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
CFG    Cheonan & NoK, please.   5/5/2010 9:28:47 AM

Thats why every decent forum needs it's slowman or a truck driver. Starting to miss em huh?

Well, I'm new to SP, I don't know what's about slowman & truck driver ...
 
Hamilcar, my man, you are not alone.
There are a lot of person that appreciate emotional thinking and reference to source/link on web. IMO, in web campaigns that's what is use: call for emotions, redirect to links with others ideas. That give productivity, in a campaign. I'm NOT say that you are on a campaign ... just that seam it's a habit.
In the same time, other persons are not like that, they appreciate that effort to bring new, own, ideas, even if are wrong. Some persons want to enrich themself with rational, ideas, effort to train the brain. A brain, like a muscle, must be train. Some want to understand better the complexities of this different world, not a simple, emotional one.
 
For example, and JUST as example: you sent me to French Revolution when I ask details about the rice & economics of NorK and the influence in the equation. I presume that you understood my point in that question, yet sent me to something in which didn't existed the economic relation in place now in NoK. That didn't bring me anything, that didn't enrich me a bit. This was JUST an example, not a came back to subject, please don't respond or refer to this as I want to point that:
 
Ignoring.
Mikko, If you ignore this behavior, if you don't feed it, you might get a chance to make it disappear.
Ignore one that act like a troll, don't respect ... For sure he/she don't want to be ignored. And step in please, with other issues then the one and only center of the world ... http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emsmile.gif" align="absmiddle" border="0" alt="" />
Btw, how's Horst doing? Just kidding, please don't get offended.
 
 
earlm said about balloons, I think. Well, does arrive at people? Some sure do. One question could be about effective and efficient.
Maybe materials will arrive on black market. This way people can get more of the DVD & stuff. There is the risk that Secret Police charge people for those materials. If the momentum is to read and have access to such materials, such action, by Secret Police, will alienate people.
 
 
Here another idea, from history. If Party members (aparatnik, or how they are call) see the opportunity to blame on Ruler and Secret Police for the bad in NoK, they might love it. Communist blame other most of the time, it's one of the method they use.
Add, from history too, that in the event of regime change the former members of the Party may participate in election, may be elected. It was the Secret Police and KRF, not almost all country members of the Party to blame. (how many are members, btw?)
Those two ideas can make Party members (some) brake from KRF (Kim Ruling Family).
 
That take time, and as Darth said - I think, some action can't be kept secret for a long time. There is a timing and schedule in this. Of course this is a public, open place ...
 
Anybody? http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emdgust.gif" align="absmiddle" border="0" alt="" />

 ...
 
The fact that none of the officials explicitly blame NoK for Cheonan, make me think of buying some time. It is true, Darth, is practical, too. Also, events like the visit in China, take place.
 
...
 
Ideas. Debate ... Cheonan & NoK, please.
 
Quote    Reply

dogberry       5/5/2010 2:31:57 PM
How close to the Armistice Line do Koreans in the Seoul area live?   
 
What is the effective range of the North's artillery?
 
Are they dug in?   Would the guns have to be in a narrow stretch of the border to hit any significant number of South Korean?
 
How long would it take for the South's counter battery fire to destroy the North's artillery?
 
Quote    Reply

Reactive       5/5/2010 3:36:21 PM

How close to the Armistice Line do Koreans in the Seoul area live?   

 

What is the effective range of the North's artillery?

 

Are they dug in?   Would the guns have to be in a narrow stretch of the border to hit any significant number of South Korean?

 

How long would it take for the South's counter battery fire to destroy the North's artillery?


C'mon, the answers to nearly all of these questions would be revealed with 2 minutes of research.
 
They've even been discussed in this thread, the last question is of course anyone's guess, and would depend on how well drilled the DPRK regiments would be in the event that C3I had been destroyed, this is exactly the sort of battle for which the US is best prepared, massed soviet-era artillery, dug in, it's not necessarily a question of how long it takes for every artillery piece (numbering several thousand) to be destroyed, but rather how long it takes for the people manning these systems to conclude that surrender is a better option than being hit by the numerous cluster/submunition/guided ordnance that would be aimed at them. What people learned from the first Iraq war was that massed formations of manpower and armour are useless without the net-centric battlefield management that western forces utilise, the DPRK is not fighting a war with any realistic hope of surviving, but rather pre-empting a war by being able to demonstrate that it can inflict thousands, or hundreds of thousands of casualties on seoul. Once war actually breaks out it's a matter of days, possibly weeks until the structured DPRK forces are unable to communicate and rapidly surrendering. 
 
Quote    Reply

Nocturne       5/5/2010 4:04:03 PM
It's probably just too many tubes to hunt down. But if you hit supply dumps,  without air cover NKs will have hard time bringing more ammunition forward. So forget individual tubes map the HQ  and supply dumps. And i wonder how many tubes they can really spare to hit Seoul while they will have lots and lots of frantic requests to commit artillery to troop support. Political targets versus military targets.
I am hearing about NK collapse for i dont know 10 years? probably more...they wont go away that easy and if they go they will implode with really big force. Don't discount possibility that if party goes down they might feel obliged to take everybody with them or just some rogue general will give orders to fire on it's own. So in the end lack of aggresive stance might lead to additional 2-3mln NKs dead from starvation and Seoul bombed anyway.
So in my opinion options from best to worst:
A) Speak with PRC - talk, bribe..do whatever it takes if China closes it's border or at least stops support to NK thats game over.
B) First strike - finish what should have been finished long ago. Element of surprise saves lives. Don't let the NK choose the time.  If China stops it's support NK might feel cornered enough to strike anyway
C) Do nothing. Pretend everything will sort out on it's own and nothing will happen. I don't think this is going to work. They are really really brainwashed. If you are some general in NK army you don't really know anything outside the party and the army, you know you will be nothing in the new state, you will be worthless and the only world you have is coming to an end. So either you shoot yourself or you take your last chance to win or at least to go down with big bang. You go to war. 

So thats my humble opinion on the NK situation

 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       5/6/2010 1:33:59 AM
NK only has enough fuel to sustain a 2 day ground war. SK can win simply by tying down their forces until reinforcements arrive, which is rather easy considering how difficult it is for the NK to move South from the DMZ. The war would be over in weeks as the NK would have no viable means to sustain ground operations barring infantry, which can easily be dealt with using air support.
 
The real problem lies in disabling the NK artillery before it can cause damage. Even worse, the NK may have managed to weaponize a nuclear warhead and place it onto an artillery piece. We would be in a world of hurt. Even with all our cruise missiles and bunker busters, it would be impossible to destroy the majority of artillery pieces in a small window or to even know where each piece is located. Another problem would be that air assets would be tied up in providing air superiority (at least in the initial stages) and other air assets would be tasked for ground support.
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       5/6/2010 2:25:54 AM



Thats why every decent forum needs it's slowman or a truck driver. Starting to miss em huh?



Well, I'm new to SP, I don't know what's about slowman & truck driver ...

You don't want to know about them, though Slowman had some promise of adjusting yo reality once he got rid of the racism and RoK uber alles attitude. . 

Hamilcar, my man, you are not alone.

Uh Huh?
 
There are a lot of person that appreciate emotional thinking and reference to source/link on web. IMO, in web campaigns that's what is use: call for emotions, redirect to links with others ideas. That give productivity, in a campaign. I'm NOT say that you are on a campaign ... just that seam it's a habit.
 
Emotion, me? No sir. Cold as ice. 

In the same time, other persons are not like that, they appreciate that effort to bring new, own, ideas, even if are wrong. Some persons want to enrich themself with rational, ideas, effort to train the brain. A brain, like a muscle, must be train. Some want to understand better the complexities of this different world, not a simple, emotional one.
 
You are confused here. Aside from the occasional swipes at Gixxerr's repeated mistakes, the case is logical and straightforward.  
 
For example, and JUST as example: you sent me to French Revolution when I ask details about the rice & economics of NorK and the influence in the equation. I presume that you understood my point in that question, yet sent me to something in which didn't existed the economic relation in place now in NoK. That didn't bring me anything, that didn't enrich me a bit. This was JUST an example, not a came back to subject, please don't respond or refer to this as I want to point that:

Well you will get clarification anyway since past is prologue or prior disasters are the models for future disasters.
 
The French Revolution began with a failed government mandated agricultural policy, a botched currency adjustment, and an emergent "technical business class" (lawyers) that exploited that twin disaster to seize power from the previous elite. Wheat may not be rice, but:

 
 
Same old political parameters, same old political MECHANISMS..... Its an example you can delve into to predict what the DPRK outcome could be. 

Ignoring.

Mikko, If you ignore this behavior, if you don't feed it, you might get a chance to make it disappear.

Ignore one that act like a troll, don't respect ... For sure he/she don't want to be ignored. And step in please, with other issues then the one and only center of the world ... http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emsmile.gif" alt="" align="absmiddle" border="0" />

And that would be?
 
Btw, how's Horst doing? Just kidding, please don't get offended.


He's dead. 
 
earlm said about balloons, I think. Well, does arrive at people? Some sure do. One question could be about effective and efficient.

Better than nothing.
 
Maybe materials will arrive on black market. This way people can get more of the DVD & stuff. There is the ri
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar    You were dragged to the truth kicking and screaming like a child.   5/6/2010 7:05:51 AM

No you don't need to be clearer. We all know that you post solely to insult me. You've said as much in your various post. Unfortunately however, the more you do that, the more it becomes clearer to people that your ego and insanity are taking away from not only the quality of what you write but also of this forum. You are so focused on trying to prove yourself that you missed opportunity to learn and damaged your integrity in the process. Many posters including the few you show some minor amount of respect for have been trying to politely and not so politely hint that to you. If you cannot perceive that, then how could you perceive the complexities of ME/SWA social/economic conditions when the closest you've probably ever been to it is Google dot Com?

1. Who called whom a liar and lied about it?
2. Who claimed all sorts of theories and then when proven wrong, won't admt it?
3.. Who claimed to know about China, and the DPRK, and when proven wrong won;t admit ot.
4. Only now when backed into a corner about Iran with no weasel way out to dace face, do you, Gixxer, admit that you don't know the subject at all.
5. I don't take anything you say as truth, basically because you never know what you discuss at all.   
6. I certainly don;t take advice from the likes of you. Never have, never will.   
7. My integrity is not based on a popularity contest. Its based on the truth.

Now, after all the back and forth, where is strategy page on the subject of Cheonan? Barely beyond where it was a month ago when I explained that POLITICS, not physics or forensics would drive this and that for reasons of national security no responsible leader is going to jump to conclusions, all possibilities would be considered and that it would be unlikely that anyone would be blamed directly as a matter of practicality. Notice any official causes yet? Do you think they don't know exactly how this happened? I didn't think so. Such is the complexity of geopolitics.
 
You don't know the politics at all, Gixxer, or you would know that Cheonan was part of the DPRK/.RoK fisheries war, or that Little Kim had to do something to keep his generals in check because even they are upset about the famine he caused and saw the RoKs chasing their desperate fishing fleet out of the rich crabbing grounds south of  Jangsam Cape as a huge loss of face for him, only exceeded by their puny efforts to fight to secure that rich stretch of waters, a battle that they very publicly LOST which was a hige loss of face for THEM.    

The Mayaguez, the Peublo and the Maine Lesson that you sneered at, that I supplied for your edification if you knew the first thing about face either in the American  or Asian context were sledgehammer clues as to the POLITICS that a one eyed man can see. Bit I knew you were blind, Gixxer. After a half.dozen stupid theories as to how the Cheonan happened, and a load of horse manure about how you claimed  you never claimed you posted that CRAP, and then you claimed it was political? What now are you going to claim? That you said the RoKs were going to float every story except  the true one because they didn't want to take action? What a laugh. I said at the time that President Lee was hobbled by a fool at 1600 Pennsylvania, which was the truth.
 
Now then....Little cross-dresser Kim is headed to Beijing on a victory tour to be congratulated by the PRC bandits for whom he stooges; while the Chicago Thug sits solidly with his thumbs up his intellect, as President Lee, alone, tries to figure out some kind of solo response to punish KJI that won't blow up into a no-win war. I said that clearly, remember, before I said torpedo? It was just after I told you that physics trumps politics,
 
meaning that you could not hide a torpedo attack from the Korean  people as at that time they knew as soon as the scuttlebutt circuit kicked in.   
   
So stow the fairy tales. Between YC, Reactoive, Santa Claws, and me, the case for what really is going
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    Gix and Herald   5/6/2010 11:51:36 AM
have both been banned.  Like William Gibson's cyberspace, this is a consensual hallucination, eh?  Let me suggest we all call people by their 'proper names.'
 
I have checked DA when he IMHO went too far with me.  Do what you like but I imagine it is easier to stop a war  after tye first launch than after the first hundredth.  Darth, why don't you apologize for calling Hamilcar a liar and let's move on.  Plenty of people here err without it constituting lying.
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       5/6/2010 11:53:17 AM
After reading a report from the investigation team, South Korean President Lee was overheard to say in a very resolute tone, "I am shocked--shocked!--to find there is torpedoing going on in these waters!"  Later, President Lee issued the following resolute response, "The Cheonan has been torpedoed.  Round up the usual suspects."  Within a few scant hours of the President's display of sheer resolute-ness, a sternly-worded demarche was resolutely delivered to the United Nations Security Council by the resolute-faced South Korean Ambassador to the United Nations.  The content of the communique has not been released to the public, but it is believed to resolutely state that South Korea is extremely put-out by this entire situation, and resolutely demands immediate and resolute action (of an unspecified nature).
 
------------------
 

Explosives traces found on sunken S.Korea warship: report

May 6, 2010

Traces of explosive from a torpedo have been found on debris from a sunken South Korean warship, fuelling suspicions that North Korea sank the vessel, a report said Thursday.

 

Aluminium fragments from a torpedo casing have also been found, Dong-A Ilbo newspaper quoted a member of a team investigating the blast as saying.

 

President Lee Myung-Bak hinted Tuesday that North Korea was involved in the sinking, which cost 46 lives. He promised a "resolute" response when the cause is established following the multinational probe.

 

The unidentified team member was quoted as saying the explosive traces were found on a funnel that was torn off the Cheonan by the blast on March 26 near the disputed border with North Korea.

 

"It has been confirmed that the explosive came from a torpedo," the team member was quoted as saying.

 

Detailed analysis of salvaged aluminium fragments also confirmed they are from a torpedo, the individual said.

 

"This type of aluminium is not in use in this country. As long as the torpedo was not ours, there is only one country that may attack a South Korean navy vessel," the team member reportedly said.

 

The paper quoted a senior military official as saying investigators would announce their findings no later than mid-May.

 

Defence Minister Kim Tae-Young told legislators last Friday that a piece of aluminium that was not from the sunken ship had been retrieved, but did not elaborate.

 

The North, whose leader Kim Jong-Il is visiting China this week, denies involvement. Kim reportedly met President Hu Jintao Wednesday evening and South Korean analysts have said the ship incident would likely be discussed.

 

The South has not publicly ruled out a military response if the North is proved to have sunk the Cheonan, but has said it would probably take the issue to the United Nations Security Council.

 

China is the North's sole major ally and main

 
Quote    Reply

CFG    Winning without the battle.   5/6/2010 12:39:35 PM

NK only has enough fuel to sustain a 2 day ground war. SK can win simply by tying down their forces until reinforcements arrive, which is rather easy considering how difficult it is for the NK to move South from the DMZ. The war would be over in weeks as the NK would have no viable means to sustain ground operations barring infantry, which can easily be dealt with using air support.


 

The real problem lies in disabling the NK artillery before it can cause damage. Even worse, the NK may have managed to weaponize a nuclear warhead and place it onto an artillery piece. We would be in a world of hurt. Even with all our cruise missiles and bunker busters, it would be impossible to destroy the majority of artillery pieces in a small window or to even know where each piece is located. Another problem would be that air assets would be tied up in providing air superiority (at least in the initial stages) and other air assets would be tasked for ground support.



Why the military option? Does the cost in lives and money justify the outcome?
 
Clausewitz said that war is the continuation of the politics by other means. It is true that some persons see war as an end, they are probably accustomed to think like that. But the end is not the war, the end is set in political and strategic goals.
 
Sun Tzu opinion for the best strategy is to attack first enemy's plan, then enemy's alliance, next the army and worst the walled city. The highest appreciation goes for winning without the battle.
 
Of course one must calculate as much as possible, military actions, too.
 
ChiefG
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics