Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Korea Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: ROKN Patrol Corvette sucken by DPRK torpedo boat
YelliChink    3/26/2010 12:10:07 PM
Just happened 2150 Korean local time. Chinese reports say that it was DPRK torpedo boat. The ROKN corvette sunk is probably a 1200t PCC. I can't read Korean so I am not sure which one exactly. At this moment, 59 out of 104 crew have been saved so far. Best wishes to the still missing ones and condolence to families of lost sailors.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
DarthAmerica    @Hamilcar   4/28/2010 10:39:12 AM
Get over yourself Hamilcar. If you spent half as much time arguing facts as you do trying to insult me then there would be something to talk about. Otherwise, your comparison to Pueblo is not very compelling. Again, I respect that's how you feel, but it just doesn't hold up to any kind of scrutiny. Nor does the suggestion that Cheonan represents some kind of American incompetence.

What you are doing is trying to compare apples and oranges. But I'll let others draw their own conclusions about that as I have mine.

Have a Nice Day
-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar    More BULL.   4/28/2010 11:14:35 AM
This thread has shown who was accurate and who was not.
 
HINT: It wasn't you, Mister Titanic and gunhouse explosion, mine and  torpedo expert. it certainly was not you in the politics or in the culprit matrix.
 
In fact we can quantify fairly well how right you were about any of the nonsense you posted including the mechanical;sheer loads and possible failure mechanisms, as well as claims to "surprises" and secret knowledge.
 
Know what? Your credibility and correctness in subject is ZERO.
 
Now many you think that the Cheonan Incident doesn't fit the bandit regime pattern of incidents like the Pueblo and Mayaguez, oncluding the incompetence that led to those disasters, but guess what? Since its incompetent thinking like yours that led to those disasters in the first place, you can well imagine what judgment I have of your opinion.
 
Look at what happened, not what is claimed happened.
 
You claim and assert too much and ignore too much of what actually happened to be considered credible.
 
In fact, so much of what you claim is so often so easily disproved (like the X-37B nonsense, and this sinking as the latest examples of your alleged expertise) that I wonder how you can be taken seriously at all.
 
H. 
 
           
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       4/28/2010 2:16:34 PM

HAmilcar,

First of all, like warpig said earlier, SHUT THE FK UP about who is qualified and toss the personal nonsense. Learn to disagree. Did you notice Warpig and I disagree somewhat on a proper South Korean response? Well then you see that we stated our points and no one got called incompetent or anything else. Two people simply talking and agreeing to disagree. Try it. You are less likely to get kicked of the forums that way. You may even be able to get others to change their point of view if you stop being such and arrogant a$$. You have a well documented long list of errors that anyone can referrece so seriosly, chill. You are just another poster.

Now, with regard to Cheonan, the subject we should be talking about. I have stated the same theories as have the people connected with the investigations. I've endorsed no paticular caused or assigned blame to any nation yet. In fact I've urged from the beginning the same caution the public officials are urging now. While you may disagree with that approach, it is the way things are going. Moreover, there is ZERO evidence of any connection between alleged American incompetence or Chinese villiany associated with this. The only possible tangential relation to the Chinese is that it has been suggested that a Torpedo of their design may have caused this. Again, something I mentioned before when I said that not all NorK weapons exist in publicly available referrences and that it's possible that types of weapons may include new weapons or weapons originating from places other than North Korean to include South Korea. I also mentioned that this may have been an attack by a submarine as one of several possibilities. Something others questioned BTW.

With regard to X-37B. How you can say with a straight face that you debunked anything is truly amazing. I presented the source data fromt he manufacturer that shows that they considered it to be a possible weapons delivery platform. One that Ironically went into space right before testing of a Global Strike weapons I might add. The USAF has declared the payload of this mission to be classified. That means you either don't know or cannot speak with any authority about what this X-37B is testing or intended to test. Like ALL of the rest of us, YOU are speculating on what you think the X-37B is doing or capable of doing. That is a fact. So if you disagree, then fine. But then that's where you need to leave things. A simple disagreement and move on.

-DA

 
Quote    Reply

CFG    Ideas, not the persons   4/28/2010 3:32:55 PM
Chill Hamilcar, please. Cheonan it's a political issue that require ration not emotions. Take on ideas not on persons, bring arguments to an idea.
It is so easy to say about a person that have an opinion (and miss a finger) that it's missing a finger, but what if that very same opinion is share buy a different person (and don't miss a finger)? Do you get my point? Maybe DA is competent, maybe he know more, or maybe other are competent and share the very same opinion with DA - what do you say to one like that, but about the opinion not person?
 
...
There are differences between Cheonan and Pueblo, big ones. Time and situation are different, too.
Does NorK intend to go to war? I don't think so.
Why the sunk of Cheonan? Birthday present? Revenge? Are someone crazy in charge in NorK? I don't think so.
 
What's next? By NorK, PRC, SouthK, USA ...
Unpredictability is good sometime ...
 
Those are more interesting then a person ... IMHO ...
 
Peace,
CFG
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/28/2010 4:40:18 PM
The Pueblo and the Cheonan are completely different. The one glaring thing is that. The Cheonana is not a US ship nor were there US citizens on board. Suggesting unilateral actions for something that we have no responsibility over is ludicrous. I can imagine the phone conversation now.
 
Obama: Hey Lee! Listen up, my bombers are hitting Pyongyang in 10 minutes.
 
Lee: What? But the North Koreans will destroy Seoul if they get attacked! Why didn't you discuss this with me?
 
Obama: Listen, we do what we want. I suggest you get to your bunker now, you've got 8 minutes. Don't worry about the nukes, the North Koreans can only hit your country, I'll be fine. Oh, see you on Saturday for tee off. You owe me lunch from last time, btw. Ciao!
 
Yah that's going to go over real smooth.
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/28/2010 5:06:00 PM
Excuse the Engrish in the last post. I wrote it in a hurry.
 
Quote    Reply

Saberhagen       4/28/2010 5:21:09 PM
Opposite of inaction is NOT full scale war. There are several other options between those two extremes in the spectrum. Yes, there's always risk out there. But doing nothing has its own risk. There's no nation, regime that goes into a full scale war because of any single incident. If NoK really wants a war, they'll just do it with or without retaliation from the south. Saying 'we musn't do anything or hell will break loose' is as naive as saying WWI caused by a Serb.
 
Quote    Reply

Saberhagen       4/28/2010 5:23:25 PM
Opposite of inaction is NOT full scale war. There are several other options between those two extremes in the spectrum. Yes, there's always risk out there. But doing nothing has its own risk. There's no nation, regime that goes into a full scale war because of any single incident. If NoK really wants a war, they'll just do it with or without retaliation from the south. Saying 'we musn't do anything or hell will break loose' is as naive as saying WWI caused by a Serb.
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/28/2010 5:48:25 PM
I don't think anyone is saying that SK should do nothing.
 
My post was to point out that the US shouldn't be taking such drastic unilateral action. If SK wants to go to war that's fine, but we shouldn't provoke a war and drag the South Koreans into it.
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       4/28/2010 5:53:17 PM

Opposite of inaction is NOT full scale war. There are several other options between those two extremes in the spectrum. Yes, there's always risk out there. But doing nothing has its own risk. There's no nation, regime that goes into a full scale war because of any single incident. If NoK really wants a war, they'll just do it with or without retaliation from the south. Saying 'we musn't do anything or hell will break loose' is as naive as saying WWI caused by a Serb.


The problem with this is that things can spiral quickly out of either sides ability to control once shooting starts. What might seem to be a proportional reasonable response by one side might be percieved as a red line by the other. Moreover, you cannot predict how the media will react to events which also has an effect that isn't easily managed.
 
Also it is incorrect to say we will "do nothing". Doing something does not necessarily mean shooting at them. There are diplomatic levers that could produce a better result potentially. Seige/Sanctions are a form of warfare as well and could provide a very painful way of driving home the point.
 
-DA
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics