas, the Japanese might have conquered Asia with all of the ships and supply they lost on the South Korean seas off Jeolla Province because of him.

So in one way, Hideyoshi's death did end the war. However, considering that Hideyoshi was withdrawing troops from Korea before his death, it was quite obvious to him that he couldn't win this war under these terms.

Additionally, the Geobukson was a first developed in the 15th Century to help defeat Japanese pirates operating on the east coast of Korea. While the innovation itslef succeeded, they were poorly equipped and maintained that the Yi Court scrapped the project after a few decades, calling it a failure. Just before Japan invaded, Admiral Yi came across the ship designs and ordered the construction of the ships. The point of this is not whether or not Admiral Yi invented the first ironclads, but rather that because of his command, he could inspire his men to do great things and achieve great victories, regardless of the technology or manpower available. No matter how much Japanese or Korean texts may slander him (Koreans did hate him, because he was against their particular coalition in the Yi Court), Admiral Yi's actions at the sea earned him a reputation as one of the greatest commanders alive. Again, even Western texts praise Admiral Yi, with one British author saying, "It is always difficult for Englishmen to admit that Lord Nelson ever had an equal in his profession, but if any man is entitled to be so regarded, it is [Admiral Yi Sun-Shin]." It is only a pity that his influence did not project into his home government, that would have created a formidable state to maintain its independence through the annexation in 1910 (although, considering the system in Korea at the time, it would have been a matter of time before Admiral Yi's accomplishments went awry to court corruption and incompetence).

Oh, by the way, if you would like to, you can go to South Korea and go inside a Geobukson and decide for yourself whether it was an ironclad or not. Then compare it to the Amereican versions and see how they are alike and different. I'm not going to say whether it is or it isn't. It is quite a hard thing to define though, so the best way to determine it is to examine it yourself.---DaeHanJeiGuk (2005.09.25)

Yes, one could make a very good case that Yi could have crushed Japan's navy even if Hideyoshi did not die and continued the invasion, but the simple fact is that Hideyoshi's death was the immediate impetous for Japan's withdrawal. Some of the invasion forces did start to retreat prior to Hideyoshi's death, but that's more likely due to the need to strengthen Hideyoshi's or the lords' internal position rather than in preparation for a general withdraw.

Furthermore, despite what many Koreans seem to think, Japan actually did not have a long tradition of trying to conquerer Korea. The whole invasion was something of Hideyoshi's personal pet project to begin with, so it was not surprising that no further attempt was made to conquerer Korea after his death, until the rise of imperialism anyway. To say that Japan kept its paws off Korea in fear of brilliant admirals like Yi is a fanciful interpretation. I realize that many Koreans take the issue very personally and take any suggestion against Admiral Yi's achievement with hostility. But it's my opinion that overstating Yi's legacy does him no service, and giving him a more objectified presentation does not diminish his greatness in anyway. Being neither Korean nor Japanese, I hope everyone can look at this with a little more reason and good faith and less nationalist passion. Uly 23:48, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken out the section of Yi Sun-Sin in movies out as it is too contemporary, not academically worthy, and is not providing useful information. It just takes space. Furthermore, the movie in question didn't do well in the box office and the reviews were mixed.---WangKon936 (2005.10.17)

There have been a number of unexplained edits made to this and related articles by User:Kkkiii (contributions). In particular I point to this edit, which left the article to suggest that Yi Sun-sin died three days before he was mortally wounded. I'm not familiar with this subject myself but the user seems to have a history of these sort of edits so I would ask those with more knowledge here to keep an eye on the article. Flowerparty ^talk 13:34, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is true that Hideyoshi had died, but the Japanese forces were on the verge of retreating anyway. They could not march upper anyway because their supply lines were cut by admiral Lee. Of course, Hideyoshi's death has prompted the retreat but already Japan was losing forces because of Lee Soon Shin's strategies. In the final phase of the war, Amiral Lee cut off enemy supply lines, ravaged the Japanese fleet of 333 with only 13(some say its 12 but historical evidence proves it to be 13. Also admiral Lee sunk 31 or so Japanese battleships and damaged about 100 Japanese battleships beyond repair), controlled the ocean, and practically instilled great fear among the Japanese invaders. This is really unbelievable. Personally I think this battle of Myung-ryang is greater than the famous battle of Hansan. I mean, how can 333 ships fail to defeat only 13 and be completely defeated? It is doubtless that admiral Lee achieved absolutely unbelievable victories. Also, ss any person who studied warfare will know, losing control of the ocean and the supply lines is critical. Also, I don't think it is good to boast about not retreating because what ruthless acts the Japanese commited upon Chosun civilians is just simply too horrifying even to describe. I mean, they should be ashmamed of making war and butchering so many innocent children and civilians.

Until we have some solid references for Yi Sun-sin's exact dates of birth and death, let's keep them out of the article. None of the sources I have at hand provide exact dates, although I suspect that if I had better references they would. There is also the small problem of lunar vs. solar dates, which requires some care. We're better off leaving this information out entirely than allowing the article to look like a joke. It's already far too much like a joke. -- Visviva 16:08, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote that Admiral Yi was the deity of the Japanese Imperial Navy. Is something wrong with that? I know that Wikipedia's older version stated that.

Here are my sites:

• http://www.e-paranoids.com/y/yi/yi_sun_sin.html
• http://www.iridis.com/Yi_Sun-shin
• http://www.masterliness.com/a/Yi.Sun.sin.htm
• http://www.free-definition.com/Yi-Sun-shin.html

-Wikimachine-

Those would be 4 Wikpedia mirrors, then? Flowerparty ^talk 00:18, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimachine, I think you are wrong. I wrote in discussion page of Imperial Japanese Navy. If admiral Yi was the official deity of IJN, IJN ships must had altar or Kamidana of Admiral Yi. But actually all major IJN ships had Kamidana dedicated to Amaterasu. --Ypacaraí 01:31, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

"If admiral Yi was the official deity of IJN, IJN ships must had altar or Kamidana of Admiral Yi" -this is totally your opinion.

"But actually all major IJN ships had Kamidana dedicated to Amaterasu." -that is also totally your opinion.

Show me a site that disproves the fact that Admiral Yi was not the deity of the IJN.

You know what? I forgot what that Japanese general who fought in the Russo-Japanese War was called, but the person who he revered the most of Admiral Yi. It's not my opinion -I can site you the book & send the scanned image of the page that says so.

-Wikimachine

Well, websites can not be reliable sources except governments' official ones. I know a site that explains how the legends has been developed through novels, memorandums and other readings, but it's written in japanese . I will search for more persuasive sources anyway. --Ypacaraí 01:39, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

---

Yes. I remember now. The name of the general, whose most revered historical character was Admiral Yi, is Togo.

Also, since nobody has evidences that actually prove the fact that Admiral Yi was not the deity of the Imperial Japanese Navy, I'll go on and edit it (as you can all see, I posted my sites somewhere above). -Wikimachine

Websites CAN NOT be evidences. You say "this is totally your opinion". But don't you know that websites are very often used as tools for spreading personal oppinions? --Ypacaraí 22:26, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Wikimachine, it looks like you have to study logic before you edit articles on Wikipedia. We don't have to prove that Yi Sunsin was not the deity of the Imperial Japanese Navy. We cannot prove that there are no extraterrestrials, but this doesn't mean extraterrestrials do exist. If you want to keep your claim on the article, you have to prove it. The burden of proof is on you.

Here is an interesting report on urban legends about Yi Sunsin: [2]. The author tries to trace them to their source(s), but he cannot go further than a fiction writtein in 1925. So, to prove your claim, you have to present ultimate sources; otherwise we have no choice but to delete your addition. Good luck! --Nanshu 01:20, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Whether Kawada Isao's book is fictional or not is still not clear. The book also refers to Japanese naval officers' rituals performed in reverence for Admiral Yi, and that is undebatably true. I'd rather say it is the record of author's memories of his experience in the imperial navy though it is told through an imaginary character. In addition, the idea of a Japanese author(an ex-naval officer) trying to make things up to belittle his country's most famed admiral is quite absurd.

Japanese editors, please prove that Kawada's book is a fiction. -- SizzleYou

In clarifying Togo's reference to Yi Sun-Shin, he never referred to the Admiral as a god or anything. He simply said to the defeated Commander of the Russian Fleet after the Battle of the Tsushima Straits:

"You may wish to compare me with Lord Nelson but do not compare me with Korea's Admiral Yi Sun-Sin . . .he is too remarkable for anyone."

Just a little clarification (that will hold up). Personally, I don't think that the Japanese would ever consider any foreigner a deity. It's called national pride - Koreans won't call any Japanese guy a deity, and Japanese won't call any Korean a deity. I may be wrong, but in the nationalist sense that Japan was undergoing in the Meiji restoration, Japan wouldn't consider Yi Sun-Shin as a god - it would be too much a shame... - DaeHanJeiGuk

In addition, I don't care whether Togo said it or not, because it has nothing to do with the greatness of Admiral Yi. Thus, I object to adding Togo's remark in the article. -- SizzleYou

I don't know if it was, but I never put Togo's remark in the article. Furthermore, if it was, why shouldn't it be put in there, as long as it was true and had valid evidence to support it? If it is true, then it shouldn't be edited out. But for the sake of not having a good valid source (I can't remember the book, but a lot of websites have the quote, I am not putting it in the article. And more or less, Togo's remark is more definitive of Togo's character than it is Yi Sun-Shin's character.

And by the way:

"In addition, I don't care whether Togo said it or not, because it has nothing to do with the greatness of Admiral Yi. Thus, I object to adding Togo's remark in the article. -- SizzleYou"

I'm not Japanese, but that was just plain ignorant. ---DaeHanJeiGuk

He was a naval deity of the Japanese Imperial Navy, but abandonned after the Meiji revolution and the annexation of Korea in 1910... Japanese people aren't stupid, you know. They do have the ability to admire great deeds. But they also have a strong national pride. They don't even admit the harm and sheer cruelty they have done on Chinese and Korean people. They have even tried to wipe out the Korean culture, forbidding the use of the language and corrupting (and destroying) historical archives... --- yourstruly

---

Really? I thought so too that he was a deity before 1900s. Could you show me the evidence please? Because without it, the fact that he was the Japanese navy deity would be forgotten.

Plus, remember what one of the Wikipedians said? He said that he visited Admiral Yi's shrine before going to battle with the Russians. Why in the world would the Japanese have a shrine just for Admiral Yi if he wasn't a deity over the navy? (Wikimachine 13:33, 14 October 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Err. This discussion seems kind of hopeless. What's up with nobody signing their comments? Anyway. Firstly, in reply to yoursetruly's comment, the IJN was created AFTER the Meiji restoration, so to say that Yi was abandoned as a deity after the restoration is completely illogical. Secondly, there is no such thing as "IJN's official deities", period. IJN worshipped the same deities with the states -- the shinto gods, the emperor, and so on. Well known historical figures, Yi possibly among them, may be honored and their names invoked in rituals, but it's a long stretch to call them deities. Nevertheless, Yi is likely well-revered among the Japanese naval officers, as can be expected of anyone studying naval strategy or history in the region, and I will bet that Tago is not the exception in regarding Yi so highly. Still, no matter what Togo thinks, he does NOT make Yi a deity. Lastly, this is admittedly just my conjecture, but I find it a bit hard to believe that there is an Admiral Yi's shrine in Japan. Japanese shrines dedicated on historical personage are rare to begin with, much less someone who's not only foreign but also an enemy, who isn't even deified in Korea. I think it's much more likely that he was simply one of the many honored in a certain shrine that Togo visited. I'm sure if an Admiral Yi's shrine truely existed, all the Koreans will know everything about it. Uly 23:27, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not attached to any particular romanization, but the naming should at least be consistent. Reading an article about Yi/Lee Soon/Sun[-][ ]Sin/sin/Shin/shin is confusing. So if you change his transliteration, please change it throughout the article. Thanks.

crism 22:14, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the references to Yi Sun-sin that weren't in quotation marks, or in the title of a book or movie to the spelling suggested by the title, for consistency. It might be a good idea to put a note a the beginning of the article to explain... something like Yi Sun-sin's name has been spelled in a variety of ways, for the purposed of this article, the spelling Yi Sun-sin is used because...--Kewp 05:43, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

...because what? McCune-Reischauer (1939) strongly discourages setting a hyphen between syllables of name, and "Sunsin" is not ambiguous in terms of orthography and pronunciation. – Wikipeditor 00:02, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Google gives “about 32,900 hits” for yi sun( /-)shin, 14,500 for yi sun( /-)sin, 2,470 for yi sunshin, only 529 for yi sunsin and only 109 for i sunsin, each excluding the word halley to reduce the number of Wikipedia clones. While I think this page should be moved away from Yi Sunshin, it would be great if somebody established which is “the spelling most frequently encountered in English” among the eight spellings that together account for the 32,900 and the 14,500 results, namely Yi Sun Shin, Yi Sun-Shin, Yi Sun-shin, Yi Sun shin and the same without h. Have fun.—19:42, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I think Lee is Chinese pronunciation of Yi. Right? Koreans pronounce the name as Ii Suun Sin , but to fit it into English language, they spelled it Yi Sun Sin.

(Wikimachine 16:59, 12 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

In the article why is he mentioned as an admiral when he was actually a General? His naval command success wasn't even due to him being an admiral but a general knowing the geography and strategy that could be employed.

Well, don't quote me on this, but I think at that time there was no such thing as a bona-fide "admiral" in Korea's military system. The navy were considered part of the armies, and thus the naval officers were generals instead of admirals. In this light, though, I don't see it as erroneous to call him an admiral, as long as it is clarified that the usage is more descriptive than official. Uly 14:34, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In a similar light, the American airforce was considered part or a subsection of the army during WW2. Would we have to call those pilots or captains as somthing other than airmen and resort to something like "army soldiers who fly planes" ? For the purposes of the article, "Admiral" is appropiate. It would look odd and confuse a lot of uninformed casual readers if a sentence read like, "General Yi Sun shin, commander of Cholla province defeated Admiral Wakizaka at the battle of Hansan-do." For all practical purposes, Yi sun shin was an admiral even though he was a land-based general during his past military career. So by 1592, he becomes a sea-based general which in effect = "Admiral". It's really a difference of semantics than military system, IMO.

In the preface to my translation of Nanjung Ilgi (War diary (of Admiral Yi Sun-sin)), translated by Ha Tae-hung (Yonsei University Press), it reads "In the 24th year of the same King he was appointed Commander of Chǒlla Left Naval Station...In the following year, with the outbreak of the Hideyoshi war...was promoted to Commander-in-Chief of the Combined Naval Forces in the Three Provinces..."

And later it reads, "Victim of factional strife and the conspiracy of his enemies in the King's court, and the false accusations of Wǒn Kyun, the Admiral was deprived of his office and imprisoned (4th day of third moon to 1st day of 4th moon, 1597) for insubordination to the royal instructions and the field order of General Kwǒn Yul..."

Finally, we read, "During the war, Admiral Yi was initially in charge of the Chǒlla Left Navy Headquarters, he was promoted to be the Supreme Commander of the Naval Forces of the three provinces of Ch'ungch'ǒng, Kyǒngsang and Chǒlla." Hope this helps. --JohnO You found the secret writing! 04:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the passage in the intro that goes something like "His Battle of Hansando is one of the top four ranked battles in naval history." There had been a citation needed tag there hanging for weeks, and no one seem to be interested in providing the citation. But I'd argue that even if there is a source cited, this kind of statement is obviously subjective by nature and should not be refered as a fact. And anyway it wouldn't belong in the intro anyway. If whoever really want it to stay, put it in the the section about the battle of Hansando, along the line of "so and so has ranked it among the top four battles in naval history." Uly 14:34, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I found the 'historical drama' content of the biography, to be severly lacking in basic english grammar skills. So I've tried to edit it out the best I can, while keeping the same information that the original author has intended.

Boulharouz the Moroccan.

3 to a stern, 6 to a side, and 2 at the bow?

ridiculous. it was 2 to the stern, 2 to the bow, and 11 to each side.

i've posted the evidence. (Wikimachine 02:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

it's actually 10 to a side. (Wikimachine 01:48, 7 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

It's instereting to find that in this article there is no mention of China and Chinese navy. Chinese navy fought a lots with Janpanese along with Korean navy. For example, in the battle on Nov. 19, 1598, Chinese navy sent out a fleet of 450 battleships, larger than Admiral Yi's fleet. The commander in chief of the China-Korea fleet is Chinese Admiral Chen Lin instead of Admiral Yi. And another Chinese Admiral Deng died too during this battle. But if you read this article, you will find that there is no contribution of Chinese at all!

Hello everyone. I made a lot of changes for Admiral Yi (check the history). I have just realized that you are right! The reason why I did not write in China's part in his story because I solely wanted to concentrate about him and his victories and his part in the Seven Year War. If you want to read more about China's part of the Seven Year War, I am planning to revise the entire article of the Seven Year War. Check it out in about a week and I will fill in China's part. --Good friend100 18:15, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's right. This is about Admiral Yi. China's role in the war should be under the Seven Year War article. (Wikimachine 18:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)) (edit: I didn't sign in)[reply]

Just like in the Turtle Ship article, this is stained with commercial ads. I mean, who cares about the modern depiction of this prominent historical figure in a movie called Chungoon and display the picture?

Let's try to be professional. Look at Japanese historical figure- articles.

They are not stained with games and movies. They pertain to the historical figures themselves.

Anyone interested in this cleanup ought to read what I posted on the discussion for the Turtle Ship article.

Thanks? Don't you all agree? (Wikimachine 22:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Look man stop trying to diss Yi Soon Shin off and sorry if im wrong but his name wasn't Yi Sun Shin or Lee Soon Shin IT WAS YI SOON SHIN. Oh yeah the Japanese retreated cause Hideyoshi died? PUH-LEASE! They fell back because Yi Soon Shin beat them all. You really should read history guys... Wakizaka,Dodo,Kato, and Konishi and the other generals got beat by Yi Soon Shin even if he had 12 ships left after Won Kyun's defeat! Wow one death in 'the "great" Japan caused the Japanese forces to retreat? WOW you guys are just pathetic trying to credit the Japanese and diss off Korea's most famous general in history. Cmon guys admit it that the Japanese forces retreated because Yi Soon Shin beat the Japanese badly.Then look again in 1903-1945, in almost 10 biographies about the annexation of Korea by the Japanese the authors discredit Syngman Rhee? Are they holding a grudge against Koreans? Ok i admit that Some Japanese generals WANTED to retreat because they thought since their Takio died they should go back. But then again there are those "great" japanese generals who wanted to kill Yi Soon Shin and failed for 6 years. So i urge you to not discredit Korea or its famous hero again or i may have to discuss this again..-KoreanHistorist

Look WikkiMachine or w/e. The Chinese or Ming barely did anything except just sit there in Chosun and get grains from the poor farmers. And WHAT THE HECK 450 BATTLESHIPS?!? AHAHHAHAHAHA those are lies Ming sent only maybe between 50-100 ships but 450? LOL. Here we go again Chinese getting credit because China is larger than Korea and Japanese getting all the credit because...what, because they have "cool" samurais? WikkiMachine i strongly disagree that China didnt even help Chosun at all. And all they did was conspire with the Japanese so they can get gold. Go watch Yi Soon Shin on WYBE. Theres a drama about "The Seven Year War" and what i see is lazy Ming officers doing nothing and chase Chosunese women. All Ming did was to discredit Yi Soon Shin AND conspire with the Japanese and get in the way of Chosun. I say again WikkiMachine i strongly disagree AND wherever you get these stories i strongly suggest that you look somewhere else. -KoreanHistorist

I was the one who typed those i just created my account like 5 minutes ago. -KoreanHistorist

Well in 1592-1598 the Japanese burned down houses and killed men with muskets and butchered children pointlessly, i should know because iam a korean. Also the Japanese kidnapped the women and... well... you know... So this went on for months and civilians were starved and used as target practices with their muskets AND the Japanese captured Potters that made Dawan (which was beatufiul pottery and vases that were worth very much) then shipped them back to Japan only to be treated like slaves and sometimes humble nobles. Also on the battlefield the Japanese were very VERY cheap with their muskets shooting Chosunese soldiers when they were charging towards them AND they threw their swords like spears and killed over 50 Chosunese officers and presumed dead or missing over 1 million soldiers and volunteers. Also when the Chosunese civilians or soldiers were dead, the Japanese cut off their ears or heads and sent them back to the Taiko who was the ruler of Japan called Hideyoshi. Disgusting piles of headless bodies that included children, men and women... THEN Yi Soon Shin got rid of them (thank god), but sadly he was shot by a bullet in his left part of chest and died gasping his last words and last orders... THEN on 1910-1945 The Japanese attacked AGAIN this time they beat Russia and China so they declared Korea a independent country THEN took it over and annexed it. The Japanese tried to get rid of the Korean culture and forbid them to use their language AND never ever to disobey the Japanese even if the order was ridiculous. After months of this rebellions sprang up with guerellias of Korean people fighting to get rid of the dirty Japanese. Unfortunately the rebellions were hopeless... Before the annexation in 1903 Koreans immigrated to Hawaii to work on sugar plantations because a church pastor said so. Then the immigrations stopped because of Japanese rule. So after a while the Koreans sprang up and cried "대하민국만새!!" which meant Victory with Korea!!! At first the Japanese were shocked because the Koreans were waving "illegal" korean flags and insulting the Japanese and holding up signs. So when the Japanese got over the shock, they gunned down the first line of the protestors and moved on to the next. Then years later they began to presecute pastors, and students and teachers and sometimes executed them or forced them into interrogation to "confess" something. The interrogtain methods were brutal. They had sharp bamboo sticks which went under the nails into the skin and hung them upside down and whipped them and did other brutal methods of 72 ways. This was worse than Laos or Cambodia when the officals tortured the innocent. Then Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and one of my friends who hates Japanese said "Italic text my grandmother was asleep on Sunday with other people sleeping too! AND my grandmother was almost killed too!" Bold text This was because Pearl Harbor was in Hawaii. I seriously wonder why Alot of people doesnt hate Japan and Korean hates Japan and China too because they made Korean a prosperous country into a war ravaged country.-Korean Historist

Did you know that Kaiser Wilhelm's real name was "Pookie"? I'm about 50% sure of that because I'm half-German. Anyhow.... what, exactly, do the big, long rants above have to do with Yi Sun-sin? If I didn't know better, I would think you're just spamming the talk pages for the heck of it. Anyhow, welcome to Wikipedia, but please try to keep your talk page contributions at least somewhat concise and to the point. Thanks.

Oh... and you spelled the name of 'your' country wrong... "대하민국" <-- see if you can spot the error. --Zonath 06:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zonath if you think I was spamming and not contributing then look at my paragraphs which i typed. Also i spelled 대한미국 right and if Im wrong or right this page is called the 'discussion' page where were contribute AND discuss. -KoreanHistorist