Korea on Verge of War

[fukuda 351]

South thwarts even bigger attack

Military says strike by howitzers took out equipment

November 25, 2010

North Korea had planned to fire more shells than the roughly 170 rounds that fell on Yeonpyeong Island and the waters around it, but a counterattack by South Korea damaged their equipment, South Korean military officials said yesterday.

The South, however, did not describe the extent of the damage, adding to the list of unanswered questions over the first inland skirmish between the two Koreas since the Korean War.

The attack by the North left two marines and two civilians dead.

“After the North Korean military fired roughly 150 rounds in the first 12 minutes of the attack, they prepared for a bigger attack but were unable to do so once our military retaliated with K9 howitzers,” said a South Korean military official. Another 20 rounds were fired after the initial attack.

The K9 is a South Korean self-propelled howitzer developed for the South Korean military by Samsung Techwin. The weapon can fire six 155-millimeter rounds per minute.

“Because the K9 is very accurate, the North Korean military bases were probably reduced to rubble,” said the official.

South Korean Minister of National Defense Kim Tae-young said during a hearing at the National Assembly’s Defense Committee yesterday that images of the North Korean coastline were hard to obtain “because of the clouds in that direction.”

The military could not confirm how much damage had been done by the South’s retaliatory response. The defense minister said military officials were working to determine the extent of the damage.

More questions were lobbed at Kim yesterday, with lawmakers demanding to know why the South Korean military had taken 13 minutes to start firing back after the North initiated firing at 2:34 p.m.

“According to our military tactics, I believe we did very well if we responded in 13 minutes,” said Kim after lawmakers accused the South Korean military of being slow to respond.

The defense minister said the soldiers had to take shelter during the first attacks and rotating the guns in the direction of the attack took time, said Kim. “To fire while you’re on the receiving end is like committing suicide,” said one South Korean military official.

The minister also explained that the North’s attack was unrelated to the joint Hoguk exercise between South Korea and the U.S. and that North Korea had bombarded the island because of monthly shooting exercises near the disputed maritime border between the two Koreas.

“We are indeed in the middle of Hoguk exercises but the training that took place near Yeonpyeong Island was not part of the Hoguk exercises, but monthly shooting exercises,” said Kim.

When asked if any of the South Korean rounds fired during the exercise had crossed the border accidentally, triggering the attack, Kim said the South Korean military prepares “with caution” and keeps their firing “4 to 5 kilometers [2.5 to 3.1 miles] away from the Northern Limit Line.”

North Korea had sent statements before the attack on Tuesday, warning South Korea to halt the Hoguk exercises. Kim said that North Korea had complained about the routine firing exercises in the past, but it was the first time for them to have acted on it.

In a report turned into the Defense Committee of the National Assembly yesterday, the Defense Ministry confirmed that North Korea had fired roughly 170 rounds toward Yeonpyeong Island.

“Around 80 rounds landed on the island, while about 90 rounds landed in the waters surrounding the island,” the report said. The South Korean military fired 80 rounds from K9 howitzers. The Defense Ministry also said troops have been “status ready” for firing since the attack, with five fighter jets on standby.

=========================================================

(trustworthy SK journal, more related news can be found there)

[Fresh Prince of Wmbg 44]

China would never enter the war so long as if their economic interests were'nt in jeopardy....

The United States will never invade the North so long as the major cities or bases in the South were attacked....

With that in mind that sandbox nation, North Korea, won't ever have to stop it 's agression because of international consequence...

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Originally posted by: morriswalters

I'm glad to see people are so worked up.  But perhaps they should read the Cliffs Notes version of the history of the Korean War before they grab their guns and volunteer for action.

quote>

Yes, it is a long, sad tale.  If the Soviets hadn't been sticking their oars in everywhere during the Cold War, none of this would have happened.  Korea would be united, and the success that has been seen in the South would have spread to the North as well.

The NK's are an ascetic bunch, probably not the choice of the general populace.  The Koreans are one people with one language, and deserved to recover from the Japanese occupation in peace.  Instead, the second world bloc found an excuse to keep the pot boiling.

The only real feelings I have for the NK's is pity.

[Msprintz 25]

Originally posted by: Fresh Prince of Wmbg

China would never enter the war so long as if their economic interests were'nt in jeopardy....

The United States will never invade the North so long as the major cities or bases in the South were attacked....

With that in mind that sandbox nation, North Korea, won't ever have to stop it 's agression because of international consequence...quote>

The Chinese government looks out for themselves, and themselves only.  They would love nothing more than to take advantage of any strife in the region, and exploit it their benefit.  It would just cement China's power on a global scale, and as a global super power.  As a pseudo-democracy, but still mostly communist block nation it would be logical that they would support like nations such as North Korea.  However it would't be too far out of left field if they were to expand their territory and take full control of North Korea should that government collapse.  

As for the cold war the blame lies both ways with America and Soviet Russia sharing an almost 50/50 blame for the troubles ( troubles that date back to the 70's ).  Just about every conflict going on in the world today in some form or another dates back to the failed cold war policies of either America or the Soviets.  That's apparently okay to our elected officials as that apparently keeps American weapons sales up, and people employed ( Blood money ).

Nations in the so called global south would probably have for the most part been better off if nations in the global north ( America and Russia in particular ) hadn't stuck their noses where they didn't belong.  In doing such unneccesary conflict was stirred up, and im some cases has caused a near permanent anti-western sentiment.

Hopefully this conflict will be resolved soon before it escalates into a global war.         

[GMT 389]

Originally posted by: A Nonny Moose

Originally posted by: GMT

4 good reasons to blast these psychopathic commies to smithereens once and for all. my 2 cents.

just dont get it how the entire world seems to accept being held at gunpoint by a handfull of fools.quote>

That's a little extreme, don't you think?  I see that the LA Times is also beating the war drums this morning.

quote>

extreme, maybe. But anyway, there's a couple of people splattered all over the world that are constantly poking whoever sits around them just to play some muscles and see how far they can go and still get away with it.

NK (actually their dictator) is one of them.

And although I'm one of the likes who want to avoid confrontations, I'm also one of those who are slowly but constantly approaching a level of being poked which asks for firm but decided action to avoid further poking.

(does it look like I like the poke the penguin game as a figure of speech? ^^)

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

The general news feeds are now saying that China has told the NK's to cool it.

@GMT:  The Dear Revered Leader of the NK's is a puppet of the generals.  He is also the third 'emperor' of that dynasty.  The generals are rich and sitting pretty.  They rattle the sabre once in a while to justify their existence.

I suspect that if some black ops mission were successful in removing the generals, things would change completely, but the odds are not great for success, and we don't know the depth to which these guys have trained replacements.  Of course a large scale assassination might cause someone to push the kill everyone button, so it is probably not worth the risk.

NK is going to be a thorn in the international body politic until they have their own revolution of the proletariat.  Don't hold your breath.  It is hard to foment a revolution when you have to spend all your time finding enough to eat.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: navyrules

You need to understand that neither North Korea or South Korea want the fighting to start again. quote>

South Korea clearly doesn't want to start fighting again. North Korea, on the other hand, is launching an awful lot of attacks for a country that doesn't want to fight...

[mightygoose 92]

well i had a long think about the motivations of NK, as far as i can see it is posturing, provided they can keep retaliating to international threats, they can keep the level of fear up internally of the outside aggressors such as SK and america, as soon as the people are free of fear revolution would follow. it seems to me that all this posturing is just to keep the kim jong dynasty on the throne.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Originally posted by: mightygoose

well i had a long think about the motivations of NK, as far as i can see it is posturing, provided they can keep retaliating to international threats, they can keep the level of fear up internally of the outside aggressors such as SK and america, as soon as the people are free of fear revolution would follow. it seems to me that all this posturing is just to keep the kim jong dynasty on the throne.quote>

I am inclined to agree with you.  But the SK's are having a bad case of Neville Chamberlain syndrome.  This article explains their posture.  They are appeasing when they should be more firm and not back off from threats as they have in the past.  This kind of behaviour gave Hitler license to invade Chechoslovakia, Austria and finally Poland.  All for a false promise of "peace in our time".  The advisors to the SK PM should be taken out and shaken up in a bag.

The international community is not thinking about 1938 either.  Shame on them.

[sneakeypete 16]

Originally posted by: Duke87

Originally posted by: navyrules

You need to understand that neither North Korea or South Korea want the fighting to start again. quote>

South Korea clearly doesn't want to start fighting again. North Korea, on the other hand, is launching an awful lot of attacks for a country that doesn't want to fight...

quote>

If they wanted a fight they'd be mobilizing their entire army. this attack is, on the scale of things (millions of troops on each side) pretty small.

[Nucks8 1]

Guys, what we need to understand here is China is in a very sticky situation here.

China literally feeds North Korea. So I don't see China just doing nothing at all if the war resumes.

Another reason is how would China react to a Pro-American Korea bordering them?

Not well if you ask me.

But if China was to actually send soldiers to the front, America would not like that at all.

That could eventually lead to a lot of problems down the road including trade( you would be surprised how much stuff is made in China).

If China does nothing, it loses an ally, if they do something, the world would not be happy.

[Aaron Graham 4,417]

Originally posted by: Nucks8

Guys, what we need to understand here is China is in a very sticky situation here.

China literally feeds North Korea. So I don't see China just doing nothing at all if the war resumes.

Another reason is how would China react to a Pro-American Korea bordering them?

Not well if you ask me.

But if China was to actually send soldiers to the front, America would not like that at all.

That could eventually lead to a lot of problems down the road including trade( you would be surprised how much stuff is made in China).

If China does nothing, it loses an ally, if they do something, the world would not be happy.quote>

Yes, it is a sticky situation. I think if China was to get on the battlefield, I do think it would be bad  for the world when it comes to lost of life and ect, but if that was to happen I believe that our economy will be a lot better, why because we get a lot of stuff from China, and we will not be able to trade with an enemy. By not trading with China I believe that the demand for stuff will be high and that means we will have to make a lot of new factories to support the demand of stuff that come from China.

The bad thing is that China has the man power and the US depend on technology, in the Korea War the US and her allies was wining in  the middle of the war until China brings millions of there men in waves, this has the allies in retreat and at the place were they agree on peace, but with china it will be bad, this could be World War 3.

[mightygoose 92]

the south korean defense minister just resigned....

[navyrules 1]

Originally posted by: Ducks87

China literally feeds North Korea. So I don't see China just doing nothing at all if the war resumes.

Another reason is how would China react to a Pro-American Korea bordering them?

Not well if you ask me.

quote>

True but like you said trade would come into the matter. We (the US) are China's biggest buyers. If there was a war with them we would stop buying their stuff. Then their economy would collapse. Then there would probably be a revolution, one has been brewing ever since the end of the Tiananmen Square incident, mainly with the working class but also with the higher classes (they would lose all their money in the economic collapse and blame it on the government)

China would call its troops back and tries to destroy the revolt. Then I have no idea what would happen then. If the government wins and defeats the revoulutionaries then China would be a communism which is basically back in the dark ages financialy. If the revolutionaries won they would probably set up a republic similar to ours and try to become our best friend. with the current administration I have no idea what we would consider of the new China.

For all of these reasons I conclude that I think China would not enter the war

[sneakeypete 16]

Originally posted by: Ilikeseattle

Let the F*ing War resume. I am ready to start a massive boycott!quote>

Why don't we let them fight over seattle instead?

[sixers33 3]

FRESH artillery shots were heard Friday on the tense South Korean island of Yeonpyeong, three days after it was devastated by a North Korean attack and hours after Pyongyang warned that the peninsula was on the brink of war.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/korean-blasts-spark-fear-of-more-shelling/story-e6frea6u-1225961648524

[mightygoose 92]

no indication that it was a second attack, artillery shots were heard though.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

The NK's were just clearing their throat.  The artillery fire was a few practice rounds that landed on their own soil.

People on the west coast beating the war drums should think about how much closer they are to the action than we are here in mid-continent.  Give thanks that the NK's are not in the ICBM business.

Everyone seems to forget that if active hostilities resume in Korea that it will just be the end of the truce.  For those of you who were not around during that mess, there is still a state of war between the two Koreas.  All they ever got was a truce.

Pyongyang, I say again, is just having a temper tantrum.  There is a good chance that something has happened to Kim Sung-il and they are gearing up for Kim Sung-un to take over.  Meanwhile, the SK's are adjusting to their dreams of reality again and continue to make moves similar to the British government in 1938.  "There is nothing new under the sun" Ecclesiastes

For the "I wanna war" crowd, if you are young enough to get the Gone to Korea disease, go tour an abbatoir and you'll get the idea of what a battlefield might be like (a little).  One of my most staunch mottos is "Youth must be served.  Nicely browned and with an apple in its mouth".

[Duke87 1,070]

Meh. This is between the two Koreas. In the event of rekindled conflict, we (the US) should not be getting involved, as it's really none of our business. Besides, we already can't afford to support the war we have going in Afghanistan, the last thing we need is to get pulled into another one.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Nor can we in Canada, nor can any so-called UN effort.  I don't know how Americans feel about foreign wars, but we've had it up to there.  All we've done is get shot at in other people's problems since 1950.  Canada has had it with "peacekeeping", and the people will do bad thngs to any government that gets us involved in another one.  Remember, we have mostly minority governments, and if there is enough fuss, the government can be chucked out by a no-confidence vote in the House.

At the moment we have three by-elections running to fill empty house seats.  This will take the political temerature to a certain extent, but I am smelling a spring or summer election.  Harper is rumoured to be planning a major cabinet shuffle, and if this happens it makes the election almost a certainty.  Election speculation here is one of the passtimes.

Harper crawfished on getting out of Afghanistan and the people are not amused.  If the Liberal Party were a little stronger with a leader rather than a caretaker, he would be out on his tokus in the next vote.  The Libs are grooming Justin Trudeau, but it will be at least ten years before he is ready.  And he won't be like his father, but more restrained, and likely more popular in the end.

[Nucks8 1]

Originally posted by: A Nonny Moose

Nor can we in Canada, nor can any so-called UN effort.  I don't know how Americans feel about foreign wars, but we've had it up to there. quote>

Well said Moose.

I'm sick of these kind of wars (Afghanistan).

Here's what modern warfare is to me.

1: People that live in your country are sent off to fight in a war thousands of kilometres away.

2: Many of them die.

3: When the war ends, everything returns to what it was like BEFORE the war (I predict that as soon as NATO leaves Afghanistan, the Taliban will take over the country again.

I predict that's what will happen if a UN supported attack of North Korea.

[§haÅ--Ñ€ §hÅŽo 370]

Originally posted by: A Nonny Moose

Nor can we in Canada, nor can any so-called UN effort.  I don't know how Americans feel about foreign wars, but we've had it up to there. quote>

America gets into any war it sees going on. (i.e Afganistan, the Koreas [They never signed a treaty so they are technically still at war])

America is trying to be a Peace Keeper. But I think as an American that we should give up on that. I doubt their will ever be a time that no nation is at war. There are too many nations to prevent that. So we should only protect those where we can actually make a difference in.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: Sirron Kcuhc

America gets into any war it sees going on. quote>

Not quite.  I doubt the folks in Darfur would agree.

(i.e Afganistan, the Koreas [They never signed a treaty so they are technically still at war]) quote>

Technically the Korea war never ended.  They were just sent to different corners and told to leave each other alone.  But technically it wasn't a "war" it was a UN "police action".   A political distinction, not one based in reality.

America is trying to be a Peace Keeper. But I think as an American that we should give up on that. I doubt their will ever be a time that no nation is at war. There are too many nations to prevent that. So we should only protect those where we can actually make a difference in.  quote>

America is not the only "Peace Keeper".  Most peace keeping efforts are joint international efforts of some sort.

But what is the difference between a "peace keeper" and an "occupying force"?    Isn't that just a matter of which point of view you have on the conflict?

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Recently the United States has had a bad case of "keep the peace, at any cost" when there hasn't been any peace in centuries.  Just because the aftermath of the War to End All Wars didn't do the job, is no reason for anyone to stick their neck out, especially when it is really none of their business.  While I am against the United States again adopting the Monroe Doctrine, I think it is time to start saying no to the UN or anyone else who asks for "peacekeepers" or "advisors".  Foreign intervetion on a consultative basis get you into things like the Viet Nam embarassment.  War is the ultimate failure of diplomacy, and there is little excuse for it as violence is the last resort of the incompetent.  Not only that, but wars tend to kill off our best and brightest young men, leaving us with a badly depleted gene pool.  Some of our brightest young scientists were lost in the great war of the twentieth century.  I am disgusted.

Now let's look at the historical record.  Has there been a declared war between nations since 1945?  I don't recall any nation advising the rest of the world that they were at war with any other nation.  Most of these things are sneak attacks of some kind, and retaliation by "conventional" warfare methods is the result.  I think it is high time that Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum had their rattles removed permanently by a visit from the monstrous crow.

Sovreignty notwithstanding, the world needs a reaction force that acts like the monstrous crow who frightens all the heros so they quite forget their battle.  I nominate a renewed NATO that includes the former members of the eastern block and as many asia/pacific nations as want to join in being monstrous crows.

[Cobraroll 138]

I think this won't change anything. The (nuclear?) detonation didn't, the sinking of Cheonyang didn't, this won't either. The situation is locked.

China doesn't have anything to lose on the current situation. North Korea only has two land borders, one of them fifty kilometres wide and with soldiers beneath every rock. The other is a border towards a semi-ally, and NK's only trade partner. Practically all of the black market trade in North Korea is over the Chinese border. After all, the army isn't as strictly guarding that border. The way it is now, China has a monopoly on North Korea's trade.

Then there's the fact that South Korea practically is a western brigdgeshead into China. In case of a war (however unlikely), any forces deployed from South Korea would have to fight through NK to get to China. North Korea acts as a comfortable buffer zone for the Chinese.

The North Korean people aren't stupid. They know and realize that outside Pyongyang, food is scarce and corruption is widespread. By demonizing the West and portraying a "father of the land" as semi-divine, the generals can gather the NK population against a common enemy, or around a central figure. They say there's a war going on, keeping the army busy enough not to revolt, but don't fight, which would risk the balance. They're walking on a thin line, but over the past fifty years, they begin to get a pretty good idea on how to stay on that line.

Then there's the Chinese fear that the "Korean success" could spread to the north. NK has a massive population, and the grown-up generation would be poorly educated, used to work under harsh conditions, and faithful to whoever provides them with a steady supply of food. In other words, perfect "meat for the grinder", in this case as factory workers. A democratic and generally pro-western Korea would appear to be a much better choice for investments than Communist China to all the Western businessmen. It would be more attractive to give the money to the poor North-Koreans than the power-hungry Chinese. South Korea and Japan are already in this situation, and the Chinese wants to keep an as big slice of the investment cake as possible.

Also, China doesn't want the West to interfere too much within their comfort zone. The US is currently losing its position as the sole global superpower to China, and every now and then a new high-tech, high-armed thingamajig (usually a boat of some fashion) pops up in the water around China to show that the US still has the lead position. Naturally, China would feel a little uncomfortable and threatened by having the US on their own doorstep. If the conflict in Korea should end peacefully, I expect the Chinese to raise their voices and ask the Americans to get away from their area as fast as possible. Before we know, Chinese aircraft carriers (yes, they are under construction) and nuclear subs appear in i.e. Venezuelan harbours, and we get a new showoff contest or "chilly war" (not as locked as the Cold War, though).

So at the moment, the situation will remain locked, until either China cuts all support, and the North Korean regime collapses on itself, or somebody interferes with a small military attack. There won't be any grand war, this is a game of waiting, and North Korea is the loser either way. I think Korea will be united, or at least the NK dictatorship cease to exist, without much bloodshed. Question is, what will happen afterwards, with all the US troops in Korea? Will they pack up and leave, satisfied with a business well done, or stay, to keep an eye on the big red neighbour, much to China's embarassment? With China's power steadily rising, along with the US debt and general economic problems, things might get a little bit exciting in the next few decades.

[fukuda 351]

... A bright future is awaiting us ...

As the world becomes more and more connected through the internet it also becomes more and more disconnected in the popular mind..

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: Cobraroll

The North Korean people aren't stupid. They know and realize that outside Pyongyang, food is scarce and corruption is widespread. quote>

Apparently they have been told this and, to some degree and in certain places, that is true.  But that is not all that exists outside Pyongyang.  Some of us manage to live relatively peacefully with more food than we should be eating.   I doubt they are getting the whole picture.

Originally posted by: fukuda

... A bright future is awaiting us ...

As the world becomes more and more connected through the internet it also becomes more and more disconnected in the popular mind..quote>

I like to think that some people are getting connected and actually broadening their horizons but you may be right.   I have wondered recently if the time of "Future Shock" has arrived.  That was a book written by Alvin Toffler back in 1970.  Quoting from the wiki article:

Future shock is also a term for a certain psychological state of individuals and entire societies, introduced by Toffler in his book of the same name. Toffler's shortest definition of future shock is a personal perception of "too much change in too short a period of time".

. . .

Toffler argues that society is undergoing an enormous structural change, a revolution from an industrial society to a "super-industrial society". This change will overwhelm people, the accelerated rate of technological and social change leaving them disconnected and suffering from "shattering stress and disorientation" – future shocked. Toffler stated that the majority of social problems were symptoms of the future shock. In his discussion of the components of such shock, he also popularized the term information overload. quote>

Lately I've often found myself asking what is wrong with people.   I suspect this might be part of it.

[edman2012 33]

i agree with NAVYRULES, if we got in conflict with china then maybe then we'l get things actually made in our country, or elsewhere anyways. Maybe the U.S. economy would explode cause we'd get our jobs(or not), but who wants a conflict with china? i sure dont.

[Ocram's Razr 964]

I skipped 5 posts because it is late and I just had Thanksgiving dinner. I have started boycotting China already and I think that North Korea is being stupid to the point of political suicide.

Because of the Cold War, the 2 superpowers (USSR and USA) looked after everyone that aligned to them. When the USSR collapsed, the USA started looking after everyone who wasn't against us and keeping on the lookout for anyone that was against us. This more than doubled the number of countries we looked after because at first we were only looking out for  1st world countries and neighbors, now we are looking out for all other countries including 1st world, 2nd world, and (usually ignored before 1991) 3rd world countries.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

This morning's news indicates that the NK's have started to back down from their hard-line stance.  They have issued an apology for killing any civilians involved.

I think that they got more mileage out of this incident than they expected.  And some of the negatives included the disaffection of China.  Wonder just how surprised they were from the attitude coming from their western border.

This is turning into a temest in a tea pot.