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
Hamilcar       4/28/2010 9:43:34 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.

Archduke Ferdinand.

Lusitania.
 
Pearl Harbor.
 
Gulf of Tonkin Incident. 
 
Yes?
 
H.
 

 
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       4/28/2010 9:58:44 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.





Shack!  Exactly.  So the South Koreans retaliate by sinking some North Korean submarines.  Oh, no they can't do that because 100,000s of South Korean civilians will die when North Korea goes full-scale war and shells the hell out of the city of Seoul.  Well, yes, certainly that is *one* possibilty, and a mighty grim one indeed.  (I've always found it odd that apparently the NorKs fire plan at the beginning of full-scale war is to turn all its tubes on the civilians in Seoul, rather than on the South Korean army that's pounding away at the NorKs.)  Obviously it is quite possible that is a sufficient risk such that the South will not retaliate so big.  So maybe they just sink one little NorK patrol boat.  Oh, no they can't do that because 100,000s of South Korean civilians will die when North Korea goes full-scale war and shells the hell out of the city of Seoul.  Hmmm, well, then maybe they just cut off all aid to NorK.  Oh, no they can't do that because 100,000s of South Korean civilians will die when North Korea goes full-scale war and shells the hell out of the city of Seoul.  Hmmm, well, then maybe they just make an ineffectual protest in the UN General Assembly.  Oh, no they can't do that because 100,000s of South Korean civilians will die when North Korea goes full-scale war and shells the hell out of the city of Seoul.  Wait, maybe, just maybe, the North won't go medieval over yet another ineffectual UN protest.  Well, then there it is, that is an acceptable reaction from the South.

 

 

Refer again to my suggestion that the RoKs set up the legal machinery in the World Court that will affect KJI's money laundering and smuggling activities by branding him a war criminal (sanctions that even the PRC bandits have to respect) and subject him to immediate international arrest if he loses diplomatic immunity or political protection.   

H.
 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       4/29/2010 12:26:06 AM

Incompetence is provable. I just did that to you, again.

 

H.


 
Dude, get over it and grow up before you get banned.
 -DA
 






 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/29/2010 12:52:49 AM
I'm all for supporting SK. What I am not in support of is unilateral action without their consent. If the SK don't want to push the issue, it's not our place to tell them to go to war. That seems pretty irresponsible to me and the exact opposite of what an ally should do.
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/29/2010 1:01:07 AM
Lusitania.
 
Pearl Harbor.
 
Gulf of Tonkin Incident. 
 
 
In all those incidents involve US citizens. The Cheonan was not a US ship. We have zero justification to go to war on South Koreas behalf, especially if they don't want it. As much as you want to consider the SK government a puppet regime of ours, they are not. The US sure as hell isn't going to say, "Hey we're going to war without your consent on your soil."
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       4/29/2010 1:44:51 AM

Lusitania.


 

Pearl Harbor.

 

Gulf of Tonkin Incident. 

 

 

In all those incidents involve US citizens. The Cheonan was not a US ship. We have zero justification to go to war on South Koreas behalf, especially if they don't want it. As much as you want to consider the SK government a puppet regime of ours, they are not. The US sure as hell isn't going to say, "Hey we're going to war without your consent on your soil."

Lusitania was a British ship.
 
H.

PS. Gixxer, you did not actually address the fact that your credibility in this subject is ZERO.

 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/29/2010 1:47:28 AM
Lucky for me I stated those incidents involved US citizens.
 
Quote    Reply

CFG    Who want war?   4/29/2010 4:32:59 AM
I'm wonder if 'who' want war? ;))
 
Let's try to find 'who'.
NoK doesn't want war, will lead to a regime change, a collapse of the communism in NoK.
China, doesn't want war either, will receive a lot of refugees and will have one Korea at the border. Those refugees will cost a lot ...
SoK, doesn't want war, will mean a lot of dead and a lot of money. Both in big numbers.
USA a war? What for? Got 1 and 1/2 already going and the economics are clear: no money for existing ones, even some troops or a/c can be sent in Korea ...
 
So, anyone else? Some persons in each country,  just a few. Even in Russia you can find people willing to get US in an other one, to spend life and money somewhere ...
 
The Cheonan require more politics and geopolitics then military.
NoK need / want something, not a birthday gift. Most likely money as food and oil, or, even more money for the reconstruction of the country, or, even more money (for the reconstruction) with conditions impose by NoK (Kim family). What else, regime change (as in next/young Kim)? For that (even more money + conditions), before negotiations, maybe, NoK will show an even bigger stick: a nuclear detonation after which no one can't deny that they have nukes. Maybe.

China can gain from US, because China is and was supporter of NoK and is holding they back. In the same time NoK can be a pain in the a.. for China, it's a trick equation. Hope Clinton is right ...
 
Regime change as collapse from inside is difficult. Most of the refugee are in China, for those that arrive in SoK will be difficult to go back. The 3 arms of Kim: Military, Party, Secret Police are far away in NoK, difficult to put a wedge ... China seam to be the most likely way for both ... And Kim, IMHO, is smart enough to not be considered foul, as in crazy, and unpredictable, therefor China will back him ...
 
 
Naval blockade? Kim will retaliate, he said so, even for naval inspections.
War criminal? Really? NoK and SoK are at war ... it's difficult to get a "conviction" ...
 
The good think, IMO, is that SoK will have elections only in 2012 (local one now, June) therefor SoK is not that press as if was election year. Maybe SoK will pass the bill to switch to 100% professional military, a conscript one is a liability ...
 
About 'bandit' and so on, please, Hamilcar, demonization of the enemy go well in military, the issue is POLITICAL and geopolitical. ... There will be no war.
And I'm sure DA can answer if want and consider is the case ... he was right to mention mines - even it was a torpedo.
The Ministry of Defense, the very one that order fire in that night, said about mines. IMHO he was wrong to mention the torpedo that soon, bad PR and political move - most likely he was under pression from military  ... These are times when emotions should be avoid.
 
Kind a long post for me ... any opinions? Contrary ones? :) ... and with arguments, please :D

Peace, people.
 
Quote    Reply

Mikko    chill H!   4/29/2010 4:36:08 AM
With all respect H, take a couple days off from posting and let the frenzy settle down. Your hostility towards DA exceeds the boundaries of being an "online personality" and seriously discredits your otherwise very valuable output here.
 
Your style of being vague on purpose and offering clues does not go well with the fact that you demand superb coherence from other posters. You try to seize both initiative and authority when you are discussed with and frankly quite many of us probably have enough authority to bow to in our offline world. Authority is automatically credited when talking strictly of science and tech (everyone here can tell a difference between a fanboy and a professional) but not interpersonally.
 
I am addressing this because the "feud" is damaging the quality of this forum, the insults drawing attention away from interesting subjects, literally destroying content. Please trust me on this: you have a twisted perspective on Darth. He's a good man; sometimes right, sometimes wrong as any of us.
 
M
 
Quote    Reply

CFG    Second to that, Mikko   4/29/2010 4:41:01 AM
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics