Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
South Korea: "N. Korea Torpedoed Our Submarine"  
User currently offlinefuturepilot16 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2035 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 3464 times:

So according to numerous reports from South Korea, the North was involved in the sinking of their Submarine last month that killed numerous S. Korean sailors. This report is backed by the U.S.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36719272/ns/world_news-asiapacific/

Question: Is the South blowing smoke or could it actually be the truth?

If it is the truth, why in the hell would the North attack the South?

Should the South retaliate?


"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
46 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7867 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 3447 times:

Quoting futurepilot16 (Thread starter):
If it is the truth, why in the hell would the North attack the South?

The problem is, you are trying to make sense of North Korea  



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19495 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 3441 times:

Quoting futurepilot16 (Thread starter):
Should the South retaliate?

Oh yes. I very much hope they do. And, unlike the nonsense in Iraq, this is a war we can help with and a war in which we can provide a definitive and decisive victory.


User currently onlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8823 posts, RR: 24
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 3397 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 1):
Quoting futurepilot16 (Thread starter):
If it is the truth, why in the hell would the North attack the South?

The problem is, you are trying to make sense of North Korea

  



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5592 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 3396 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
And, unlike the nonsense in Iraq, this is a war we can help with and a war in which we can provide a definitive and decisive victory.

Er..... perhaps you forgot about the DPRK's northern neighbor?

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 1):
The problem is, you are trying to make sense of North Korea

  



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3516 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 3361 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
Oh yes. I very much hope they do. And, unlike the nonsense in Iraq, this is a war we can help with and a war in which we can provide a definitive and decisive victory.

57 years after the cease fire was signed you expect a decisive victory in Korea? You expect the Chinese to stand idle? I hope you're joking. Conflict in Korea would be very bloody and unlikely to change the situation substantially - best avoided.



Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offlineFly2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 3354 times:

Sounds like speculation more than anything still. They are still in the process of resurfacing the ship. Nothing will be known for sure until after the fact. And even then...

User currently offlineTheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2038 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 3355 times:

I have a hard time believing that an ex-soviet clunker can sneak up on modern warship, equipped with a state of the art sonar, and sink it undetected. All these media reports seem to be more speculation than anything else. If South Korea ever detected a submarine trying to make a move on em, you could bet your ass that the shit would hit the fan within minutes.


No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
User currently offlinecpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 38
Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 3352 times:

Quoting futurepilot16 (Thread starter):
the North was involved in the sinking of their Submarine last month that killed numerous S. Korean sailors. This report is backed by the U.S

No South Korean submarine was involved. However, as ship called Cheonan did sink in mysterious circumstances.

If the North were responsible, the repercussions could be serious.

[Edited 2010-04-22 18:47:20]

User currently onlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8823 posts, RR: 24
Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 months 22 hours ago) and read 3322 times:

Quoting Fly2HMO (Reply 6):
Sounds like speculation more than anything still. They are still in the process of resurfacing the ship. Nothing will be known for sure until after the fact. And even then...

They salvaged the ship over a week ago.




Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineUAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 months 21 hours ago) and read 3269 times:

Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 5):
57 years after the cease fire was signed you expect a decisive victory in Korea? You expect the Chinese to stand idle? I hope you're joking. Conflict in Korea would be very bloody and unlikely to change the situation substantially - best avoided.

If these two countries didn't have sphere's of influence coming from various friends, then a war to end the regime in the North would have already been fought and won.

Problem is the surrounding countries and setting off a wider conflict. However, these surrounding countries will also have to take into consideration the economic implications of choosing to support the North in such a war instead of remaining neutral or supporting the South.


User currently offlineJCS17 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 8065 posts, RR: 39
Reply 11, posted (4 years 4 months 20 hours ago) and read 3229 times:

Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 5):
57 years after the cease fire was signed you expect a decisive victory in Korea? You expect the Chinese to stand idle? I hope you're joking. Conflict in Korea would be very bloody and unlikely to change the situation substantially - best avoided.


The Chinese government of the 1950s and 2010 are two completely different animals. The power brokers in China are the capitalists, the educated, and businesspeople, not the peasants of 1952. The Communists know this and know they will be quickly eliminated from power (with the leadership put on trial various crimes) if they put their power-brokers back into poverty. A bad step being intervening in any sort of Korean Crisis, which would immediately lead to a trade embargo from the West.



America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
User currently offlineFlyDeltaJets87 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (4 years 4 months 20 hours ago) and read 3186 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 4):
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
And, unlike the nonsense in Iraq, this is a war we can help with and a war in which we can provide a definitive and decisive victory.

Er..... perhaps you forgot about the DPRK's northern neighbor?

Actually, I believe the US and China have partnered with South Korea in pressuring the North and the North Korea issue is one area where the US and China stand firmly together, especially on the North's nuclear programs. If military intervention does happen, my belief is the Chinese will either stay neutral and let the US and South Korea do their thing or they may even assist in a two front operation.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7867 posts, RR: 52
Reply 13, posted (4 years 4 months 19 hours ago) and read 3164 times:

I sure hope no war breaks out. Our military has been fighting hard for almost a decade. Could the US military do the job? Yes, but many servicemen are exhausted from multiple deployments. Hopefully we can finish off Iraq and Afghanistan while avoiding the nutjobs in Iran and North Korea.


Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinesw733 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6311 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (4 years 4 months 9 hours ago) and read 2986 times:

Quoting futurepilot16 (Thread starter):
Question: Is the South blowing smoke or could it actually be the truth?

It could very well be the truth. It could also be the truth that there was some attack on each other and North Korea simply won.It's also possible that something completely different happened and the North is getting the blame. We only know one side of the story, and probably always will.


User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12428 posts, RR: 37
Reply 15, posted (4 years 4 months 8 hours ago) and read 2952 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 13):
sure hope no war breaks out. Our military has been fighting hard for almost a decade. Could the US military do the job? Yes, but many servicemen are exhausted from multiple deployments. Hopefully we can finish off Iraq and Afghanistan while avoiding the nutjobs in Iran and North Korea.

I don't see war breaking out over this; the danger of war breaking out arises, I think, if there is a lengthy scuffle between the two sides and might possibly have happened if the South Koreans had opened fire on the North Koreans in retaliation for its attack on their vessel. This must have been a very difficult decision for the south (i.e. not to retaliate), but when you're dealing with an unpredictable regime like the DPRK, it has to be assumed that things will spin out of control.

The South can impose sanctions and withhold aid, or other methods of making its displeasure felt. The problem is, of course, that if the South fails to respond once, the North may say, "oh, we can get away with it again" and I'm sure that the South would ensure that its forces were made aware of new terms of engagement in the case of another DPRK attack.

At the end of the day, while the DPRK has an impressive air force on paper (although most outdated - how long is a MiG 23 going to last against an F-15 or an F-16?), fuel supply must be an issue for them.

Nor can the DPRK rely on anyone else, as stated above; I'm sure that China and Russia know that the DPRK's time is limited and that ultimately, the two Koreas will be united, with Seoul as the capital. With China being one of S. Korea's big trading partners, I'm sure it sees its best interests lying with a united Korea, so I would not see it posing any threat to the south (nor offering protection to the North) if an escalating battle broke out.


User currently offlineAcheron From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1623 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (4 years 4 months 7 hours ago) and read 2913 times:

Actually, nothing will happen.

Both countries benefit from the status quo, even with happenings like these. The South avoids having to deal and spend money millions of malnourished north koreans who at this point are probably way too different in many aspects to the south koreans to have a proper integration. Plus the ridiculous amounts of money that are going to be needed to rebuilt the north.

And Kim Jong-Il gets to stay in power, instead of killed by a LGB.

Also, everybody wants to avoid confrontation with some madman that has nukes.

So, I see the south koreans sucking it up and moving on at most doing some strike on north korean border post.


User currently onlinehoons90 From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 3006 posts, RR: 52
Reply 17, posted (4 years 4 months 7 hours ago) and read 2877 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting Acheron (Reply 16):
Actually, nothing will happen.

Both countries benefit from the status quo, even with happenings like these. The South avoids having to deal and spend money millions of malnourished north koreans who at this point are probably way too different in many aspects to the south koreans to have a proper integration. Plus the ridiculous amounts of money that are going to be needed to rebuilt the north.

  

One thing that many people seem to overlook are the ramifications that the collapse of the North would have for South Korea. South Korea simply cannot cope with the massive, sudden influx of refugees.



The biggest mistake made by most human beings: Listening to only half, understanding just a quarter and telling double.
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31667 posts, RR: 56
Reply 18, posted (4 years 4 months 4 hours ago) and read 2815 times:

Maybe the Godfather countries controlling either side work towards Reunification.


Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineTheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2038 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (4 years 4 months 4 hours ago) and read 2774 times:

Quoting sw733 (Reply 14):
It's also possible that something completely different happened and the North is getting the blame.

I'm leaning towards that one. Looking at the outcome from a tactical point of view, nothing seems to add up.

Quoting hoons90 (Reply 17):

Neither could China.



No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19495 posts, RR: 58
Reply 20, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2663 times:

Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 5):
57 years after the cease fire was signed you expect a decisive victory in Korea? You expect the Chinese to stand idle? I hope you're joking. Conflict in Korea would be very bloody and unlikely to change the situation substantially - best avoided.

Um. The Chinese are not fans of the North Koreans by any stretch of the imagination. They'd be quite happy to see them Mr. Kim wearing a custom-fitted noose.

Quoting hoons90 (Reply 17):
One thing that many people seem to overlook are the ramifications that the collapse of the North would have for South Korea. South Korea simply cannot cope with the massive, sudden influx of refugees.

Germany did it. There are still issues, but it's only been a generation and it's much improved.


User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3741 posts, RR: 11
Reply 21, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2618 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
this is a war we can help with and a war in which we can provide a definitive and decisive victory.

Very idealistic and simplistic view. A war will create more problems than it will solve. The last thing North Korea needs is a sudden change in regime. A population that has been oppressed and tortured by a brutal regime for many decades cannot just be suddenly 'offered' democracy and expected to know what to do with it, other than flocking en masse towards the already crowded south, creating one of the worst immigration crisis in history. South Korea knows that all too well.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 16):

  

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 18):
Maybe the Godfather countries controlling either side work towards Reunification.

One wonders whether there might be some interests against the fall of DPRK from either side of those 'godfather countries' (US and China, not to name them...). But then I am unsure really how much pressure both of these countries are actually able to exert on South and North Korea, especially when factoring in the complicated economic ties between them all.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 20):
Germany did it.

A South/North Korea reunification would be orders of magnitude harder than the German one. The differences are much greater, especially in terms of ideology, education and culture, not to mention the catastrophically failed economy of the North.

Let's face it, as much as anyone would like the North Korean regime to be decimated, few are ready to deal with the aftermath of that defeat. Such a mess cannot be entangled in an instant, it would take decades.



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlinemandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6836 posts, RR: 75
Reply 22, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2603 times:

Quoting TheCol (Reply 7):
I have a hard time believing that an ex-soviet clunker can sneak up on modern warship, equipped with a state of the art sonar, and sink it undetected.

If the picture shown by:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 9):
They salvaged the ship over a week ago.

... was the ship... No, I don't have a hard time believing that an ex-soviet clunker can sneak up on a modern warship... well, it looks like a fast missile patrol vessel or an anti-surface corvette, which normally comes without the state-of-the-art sonar... even if it does, make the ship do 20kts and it might not hear the torpedo coming because it's own hull noise would be too much for the sonar to pick anything up.

Now if the warship was an ASW frigate doing less than 15knots with its towed array, or doing less than 10kts in not too rough seas... then yes, I'd have a friggin' hard time believing the story.

Quoting JCS17 (Reply 11):
A bad step being intervening in any sort of Korean Crisis, which would immediately lead to a trade embargo from the West.

And the trade embargo from the west would lead to chronic shortage of cheap LCDs and other electronic stuff... made in China! (Even some of Airbus' components are made in China... and yes, even Chinese components for Airbus (which you get from buying deeply discounted new airbuses, but that's a different story!    ) fails... gimme the non-Chinese alternative please...)

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 13):
Our military has been fighting hard for almost a decade. Could the US military do the job? Yes, but many servicemen are exhausted from multiple deployments. Hopefully we can finish off Iraq and Afghanistan while avoiding the nutjobs in Iran and North Korea.

Can the US afford to have another theatre??? I mean a LARGE battle theatre in addition to Iraq and Afghanistan? Europe's military logistics are already stretched, so unless Iraq and Afghanistan settles, the US would also have it's support limited by circumstance... the pacific assets would be totally occupied on Korea, leaving Taiwan and the Indian Ocean with little US presence (which is needed to keep the locals from getting "ambitious" over their backyard disputes and claims).

Quoting kaitak (Reply 15):
I'm sure that China and Russia know that the DPRK's time is limited and that ultimately, the two Koreas will be united, with Seoul as the capital.

China and Russia would like to keep DPRK as what it is now... their little naughty boy in the corner they can bully whilst pretending to be friends...    Loose that, and they've gotta find a new one to tell off...

Quoting hoons90 (Reply 17):
One thing that many people seem to overlook are the ramifications that the collapse of the North would have for South Korea. South Korea simply cannot cope with the massive, sudden influx of refugees.

Indeed! Actually, there's no need for a massive influx of NK refugees for SK to get bogged down in... the collapse of the DPRK without anyone crossing the border would keep SK and China busy ! Add the refugees and SK might collapse too, and we're all going to be back to square one!

Mandala499



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently onlinehoons90 From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 3006 posts, RR: 52
Reply 23, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2577 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 20):
Germany did it. There are still issues, but it's only been a generation and it's much improved.

L410Turbolet's post in Reply 27 sums it up perfectly.
Air Koryo Post Korean Reunification? (by PillowTester Apr 21 2010 in Civil Aviation)

Also, at the time of German reunification, West Germany's GDP per capita was around 3 times larger than the East's. South Korea's GDP per capita is around 15 times larger than the North's. Thus, Germany's situation does not apply to Korea's situation at all.



The biggest mistake made by most human beings: Listening to only half, understanding just a quarter and telling double.
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13985 posts, RR: 62
Reply 24, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2570 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 20):
Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 5):
57 years after the cease fire was signed you expect a decisive victory in Korea? You expect the Chinese to stand idle? I hope you're joking. Conflict in Korea would be very bloody and unlikely to change the situation substantially - best avoided.

Um. The Chinese are not fans of the North Koreans by any stretch of the imagination. They'd be quite happy to see them Mr. Kim wearing a custom-fitted noose.

I´m not sure that the Chinese would want US or US allied troops standing right at their border. This was which prompted the millions of Chinese volunteers back in the 1950s. China might agree if a united Korea becomes neutral, or if it becomes a Chinese vassal state, like the old pre-20th Korea under the Chinese empire (that it was later colonised by the Japanese is a different matter).

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 20):
Quoting hoons90 (Reply 17):
One thing that many people seem to overlook are the ramifications that the collapse of the North would have for South Korea. South Korea simply cannot cope with the massive, sudden influx of refugees.

Germany did it. There are still issues, but it's only been a generation and it's much improved.

The South Koreans watched the German re-unification very closely. They noticed the cultural clash between East and West and how the West struggled with the sudden expenses (for which we are still paying, even though the re-unification happened 20 years ago).
Now East and West Germany were never as divided as North and South Korea, East and west German radio and TV were accessible on both sides of the border, unlike North Korea, where the radios and TVs are preset to be only able to receive the government channels, also since the early 1970s family visits were possible and were used a lot. Also retired East Germans could travel to the West. Basically the East Germans knew more or less what to expect from the West, while we knew more less what was going on in the East.
This doesn´t exist between North and South Korea.
Then East Germany never was as poor as North Korea and West Germany was considerably richer than South Korea.
An uncontrolled re-unification of the Koreas might well bankrupt South Korea.
The Chinese are also worried about a collapse of the North Korean government. It would mean that the border areas with an already big Korean ethnic minority would be swamped by millions of refugees.

Quoting TheCol (Reply 19):
Quoting sw733 (Reply 14):
It's also possible that something completely different happened and the North is getting the blame.

I'm leaning towards that one. Looking at the outcome from a tactical point of view, nothing seems to add up.

I´ve read in some sources that the ship might have been sunk by an old mine left over from the 1950-1953 war, which had never been cleared.

Jan


25 waterpolodan : Indeed. East Germans may have been working in inefficient factories that failed to compete in a newly capitalistic system immediately post unificatio
26 Post contains images ZANL188 : Um. Ever been there? I spent time (years) in both South Korea & West Germany. North Korea (NK) is far more isolated than East Germany ever was. N
27 mandala499 : This one is probably the biggest difference between East Germany and NK. In NK, they literally worship (and made to worship) the leader... East Germa
28 MD11Engineer : You are right. The Stasi and Brandenburg and especially Bautzen prison were feared, but Honecker was considered to be more of a laughingstock. Jan
29 TheCol : Yeah, that makes more sense to me. The damage to the ship is more consistent with that scenario as well.
30 ZANL188 : I don't know about that. Antiship torpedoes are designed to detonate beneath the hull and break the ships back - which appears to be what happened in
31 MD11Engineer : So do magnetic or acoustic mines dropped into shallow coastal waters (this type of mine often gets dropped by aircraft using prachutes. Unlike the ol
32 ZANL188 : It doesn't seem likely that such a mine would still be functional after 57 years - but I'm not a naval weapons expert either.
33 DocLightning : They very may well be functional. Unexploded WWII bombs are dug up in Europe all the time and some of them are still very much live.
34 waterpolodan : A couple of weeks ago, someone was very much killed in Connecticut by a revolutionary war-era hand grenade that went off when they were digging a new
35 ZANL188 : Those are contact fuses, I presume a magnetic or acoustic mine would require electrical fuses with a battery.
36 TheCol : I wouldn't be surprised if North Korea used mines well after the war.
37 ZANL188 : Which would put a hole in the "leftover munition from the war" theory....
38 TheCol : I doubt anybody could be 100% certain when the mine was laid, unless a similar one was found in the same area.
39 MD11Engineer : Not really. the delayed action bombs dropped by Germany over the UK also have electrical fuzes, and many of them are still very much alive (the timin
40 Post contains links ZANL188 : I'm skeptical. Although this scenario uses no electricity until the needle closes the circuit, it also assumes that the battery will survive with a c
41 einsteinboricua : Northern neighbors...emphasis on the plural. Russia is up there too. But this is not about the nuclear program. it's about either letting the norther
42 Post contains links TheCol : Apparently there are a number of "likely causes" that haven't been ruled out. The media is just playing up the likelihood of a submarine attack. http:
43 Post contains images HAWK21M : Don't they do that with every bordering state
44 Post contains images UH60FtRucker : Hey man, what the heck is the matter with you!? Do you realize what you're saying? The conflict that you hope for, would be the most bloody war in ov
45 Aaron747 : Again, as others have pointed out, I don't really see how they benefit from doing so. The last thing China wants is a flood of Korean refugees on the
46 Corinthians : I lived in South Korea for a year. When I was there, it was always a delicate balance with how the South handled the North. Looks like things have cha
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
South Korea: Kim Jong Il Has Pancreatic Cancer posted Sun Jul 12 2009 22:55:17 by Longhornmaniac
South Korea Opens Camp For Internet Addicts posted Wed Nov 21 2007 19:08:41 by Evan767
Anyone Been To South Korea? posted Sat Aug 19 2006 21:36:12 by Cxsjr
Seoul In South Korea posted Wed Jan 4 2006 10:00:54 by Mattlancs
Is South Korea Going To Be Next Japan? posted Wed Apr 20 2005 03:12:52 by JCS17
How Is South Korea Viewed In The World? posted Thu Feb 10 2005 11:11:40 by HL7460
Info About South-korea posted Wed Feb 9 2005 01:43:26 by Avianca
Study Abroad In Seoul, South Korea posted Fri Sep 17 2004 17:42:03 by 174thfwff
South Korea Planning New Capital City posted Fri Aug 13 2004 03:34:37 by Garnetpalmetto
North Korean Refugees Arrive In South Korea posted Fri Jul 30 2004 12:14:53 by Swissgabe