The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Sun Nov 24, 2024 1:40 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 4:57 am
Posts: 849
It's been about 4 months now since the South Korean Cheonan sunk suspiciously. We're probably all somewhat familiar with the incident. It's hard to find any one article to serve as refresher since the story unfolded over time, but suffice to say the ship broke in half and 46 of 104 crew members died. Between a multinational inquiry pointing the finger at North Korea, along with a whole lot of precedent besides, it doesn't seem like much of a mystery. Nothing much came of it, even after the inquiry released their results, and it seemed like just another event in a long string that changes nothing between the Koreas.

Yet... this one doesn't seem to be going away. Now the US is running joint maritime exercises alongside South Korea, which North Korea certainly doesn't like. Not that they like anything, I suppose. We have a fairly highly hostile statement from Defense Secretary Robert Gates laying the blame unquestioningly and quite publicly at NK's feet. Yesterday's article from AP on all this can be found here and I shall spoiler it as well:

Spoiler:
NKorea warns US drill, sanctions endanger region
MARGIE MASONMARGIE MASON, Associated Press Writer


HANOI, Vietnam (AP) — North Korea on Thursday warned the United States that imposing fresh sanctions and holding military drills with South Korea this weekend will endanger the entire region and destroy hopes for a nuke-free Korean peninsula.

The remarks precede an Asian security meeting in the Vietnamese capital, Hanoi, on Friday, attended by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and the top diplomats from both Koreas four months after the sinking of a South Korean warship that killed 46 sailors. The North has been blamed but denies responsibility.

"If the U.S. is really interested in the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula, it should halt the military exercises and sanctions that destroy the mood for dialogue," North Korean spokesman Ri Tong Il told reporters on the sidelines of meetings Thursday.

Sanctions, he said, escalate the U.S.'s "hostile policy toward North Korea."

On Wednesday, Washington announced it would impose new sanctions aimed at stifling the North's nuclear activities. Ri said any new sanctions would be in violation of a U.N. Security Council statement approved earlier this month that condemned the sinking but stopped short of directly assigning blame.

Regarding the naval drills the U.S. and South Korea plan this weekend, Ri told Yonhap news agency, "Such a move presents a grave threat to the peace and security not only to the Korean peninsula, but to the region."

He later said the North is willing to meet the U.S. and Japan on the sidelines of Friday's security meeting if they request it, but no such proposals have come, Yonhap reported.

Seoul has said there will be no one-on-one meetings with the North until an apology is issued for the sinking of the navy ship Cheonan. Clinton and representatives from all other parties in the stalled nuclear talks will be in Vietnam, but diplomats have said a meeting among them is unlikely.

In a sign of how tense relations are — and how difficult such meetings would be — U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates struck back Thursday at North Korea's criticism of the military drills. "My response to that is that I condemn their sinking of the Cheonan," Gates said to reporters in Jakarta, Indonesia.

South Korea has said the naval drills are defensive training exercises that do not violate the U.N. Security Council statement and that the sanctions are not to avenge the ship sinking but instead target the North's illicit nuclear activities.

A South Korean foreign ministry official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the press, accused North Korean Foreign Minister Pak Ui Chun of using the meeting in Vietnam to look for friends.

"North Korea's foreign minister has been very busy hanging out and trying to gain support from other countries," the official said. "Many countries support South Korea's position, and nobody likes North Korea."

Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa said he wasn't surprised the North was upset about the drills, but that South Korea and the U.S. have the right to conduct the military exercises.

"They can be angry on many things," he told reporters, speaking in English. "If you Google North Korea every day, you find all kinds of angry words, and I'll be in trouble if I follow my policy based on their state of emotion."

An international investigation concluded the North sunk the ship by torpedo attack. The two Koreas remain in a state of war because a peace treaty was never signed to end their three-year war in the 1950s. Pyongyang cites the presence of 28,500 U.S. troops on South Korean soil as a main reason it needs to build nuclear weapons to defend itself.

North Korea vehemently denies any involvement in the sinking, and has asked the U.N. Command governing the armistice to let the regime conduct its own investigation. Military officers from the command and North Korea were to meet along the heavily fortified border that divides the peninsula, known as the Demilitarized Zone, on Friday.

The 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations are now caught in the middle of a diplomatic tug-of-war, with the two Koreas battling over the exact wording of one paragraph in a regional security statement about the sinking. The statement will be issued Friday by ASEAN, along with 17 other nations that include the United States, Japan and both Koreas.

The North and its main ally China are pushing to avoid any terse wording, while South Korea and its staunch backer the United States want tough language condemning the attack and nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula.

There was similar haggling earlier in the week during the ASEAN's foreign ministers meeting, which concluded with a watered-down version of what South Korea wanted. The ministers' statement "deplored" the ship sinking, but characterized it as an "incident" instead of an "attack."

___

Associated Press writers Jim Gomez and Tran Van Minh in Hanoi, Kwang-tae Kim in Seoul, South Korea, and Joe Cochrane in Jakarta, Indonesia, contributed to this report.


Is anything going to come of this after all? We've all become somewhat used to there being some issue between NK and SK for... awhile now. I searched back through our forums and saw a thread on some artillery fire significantly damaging a North Korean ship, for example. Yet this one seems to be persisting. I'm starting to wonder if it might turn out to be historically meaningful in some way, where all the others are news for a week and never heard from again.

Is it just the fact that so many were killed that gives it a longer shelf life, and a year from now it will end up as just one of the many small scale, over-before-it-starts conflicts between North and South Korea? Or is this one really something that is set apart from those?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:37 am 
Offline
Rihannsu Commander

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:31 am
Posts: 4709
Location: Cincinnati OH
Today the DPRK issued a statement that the wargames would meet with a "physical response"

wonder if its saber rattling or what. This isnt the first time the DPRK has committed what amounts to an act of war that we've delayed the response.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:22 pm
Posts: 5716
TheRiov wrote:
Today the DPRK issued a statement that the wargames would meet with a "physical response"

wonder if its saber rattling or what. This isnt the first time the DPRK has committed what amounts to an act of war that we've delayed the response.


We should respond thusly:

"War games will proceed as planned. Any attack on either the United States or South Korean navies will result in the destruction of the North Korean naval fleet."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 5:44 pm
Posts: 2315
I don't think North Korea has the ability to do anything. I found it pretty surprising that they even had a functioning submarine and functioning torpedo with which to blow up that SK ship when it was announced.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:27 am
Posts: 2169
They have a butt load of artillery, most pointed south, some pointed east.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:38 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Keeping a diesel-electric sub operating is WWII stuff; NK can do that. So is making a torpedo work; it wasn't necessarily a modern torpedo.

Using a torpedo and completely destroying one of SKs major combatants is a serious escalation, however. SK has been stuck between a rock and a hard place on this; doing nothing encourages the North, but it's not really worth starting a major war over even if it is a legitimate Casus Belli. Any sort of direct military response, such as a bombing raid, could trigger that general war too; NK can't be counted on to respond to a punitive action with rationality.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 1:34 pm 
Offline
Rihannsu Commander

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:31 am
Posts: 4709
Location: Cincinnati OH
Didn't the DPRK shoot down one of our listening planes over international waters during the Clinton administration?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:47 pm 
Offline
Mountain Man
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:15 pm
Posts: 3374
Huh. I think they forced one down ... gonna have to look that up, thanks for the additional distraction today. :)

Not finding it easily ... there was an EC-121 shot down in 1969, apparently. Sheesh, was it China that forced down one of our planes? Mechanical trouble, maybe, and a quarantine, etc.? That's ringing some bells ...

Ah, found it, at least the one I'm thinking of. There was a collision between a U.S. EP-3 reconnaissance plane and a Chinese F-8, which crashed, in April 2001. The U.S. plane made an emergency landing in China, where the crew of 24 was detained for over three weeks. Maybe that's the one you're thinking of, TheRiov?

_________________
This cold and dark tormented hell
Is all I`ll ever know
So when you get to heaven
May the devil be the judge


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:25 pm 
Offline
Rihannsu Commander

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:31 am
Posts: 4709
Location: Cincinnati OH
No, this was an actual shoot-down of one of our larger planes, though I could be misremembering the era. I heard about it during an NPR Discussion of the Cheonan sinking. They cited previous situations where North Korea had shot down or destroyed/killed SK/US assets. In this case, it was an actual US plane, though. I remember it was during a liberal administration, it could have been much earlier, and now that I think about it they were discussing a number of responses including potentially nuclear responses, so its highly unlikely it was after 1975.

Their point in the article however, was that NK has every reason to expect that the US/SK would temper or even not respond at all to, what to many nations, would be an act of war.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:08 am
Posts: 6465
Location: The Lab
Perhaps you were thinking of KAL 007?

This was the Korean passenger jet shot down by Soviet interceptors because it violated their airspace?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:20 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
Some NK Migs intercepted a RC-135S Cobra Ball recon plane in international waters over the Sea of Japan in 2003. They didn't shoot it down, however, they just shadowed it.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:08 pm 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
Arathain Kelvar wrote:
TheRiov wrote:
Today the DPRK issued a statement that the wargames would meet with a "physical response"

wonder if its saber rattling or what. This isnt the first time the DPRK has committed what amounts to an act of war that we've delayed the response.


We should respond thusly:

"War games will proceed as planned. Any attack on either the United States or South Korean navies will result in the destruction of the North Korean naval fleet."


China won't like this, and quite frankly, China has us by the balls. I'm not saying we would be wrong, or that it isn't the best solution. I'm simply pointing out the geo-political realities of such a move.

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:23 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Rynar wrote:
Arathain Kelvar wrote:
TheRiov wrote:
Today the DPRK issued a statement that the wargames would meet with a "physical response"

wonder if its saber rattling or what. This isnt the first time the DPRK has committed what amounts to an act of war that we've delayed the response.


We should respond thusly:

"War games will proceed as planned. Any attack on either the United States or South Korean navies will result in the destruction of the North Korean naval fleet."


China won't like this, and quite frankly, China has us by the balls. I'm not saying we would be wrong, or that it isn't the best solution. I'm simply pointing out the geo-political realities of such a move.


The geopolitical realities are most certainly not that China has us by the balls.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 6:00 pm 
Offline
Mountain Man
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:15 pm
Posts: 3374
Diamondeye wrote:
Rynar wrote:

China won't like this, and quite frankly, China has us by the balls. I'm not saying we would be wrong, or that it isn't the best solution. I'm simply pointing out the geo-political realities of such a move.


The geopolitical realities are most certainly not that China has us by the balls.


I think Rynar had in mind the "International Political Economy" realities, actually. In which case, yeah, they've certainly got a hand somewhere down around the short hairs.

_________________
This cold and dark tormented hell
Is all I`ll ever know
So when you get to heaven
May the devil be the judge


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 6:56 pm 
Offline
Rihannsu Commander

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:31 am
Posts: 4709
Location: Cincinnati OH
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EC-121_shootdown_incident

This was the incident I guess. What I get for being distracted this week.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 7:19 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Aethien wrote:
Diamondeye wrote:
Rynar wrote:

China won't like this, and quite frankly, China has us by the balls. I'm not saying we would be wrong, or that it isn't the best solution. I'm simply pointing out the geo-political realities of such a move.


The geopolitical realities are most certainly not that China has us by the balls.


I think Rynar had in mind the "International Political Economy" realities, actually. In which case, yeah, they've certainly got a hand somewhere down around the short hairs.


That's more accurate, but they still don't have that much leverage. Yeah, they own a lot of our debt. There's very little they can do with that.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 7:40 pm 
Offline
Bull Moose
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:36 pm
Posts: 7507
Location: Last Western Stop of the Pony Express
The road to US solvency is winning a war against China. We can absolve ourselves of all our debts to China by declaring them null and void when China commits an act of war against the United States.

Don't for a moment think either side has forgotten that aspect of warfare.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 10:18 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Micheal wrote:
The road to US solvency is winning a war against China. We can absolve ourselves of all our debts to China by declaring them null and void when China commits an act of war against the United States.

Don't for a moment think either side has forgotten that aspect of warfare.


There's another leverage we have as well. If China were to attempt to cause a major economic collapse in this country.. well, I guarantee we can render that irrelevant in very short order. Like 30 minutes to 12 hours.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 10:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:22 pm
Posts: 5716
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-10748148

Quote:
North Korea says it will use its "nuclear deterrent" in response to joint US-South Korean military exercises this weekend.

Pyongyang was ready to launch a "retaliatory sacred war", the state-run Korean Central News Agency (KINA) said, quoting defence officials.

Washington and Seoul say the war games are to deter North Korean aggression.

Tensions between the two Koreas have been high since the sinking of a South Korean warship in March.

North Korea: A Secretive StateGrowing apart
N Korea watches Clinton in DMZ
The Korean War armistice
Q&A: Inter-Korean crisis
An international investigation said the ship was sunk by a North Korean torpedo, a claim strongly denied by Pyongyang.

"All these war manoeuvres are nothing but outright provocations aimed to stifle the Democratic People's Republic of Korea [North Korea] by force of arms," KCNA reported the powerful National Defence Commission as saying.

"The army and people of the DPRK will start a retaliatory sacred war of their own style based on nuclear deterrent any time necessary in order to counter the US imperialists and the South Korean puppet forces deliberately pushing the situation to the brink of a war."

The BBC's John Sudworth, in Seoul, says it is not the first time that North Korea has issued such a warning.

Although it is likely to be dismissed as the usual diplomatic brinkmanship, the rising tension will cause concern among governments in the region, he adds.

In response, the White House said it was not interested in a "war of words" with North Korea.

State Department spokesman PJ Crowley said the US wanted "more constructive action and fewer provocative words" from Pyongyang.

The North had already promised a physical response to the military exercises during an Asian regional security forum in Vietnam.

Continue reading the main story

Start Quote
If you keep on stabbing an animal with a sharp stick, eventually it'll bite you ”
End Quote
Droschke

Have your say
North Korea's delegation spokesman at the Association of South East Asian Nations (Asean) Regional Forum (ARF) said the exercises were an example of 19th century "gunboat diplomacy".

"It is a threat to the Korean peninsula and the region of Asia as a whole," he said.

China warning

The forum was dominated by the crisis between the two Koreas.

The war games - which begin on Sunday - will involve the aircraft carrier USS George Washington, 20 other ships and submarines, 100 aircraft and 8,000 personnel.

China has criticised the plans and warned against any action which might "exacerbate regional tensions".

But Japan is sending four military observers, in an apparent endorsement of the drills.

The US announced on Wednesday that it was to impose new sanctions on North Korea, aimed at halting nuclear proliferation and the import of luxury goods.


Crazy....


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:49 am
Posts: 2410
Micheal wrote:
The road to US solvency is winning a war against China. We can absolve ourselves of all our debts to China by declaring them null and void when China commits an act of war against the United States.

Don't for a moment think either side has forgotten that aspect of warfare.


*shiver*

That's terrifying. Sadly, our debt would be irrelevant in any case, as we'd plunge the world into a nuclear hell.

_________________
Image

It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:44 pm 
Offline
Bull Moose
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:36 pm
Posts: 7507
Location: Last Western Stop of the Pony Express
I'm not recommending it. I've just feared that option for the last decade as our indebtedness to China has grown to be the Dragon eating our tail..

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 24, 2010 2:06 am 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
Micheal wrote:
I'm not recommending it. I've just feared that option for the last decade as our indebtedness to China has grown to be the Dragon eating our tail..


Exactly. Reality isn't pretty, but it's real.

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 24, 2010 7:08 am 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Monte wrote:
Micheal wrote:
The road to US solvency is winning a war against China. We can absolve ourselves of all our debts to China by declaring them null and void when China commits an act of war against the United States.

Don't for a moment think either side has forgotten that aspect of warfare.


*shiver*

That's terrifying. Sadly, our debt would be irrelevant in any case, as we'd plunge the world into a nuclear hell.


A war with China would not necessarily involve nuclear weapons; in fact it probably wouldn't. There's little chance we would invade the Chinese mainland except possibly in the form of raids or landings to destroy forces preparing to invade Taiwan. There's no chance China would invade any U.S. possession. In the event of a NK-SK conflict, China probably wouldn't get involved; if they did it would be on the Korean penninsula, and no one used nuclear weapons last time despite the fact that we could have used them with total impunity.

In the case of Taiwan, the bulk of our involvement would be sea and air.

Neither nation would be faced with national destruction or catastrophe from such a war, and thus have little incentive to risk global thermonuclear war. If either side did, regardless of who shot first, China is going to get annihilated. We're not. China has a single, easily-tracked SSBN that almost certainly won't survive to launch its missiles, and it only has a few dozen ICBMs which will be fairly easy to stop with GBI, SM3, THAAD, and PAC-3. A few will get through, but nothing that is beyond the range of "surviveable".

The only real risk of it going global is if China flings a few at Russia hoping to get them to shoot wildly back at both of us, which will also mean them shooting at France and Britain who will also shoot back at Russia. In that case, there will be a global nuclear war, and it will be bad. However, with deployed warheads and launchers down to about 10% of their 1988 levels on both sides, most infrastructure on both sides will probably survive. In any case, that would depend on Russia either believing we struck them or not caring, which would be far from certain anyhow. Russia gets out a lot better taking a few Chinese hits and hitting just them back than taking over a thousand hits from us.

China, however, has little incentive to go nuclear since they have essentially no chance of knocking out any enemy weapons before they are launched. Their capabilities are entirely second-strike deterrent. We have no incentive to do so unless they try to cause economic collapse or launch first. The risk is pretty minimal; nuclear-armed nations tend to be exceedingly cautius in dealing with each other.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 5:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 4:57 am
Posts: 849
So... the general consensus is that this won't lead to anything, and is indeed just one of the more egregious offenses that will be (for lack of a better term) tolerated in the name of non-escalation?

If this normally would be a casus belli for most countries, why is NK an exception? Seoul's proximity to the NK border and its artillery?

Is there perhaps a hope that when Kim Jong Il passes, the country will wisen up some? It seems like there has to be some time these incidents come to an end, and if NK won't stop then someone likely should stop them, but it seems quite unlikely Kim Jong Il will be around all that much longer so I can see that waiting is a viable option at this point.

Seeing as how there is no rush, it seems to me that SK can build extensive shelters in Seoul (if they haven't already -- I'm a bit surprised a quick search turned up nothing of the sort) and plan something to take out and otherwise minimize NK's threat to the city. I'm sure much more well-informed people than I have looked this scenario over though. I'm sure there would be pretty substantial damages and loss of life, certainly moreso than these 46 sailors, and with this Cheonan incident not going away it seems more and more that there is some call to putting an end to these incidents even at that cost. Not to mention miscellaneous other positive results like a united Korea and an improvement in life for most of the NK population.

I suppose it's a complex enough situation without even mentioning China...

-

edit: http://hosted2.ap.org/TNMOR/national/Ar ... 6c75c8c774

Spoiler:
US aircraft carrier leads drills with South Korea
ERIC TALMADGEERIC TALMADGE, Associated Press Writer


ABOARD USS GEORGE WASHINGTON (AP) — A nuclear-powered U.S. supercarrier led an armada of warships in exercises off the Korean peninsula on Sunday that North Korea has vowed to physically block and says could escalate into nuclear war.

U.S. military officials said the maneuvers, conducted with South Korean ships and Japanese observers, were intended to send a strong signal to the North that aggression in the region will not be tolerated.

Tensions on the Korean peninsula have been particularly high since the sinking in March of a South Korean naval vessel. Forty-six Korean sailors were killed in the sinking, which Seoul has called Pyongyang's worst military attack on it since the 1950-53 Korean War.

The military drills, code-named "Invincible Spirit," are to run through Wednesday with about 8,000 U.S. and South Korean troops, 20 ships and submarines and 200 aircraft. The Nimitz-class USS George Washington was deployed from Japan.

"We are showing our resolve," said Capt. David Lausman, the carrier's commanding officer.

North Korea has protested the drills, threatening to retaliate with "nuclear deterrence" and "sacred war."

The North routinely threatens attacks whenever South Korea and the U.S. hold joint military drills, which Pyongyang sees as a rehearsal for an invasion. The U.S. keeps 28,500 troops in South Korea and another 50,000 in Japan, but says it has no intention of invading the North.

Still, the North's latest rhetoric carries extra weight following the sinking of the Cheonan.

Capt. Ross Myers, the commander of the carrier's air wing, said the exercises were not intended to raise tensions, but acknowledged they are meant to get North Korea's attention.

The George Washington, one of the biggest ships in the U.S. Navy, is a potent symbol of American military power, with about 5,000 sailors and aviators and the capacity to carry up to 70 planes.

"North Korea may contend that it is a provocation, but I would say the opposite," he said. "It is a provocation to those who don't want peace and stability. North Korea doesn't want this. They know that one of South Korea's strengths is its alliance with the United States."

He said that North Korea's threats to retaliate were being taken seriously.

"There is a lot they can do," he said. "They have ships, they have subs, they have airplanes. They are a credible threat."

The exercises are the first in a series of U.S.-South Korean maneuvers to be conducted in the East Sea off South Korea's east coast and in the Yellow Sea closer to China's shores in international waters. The exercises also are the first to employ the F-22 stealth fighter — which can evade North Korean air defenses — in South Korea.

South Korea was closely monitoring North Korea's military but spotted no unusual activity Sunday, the Defense Ministry said.

North Korea, which denies any involvement in the sinking of the Cheonan, warned the United States against holding the drills.

"Our military and people will squarely respond to the nuclear war preparation by the American imperialists and the South Korean puppet regime with our powerful nuclear deterrent," the North's government-run Minju Joson newspaper said in a commentary Sunday headlined, "We also have nuclear weapons."

The commentary was carried by the official Korean Central News Agency.

The North's powerful National Defense Commission issued a similar threat Saturday, saying the country "will start a retaliatory sacred war ... based on nuclear deterrent any time necessary in order to counter the U.S."

The country's Foreign Ministry separately said Saturday that Pyongyang is considering "powerful physical measures" in response to the U.S. military drills and sanctions.

Though the impoverished North has a large conventional military and the capability to build nuclear weapons, it is not believed to have the technology needed to use nuclear devices as warheads.

North Korea has been in increasingly difficult diplomatic straits since the Cheonan incident.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton announced Wednesday, after visiting the Demilitarized Zone dividing the two Koreas, that the U.S. would slap new sanctions on the North to stifle its nuclear ambitions and punish it for the Cheonan sinking.

On Friday, the European Union said it, too, would consider new sanctions on North Korea.

The George Washington had been expected to join in exercises off Korea sooner, but the Navy delayed those plans as the United Nations Security Council met to deliberate what action it should take over the Cheonan sinking.

The council eventually condemned the incident, but stopped short of naming North Korea as the perpetrator.

___

Associated Press writer Hyung-jin Kim in Seoul contributed to this report.


The mentioned US + SK naval exercises have commenced some 2 days ago... no nuclear retaliation yet!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 5:32 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Noggel wrote:
So... the general consensus is that this won't lead to anything, and is indeed just one of the more egregious offenses that will be (for lack of a better term) tolerated in the name of non-escalation?

If this normally would be a casus belli for most countries, why is NK an exception? Seoul's proximity to the NK border and its artillery?


That is a major part of it. The fear is heavily of the use of chemical weapons, and the fact that a lot of these sites are hardened and would be very difficult to destroy at any point other than when the gun is actually firing.

There's also the impact that winning the war (and SK would definitely win any full-scale war) would have on the SK economy. NK is an utter mess and the funds to fix it are a matter of serious concern to the South Koreans. Reunification could be an economic disaster even without a war.

Quote:
Is there perhaps a hope that when Kim Jong Il passes, the country will wisen up some? It seems like there has to be some time these incidents come to an end, and if NK won't stop then someone likely should stop them, but it seems quite unlikely Kim Jong Il will be around all that much longer so I can see that waiting is a viable option at this point.


There's a hope, but that's it - a hope. NK is such a closed society that getting any sort of internal political pulse is chancy at best.

Quote:
Seeing as how there is no rush, it seems to me that SK can build extensive shelters in Seoul (if they haven't already -- I'm a bit surprised a quick search turned up nothing of the sort) and plan something to take out and otherwise minimize NK's threat to the city. I'm sure much more well-informed people than I have looked this scenario over though. I'm sure there would be pretty substantial damages and loss of life, certainly moreso than these 46 sailors, and with this Cheonan incident not going away it seems more and more that there is some call to putting an end to these incidents even at that cost. Not to mention miscellaneous other positive results like a united Korea and an improvement in life for most of the NK population.


I'm sure Seoul has lots of shelters that would be perfectly adequate to protect citizens against high explosive and chemical agents, aside from those killed before they could get to the shelters. The real damage would be to infrastructure and from the essential shutting down of the city while it's decontaminated. Persistent chemical agents can last up to 48 hours under the right conditions and if NK could re-seed that at all, the problems of economic loss and the logistics of caring for people in shelters would quickly surpass initial casualties in terms of being a burden on the country.

Planning to take out NK artillery is something that goes on almost constantly, I'm sure. However the simple fact is that there's a lot of it, and the really big stuff that can reach Seoul is well-hardened. That's either an ass-load of painful infantry work, an ass-load of airstrikes with specialized and expensive munitions, or a fair number of nukes, which would have to be ground-burst and therefore produce a hell of a lot of fallout. None of these options is very palatable.

Keep in mind that while a united Korea and benefits to the poor of NK sound great to us, we're not the SK that has to deal with the problems. That's their financial future at stake there, not ours (although we'd be effected since they're a huge trading partner).

Quote:
I suppose it's a complex enough situation without even mentioning China...


China is a complication, but they aren't ruled by Mao with his paranoia about American invasion anymore issuing ultimatums and overestimating his army's ability to execute them, we don't have a MacArthur antagonizing them, and they've got a lot more to lose. Mao was casually dismissive of American nuclear arms, feeling that his massive population could have simply absorbed them. Disregarding the overptomisim and callousness of this view, he did have a point about China's relative lack of industrial targets at that time. They have a lot more to lose now, both from possible damage, and from damage to their export markets. Not only that, they've shown signs of being entirely fed up with the Kim dynasty.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 71 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group