PDA

View Full Version : Growing tensions between North and South Korea - Live Fire and Threat of War



Pages : [1] 2

truth.ie
26-03-2010, 05:44 PM
Surprised this is not being discussed (though little it known at this stage) but a south Korean warship has been apparently struck by a torpedo.
This is potentially very serious and could disrupt U.S foreign policy globally if it escalates. The U.S is pretty well stretched at present and need another Korean war like we need more apartments.
One to watch.


NOTE: GO TO POST 48 FOR NEWS OF 27/07/2010 ADMIN

C. Flower
26-03-2010, 05:51 PM
Do you have a link truth.ie ?
What's your source?
I almost posted this morning that things were very tense. There were nuclear threats by the North, because the South and Taiwan had produced a open Regime Change plan.

truth.ie
26-03-2010, 05:52 PM
BBC News Homepage.

C. Flower
26-03-2010, 05:53 PM
http://rt.com/s/obj/2010-03-26/ship.jpg




A South Korean navy ship with about 100 sailors on board has sunk near the border with North Korea after a suspected torpedo hit. It has also been reported that some South Korean ships opened fire toward North Korea.

South Korean media reported that many of the 104 crew of the sinking ship “Cheonan” have been killed. Only 58 men were rescued, the rest are either dead or missing. State television said the government called an urgent meeting of security ministers on Friday.
British newspapers report that the ship opened fire at an unidentified vessel nearby in a suggested retaliation.
The news broke shortly after North Korea announced it was fortifying its naval force in response to joint US-South Korean military exercises which were held in March 2010



Does anyone know who fired first ? There has been shoving and jockeying of shipping going on for months.

Great, on the day that Obama announces World Peace.

Cassandra Syndrome
26-03-2010, 06:01 PM
Seen that earlier but it was on a blog

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/south-korea-fires-unidentified-ship-coast-one-its-own-ships-sinks-near-maritime-border

C. Flower
26-03-2010, 06:02 PM
This is the report from this morning. With Kim on dialysis and very ill, they are aware of US and Chinese intentions to leverage a regime change..

The background ----



North Korea's military accused the United States and South Korea Friday of trying to topple the Pyongyang regime and said it was ready to launch nuclear attacks to frustrate any provocations.
The military General Staff cited a South Korean newspaper report as evidence of "desperate moves of the US imperialists and the South Korean puppet warmongers" for regime change.
"Those who seek to bring down the system in the DPRK (North Korea)... will fall victim to the unprecedented nuclear strikes of the invincible army," a General Staff spokesman told the official Korean Central News Agency.
Dong-A Ilbo on March 19 said representatives of the US Pacific Command and state defence think-tanks from South Korea and China would meet in China next month to discuss controlling weapons of mass destruction in case of regime collapse in Pyongyang.
There has been no confirmation of the report.
The North has previously threatened nuclear attacks in response to what it calls plots for regime change -- an especially sensitive topic given leader Kim Jong-Il's age and health.
Kim, 68, suffered a stroke in August 2008 and is widely reported to be preparing to hand over power eventually to his youngest son.
The head of a South Korean think-tank said this week that Kim is also suffering from kidney failure, which requires dialysis.
The military described the North's communist system as an "impregnable fortress" and described expectations of regime collapse as "a pipe dream of a lunatic wishing for the sky to fall".
It said its army and people would bolster the nuclear deterrent "capable of frustrating any plot and provocation at a single strike".
The North is suffering severe food shortages, exacerbated by a bungled currency reform last November that sparked rare public unrest.
A study published Wednesday by the US East-West Center, based on information from refugees, found the regime was increasingly unpopular at all levels.
Efforts are continuing to bring Pyongyang back to the six-nation nuclear disarmament talks, which it quit in April 2009.
As preconditions, it demands a lifting of UN sanctions that have hit its hard currency earnings and a US commitment to hold talks about a formal peace treaty.



http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hggBA1Xa1MUHOGuDz108h02LWVQg


There have been a series of hostile moves against the North Korean regime, from spy incursions, naval and military build up to sanctions.

truth.ie
26-03-2010, 06:04 PM
South Korean Navy later fired on an "unidentified target" in the area.
Although, this was later believed to have been "a flock of birds". (Damage limitation??)

C. Flower
26-03-2010, 06:09 PM
South Korean Navy later fired on an "unidentified target" in the area.
Although, this was later believed to have been "a flock of birds". (Damage limitation??)

More damage limitation:



updated 1:38 p.m. ET March 26, 2010
SEOUL - A South Korean naval ship sank Friday night after an explosion tore a hole in the hull, but officials played down earlier suggestions that it may have been the result of an attack by the North.
U.S. officials told NBC News there was no indication that the boat was attacked, or that the North was involved in any way.
"It is not clear whether North Korea was involved," Presidential Blue House spokeswoman Kim Eun-hye told Reuters.




The Joint Chiefs of Staff in Seoul also said it could not conclude that the reclusive North was behind the sinking of the military vessel Cheonan off the coast of South Korean-controlled Baengnyeong Island.
An official with the Joint Chiefs of Staff said early Saturday that the 1,200-ton ship sank about four hours after it began taking on water. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said at least 58 of the 104 crew members have been rescued.
There was no immediate confirmation of casualties. A rescue operation was still under way.
Earlier, South Korean media had quoted officials as saying the North could have torpedoed the ship near the disputed western sea border that separates the two Koreas.
Emergency meeting
South Korea scrambled naval vessels to the border after an explosion ripped a hole in the bottom of the ship, officials and news reports said.

C. Flower
26-03-2010, 06:10 PM
I've updated the thread title - again.

The price of Krugerrand is up - any connection, I wonder.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/business/krugerrand-up-451569.html

Cáthasaigh
26-03-2010, 08:24 PM
Surprised this is not being discussed (though little it known at this stage) but a south Korean warship has been apparently struck by a torpedo.
This is potentially very serious and could disrupt U.S foreign policy globally if it escalates. The U.S is pretty well stretched at present and need another Korean war like we need more apartments.
One to watch.

US forces in Korea, particularly 2nd Infantry division, have been seriously depleted since the Iraq invasion. Troops and armour were replaced with political deployments of Patriot batteries and biosurveillance companies. There have also been base closures and there is considerable pressure from the S Koreans for the return of land, particularly in urban areas.

Traditionally the US forces stationed along the DMZ were referred to as the 'speed bump' which would slightly slow the NKA in their advance on Soeul, a city which was still staging regular evacuation drills when I was there '04-'05.

Xray
26-03-2010, 08:54 PM
A war with North Korea would be very bloody. There are at least 700 scuds already deployed, plus many many heavy artillery pieces within range of populated areas of the south. Even a rapid nuclear strike could not stop these being effective.

C. Flower
26-03-2010, 08:57 PM
US forces in Korea, particularly 2nd Infantry division, have been seriously depleted since the Iraq invasion. Troops and armour were replaced with political deployments of Patriot batteries and biosurveillance companies. There have also been base closures and there is considerable pressure from the S Koreans for the return of land, particularly in urban areas.

Traditionally the US forces stationed along the DMZ were referred to as the 'speed bump' which would slightly slow the NKA in their advance on Soeul, a city which was still staging regular evacuation drills when I was there '04-'05.

What do you make of this warship going down - one minute its a torpedo, and an hour later, its not ? It definitely went down. There are photographs.

Cáthasaigh
26-03-2010, 09:02 PM
What do you make of this warship going down - one minute its a torpedo, and an hour later, its not ? It definitely went down. There are photographs.

Hard to know what happened but 'Gulf of Tonkin' does spring to mind.

C. Flower
26-03-2010, 09:10 PM
Hard to know what happened but 'Gulf of Tonkin' does spring to mind.

Well, the possibility of an own goal did spring to mind.

C. Flower
26-03-2010, 10:07 PM
The Guardian report is a bit more informative.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/26/south-korea-navy-ship-attack

North and South Korea are technically on a cease fire, since 1953, in a war that started in 1950. According to the Guardian, 2 ships exchanged fire causing damage, last November.

johnfás
27-03-2010, 12:36 AM
North Korea have alot of decent weaponry.

I have a friend in the South Korean Navy, thankfully wasn't on board the vessel.

C. Flower
29-03-2010, 10:29 AM
http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/north-korea-threatens-action-over-buffer-zone-misuse-451852.html

More tension over incursion of US "journalists" into the buffer zone.

truth.ie
29-03-2010, 10:51 PM
South Korean Ministry, now suggesting a North Korean mine may have sunk the vessel.
Over 50 dead. Gives an insight into how bloody a full blown war in the region could be.

C. Flower
29-03-2010, 11:13 PM
South Korean Ministry, now suggesting a North Korean mine may have sunk the vessel.
Over 50 dead. Gives an insight into how bloody a full blown war in the region could be.

There are nuclear weapons on both sides.

C. Flower
05-05-2010, 03:20 PM
This hasn't gone away - been watching out of the corner of my eye. Yesterday, the South Korean government came close to accusing North Korea of sinking the warship.

Today there are reports of North Korean troops along the border. They may be responding to something happening in the South.

Things are very very tense.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/7680345/North-Korea-masses-50000-troops-on-border.html

moss
20-05-2010, 02:18 AM
Update



A North Korean torpedo sank a South Korean navy ship in March causing the loss of 46 sailors, an international report has found.
Investigators said they had discovered part of the torpedo on the sea floor and it carried lettering that matched a North Korean design.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia_pacific/10129703.stm

All very strange.

Was on BBC News that the report has just been released.

ang
20-05-2010, 02:57 AM
I wonder what sort of reaction we can expect from South Korea and International communities now that this has been released ?

C. Flower
20-05-2010, 06:28 AM
The US has condemned, and North Korea has said that retaliation would mean war.
The tension between the US and North Korea has been ramped up over the last couple of years with complaints from the North of repeated border incursions from the South and harassment of North Korean shipping by US vessels.

For those interested in the technicalities, there's a good article here on the North Korean sub fleet.
http://news.scotsman.com/news/Questions-surface-over-North-Korea39s.6282937.jp

This article describes similar tensions between the US Navy and China, with naval surveillance within 80 miles of the Chinese coast.

http://www.jamestown.org/programs/chinabrief/single/?tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=34923&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=25&cHash=1f56d16a9a

antiestablishmentarian
20-05-2010, 10:10 AM
Its all very interesting. However North Korea is a paper tiger to a large extent. Their navy is mostly scrap, with very little surface capability while their subs are also obsolescent and no match in combat for the blue-water fleet possessed by the South. The same holds true for the Air-Force, which has very little flying time per year because of fuel shortages and is composed of aging aircraft of Soviet origin, while the army is plagued by reports of poor morale from defectors, lack of skilled upkeep and fuel has depleted their armoured capabilities and much of their artillery is obsolete as well. They do have an advantage in numbers over their opponents but in a serious war, while they would inflict high casualties on any attacker, the North Koreans would be annihilated. Their only key advantage is their arsenal of non-conventional weapons: the North is believed to have a large chemical and biological arsenal while their ballistic and nuclear capabilities have already been demonstrated- whats interesting though is that apparently their first test was a failure and their bombs are much smaller than those dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

Kev Bar
20-05-2010, 12:03 PM
Well when a state resorts to forgery - come in Stickies - and major smack smuggling in the pursuit of hard currency to finance their ...what's it called...Junche? policy... one should really question the state. Some of the more loo laah leaders also thought the forgery while lining their pockets would destroy the US economy.

Isolation is a bit like LSD. Bad for your grasp of reality.

They didn't destroy the US (yet).

But they nearly destroyed my Xmas.

I boogied home from Cambodia with about 5,000 dollars in 100 notes in the early 90s. BoI in the airport would not change a single one cos of the amount of North Korean forgeries.
Pennniless. Had to hustle a lift home. And next day go to BoI HQ where they spent two hours looking up the bum of each note before handing me punts and wishing me a merry one.

Think Da - Kim Jong Il- may have been still alive.

Never been there but was hit by a North Korean bodyguard once after he decked a female journo. A stupid move. If he's going to deck a yuppie yank chick, what's he gonna do to a morally indignant paddy screaming in his face. Ouch.

Talk about a medi-evil society. The bodyguards were a gift to King Sihanouk from Kong Jong Il. There again, they probably dine on left over foie gras 'sted of babies' innards.

ang
25-05-2010, 11:30 PM
Latest Update:-


North Korea said Tuesday it was severing all ties with South Korea and cutting communications links in protest at claims that it had torpedoed one of Seoul's warships.

The North said it would expel all South Korean personnel from a jointly-run industrial estate at Kaesong north of the border, and ban South Korean ships and planes from its territorial waters and airspace.

The state Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of Korea said South Korea's claims that it had sunk the warship were tantamount to a declaration of war.



http://www.france24.com/en/20100525-north-korea-cuts-all-ties-with-south-korea-warship-sinking

C. Flower
26-05-2010, 01:09 AM
Its very serious hence the collapse in the markets today. Very odd of them to deny it if its true ??

Xray
26-05-2010, 11:04 AM
Its all very interesting. However North Korea is a paper tiger to a large extent. Their navy is mostly scrap, with very little surface capability while their subs are also obsolescent and no match in combat for the blue-water fleet possessed by the South. The same holds true for the Air-Force, which has very little flying time per year because of fuel shortages and is composed of aging aircraft of Soviet origin, while the army is plagued by reports of poor morale from defectors, lack of skilled upkeep and fuel has depleted their armoured capabilities and much of their artillery is obsolete as well. They do have an advantage in numbers over their opponents but in a serious war, while they would inflict high casualties on any attacker, the North Koreans would be annihilated. Their only key advantage is their arsenal of non-conventional weapons: the North is believed to have a large chemical and biological arsenal while their ballistic and nuclear capabilities have already been demonstrated- whats interesting though is that apparently their first test was a failure and their bombs are much smaller than those dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

They are said to have about 700 hundred scuds deployed within range of seoul. Considering their relatively rapid and mobile use and chemical and biological ability I would be pretty worried about that.

BrendanGalway
26-05-2010, 11:15 AM
You would wonder about those running North Korea. Is there any other nation like them in the World? I dont know of any other country thats so sealed off from the rest of us. They exist on their own Planet and the people are Ruled by Tyrants best described as Batshit Insane. If it came to War, I have no doubt they would be crazy enough to use many of these terrible weapons, including sending a Nuke to Seoul. This is an extremely difficult situation.

Xray
26-05-2010, 11:37 AM
You would wonder about those running North Korea. Is there any other nation like them in the World? I dont know of any other country thats so sealed off from the rest of us. They exist on their own Planet and the people are Ruled by Tyrants best described as Batshit Insane. If it came to War, I have no doubt they would be crazy enough to use many of these terrible weapons, including sending a Nuke to Seoul. This is an extremely difficult situation.

If there is a war with North Korea it was last about 20 minutes and you will see the Yanks deploy weapons we never even dreamed of. The lights will go out and that will be it. Surgical strikes will not be a issue. People forget the power the America military have at the last few wars have been one hand behind the back stuff. But if they really needed to neutralize somewhere quickly it would be simply amazing to watch. I suspect they can flatten the whole Military there without any fallout going south of the Border. They have had 60 years to figure out how to do it.

The only concern is China after that.

C. Flower
26-05-2010, 01:57 PM
If there is a war with North Korea it was last about 20 minutes and you will see the Yanks deploy weapons we never even dreamed of. The lights will go out and that will be it. Surgical strikes will not be a issue. People forget the power the America military have at the last few wars have been one hand behind the back stuff. But if they really needed to neutralize somewhere quickly it would be simply amazing to watch. I suspect they can flatten the whole Military there without any fallout going south of the Border. They have had 60 years to figure out how to do it.

The only concern is China after that.


The physics of the planet didn't change in the last 60 years. They used low grade plutonium tipped shells in Iraq and the Lebanon and claimed it was "safe". Have you seen the photographs of the state of the little children and aborted babies ?

antiestablishmentarian
26-05-2010, 03:21 PM
They are said to have about 700 hundred scuds deployed within range of seoul. Considering their relatively rapid and mobile use and chemical and biological ability I would be pretty worried about that.

I still think that S Korean anti missile defences would be too strong, they have recently upgraded their anti-missile defences according to this: www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4001378

Cassandra Syndrome
26-05-2010, 08:50 PM
There appears to be a serious development


South Korea's military was tracking four North Korean submarines which disappeared from their east coast base after conducting naval training in the East Sea earlier this week, a military official in Seoul said Wednesday.

Locations of the North's four 300-ton-class submarines have been unknown for two days, the military official said, noting, "We are tracking the four submarines by mobilizing all naval capabilities in the East Sea."

The submarines left the Chaho base located near the Musudan-ri missile launch pad site in North Hamgyong province in North Korea's northeast coast, according to the official.


http://www.zerohedge.com/article/south-korea-alert-north-korean-subs-disappear-east-sea

C. Flower
27-05-2010, 08:48 AM
The South is blocking the North's freight ships and the North has broken off the Naval accord.
http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/north-korea-to-scrap-naval-accord-with-south-459291.html

The North still say they had nothing to do with the torpedo.

antiestablishmentarian
27-05-2010, 11:31 AM
The South is blocking the North's freight ships and the North has broken off the Naval accord.
http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/north-korea-to-scrap-naval-accord-with-south-459291.html

The North still say they had nothing to do with the torpedo.

This is escalating fast. The most the South Koreans said they would do is step up the propaganda war but now it seems we're going to see more naval clashes imo.

antiestablishmentarian
27-05-2010, 11:35 AM
http://www.kcna.co.jp/index-e.htm

Interesting piece on the North Koreans official news website, KCNA.

BrendanGalway
27-05-2010, 12:49 PM
This is grim. All War is terrible but theres something additionally appalling when a Nuclear-armed Power is involved. You get a sense Kim Jong-il would be bonkers enough to use on if he thought his Army was collapsing.

C. Flower
27-05-2010, 12:50 PM
A quick look at the history of Korea would explain a defensive attitude.

ang
11-07-2010, 02:32 AM
North Korea are willing to return to Nuclear talks:-


North Korea has said it is willing in principle to return to nuclear disarmament talks after the United Nations did not blame it for an attack on a South Korean warship.

The North denies US and South Korean claims that it torpedoed the ship with the loss of 46 lives in March.

It said it was vindicated by the UN statement, which was watered down under pressure from China.

All parties in the dispute have professed satisfaction with the compromise statement, which condemns the attack without specifying the culprit.


http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0710/korea.html

C. Flower
23-07-2010, 10:43 PM
US Military exercises (joint with S. Korea) and sanctions are seriously raising tensions.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66M10I20100723



A North Korean diplomat said Washington's new sanctions and the U.S.-South Korea (http://www.reuters.com/places/south-korea)n drills would be met with a "physical response," and that charges it torpedoed the warship Cheonan had pushed the divided Korean peninsula "to the brink of explosion."

"There will be a physical response to the steps imposed by the United States militarily," Ri Tong-il, a member of Pyongyang's delegation in Hanoi, told reporters. The military exercises, he added, would violate North Korea (http://www.reuters.com/places/north-korea)n sovereignty.

Xray
23-07-2010, 10:48 PM
I still think that S Korean anti missile defences would be too strong, they have recently upgraded their anti-missile defences according to this: www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4001378

Missiles are one thing, artillery another, there is nothing you can do to stop many of these weapons reaching their target other than prevent a launch. They are just too close by. The only viable way to cease widespread launches is a nuclear strike on the area. That is the grim reality. If North Korea goes for it, the yanks will either have to let Seoul burn or push the button.

C. Flower
23-07-2010, 10:52 PM
Some background on how this country has been torn apart by outside interests.

The US should back off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korea

Brehon
24-07-2010, 12:39 PM
The biggest threat to South korea in military terms is the huge number of artillery pointed to Soeul. 1 hour of artillery would really do alot of damage. The US though would probably use their new 250Ib small diameter bomb. A few B52's, some sleath fighters etc would most likely take out most of North Korea's defenses in less than a day. Most of it is buried in large bunkers in mountains etc. The best way to stop that is just explode ordenance at the door to stop it getting out. The odds of something happening militarily is very high.

C. Flower
24-07-2010, 01:39 PM
The biggest threat to South korea in military terms is the huge number of artillery pointed to Soeul. 1 hour of artillery would really do alot of damage. The US though would probably use their new 250Ib small diameter bomb. A few B52's, some sleath fighters etc would most likely take out most of North Korea's defenses in less than a day. Most of it is buried in large bunkers in mountains etc. The best way to stop that is just explode ordenance at the door to stop it getting out. The odds of something happening militarily is very high.

Why ?

antiestablishmentarian
24-07-2010, 08:05 PM
Yikes, this is escalating fast. The DPRK's National Defence Commission (which incidentally is Kim Jong-Il's power base) issued a statement saying that nuclear weapons might possibly be used to prevent these naval exercises from going ahead. As to whether this threat is merely bluster, I'd be inclined to think not. There are a number of possible scenarios where the North might take military action against the South and these include an internal crisis in the South or within their own borders where the régime feels its existence is threatened. At the moment, because of a disastrous revaluation of the Won last year, the latter is real possibility: there has been severe internal unrest and a number of incidents including executions and even the show capital Pyongyang is starting to shrink because of the disastrous food shortages which this revaluation has exacerbated

http://www.nkeconwatch.com/2009/12/04/dprk-renominates-currency/

http://nkleadershipwatch.wordpress.com/2010/07/19/pyongyang-shrunk-by-13/ (journal).

A quick reunification is virtually impossible but a military attack where they inflicted severe losses on the South would bolster the régime and win support for Kim Jong-Il's son and heir apparent Kim Jong-Un from the military hard-liners who remain the Kim family's key backers. As previous belligerent moves were taken to mollify this group such as the sinking of the Cheonan and the launching of the Taepodong 2 missile, its not unlikely that there could be some form of military action taken by the North in the near future.

C. Flower
24-07-2010, 08:12 PM
Yikes, this is escalating fast. The DPRK's National Defence Commission (which incidentally is Kim Jong-Il's power base) issued a statement saying that nuclear weapons might possibly be used to prevent these naval exercises from going ahead. As to whether this threat is merely bluster, I'd be inclined to think not. There are a number of possible scenarios where the North might take military action against the South and these include an internal crisis in the South or within their own borders where the régime feels its existence is threatened. At the moment, because of a disastrous revaluation of the Won last year, the latter is real possibility: there has been severe internal unrest and a number of incidents including executions and even the show capital Pyongyang is starting to shrink because of the disastrous food shortages which this revaluation has exacerbated

http://www.nkeconwatch.com/2009/12/04/dprk-renominates-currency/

http://nkleadershipwatch.wordpress.com/2010/07/19/pyongyang-shrunk-by-13/ (http://journal).

A quick reunification is virtually impossible but a military attack where they inflicted severe losses on the South would bolster the régime and win support for Kim Jong-Il's son and heir apparent Kim Jong-Un from the military hard-liners who remain the Kim family's key backers. As previous belligerent moves were taken to mollify this group such as the sinking of the Cheonan and the launching of the Taepodong 2 missile, its not unlikely that there could be some form of military action taken by the North in the near future.

Is there evidence that the Cheonan was sunk by the North ? It looked rather unlikely at the time and there is a great deal of scepticism about it.
The US and Clinton in particular have been ramping up the pressure on the North, perhaps thinking that Kim's withdrawal from government might be the right time to get "regime change".



http://twitter.com/YonhapNews

antiestablishmentarian
24-07-2010, 08:25 PM
Is there evidence that the Cheonan was sunk by the North ? It looked rather unlikely at the time and there is a great deal of scepticism about it.
The US and Clinton in particular have been ramping up the pressure on the North, perhaps thinking that Kim's withdrawal from government might be the right time to get "regime change".



http://twitter.com/YonhapNews

I'd be sceptical about it. The Norths submarine fleet is antiquated and barring a number of midget subs which might possibly slip under the radar its unlikely that a sub capable of sinking a corvette would get through undetected. Its mysterious and I wouldn't rule out the possiblity that the KPN did carry out the attack but the US have form for lies and smokescreens in that part of the world with things such as the Korean Wall.

C. Flower
27-07-2010, 10:47 AM
The US and South Korea are conducting live-fire anti-submarine exercises. The US Commander has said that North Korea has breached the 1953 cease fire according to the Yonhap Korean news agency. This is close to a declaration of war by the US.




A flotilla of South Korean and U.S. warships fired naval guns and dropped anti-submarine bombs Tuesday during the third day of military drills in the East Sea meant to deter North Korea against future provocations, military officials said.

About 20 warships, led by the U.S. nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS George Washington, 200 aircraft and 8,000 military personnel have staged the "Invincible Spirit" exercises in the East Sea since Sunday to signal a warning to the North for its sinking of a South Korean warship in March.




http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2010/07/27/88/0301000000AEN20100727007600315F.HTML



SEOUL, July 27 (Yonhap) -- North Korea's deadly sinking of a South Korean warship was a violation of the 1953 cease-fire agreement, the U.S. military chief in the South said Tuesday, marking his first public acknowledgment that the North breached the armistice by torpedoing the ship.

A multinational team of civilian and military investigators concluded in May that a North Korean submarine fired a torpedo and sank the Cheonan warship near the tense Yellow Sea border on March 26, killing 46 sailors and escalating tensions on the Korean Peninsula to new heights.


http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2010/07/27/0200000000AEN20100727006400315.HTML

It should be remembered that there is good reason to be sceptical that North Korea was involved in the torpedo incident and that the US has form for this type of provocation.

Captain Con O'Sullivan
27-07-2010, 11:27 AM
'Doubts surface on North Korea's role in ship-sinking' ... Los Angeles Times 23 July 2010

'The critics, mostly but not all from the opposition, say it is unlikely that the impoverished North Korean regime could have pulled off a perfectly executed hit against a superior military power, sneaking a submarine into the area and slipping away without detection. They also wonder whether the evidence of a torpedo attack was misinterpreted, or even fabricated.

"I couldn't find the slightest sign of an explosion," said Shin Sang-chul, a former shipbuilding executive-turned-investigative journalist. "The sailors drowned to death. Their bodies were clean. We didn't even find dead fish in the sea."

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/23/world/la-fg-korea-torpedo-20100724

C. Flower
27-07-2010, 11:48 AM
'Doubts surface on North Korea's role in ship-sinking' ... Los Angeles Times 23 July 2010

'The critics, mostly but not all from the opposition, say it is unlikely that the impoverished North Korean regime could have pulled off a perfectly executed hit against a superior military power, sneaking a submarine into the area and slipping away without detection. They also wonder whether the evidence of a torpedo attack was misinterpreted, or even fabricated.

"I couldn't find the slightest sign of an explosion," said Shin Sang-chul, a former shipbuilding executive-turned-investigative journalist. "The sailors drowned to death. Their bodies were clean. We didn't even find dead fish in the sea."

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/23/world/la-fg-korea-torpedo-20100724

Anyone remember the Gulf of Tonkin / USS Cole faking to set Iran up ?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2008/01/15/olbermann-accuses-joints-chiefs-faking-gulf-tonkin-iran

Captain Con O'Sullivan
27-07-2010, 11:59 AM
There's a story circulating among US right wing nutjobs that the BP oilrig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico was down to a North Korean sub torpedo-ing it. That shows you the state of mind of these freaks.

The Gulf of Mexico is a very shallow sea ... any sub anywhere near the area would be immediately detectable. Its about as likely as John F Kennedy's patrol boat off the coast being torpedoed by a Japanese submarine during WW11 when jap subs didn't have the range to go halfway to the region.

Still- John F apparently swam back to shore with the crew safely held between his teeth and got the necessary medal for a post-war career in politics! Ha ha ...

antiestablishmentarian
27-07-2010, 01:07 PM
Anyone remember the Gulf of Tonkin / USS Cole faking to set Iran up ?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2008/01/15/olbermann-accuses-joints-chiefs-faking-gulf-tonkin-iran

Yes and this stinks to high heavens as well. First they said it was a torpedo, then a suicide sub attacks now they're getting their stories mixed up.

antiestablishmentarian
07-08-2010, 12:08 AM
South Korea began large scale naval exercises near its disputed maritime border with the DPRK on Thursday: this is another move that will ratchet up tension on the peninsula. Seems like a game of chicken at the moment: although the DPRK is much weaker than the South and her US ally, its leadership will feel compelled to give a belligerent response to show they aren't intimidated/weak: better hold onto our hats folks, this could get rougher.

http://m.theepochtimes.com/index.php?page=content&id=40472

C. Flower
09-08-2010, 11:19 AM
(URGENT) N. Korea fires artillery into Yellow Sea (more to follow)

From the Yonhap S. Korean news agency.

C. Flower
09-08-2010, 11:31 AM
SEOUL, Aug. 9 (Yonhap) -- North Korea on Monday fired some 100 rounds of artillery into its side of a disputed border with South Korea in the Yellow Sea, a South Korean military source said.

The North Korean move comes right after South Korea ended large-scale five-day navy exercises near the inter-Korean border in a show of force against its communist neighbor blamed on sinking one of its warships in March.

North Korea had warned of "strong physical retaliation" against the drills that it denounced as preparations for a northward invasion.
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2010/08/09/79/0301000000AEN20100809008300315F.HTML

antiestablishmentarian
09-08-2010, 12:33 PM
Thats bad. Both sides have internal problems which increased sabre-rattling would distract their citizens from so an escalation is not beyond the bounds of possibility.

politicsguy
09-08-2010, 05:01 PM
I wonder how different things would be if Truman had listened to macarthur and dropped 21 nukes on those guys

C. Flower
09-08-2010, 05:05 PM
I wonder how different things would be if Truman had listened to macarthur and dropped 21 nukes on those guys

Did he have 21 "nukes" ? If he had, there's a fair chance that we wouldn't be sitting here talking about it.

antiestablishmentarian
09-08-2010, 07:31 PM
I wonder how different things would be if Truman had listened to macarthur and dropped 21 nukes on those guys

Thus bringing the Red Army into the conflict. In reality, the US didn't give a damn about the welfare of the Korean people, as shown by their enthusiastic support for right wing military dictatorships in the South until the late 1980's. They wouldn't have dropped nukes on Korea for several reasons:
An atomic bomb drop on Korea would have been seen as the start of a 'reconquest' of China by the Chinese stalinists and the Russian stalinists too. McArthur was notorious for his links to the so-called 'China hands', a pro-Chiang lobby who exercised enormous influence in American foreign policy through their control of Time Magazine. It was he who preemptively started the policy of support for Taiwan by visiting Chiang and announcing that he would be supported whatever the cost by the US. His other idea, to use 500,000 Nationalist Chinese troops in conjunction with the planned atomic attack would have been viewed by Mao and the stalinists as a declaration of full scale war, something Truman knew and wished to avoid. There's actually a good book written about the internal tensions between Truman and McArthur leading to McArthurs dismissal by an American author: its quite detailed and well worth a look, called 'The Coldest Winter' by a guy called David Halberstam

Xray
09-08-2010, 07:58 PM
Who else would have attacked the boat if not the NKs?

The USA? Hardly
China? Doubtful

Why would anyone fake a NK attack? And if they did why have they not followed up?


NK is nuts and very dangerous, if the start a war I would end it very very quickly if I were South Korea, Japan or USA.

Xray
09-08-2010, 08:00 PM
Did he have 21 "nukes" ? If he had, there's a fair chance that we wouldn't be sitting here talking about it.

We certainly would not be driving Kias anyway :)

antiestablishmentarian
09-08-2010, 08:11 PM
Who else would have attacked the boat if not the NKs?

The USA? Hardly
China? Doubtful

Why would anyone fake a NK attack? And if they did why have they not followed up?


NK is nuts and very dangerous, if the start a war I would end it very very quickly if I were South Korea, Japan or USA.

The NK leadership is not nuts as you put it. They are seeking to maintain their power and control over the state and its armed forces, and their actions are quite understandable when you look at the history of their state and their ideology, Juche. They would only attack the South or its allied forces if:
1. The South was weakened to such an extent that an attack would have a reasonable chance of success, a prospect that disappeared at the start of the 1980's.
2. The US had withdrawn its forces and they felt that with a nuclear arsenal and a healthy numerical advantage in terms of troops their deficiencies in terms of armour and airpower could be overcome by a quick strike.
3. The North's internal situation had reached a point where collapse appeared imminent for the régime. In such a case they would launch a pre-emptive war of reunification in what would almost certainly be a vain attempt to maintain the internal cohesion and unity of the nation behind the regime. It should be remembered that the North suffered greatly from US bombing and that GI's committed many war crimes there: that does not excuse the barbarity of the Kim régime but it explains the paranoia of its leadership and the possibility that in times of war the populace might swing in behind the régime. A big if, but not improbable to DPRK watchers.
As for the US faking an attack, its not beyond the bounds of possibility: they've done things like this before (Gulf of Tonkin etc) and with the state their economy is in, an attack on North Korea would provide opportunities for US mining companies (North Korea has huge mineral deposits that haven't been fully developed by the regime thanks to technological deficiencies) and US arms and reconstruction companies, as well as in fields like telecommunications and construction. In effect, war has always played an economic role in opening closed markets and North Korea is the worlds largest existing closed market, something US strategists won't have forgotten.
Finally, as for not following the attack up, the North's leadership believes it needs to sabre-rattle every time the US or South makes a show of strength but they are aware of their limited military capabilities and excepting the scenarios I outlined above, its unlikely they'd follow up an attack of this nature, if indeed they were responsible.

Xray
09-08-2010, 08:26 PM
The NK leadership is not nuts as you put it. They are seeking to maintain their power and control over the state and its armed forces, and their actions are quite understandable when you look at the history of their state and their ideology, Juche. They would only attack the South or its allied forces if:
1. The South was weakened to such an extent that an attack would have a reasonable chance of success, a prospect that disappeared at the start of the 1980's.
2. The US had withdrawn its forces and they felt that with a nuclear arsenal and a healthy numerical advantage in terms of troops their deficiencies in terms of armour and airpower could be overcome by a quick strike.
3. The North's internal situation had reached a point where collapse appeared imminent for the régime. In such a case they would launch a pre-emptive war of reunification in what would almost certainly be a vain attempt to maintain the internal cohesion and unity of the nation behind the regime. It should be remembered that the North suffered greatly from US bombing and that GI's committed many war crimes there: that does not excuse the barbarity of the Kim régime but it explains the paranoia of its leadership and the possibility that in times of war the populace might swing in behind the régime. A big if, but not improbable to DPRK watchers.
As for the US faking an attack, its not beyond the bounds of possibility: they've done things like this before (Gulf of Tonkin etc) and with the state their economy is in, an attack on North Korea would provide opportunities for US mining companies (North Korea has huge mineral deposits that haven't been fully developed by the regime thanks to technological deficiencies) and US arms and reconstruction companies, as well as in fields like telecommunications and construction. In effect, war has always played an economic role in opening closed markets and North Korea is the worlds largest existing closed market, something US strategists won't have forgotten.
Finally, as for not following the attack up, the North's leadership believes it needs to sabre-rattle every time the US or South makes a show of strength but they are aware of their limited military capabilities and excepting the scenarios I outlined above, its unlikely they'd follow up an attack of this nature, if indeed they were responsible.

If the USA had faked an attack they would surely have started a war by now rather than pour cold water on the idea?

NK is nuts, leaders may act rationally within a nuts organisation, but NK is a totally nuts organsiation. It is potentially extremely unstable in the just the way you have stated, it could easily decide that it is rational to use a nuclear weapon or shell the South for exactly the reasons you outline. Nutcases like that can provoke nutcase responses from those facing them. Depending on the South and USA to always act intelligently and in their own best interests is a weak policy.

antiestablishmentarian
09-08-2010, 09:12 PM
If the USA had faked an attack they would surely have started a war by now rather than pour cold water on the idea?

NK is nuts, leaders may act rationally within a nuts organisation, but NK is a totally nuts organsiation. It is potentially extremely unstable in the just the way you have stated, it could easily decide that it is rational to use a nuclear weapon or shell the South for exactly the reasons you outline. Nutcases like that can provoke nutcase responses from those facing them. Depending on the South and USA to always act intelligently and in their own best interests is a weak policy.

If the US faked the attack it was possibly an attempt to provoke the North by sinking the ship then blaming the North and trying to goad the North into retaliation, which is quite easy to do. The North is not that unstable though: it has defined state policies (ie survival of the régime and its current social and economic model from internal and external threats, succession and continued rule of the Kim dynasty, revival of the flagging economy and ultimately re-unification, although this is by now a forlorn hope barring highly improbable events) and any policies it carries out are within the perameters of these defined strategic goals: for instance, launching missiles and testing atomic bombs are to project an image of itself as a military power strong enough to deter an attack from the US, the disastrous revaluation of the won last year was an attempt to build on economic progress that had been made by last years good harvest, and its continuation of Songun (military first) policies are an insurance policy taken out by the Kims to ensure the continuation of the dynasty. The regime is alot less erratic than the US as that the US has a past history of attacking states for trivial reasons (Guatemala in 1954, Vietnam, Haiti in 1994) such as a new head of state that impedes on activities of a private US multinational, while the DPRK has only launched one war in the past and while Kim-il Sing was definitely the aggressor in that war, there had been military incursions by the South into the Norths territory prior to that attack and so it was carried out on a more logical basis (ie consistent with the internal logic of the régimes strategic aims) than many US wars.

Sam Lord
09-08-2010, 09:23 PM
while the DPRK has only launched one war in the past and while Kim-il Sing was definitely the aggressor in that war...

That is debatable from what I can recall. I will look into it. You have to look at the matter in the context of a broader historical sweep of WW2 and its aftermath, if you like, to get a real understanding. I know that the whole country was liberated prior to any US boot hitting the ground and peoples committees were set up to run things. The US landed, marched up to the whatever parallel... would not recognise any of the established committees and put all the Japanese collaborators back into power in the territory they controlled. And it went on from there ..

antiestablishmentarian
09-08-2010, 09:26 PM
That is debatable from what I can recall. I will look into it. You have to look at the matter in the context of a broader historical sweep of WW2 and its aftermath, if you like, to get a real understanding. I know that the whole country was liberated prior to any US boot hitting the ground and peoples committees were set up to run things. The US landed, marched up to the whatever parallel... would not recognise any of the established committees and put all the Japanese collaborators back into power in the territory they controlled. And it went on from there ..

I mentioned in the rest of my post that you might not have seen how there were constant incursions by both sides into the others territiory prior to the launching of the war.

Sam Lord
09-08-2010, 10:23 PM
I mentioned in the rest of my post that you might not have seen how there were constant incursions by both sides into the others territiory prior to the launching of the war.

The question is deeper than that of incursions. Say, for example, that the Republicans had won the civil war and resumed fighting into the 6 counties would you describe that as being an "aggressor".

antiestablishmentarian
10-08-2010, 12:18 PM
The question is deeper than that of incursions. Say, for example, that the Republicans had won the civil war and resumed fighting into the 6 counties would you describe that as being an "aggressor".
It depends. I would qualify aggression as being an unprovoked armed attack by forces of one state upon another. There is plenty of evidence from the opened russian archives that Kim-il Sung was planning an invasion for at least a year before he actually carried it through, and that incursions were used as a justification for the invasion. As a trotskyist, I reject the idea that the revolution could have been spread through armed invasion: firstly it was spreading stalinism, which is and was counter-revolutionary as it paved the way for the dictatorial rule of a bureaucracy rather than the democratic rule of the working class, secondly, it was sidelining the masses from their own revolution, in a similar fashion to Mao's guerrilla's and Castro and Che in Cuba: where the masses are alienated from the struggle or rendered passive observers of a struggle between partisans/guerrilla and the state, democratic socialism has never been the outcome.

Sam Lord
10-08-2010, 01:14 PM
It depends. I would qualify aggression as being an unprovoked armed attack by forces of one state upon another. There is plenty of evidence from the opened russian archives that Kim-il Sung was planning an invasion for at least a year before he actually carried it through, and that incursions were used as a justification for the invasion. As a trotskyist, I reject the idea that the revolution could have been spread through armed invasion: firstly it was spreading stalinism, which is and was counter-revolutionary as it paved the way for the dictatorial rule of a bureaucracy rather than the democratic rule of the working class, secondly, it was sidelining the masses from their own revolution, in a similar fashion to Mao's guerrilla's and Castro and Che in Cuba: where the masses are alienated from the struggle or rendered passive observers of a struggle between partisans/guerrilla and the state, democratic socialism has never been the outcome.

Oh my God ..... I pressed the wrong button.

C. Flower
10-08-2010, 01:19 PM
You're both wrong.

antiestablishmentarian
10-08-2010, 01:42 PM
Oh my God ..... I pressed the wrong button. :D.

Sam Lord
10-08-2010, 01:52 PM
You're both wrong.

I don't see how. It was either an act of aggression or it wasn't to my mind. What is your third position?

C. Flower
10-08-2010, 02:41 PM
I don't see how. It was either an act of aggression or it wasn't to my mind. What is your third position?

I don't agree with the "Third position", either. I'll have to reply later, apologies. The two positions seem to me to be doctrinaire, to start with.

Xray
10-08-2010, 07:05 PM
I am with the right wing Americans who simply dismiss them all are red nuts and send in the stealth bombers :D

C. Flower
10-08-2010, 11:25 PM
I am with the right wing Americans who simply dismiss them all are red nuts and send in the stealth bombers :D

Were you bitten by a Red when you were a baby ? :mad:

Sam Lord
11-08-2010, 10:34 PM
You're both wrong.

Well, were you going to explain why or are you still working it out?

C. Flower
11-08-2010, 11:54 PM
It depends. I would qualify aggression as being an unprovoked armed attack by forces of one state upon another. There is plenty of evidence from the opened russian archives that Kim-il Sung was planning an invasion for at least a year before he actually carried it through, and that incursions were used as a justification for the invasion. As a trotskyist, I reject the idea that the revolution could have been spread through armed invasion: firstly it was spreading stalinism, which is and was counter-revolutionary as it paved the way for the dictatorial rule of a bureaucracy rather than the democratic rule of the working class, secondly, it was sidelining the masses from their own revolution, in a similar fashion to Mao's guerrilla's and Castro and Che in Cuba: where the masses are alienated from the struggle or rendered passive observers of a struggle between partisans/guerrilla and the state, democratic socialism has never been the outcome.

Given it was, if you had been there at the time as a Trotskyist, what would you have done ? I would have thought, take part in the invasion and try to spread trotskyist ideas in the army, or else if you were in the south, agitate or take part in supportive action to support the invasion, but again, spreading your ideas as a trotskyist. A fair chance that if the Stalinists didn't get you, the US would, but that's what Trotskyists do.

But if what Sam Lord said is correct, this wasn't an invasion at all. It was a military action to expel an invader.

Just to add - when you say this army was "spreading stalinism" what actually happened to the land and factories in the North ? If the US had been expelled and the country reunited, what kind of economy would there have been ? I'm assuming that it would largely have been taken out of private ownership. The existence of a bureaucracy would need to be dealt with, but it was still a gain.

It seems that your thinking is closer to the SWPs that I had thought.

C. Flower
12-08-2010, 12:23 AM
Well, were you going to explain why or are you still working it out?

I've replied to antiestablishmentarian. I agree with him about the importance of the working class and peasants' active participation in their own revolution. But that doesn't mean that doesn't need to mean opposition to the army going in to the south.

antiestablishmentarian
12-08-2010, 12:36 AM
Given it was, if you had been there at the time as a Trotskyist, what would you have done ? I would have thought, take part in the invasion and try to spread trotskyist ideas in the army, or else if you were in the south, agitate or take part in supportive action to support the invasion, but again, spreading your ideas as a trotskyist. A fair chance that if the Stalinists didn't get you, the US would, but that's what Trotskyists do.

But if what Sam Lord is correct, this wasn't an invasion at all. It was a military action to expel an invader.

Just to add - when you say this army was "spreading stalinism" what actually happened to the land and factories in the North ? If the US had been expelled and the country reunited, what kind of economy would there have been ? I'm assuming that it would largely have been taken out of private ownership. The existence of a bureaucracy would need to be dealt with, but it was still a gain.

It seems that your thinking is closer to the SWPs that I had thought.

Dunno if its what you'd describe as being close to the SWP but to be honest I think my position is closer to that of Trotsky on Georgia and its invasion by the Bolsheviks in the 1920's. Intervene when there was a mood on the ground for it, but in the meantime help the workers movement through funding parties, providing refuge for activists etc, rather than invasion and absorption. I know its not fully analogous (questions of naitonalism etc) but there's no such thing as a perfect comparison so it'll have to do.

C. Flower
12-08-2010, 12:52 AM
Dunno if its what you'd describe as being close to the SWP but to be honest I think my position is closer to that of Trotsky on Georgia and its invasion by the Bolsheviks in the 1920's. Intervene when there was a mood on the ground for it, but in the meantime help the workers movement through funding parties, providing refuge for activists etc, rather than invasion and absorption. I know its not fully analogous (questions of naitonalism etc) but there's no such thing as a perfect comparison so it'll have to do.

Well, it is a good bit different. Georgia was a separate country.
Also in Korea there was a hostile army parked on half of the place.

Georgia was one of the (few) things Lenin got wrong initially.

Why I mentioned the SWP is that I have the impression that they don't always look at the economic base as the fundamental factor.

Sam Lord
12-08-2010, 06:37 AM
I think whether the North Koreans were Stalinists, Trotskyites, Juchists, or Anarchists is entirely irrelevant to the historical question of whether the conflict which took place on the peninsula is correctly viewed as one of aggression by the North against the south.

The Koreans are an ancient people who have inhabited the peninsula forever. Although divided into different kingdoms or whatever over the years there has been a unified and recognisable Korean country or state since probably the 9th Century. This continued until 1948 when the country was partitioned .... essentially by the US in my view.

The Peoples Republic of Korea was the entity established by the Korean people to run their entire country upon the surrender of the Japanese. Here is information on it from Wiki:

"The Japanese colonial authorities requested that a government be established to ensure the safety of their persons and property after the occupation ended. Under the leadership of Yeo Un-hyeong, the newly-formed Committee for the Preparation of Korean Independence (CPKI) organized people's committees throughout the country to coordinate the transition to independence. On August 28th, the CPKI announced that it would function as the temporary national government of Korea.[1] On September 6, CPKI activists met in Seoul and established the PRK.

The program of the PRK was presented in its September 14th twenty-seven point program. The program included: "the confiscation without compensation of lands held by the Japanese and collaborators; free distribution of that land to the peasants; rent limits on the nonredistributed land; nationalization of such major industries as mining, transportation, banking, and communication; state supervision of small and mid-sized companies; ... guaranteed basic human rights and freedoms, including those of speech, press, assembly, and faith; universal suffrage to adults over the age of eighteen; equality for women; labor law reforms including an eight-hour day, a minimum wage, and prohibition of child labor; and "establishment of close relations with the United States, USSR, England, and China, and positive opposition to any foreign influences interfering with the domestic affairs of the state."[2][3]

Shortly after the American landing in September 1945, the new United States Army Military Government in Korea, which controlled the peninsula south of the 38th parallel, abolished the PRK government by military decree, primarily because of suspicions that it was Communist."

It should be noted that the administration that the US installed to replace south of the 38th parallel the PRK was the old Japanese colonial collaborationist one.

Then we had the election of 1948 held under US military occupation. Again from Wiki:

"The South Korean election of 1948 was held on May 10, 1948. It was South Korea's first general election. It was held under the American military occupation, with supervision from the United Nations. The election was originally intended to be held throughout the Korean peninsula, but US and Soviet forces were unable to agree on the terms of such an election. It was therefore held only in the US-administered territory.However one hundred seats were left open in Parliament for North Koreans to vote on when they were able. [1] The voters elected members of parliament, who then voted on the constitution and elected the president. The overwhelming majority of Koreans opposed the election and the division of Korea that would result.[2] The elections were filled with terrorism resulting in 600 deaths between March and May.[3]

This election was followed by the establishment of the First Republic of South Korea under Syngman Rhee, the country's first independent government since the fall of the Joseon Dynasty in 1910.

The first general election in North Korea was held in August.

As far as the recognition of the legitimacy of the elections for the creation of a nation-state, at least two historians say that

None of the UNTCOK members thought of the elections as creating a national parliament, but after seven week's debate and continuing United States pressure, and only in the absence of the Syrian and Australian delegates, agreement was reached to declare the elections "a valid expression of the free will of the electorate in those parts of Korea which were accessible to the Commission.[4]"

Sam Lord
12-08-2010, 06:46 AM
In response to this we have armed uprisings taking place in the territory controlled by the US.

Jehu for example:

The Jeju Uprising (Korean: 제주 4·3 민중항쟁, Hanja: 濟州 4·3 民衆抗爭) refers to the rebellion on Jeju island, South Korea, beginning on April 3, 1948. Between 14,000 and 60,000 individuals were killed in fighting or execution between various factions on the island. The suppression of rebellion by the South Korean army has been called “brutal”, resulting in tens of thousands of deaths, the destruction of many villages on the island, and sparking rebellions on the Korean mainland. The rebellion, which included the mutiny of several hundred members of the South Korean 11th Constabulary Regiment, lasted until May 1949, although small isolated pockets of fighting continued into 1953.[3] [4] Many residents of Jeju escaped from the massacre to Japan, and some of them made their Jeju town in Osaka.

Yeosu-Suncheon Rebellion was another

"The Yeosu-Suncheon Rebellion, also known as the Yeo-Sun incident, was an October 1948 rebellion, that took place in Yeosu, Suncheon, and surrounding towns, South Jeolla against the fledgling South Korean Syngman Rhee government largely cued by that government's suppression of the Jeju Uprising and refusal of Yeosu soldiers to go and help suppress the rebellion.[1] In Yeosu, the rebelling South Korean soldiers seized weapons and took control of the town. The residents paraded through the town holding red flags. They restored the town's people committee and tried and executed a number of police, officials, and landlords. The rebelling soldiers increased between 2,000 and 3,000, and massacred rights families and Christian youth.[2] After one week the South Korean army overwhelmed the rebels.[3] The matter was reviewed by the South Korean Truth and reconciliation commission, which found that government forces killed between 439 and 2000 area civilians.[1] U.S. forces played a role in suppressing the rebellion: U.S. commanders planned and directed the military operations, U.S. military advisors accompanied all ROK units, and U.S. aircraft was used to transport troops.[4]

Park Chung-hee, who would later become the president of Korea, participated in the rebellion. It is alleged, however, that he was punished leniently in exchanged for agreeing to hunt down those involved.[5]"

From The Korean War 1945 to 1953 by Hugh Deane on the Sunchon Rebellion

The civilian rebels included at least 70 teachers. The head of the Yosu's People's Committee was Song Uk, prinicipal of the Yosu Girls' Middle School---the girls were described as "redder than the inside of a watermelon" and proved it when, armed with Japanese rifles, they fought in the vain defense of the city.
:):)

But the cities and towns were more easily dealt with than the countryside. A thousand or more participants in the Yosu uprising escaped into the nearby Chiri Mountains, which rose 6,300 feet and were capped by hundreds of acres of thick forest. They became part of a guerrilla war organized principally by the South Korea Workers Party that soon engulfed large parts of the south.

Sam Lord
12-08-2010, 07:29 AM
I won't bother going into the constant fighting that was going on in the North of the South between 1948 and 1950.

Now when full scale conflict breaks out across the 38th parallel in June 1950 what happens in the South? According to the Korean Truth Commission this is what happened:

"South Korea's Truth and Reconciliation Commission (Korean: 진실·화해를 위한 과거사 정리 위원회), established on December 1, 2005, is a governmental body responsible for investigating incidents in Korean history which occurred starting from Japan's rule of Korea in 1910 up until the end of Authoritarian Rule in Korea with the election of President Kim Young-sam in 1993.

The commission estimates that at least 100,000 people—and possibly 200,000 or higher—were executed in the summer of 1950.[1][2] The victims include political prisoners, civilians who were killed by US Forces, and civilians who allegedly collaborated with communist North Korea or local communist groups. Each incident that is investigated is based on a citizen's petition, with some incidents having as many as hundreds of petitions. The commission, staffed by 240 people with an annual budget of $19 million, is expected to release a final report on their findings in 2010.[1]"

Up to 200,000 people in the south are put to death that Summer alone!

So to sum up:

Following the military suppression by the US south of the 38th parallel of the Government established by the Korean people and the reinstallation of Japanese collaborators we have two years of widespread dissatisfaction, unrest, and even substantial armed uprisings and guerrilla warfare in the south. Thousands of political prisoners are held. Then when full scale conflict breaks out across the 38th parallel up to 200,000 south Koreans are executed.

And some people would have us accept that this conflict was simply some sort of war between two states with the North being the aggressor.

Baloney.

http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2008/07/05/image4234887g.jpg

The Killing fields of South Korea in the summer of 1950

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/05/national/main4234885.shtml

"The American colonel, troubled by what he was hearing, tried to stall at first. But the declassified record shows he finally told his South Korean counterpart it "would be permitted" to machine-gun 3,500 political prisoners, to keep them from joining approaching enemy forces.

In the early days of the Korean War, other American officers observed, photographed and confidentially reported on such wholesale executions by their South Korean ally, a secretive slaughter believed to have killed 100,000 or more leftists and supposed sympathizers, usually without charge or trial, in a few weeks in mid-1950.

Extensive archival research by The Associated Press has found no indication Far East commander Gen. Douglas MacArthur took action to stem the summary mass killing, knowledge of which reached top levels of the Pentagon and State Department in Washington, where it was classified "secret" and filed away."

Sam Lord
12-08-2010, 07:48 AM
In conclusion I think their could be a debate as to whether the conflict can be best characterised as a civil war (with a strong class component) or a war of national liberation.

What cannot be argued to my mind is that it was a matter of aggression by one state against another.

C. Flower
12-08-2010, 08:56 AM
Thanks, Sam Lord, very interesting stuff. It would seem more of a rescue action than an invasion.

Do you have an answer to this question ?


Just to add - when you say this army was "spreading stalinism" what actually happened to the land and factories in the North ? If the US had been expelled and the country reunited, what kind of economy would there have been ? I'm assuming that it would largely have been taken out of private ownership. The existence of a bureaucracy would need to be dealt with, but it was still a gain.

Sam Lord
12-08-2010, 01:16 PM
Thanks, Sam Lord, very interesting stuff. It would seem more of a rescue action than an invasion.


It was essentially the continuation of a nation wide conflict that had been ongoing since the arrival of the Americans.



....what actually happened to the land and factories in the North ? If the US had been expelled and the country reunited, what kind of economy would there have been ? I'm assuming that it would largely have been taken out of private ownership. The existence of a bureaucracy would need to be dealt with, but it was still a gain.

I do not know much about the measures taken in North Korea after partition. When I was a young man and interested in these things no one on the left whether Leninist, Revisionist, Trotskyite, or Maoist ever talked about North Korea. I can recall being very affected by the Kwanju uprising and organised a meeting on my university campus to discuss it ... everyone on the left thought I was nuts. It was only after the collapse of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe that it developed a certain cachet in some quarters.

What would have happened if the US had been expelled and the country reunited I cannot say. I did make reference above to the program adopted by the government the Koreans put into place prior to the Yanks landing (why did they have to land?) and which the Yanks abolished by military decree. If the Yanks had recognised that government like the Russians did and all foreign powers had left I presume that this is what would have been implemented. It was a good program in my view. Here it is again:

The program of the PRK was presented in its September 14th twenty-seven point program. The program included: "the confiscation without compensation of lands held by the Japanese and collaborators; free distribution of that land to the peasants; rent limits on the nonredistributed land; nationalization of such major industries as mining, transportation, banking, and communication; state supervision of small and mid-sized companies; ... guaranteed basic human rights and freedoms, including those of speech, press, assembly, and faith; universal suffrage to adults over the age of eighteen; equality for women; labor law reforms including an eight-hour day, a minimum wage, and prohibition of child labor; and "establishment of close relations with the United States, USSR, England, and China, and positive opposition to any foreign influences interfering with the domestic affairs of the state."[2][3]

I suspect a great deal of the character of the regime that emerged in the North was shaped by the trauma of the War and the massacres of communists in the south etc.

I am not a supporter of the regime in the North, btw. Apart from anything else I hate dynasties.:) But I think we can all benefit from a greater understanding of the history of places,

C. Flower
12-08-2010, 01:28 PM
It was essentially the continuation of a nation wide conflict that had been ongoing since the arrival of the Americans.



I do not know much about the measures taken in North Korea after partition. When I was a young man and interested in these things no one on the left whether Leninist, Revisionist, Trotskyite, or Maoist ever talked about North Korea. I can recall being very affected by the Kwanju uprising and organised a meeting on my university campus to discuss it ... everyone on the left thought I was nuts. It was only after the collapse of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe that it developed a certain cachet in some quarters.

What would have happened if the US had been expelled and the country reunited I cannot say. I did make reference above to the program adopted by the government the Koreans put into place prior to the Yanks landing (why did they have to land?) and which the Yanks abolished by military decree. If the Yanks had recognised that government like the Russians did and all foreign powers had left I presume that this is what would have been implemented. It was a good program in my view. Here it is again:

The program of the PRK was presented in its September 14th twenty-seven point program. The program included: "the confiscation without compensation of lands held by the Japanese and collaborators; free distribution of that land to the peasants; rent limits on the nonredistributed land; nationalization of such major industries as mining, transportation, banking, and communication; state supervision of small and mid-sized companies; ... guaranteed basic human rights and freedoms, including those of speech, press, assembly, and faith; universal suffrage to adults over the age of eighteen; equality for women; labor law reforms including an eight-hour day, a minimum wage, and prohibition of child labor; and "establishment of close relations with the United States, USSR, England, and China, and positive opposition to any foreign influences interfering with the domestic affairs of the state."[2][3]

I suspect a great deal of the character of the regime that emerged in the North was shaped by the trauma of the War and the massacres of communists in the south etc.

I am not a supporter of the regime in the North, btw. Apart from anything else I hate dynasties.:) But I think we can all benefit from a greater understanding of the history of places,

Agreed. That's a great programme.

The US went on to link up with islamicists in Indonesia to kill up to a million communists and their families, to pre-empt the Communist Party from legally and democratically taking part in Government. Obama mentioned it in one of his biogs.

There was no army there to defend them.

Regarding who was watching events in Korea, Trotskyists certainly were, and the Pabloite split(an important one, one of the many with which you are familiar) originated from it. Pablo, I read yesterday, believed the Korean war meant imminent World revolution and advocated entryism, because Trotskyist parties weren't built/ready. Basically liquidation of a type that recurrs on the left.

Sam Lord
12-08-2010, 02:06 PM
The US went on to link up with islamicists in Indonesia to kill up to a million communists and their families, to pre-empt the Communist Party from legally and democratically taking part in Government. Obama mentioned it in one of his biogs.

There was no army there to defend them.


I am familiar with the massacres in Indonesia. The rivers apparently ran red for weeks. Time magazine referred to the extermination of up to a million people as "The Wests best news in the East for years".

C. Flower
12-08-2010, 02:18 PM
I am familiar with the massacres in Indonesia. The rivers apparently ran red for weeks. Time magazine referred to the extermination of up to a million people as "The Wests best news in the East for years".

Purely as an aside, Obama's mother worked for the State Department and USAID in rural Indonesia during the "mopping up operation" working as an "anthropologist" and collating lists of local leaders.

antiestablishmentarian
04-10-2010, 02:58 PM
According to the South Korean Defence Minister, there is the possibility that the North might try to disrupt the upcoming G20 summit in Seoul. He has a point: the North has previously sought to attack the South to secure the position of 'heir-apparent' to the régime. A number of attacks were carried out against different targets to cement the reputation and position of Kim Jong-Il in the military. The promotion of Kim Jong-Un last week has opened up the possibility that the military may launch a number of provocations on his orders to secure his position.

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/world-news/n-korea-may-disrupt-g20-summit-2364030.html

Griska
04-10-2010, 08:21 PM
Well, the North won't be the only ones hoping to disrupt the Beano in November, will they? Nice groundwork for blaming the North for anything that happens during the summit.

antiestablishmentarian
04-10-2010, 11:10 PM
Well, the North won't be the only ones hoping to disrupt the Beano in November, will they? Nice groundwork for blaming the North for anything that happens during the summit.

Yes thats true and I doubt they'll do anything surrounding the conference itself. I still think there may be some actions from the North Koreans though. A weapons launch or something like that.

Garibaldy
05-10-2010, 09:13 AM
As opposed to something non-provocative like the annual massive military mobilisation between the south and the US for "wargames".

antiestablishmentarian
05-10-2010, 10:22 AM
As opposed to something non-provocative like the annual massive military mobilisation between the south and the US for "wargames".

We could start another thread to talk about that: its true that there are continuous operations around the coasts of North Korea by both ROK and US forces, which are extreme provocations too.

Garibaldy
05-10-2010, 10:40 AM
We could start another thread to talk about that: its true that there are continuous operations around the coasts of North Korea by both ROK and US forces, which are extreme provocations too.

Does it need another thread? Is it not part of the same continuum? For example, we hear a lot about incursions or supposed incursions by the DPRK. And next to nothing about those carried out by others. A couple of years ago former south Korean commandos who had engaged in such activities held a protest at their treatment by Seoul. Hardly a peep in the media, and no outrage at this violation of territory and provocation.

C. Flower
29-10-2010, 12:51 PM
More tension leading up to the G20 in South Korea - is that in itself a provocation ??

Shots reported exchanged across the border.

I think one good thread following the ongoing tensions would be much better than a number of short ones.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/north-korean-troops-fire-on-south-479632.html

antiestablishmentarian
30-10-2010, 11:02 AM
It seems shots were exchanged at the DMZ yesterday alright: soldiers from the North were alleged to have started it, with the South retaliating immediately. No onformation from the North yet on the alleged incident or casualties, we know that there were no casualties from the South and I'd imagine this was accidental: with so many soldiers facing each other on opposite sides of the frontier, incidents like this are bound to happen.

Garibaldy
31-10-2010, 08:22 AM
http://www.independent.ie/world-news/tears-as-north-korea-allows-family-reunions-2401306.html

tea drinker
23-11-2010, 01:26 PM
North and south Korea exchanged Artillery fire today. It's claimed North fired first on South Korean Island of Yeongpyeong.
" ROK marines are reported killed, a dozen or so people injured. South responded with 155mm Self propeled guns, launched aircraft etc.



South Korea has warned North Korea it would "sternly retaliate" to any further provocations after dozens of shells were fired at a South Korean island.

Two South Korean marines were killed and 17 others injured, as well as three civilians, after North Korea fired dozens of artillery shells onto a Yeonpyeong Island in the Yellow sea, 50 miles off the South's northwest coast in an area close to a disputed sea border.

The attack, which comes days after it emerged that North Korea was pressing ahead with its illegal nuclear programme, marks a serious further escalation of tensions on the Korean Peninsula.

A presidential statement said the shelling âconstitutes a clear armed provocation.â

âFurthermore, its reckless shelling of civilian targets is unpardonable.

âNorth Korean authorities must take responsibility.â

The incident is believed to have been sparked by South Korean military exercises in the area, which the North had objected to.
http://www.independent.ie/world-news/asia-pacific/south-korea-threatens-retaliation-after-north-korea-shells-island-2432042.html


YouTube - Artillery Fire in South Korean Town on Yeonpyeong Island

C. Flower
23-11-2010, 01:50 PM
After South Ossetia, where the western media got it completely wrong, I would hesitate to accept first reports, although they may well be true.

The tension between North and South Korea seems to be getting worse - is there more pressure being applied because of the uncertainty over succession ?

antiestablishmentarian
23-11-2010, 02:10 PM
A number of things are interesting about the timing of this. It comes in the wake of allegations from a US scientist who was allowed into the country about a new state of the art nuclear reactor for enriching uranium, where he alleged that over 1,00 centrifuges were currently being processed. He likened it to a space age facility whereas the technology in the existing Yongbyon reactor was aging and mostly Soviet in nature. However, something doesn't quite add up about this allegation. They are saying that the DPRK obtained this technology from Pakistan, Iran and through the black market, however it stretches credibility to say that technology this advanced was bought from countries like Iran, whose programme is only embryonic, or Pakistan.

Another point to remember is that the current leaderships North and South are becoming increasingly hardline- Lee Myung Bak's government in the South is very hardline (the Minister of Defence called for US nuclear weapons to be stationed in the South just the other day), while Kim's Songgun, or military-first, policy has increased the Kim family's dependence on the army leaderhsip as the basis for their rule

As for the incident this morning, I would be hesitant like Cactus to condemn the North straight off- however, as I've pointed out on other threads, the North tends to do things like this during leadership succession and the rushed nature of this succession means that it's being carried out faster, with a concomitant knock on effect in terms of tension, than the last succession, which took place over 2 decades.


Washington's top envoy on North Korea said today revelations that the regime had made dramatic progress in enriching uranium posed a "difficult problem" but played down fears that the region is on the brink of a nuclear crisis.

Speaking to reporters in Seoul, Stephen Bosworth said evidence the North had built an ultramodern enrichment plant was "the latest in a series of provocative moves ... it is a very difficult problem we have been struggling to deal with for 20 years".

"This is not a crisis, we are not surprised. We have been watching and analysing [North Korea's] aspirations to produce uranium, [but] it is not helpful to jointly agreed goals we have subscribed to in terms of peace, prosperity and stability in the Korean peninsula and north-east Asia."

Bosworth arrived in the region after a US scientist, Siegfried Hecker, said the government in Pyongyang had shown him a "stunning" new uranium enrichment plant at the country's main nuclear complex at Yongbyon this month.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/22/north-korea-nuclear-plant-crisis

Fing Fers
23-11-2010, 09:03 PM
This could be the start of world war 3. Baba Vanga who died years ago predicted World War 3 would start Nov 2010.


2010: World War 3 begins in November 2010. Starting as a regular war, it will progress to a nuclear and chemical war. Vanga says the war will be finished by October 2014.


2011 as a result of the war, radioactive showers will destroy almost all life in the Northern Hemisphere.

http://www.theastralworld.com/prophecies/babavanga.php

antiestablishmentarian
23-11-2010, 09:41 PM
This could be the start of world war 3. Baba Vanga who died years ago predicted World War 3 would start Nov 2010.





http://www.theastralworld.com/prophecies/babavanga.php

It'd be a pretty one-sided world war if it was to start in Korea- China wouldn't intervene on their side, as they are a nuisance and the Chinese prop them up to prevent internal collapse, a refugee crisis and the nightmare that would be the spread of arms, WMD's etc in the event of a collapse given the size of the North Korean arms stockpiles and industries

C. Flower
25-11-2010, 12:35 AM
Not good. US sending warships. Sorry about the paywall.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/4f832eda-f78c-11df-b770-00144feab49a,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=htt p%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F4f832eda-f78c-11df-b770-00144feab49a.html%3Fftcamp%3Drss&_i_referer=&ftcamp=rss#axzz16FY9ybkK

Ah Well
25-11-2010, 12:45 AM
Not good. US sending warships. Sorry about the paywall.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/4f832eda-f78c-11df-b770-00144feab49a,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=htt p%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F4f832eda-f78c-11df-b770-00144feab49a.html%3Fftcamp%3Drss&_i_referer=&ftcamp=rss#axzz16FY9ybkK

http://www.stripes.com/news/pacific/korea/u-s-sending-carrier-strike-group-off-korea-for-joint-exercises-1.126345

C. Flower
25-11-2010, 09:38 AM
http://www.stripes.com/news/pacific/korea/u-s-sending-carrier-strike-group-off-korea-for-joint-exercises-1.126345

Someone comments on Stars and Stripes that this exercise was clearly planned before the shelling as a 24 turnaround would not be possible for an operation of this scale.


The U.S. military announced Wednesday it is sending the USS George Washington Carrier Strike Group to Korean waters to take part in a joint U.S.-South Korean naval exercise, one day after North Korea bombarded a populated South Korean island near the disputed maritime border.

The strike group, which includes the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and four other ships, left Yokosuka Naval Base on Wednesday with 6,000 sailors and about 75 aircraft, said U.S. 7th Fleet spokesman Lt. Anthony Falvo. A South Korean spokesman for the Joint Chiefs of Staff said he did not know how many South Korean troops or ships would be involved in the four-day exercise.

Two South Korean marines were killed in the attack on Tuesday and the bodies of two civilian workers were found at a construction site on the island on Wednesday, South Korean officials said. Also, 15 troops and four civilians were injured during the attack, officials said.

In Washington on Wednesday, the Obama administration called on China exert its influence over North Korea to prevent further provocative acts.

“China is pivotal in moving North Korea in a fundamentally different direction,” State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley told reporters. “We expect China to be clear, like we are, as to where the responsibility for the current situation, the current tension lies. This is something that we feel strongly about.”

He said U.S. diplomats had delivered that message to Chinese officials in Washington and Beijing in the aftermath of Tuesday’s attack.

It was probably this kind of exercise that the shelling responded to.
The US is choosing to breach an agreement with S. Korea on handover of military control to the Koreans. A major exercise was carried out last week under the control of a US general.

The sinking of the Cheonan, allegedly but unconvincingly so, by the North Koreans, is being used as the excuse for the US to hold on to wartime control.

http://www.stripes.com/news/will-operational-control-transfer-be-another-casualty-of-n-korean-torpedo-1.103753



The sinking of the Cheonan has cost 46 South Korean lives, pushed the country Monday to sever trade with North Korea, and shattered always-tenuous relations.

But there could be another casualty: The plan for South Korea to take command of its own troops during a possible war.

The United States and South Korea agreed to the plan, called OPCON, in 2007. It currently would give South Korea operational control of its troops beginning April 17, 2012, a responsibility that now falls to the top U.S. general in the country.

But a growing number of critics, including some former South Korean military officials, have raised questions about whether the country’s military capabilities — from its command-and-control systems to its missile defenses — are advanced enough to defend against a North Korean attack.

The March 26 sinking of the Cheonan, which a multinational investigation team last week said was the result of a North Korean torpedo attack, has bolstered their case and may hasten a decision to delay the transfer, according to several experts.

“I think what this does show is the North Korean threat remains ominous, and North Korea’s capability for using [nonconventional] forces continues to be a threat to South Korea,” said Bruce Bechtol, an international relations professor at the Marine Corps Command and Staff College in Quantico, Va., and author of “Red Rogue: The Persistent Challenge of North Korea.”



There is constant pressure on N. Korea and also on the South from the US. Indirectly China is also being leaned on by these large scale war exercises at their front door.

This particular flashpoint looks as if its going to become more and more dangerous.

Ah Well
25-11-2010, 09:39 AM
This particular flashpoint looks as if its going to become more and more dangerous.

Well, it's going nowhere good anyway. Sabre rattling is one thing but military action and fatalities is another.

TotalMayhem
25-11-2010, 02:43 PM
Sarah Palin - We've Got To Stand With Our North Korean Allies

YouTube - Sarah Palin - We've Got To Stand With Our North Korean Allies

Andrew49
25-11-2010, 05:32 PM
Sarah Palin - We've Got To Stand With Our North Korean Allies

YouTube - Sarah Palin - We've Got To Stand With Our North Korean Allies (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-3hL9FfQFc)

Oh Gawd!

She will have to 'refudiate' it now.

jimmymalone
25-11-2010, 05:43 PM
Would a war between North and South Korea help stabilise the value of the dollar?

Hapax
25-11-2010, 05:48 PM
Sarah Palin - We've Got To Stand With Our North Korean Allies


Beautiful example of the radical ambiguity of the word "sanction" which has two diametrically opposed meanings: to approve / to penalize.

Lapsedmethodist
28-11-2010, 12:33 AM
The spirit of the Skibereen Eagle still lives !! The Belfast Telegraph reports that North Korean workers are heading home as the North prepares for war...

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/workers-recalled-as-north-korea-prepares-for-war-15015260.html

Lifeisagame
28-11-2010, 12:39 AM
The spirit of the Skibereen Eagle still lives !! The Belfast Telegraph reports that North Korean workers are heading home as the North prepares for war...

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/workers-recalled-as-north-korea-prepares-for-war-15015260.html
Difficult to see a war with US and China on opposite sides.

Ah Well
28-11-2010, 12:58 AM
Good Blog Entry here

http://boingboing.net/2008/10/30/bob-harris-photo-dia.html

Lapsedmethodist
28-11-2010, 01:04 AM
Difficult to see a war with US and China on opposite sides.

That's the definition of a proxy war, Life.

Lifeisagame
28-11-2010, 01:11 AM
Thank you.
However, the World is due a war with the massive national/international disputes going on.
Probably the Middle East will be a starting point.

TotalMayhem
28-11-2010, 01:16 AM
Difficult to see a war with US and China on opposite sides.

Rather sooner than later.

Lifeisagame
28-11-2010, 01:19 AM
Nuclear is the biggest worry.

TotalMayhem
28-11-2010, 01:43 AM
Indeed.

And I don't think the Chinese would risk a shooting war with the US over Korea. Taiwan, however, is a different story altogether.

C. Flower
28-11-2010, 03:56 AM
Things are incredibly tense over the up and coming US led exercises in the Yellow Sea. There were rumours this evening that land missile bases were being loaded and now this from Yonhap


(URGENT) Explosion sounds of artillery fire heard on Yeonpyeong Island, S. Korean official says

C. Flower
28-11-2010, 03:59 AM
This week marks the 60th anniversary of China’s entry in force into the Korean War. The attack carried out by some 300,000 Chinese troops resulted in one of the most stunning defeats suffered by the US military in its entire history.
What followed was a protracted and bloody stalemate that ended only with the armistice declared in July 1953. The war had claimed the lives of more than four million people, the vast majority of them Korean civilians.
Six decades after US and Chinese troops waged bitter hand-to-hand combat south of the Yalu River, tensions on the Korean peninsula are arguably at their highest since the end of the Korean War. They are being fed by and are in turn exacerbating great power conflicts between Washington and Beijing.
The arrival in the Yellow Sea this weekend of a naval battle group led by the US nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, the USS George Washington, signals another escalation in the current crisis.
The dispatch of the giant warship was announced in the immediate wake of the North Korean shelling Tuesday of the island of Yeonpyeong, killing two South Korean marines and two construction workers.
North Korea has said that its bombardment was in response to shells fired into its territorial waters by the South Korean military during war games held only a few miles from the North’s coastline. South Korea launched a retaliatory barrage that it claimed inflicted significant damage, but no casualty reports have been issued in the North. Now new war games—this time with a massive US component—create the conditions for another clash.
Incendiary rhetoric has accompanied the crisis on both sides of Korea’s demilitarized zone. On Friday, North Korea denounced the planned joint US-South Korean exercises as a provocation and warned, “The situation on the Korean peninsula is inching closer to the brink of war.”
In the South, the government replaced its defense minister with a former chairman of the military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff and announced the adoption of new rules of engagement that would allow the military to respond with disproportionate force to attacks from the North. The garrison on Yeonpyeong (just seven miles from the North Korean coast), meanwhile, has been reinforced with more troops and heavy weapons.
Right-wing legislators, meanwhile have denounced the government of President Lee Myung-bak for failing to take more aggressive action, including the use of air strikes, against the North.
Lee and his Grand National Party (GNP), the party of the former military dictatorships that ruled South Korea with US support, came into office promising a hard-line stance toward North Korea. Its cutting off of aid and rejection of the “Sunshine Policy,” through which previous South Korean governments sought reconciliation via investments and aid, have played a significant role in provoking the escalating conflict. Now Lee is under pressure from his own supporters and elements within the military to make good on his hard-line rhetoric.
The potential for a catastrophic confrontation on the Korean peninsula is high. It is difficult to imagine another armed confrontation not provoking a major retaliation by the South Korean military.
What makes the situation all the more fraught with danger is the way in which it is being exploited by Washington to pursue its own strategic aims in the region, particularly vis-à-vis China.
US officials have acknowledged that the dispatch of the USS Washington and its accompanying destroyers and other escort ships to the Yellow Sea is aimed as much, if not more, at China as at North Korea.
“Mr. Obama’s decision to accelerate the deployment of an American aircraft carrier group to the region is intended to **** the Chinese,” the New York Times reported Thursday. “American officials hope that by presenting Beijing with an unpalatable result—the expansion of American maneuvers off its shores—China will decide that pressing North Korea is the lesser of two evils.”
A senior administration official told the New York Times on Wednesday: “To the Chinese, the message is that if North Korea undertakes actions such as uranium enrichment or the attack on the South that threaten our equities, the US will respond in ways that negatively affect China’s perceived interests. The response is directed at messaging North Korea and reassuring South Korea, but China clearly does not like to see US aircraft carriers, for example, in the Yellow Sea.”
Washington had threatened to carry out joint US-South Korean military exercises in the Yellow Sea last July, ostensibly in response to the sinking of a South Korean warship in which 46 sailors lost their lives. South Korea has charged North Korea with having sunk the vessel, which went down near the disputed maritime border imposed by the US at the end of the Korean War, but Pyongyang has denied any responsibility.
In the face of Beijing’s sharp protests, the Obama administration shifted those exercises to the Sea of Japan, away from Chinese waters.
This time Washington is deploying one of its most powerful warships in the Yellow Sea as a demonstration of its military supremacy against China.
While the Chinese government issued a measured warning over the exercise, declaring that it opposed “any military acts in our exclusive economic zone”—which extends 200 miles from the Chinese coast—others close to the Beijing government and its military vigorously denounced the US maneuvers.
While the immediate pretext for the provocative exercise is the Korean conflict, it is in line with an increasingly aggressive US policy in Asia. This has included the US attempt to insert itself into territorial conflicts in the South China Sea, backing Japan, Vietnam and other ASEAN countries against China. Washington’s aim in the region has been the pursuit of a series of alliances and assertions of military power directed against China that stretch from India, Pakistan and Afghanistan to Southeast Asia, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.
In the wake of the world capitalist financial meltdown, geostrategic offensive has been coupled with increasingly aggressive demands for Chinese currency revaluations and trade concessions.
Fundamentally, the growing US-China tensions are rooted in deep-going shifts in the world economy and the global balance of forces: China’s rise to the position of the world’s second-largest economy, eclipsing Japan, on the one hand, and the relative economic decline of US imperialism, combined with its growing use of military force, on the other.


http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/nov2010/pers-n27.shtml

C. Flower
28-11-2010, 04:03 AM
(URGENT) S. Korea's military spots signs of N. Korean artillery firing: official

This looks horribly close to war.

C. Flower
28-11-2010, 04:17 AM
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2010/11/28/0200000000AEN20101128002100320.HTML

Civilians ordered to take cover in shelters.

The US is bringing its largest nuclear armed battle ship into the exercises.

C. Flower
28-11-2010, 04:20 AM
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2010/11/27/90/0200000000AEN20101127003000320F.HTML

N. Korea says the situation started with the US firing live rounds in disputed waters in their recent exercise.


SEOUL, Nov. 27 (Yonhap) -- North Korea on Saturday blamed the United States for its artillery attack on a South Korean island this week, accusing the U.S. of bringing on the confrontation between the divided Koreas to use it as an excuse to increase its military presence in the region.

The accusation came shortly after Seoul and Washington announced plans for a joint naval exercise in Korea's Yellow Sea in a show of force against the North, following its shelling of a populated South Korean island, Yeonpyeong, earlier this week.

The five-day exercise will begin Sunday, involving dozens of South Korean and U.S. warships, including the United States' nuclear-power aircraft carrier USS George Washington.

"No sooner had the Yeonpyeong incident occurred than the U.S. announced that it would stage joint naval exercises with the South Korean puppet forces with nuclear-powered carrier George Washington involved in the West Sea of Korea as if it had been waiting for it to happen before immediately sending the carrier to the sea," the North's official Korean Central News Agency said in a commentary.

"This clearly indicates that the U.S. was the arch criminal who deliberately planned the incident and wire-pulled it behind the scene," it said.

Pyongyang claims its military only returned fire after South Korean and U.S. forces fired into its territorial waters during their joint exercise in the Yellow Sea.

Some 90 artillery shells landed on the South Korean island inhabited by some 1,400 civilians and 300 soldiers, police and government officials, killing four people, including two civilians, and wounding dozens of others.

The North said it was deeply regrettable if any civilian lives had, in fact, been lost in the shelling, but claimed its artillery shells were only aimed at military bases.

"If that is true, it is very regrettable, but the enemy (South Korea) should be held responsible for the incident as it took such inhuman action as creating 'a human shield' by deploying civilians around artillery positions and inside military facilities before the launch of the provocation," it said.

The North also renewed its threat of additional military actions against joint military drills of South Korean and U.S. troops.

"The DPRK has so far restrained itself with the maximum patience. But the enemy encroached upon the inviolable territorial waters and land of the DPRK by firing live shells in the most sensitive disputed area despite its repeated warnings," the commentary said, referring to North Korea by its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

"If the U.S. brings its carrier to the West Sea of Korea at last, no one can predict the ensuing consequences," it said.

Meanwhile, an informed government source in Seoul said the North was stepping up its military activities on the west coast in a possible preparation for additional provocations.

"North Korea is not only stepping up the combat readiness of its eighth naval squadron based in the area, but is also showing signs of additional provocations by maintaining its coastal artillery batteries in a firing mode," the source said, adding the South Korean military was closely monitoring the North.

Captain Con O'Sullivan
28-11-2010, 08:23 AM
I have to say I'm struggling to care. The Americans and Chinese are as usual using the Korean peninsula in a game of brinkmanship similar to the Russian convoys to Cuba during the missile crisis.

The Chinese will bring the North Koreans to heel if they think they are losing control over that state.

Can the US control South Korea? I'm not so sure and there should not be an American aircraft carrier in the area provoking China.

The Chinese know the Americans are on the slide in global reach and don't have to fight any battles only wait ... and strategy is on their side.

Worst case scenario? Round three of the Korean War actually on the peninsula itself. Or an exchange of battlefield nukes between the two Koreas. I don't care and if both Koreas were destroyed it wouldn't bother me at all.

C. Flower
28-11-2010, 10:06 AM
I have to say I'm struggling to care. The Americans and Chinese are as usual using the Korean peninsula in a game of brinkmanship similar to the Russian convoys to Cuba during the missile crisis.

The Chinese will bring the North Koreans to heel if they think they are losing control over that state.

Can the US control South Korea? I'm not so sure and there should not be an American aircraft carrier in the area provoking China.

The Chinese know the Americans are on the slide in global reach and don't have to fight any battles only wait ... and strategy is on their side.

Worst case scenario? Round three of the Korean War actually on the peninsula itself. Or an exchange of battlefield nukes between the two Koreas. I don't care and if both Koreas were destroyed it wouldn't bother me at all.

A smaller state divided by outside Big Powers and then blamed for being difficult ? Why should we bother about them at all, politically? But even if that doesn't grab you, they are human beings, the same as us.

Captain Con O'Sullivan
28-11-2010, 10:12 AM
Mm;) I care more about containment than the countries concerned I have to admit.

antiestablishmentarian
28-11-2010, 12:54 PM
Reports are coming in that South Korea has ordered journalists to evacuate Yeongpyeong island. One of the things about this cross-peninsular standoff is that it's almost impossible to tell whether one side is making preparations to deploy troops against the other- the respective armies are both mostly deployed within 100km of the DMZ, meaning that they could switch from defensive posture to deployment for offensive pretty quickly and without setting off alarm-bells by bringing in reinforcements prior to an attack.

Lapsedmethodist
28-11-2010, 02:21 PM
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2010/11/27/90/0200000000AEN20101127003000320F.HTML

N. Korea says the situation started with the US firing live rounds in disputed waters in their recent exercise.

Well I never... North Korea says.....:rolleyes:

C. Flower
29-11-2010, 04:11 PM
Well I never... North Korea says.....:rolleyes:


Breaking News says ---

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/confusion-as-south-korea-cancels-military-drills-483743.html



South Korea today announced a provocative series of front-line military exercises on the island shelled by North Korea last week, then immediately postponed them.

The move was taken as sign of disarray hours after the president vowed to get tough on the North.

Similar live-fire manoeuvres by South Korean troops last week triggered the North’s bombardment of Yeonpyeong Island that killed four people and drew return fire in a clash that set the region on edge.

The new drills originally planned for tomorrow could have had even higher stakes: South Korean and American warships are currently engaged in separate military exercises in waters to the south.

Officials at the Joint Chiefs of Staff said the latest drills were postponed after the marine unit on the island mistakenly announced them without getting final approval from higher military authorities.

The cancellation had nothing to do with North Korea, and the drills will take place later, one said.

Pyongyang had warned last week that it would consider any South Korean drills off Yeonpyeong Island a deliberate provocation and territorial violation, and urged Seoul to call off last week’s exercises. The artillery attack came after South Korea went ahead with its drills.

Earlier today President Lee Myung-bak gave his first address to the nation in nearly a week, taking responsibility for failing to protect his citizens, expressing outrage at the North’s “ruthlessness” and vowing tough consequences for any future aggression.

Mr Lee has come under criticism for what opponents have called lapses in South Korea’s response to the attack just eight months after the sinking of a South Korean warship in nearby waters that killed 46 sailors.

Hours after his speech, authorities on Yeonpyeong Island announced new live-fire drills for tomorrow morning, warning residents by loudspeaker to take shelter in underground bunkers well in advance. Another announcement later in the evening said there would be no exercise.

Meanwhile, a nuclear-powered US supercarrier and a South Korean destroyer carried out joint military exercises in the waters south of the island in a united show of force by the allies.

Under pressure to take stronger action in dealing with the defiant North, Lee lashed out at Pyongyang today.

“Only a few metres away from where shells landed, there is a school where classes were going on,” Mr Lee said. “I am outraged by the ruthlessness of the North Korean regime, which is even indifferent to the lives of little children.”

In the past week, Mr Lee has replaced his defence minister, ordered reinforcements for the 4,000 troops on Yeonpyeong and four other Yellow Sea islands, and upgraded the military rules of engagement.

Minutes later, North Korea issued another threat to attack South Korea and the United States, calling the allies’ joint war drills “yet another grave military provocation.”

The two Koreas are required to abide by an armistice signed in 1953 at the close of their three-year war.

However North Korea does not recognise the maritime border drawn by the UN at the close of the war, and considers the waters around Yeonpyeong Island – just seven miles from its shores – its territory.


Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/confusion-as-south-korea-cancels-military-drills-483743.html#ixzz16gkSFqfP


Somebody please remind me what business the US has in Korea, North, South or maritine ?

Captain Con O'Sullivan
29-11-2010, 04:15 PM
None whatsoever ... same as the stupidity of attempting to put missile sites in Poland up against the Russian border.

Provocative, stupid and aggressive.

antiestablishmentarian
30-11-2010, 12:12 AM
The tensions in the region will be ratcheted up another notch after the wikileaks cable revealed that China is ready to cast Kim's régime loose. As all of this was known beforehand by the US, it's not surprising that they don't seem overly worried about the rise in tension that will result from the latest military exercises in the Yellow Sea and that South Korea has been far more bellicose in its rhetoric towards the North recently than on previous occasions following provocations. I think we're witnessing the start of a turning of the screws on the DPRK with the aim of bringing about political disintegration.


Chun, who has since been appointed national security adviser to South Korea's president, said North Korea had already collapsed economically.

Political collapse would ensue once Kim Jong-il died, despite the dictator's efforts to obtain Chinese help and to secure the succession for his son, Kim Jong-un.

"Citing private conversations during previous sessions of the six-party talks , Chun claimed [the two high-level officials] believed Korea should be unified under ROK [South Korea] control," Stephens reported.

"The two officials, Chun said, were ready to 'face the new reality' that the DPRK [North Korea] now had little value to China as a buffer state – a view that, since North Korea's first nuclear test in 2006, had reportedly gained traction among senior PRC [People's Republic of China] leaders. Chun argued that in the event of a North Korean collapse, China would clearly 'not welcome' any US military presence north of the DMZ [demilitarised zone]. Again citing his conversations with [the officials], Chun said the PRC would be comfortable with a reunified Korea controlled by Seoul and anchored to the US in a 'benign alliance' – as long as Korea was not hostile towards China. Tremendous trade and labour-export opportunities for Chinese companies, Chun said, would also help 'salve' PRC concerns about … a reunified Korea.

"Chun dismissed the prospect of a possible PRC military intervention in the event of a DPRK collapse, noting that China's strategic economic interests now lie with the United States, Japan and South Korea – not North Korea."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-cables-china-reunified-korea

It's certainly an interesting story, but it needs to be taken with some caution. If true it's a game changer.

C. Flower
30-11-2010, 12:25 AM
I retain an open mind as to whether Wikileaks is for real or a US game.

There was a lot of shouting beforehand from the Western governments about damage to relations between states, and then we get this one...

Ah Well
30-11-2010, 12:36 AM
Letting the shape throwing militarily aside for a quick sec, this is a good Blog to peruse at one's leisure about a guy's train trip in 2008 from Vienna to Pyongyang, entering via Russia without a "Guide" and travelling right across North Korea

http://vienna-pyongyang.blogspot.com/

And the obligatory Youtube Vid

YouTube - Vienna - Pyongyang, part 2 (see http://vienna-pyongyang.blogspot.com/)

antiestablishmentarian
30-11-2010, 03:29 PM
This is getting very, very serious; like a high stakes poker game, Lee Myung Bak further raised the stakes, which are the threat of conflict, with his statement last night- it gives him very little room for manouvre. Also, given the way power works in the North, it will bind them into retaliating further and continuing to escalate the stakes if they do make some move, or a move is made and attributed to them a la the Cheonan. It was not a good time to leak info like this...



South Korean President Lee Myung-bak vowed retaliation against any further provocation by the North after it attacked an island last week as anger simmered over the government's response.

Lee addressed the nation for the first time since Tuesday's attack as US and South Korean warships took part in military manoeuvres, prompting concern in regional power China and threats of all-out war from North Korea.

He also visited US forces in Korea to thank them for the show of force.

"North Korea will pay the price in the event of further provocations," Lee said. "Attacking civilians militarily is an inhumane crime that is strictly forbidden in a time of war... Now is the time to show action, not a hundred words."

http://www.jordantimes.com/?news=32200

Griska
30-11-2010, 04:07 PM
As a result of last weeks carry on, started by the South, South Korea and the U.S. are to hold joint manouvres involving an American Warship. Pure provocation.


Obama and South Korean President Lee Myung-bak "agreed Tuesday night to hold joint military exercises as a first response to North Korea's deadly shelling (as) both countries struggled for the second time this year to keep a North Korean provocation from escalating into war."

America's USS George Washington, a nuclear armed aircraft carrier, and accompanying ships will participate, clear saber-rattling over diplomacy that all US administrations, to one degree or another, have emphasized in US-North Korean relations for decades. That despite Pyongyang wanting rapprochement with the West, only to have Washington rebuff them, choosing confrontation over stability and risking war, potentially with nuclear weapons.

http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2010/11/latest-northsouth-korean-exchange.html

antiestablishmentarian
01-12-2010, 04:10 PM
In response to Myung-Baks statement yesterday, KCNA released the following communiqué today. It makes for worrying reading as it is an indication of the siege mentality that the North Korean ruling class feels at present (with some justification perhaps given the recent actions in the area and the wikileaks affair)


The DPRK-targeted adventurous war maneuvers kicked off by the U.S. and the south Korean war-like forces in the West Sea of Korea on Nov. 28 may spill over into an all-out war any time, warns Minju Joson Tuesday in a signed commentary. It discloses the danger of their escalating moves for a war of aggression against the DPRK.

What should not be overlooked is the fact that the U.S. super-large nuclear carrier George Washington is involved in these war maneuvers, the commentary notes, and goes on:

The said saber-rattling is fraught with the danger of an all-out war which may break any moment.

What merits a serious attention is that the above-said moves for a war of aggression against the DPRK are escalating.

These moves bring to bolder relief their ulterior intention. What they seek is to strain the situation on the Korean Peninsula and ignite a war of aggression against the DPRK under any pretext. As a matter of fact, the south Korean military is busy working out new "rules for battles" and introducing "precision guided weapons for destroying underground facilities in the north" on the instruction of traitor Lee Myung Bak for thoroughly countering "local war" and "asymmetric combat power."


If the U.S. and the south Korean war-like forces fire even a shell into the inviolable land and territorial waters of the DPRK, they will have to pay dearly for this.

They would be well advised to properly understand who their rival is and stop at once their moves for a war of aggression against the DPRK.

antiestablishmentarian
01-12-2010, 05:17 PM
There's been a further escalation on the South's part- it's just been announced that artillery drills are going to be held near the Norths sea borders. And the South Korean head of intellgence said it's likely that there will be more attacks from the North in the near future. I hope he doesn't know something we don't because any further escalation might feasibly kick something off.


But some analysts warned that more military drills could escalate a delicate situation by angering the North.

"The overall situation might be intensified and a new crisis might be brought by doing this," said Professor Chu Shulong, an expert on international security at Beijing's Tsinghua University.

He added: "Because of the Cheonan incident in March and the shelling in Yeonpyeong, [South Korean] people are angry and their anger has not been addressed yet. They are not happy with the reaction of the government.

"At the same time, South Korea cannot attack North Korea. They can only express their anger through military drills; it is their only way to show the determination to defend their country and to warn the North."

Dr Leonid Petrov, an expert on the North at the University of Sydney, added: "Conservatives in Pyongyang and Seoul are driving the situation to a new extreme."

He argued that Lee's choice was effectively to "either go to war with North Korea or reverse his policy and return to the sunshine policy [of his predecessors] and renege on his electoral promises".

Petrov added that the "responsible" course for the US would be to talk to the North.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/01/south-korea-artillery-border-north




North Korea is highly likely to attack again, South Korea's intelligence chief has told MPs, according to Seoul-based media.

His remarks come a week after an artillery bombardment killed two civilians and two soldiers on Yeonpyeong island – and hours after the South announced fresh military manoeuvres.

Won Sei-hoon, director of the National Intelligence Service, warned: "There is a high possibility that the North will make another attack."

He said the shelling had come amid domestic pressure in Pyongyang, telling a closed session of a parliamentary committee that "internal complaints are growing about the North's succession for a third generation, and its economic situation is worsening".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/01/north-korea-attack-likely-warns-south-korea

matt
01-12-2010, 05:42 PM
China's diluted support leaked - which may be true whether or not the 'leaks' are genuine.
US & South surely knew manoeuvres would provoke this response.
And, long prior to all of this, the treatment of it's people by the North and the apparent misery of the country has been the subject of more documentaries & news reports than the average we could expect.
I think this has been a carefully orchestrated courtship to conflict, on the part of the US (with tacit China support ?)

Just one possibility, of course.

Maybe China are playing two hands.

C. Flower
18-12-2010, 03:31 PM
http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article961319.ece

The Hindu reports on S. Korean demonstrations against the artillery exercises, and that China is expressing a high level of anxiety about the tensions being raised by them.

C. Flower
18-12-2010, 03:39 PM
http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article961319.ece

The Hindu reports on S. Korean demonstrations against the artillery exercises, and that China is expressing a high level of anxiety about the tensions being raised by them.

Two hours ago, the Voice of America said the shelling will go ahead from the island that was allegedly shelled by the North.

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/South-Korea-to-Go-Ahead-with-Live-Fire-Drills---112121084.html

I read yesterday that the Korean Foreign Minister was unaware of the shelling of the island hours after it happened.

It is so difficult to know if information on what is happening there is sound or not.

C. Flower
18-12-2010, 06:19 PM
Less than an hour ago, N. Korea said that if the artillery exercises in disputed waters went ahead with the US "using human shields" - the situation would explode.

There have been unconfirmed reports that the exercises may be postponed due to weather conditions.

http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFTRE6BG1O220101218
This is shocking brinkmanship on the part of the US and the situation is reminiscent of the Reagan era, or the Cuban crisis under Kennedy, with the potential for nuclear war.


North Korea says the situation on the Korean peninsula will "explode" if South Korea goes ahead with a planned live-fire artillery exercise on a border island.
The North rained a deadly bombardment on Yeonpyeong island after a similar drill last month. It has threatened a deadlier attack if the one-day drill which was scheduled sometime between December 18 and 21 goes ahead.
A foreign ministry statement, quoted by the official news agency, accused US troops - some 20 of whom who will take part in the drill - of providing a "human shield" for the upcoming exercise, but repeated threats to attack it.
"The US Department of State sent a threatening message to the DPRK (North Korea), urging it not to forget there are Americans and foreign reporters on the island. The US is providing even 'a human shield'," the statement said.
Pyongyang disputes the Yellow Sea border drawn after the 1950-53 war and claims the waters around Yeonpyeong and other South Korean frontline islands as its own maritime territory.
It says the last drill, on November 23, dropped shells into its waters.
Hours later that day, the North's bombardment killed two marines and two civilians on Yeonpyeong and damaged dozens of homes.
The upcoming exercise, which would violate the North's waters, "would make it impossible to prevent the situation on the Korean peninsula from exploding and escape its ensuing disaster", the North said.
It said its military has already threatened "decisive and merciless punishment" for such an action and "does not make an empty talk".
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia-pacific/2010/12/201012189734344798.html

There are demonstrations against war, North and South.


http://english.aljazeera.net/mritems/Images/2010/12/18/201012189392405621_20.jpg


http://www.thehindu.com/multimedia/dynamic/00311/ALBERT_SOUTH_KOREA__311063e.jpg

C. Flower
19-12-2010, 10:14 AM
S. Korean troops are on maximum alert. A US soldier has been arrested for posting a picture of Bagdad on the internet, claiming it was the S. Korean island damaged by N. Korean artillery shells.

Yonhap is giving regular updates.

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2010/12/19/0200000000AEN20101219000700315.HTML

Things seem to be tense, even on a scale of decades of tensions between N. Korea and the South and US.

Pressures have been ramped up by a couple of years of full on naval / military exercises in contested waters and border incidents. The US is looking to take advantage of the succession period, it seems, to engineer regime change. It is a desperately dangerous strategy as N. Korea at the moment seems serious about fighting fire with fire.

C. Flower
19-12-2010, 01:08 PM
The Irish Times give an update on this - The North is often on high alert

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/1219/breaking13.html



North Korea's military has raised an alert for its artillery units on the west coast in readiness for a planned live-fire drill by the South, a government source said today.
"We understand that there's been an upgrade in alert at artillery units," he said.


South Korean marines are expected to stage live-fire drills off Yeonpyeong island, hit by a North Korean bombardment last month, some time before nightfall on Tuesday.
North Korea has threatened another military attack if the live-fire drill goes ahead.


Meanwhile, a US envoy on an unofficial visit to North Korea yesterday warned that the situation on the peninsula is a “tinderbox.”
Mr Richardson, on a private mission to cool tensions, urged North Korea to show restraint and to let the rival South conduct exercises.
"There's enormous potential for miscalculation," he said "I'm urging (on the North) extreme restraint ... Let's cool things down."
Analysts were sceptical the North would carry out the threat it issued on Friday, which rattled financial markets and brought a vow by the South to retaliate against any attack by Pyongyang.


China, the North's main backer, urged both nations to refrain from acts that would inflame an already "extremely precarious" situation.
"The serious tension on the peninsula must not be allowed to escalate," Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Zhijun said today. "China is firmly against any behaviour that may result in the situation deteriorating or damaging regional stability."


Yeonpyeong is a usually sleepy place. But the island is also only a short distance from the Northern Line Limit (NLL) - the sea border declared at the end of the 1950-53 Korean War but still disputed by the North.
Many of the 1,600 residents, who live alongside 1,000 military personnel, are uneasy about the prospect of a new barrage and have chosen to leave for the mainland for a while.

DCon
19-12-2010, 04:23 PM
South Korea are taking steps to limit foreign currency debt. Unlikely to please the big banks..


outh Korea plans to impose a levy on non-deposit foreign currency debt held by domestic and foreign banks in a bid to defend itself against capital surges that could threaten the country's economy, financial authorities said Sunday.


The announcement comes as emerging countries try to control the movement of so-called "hot money" from abroad that they say drives up the value of their currencies and destabilizes their markets. Foreign investors have sought higher returns in fast-growing developing economies amid ultra-low interest rates and other stimulatory monetary policies in advanced countries such as the United States and Japan.

South Korea has already announced limits on investments by domestic and foreign banks in foreign exchange derivatives trading and is moving to bring back a tax on foreign investment in government bonds as ways to shield itself against potential financial instability.

"A surge of capital inflows could lead to inflation and asset price bubbles, and a sudden reversal of such inflows could possibly result in a systemic risk," said a statement released by the Ministry of Strategy and Finance.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/12/19/business/AP-AS-SKorea-Bank-Levy.html?ref=business

Ah Well
19-12-2010, 10:14 PM
As if things weren't tense enough round those parts ...

South Korea has detained eight Chinese fishermen after their boat collided with a patrol ship in an incident that threatens to damage relations with China at a time when the US is pushing Beijing to broker a detente on the Korean peninsula.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d4d6c7e8-0b7a-11e0-a313-00144feabdc0.html?ftcamp=rss#axzz18bAhLJ59

C. Flower
20-12-2010, 02:24 AM
The exercises are reported to be beginning tomorrow and Reuters is reporting that islanders in the affected area are being told to go to bunkers.

In the North, there are reports that the succession form Kim to his son is being speeded up, to end uncertainty.

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2010/12/15/63/0401000000AEN20101215005100315F.HTML

bokonon
20-12-2010, 02:43 AM
A friend of mine lives out East and frequently visits China. He sent me this last week:


The Chinese view of the North Korean attack on South Korea: there is a power struggle in North Korea, some of the military leadership are close to the Chinese, they want North Korea to start implementing Chinese type reforms. These people opposed Kim junior's accession. Kim senior felt threatened by this and started executing a few of these he thought too close to China. China protested - his response was get your guys to support my son or I will cause trouble - to show he meant business they lobbed a bunch of missiles across the border.

antiestablishmentarian
20-12-2010, 12:04 PM
This is shocking stuff. Kim and the North koreans will fight fire with fire, that much is clear. A message to this extent was sent out during Richardsons visit, when instead of greeting his guest Kim and Jong-Un visited an élite North Korean division charged with the defence of the capital. A very symbolic move.

C. Flower
20-12-2010, 12:45 PM
The exercises are scheduled to start this morning. Nothing from Yonhap yet.

C. Flower
20-12-2010, 12:56 PM
94 minutes artillery fire exercise has been completed by S. Korea and the US into waters claimed by North Korea. S. Korea has scrambled fighter jets.

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/South-Korea-Concludes-Artillery-Drill-Scrambles-Jet-Fighters-112173129.html

Ah Well
20-12-2010, 01:29 PM
Kim and Jong-Un visited an élite North Korean division charged with the defence of the capital.

I guess you mean these guys?

North Korea has long maintained elite commando forces, troops who were carefully selected, then paid, housed and fed better, and given access to better equipment. About 15 percent of all troops are in these elite units. Most of them are similar to U.S. rangers, marines, paratroopers or special reconnaissance troops (U.S. Marine Force Recon and army LURPS).



http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htwin/20090602.aspx

antiestablishmentarian
20-12-2010, 01:39 PM
I guess you mean these guys?

North Korea has long maintained elite commando forces, troops who were carefully selected, then paid, housed and fed better, and given access to better equipment. About 15 percent of all troops are in these elite units. Most of them are similar to U.S. rangers, marines, paratroopers or special reconnaissance troops (U.S. Marine Force Recon and army LURPS).



http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htwin/20090602.aspx

They could be. The reason I called them élite is because they were located in the capital defence district, which is defended by the best equipped Air Force units and tank units. I think the unit he visited is a ground support unit for the 105th Armoured Division, which was the Norths first armoured unit and which played a key role in the initial stages of the Korean War.

antiestablishmentarian
20-12-2010, 02:01 PM
It seems the exercise has passed off without any reaction from the North.

C. Flower
20-12-2010, 04:01 PM
It seems the exercise has passed off without any reaction from the North.

No return of fire? Good. But I'm quite sure there was, and will be, a reaction.

C. Flower
22-12-2010, 11:13 AM
North Korea took a quiet and conciliatory approach to the first exercise this week.

More and larger artillery drills planned by the South and US tomorrow.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/12/22/south.korea.drills/index.html?eref=ft

Kev Bar
22-12-2010, 01:15 PM
Cactus - just curious as to why you left the last two paras out yr cited article

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/no...pers-n27.shtml

Sure it's editorialising...but it's always helpful to know the viewpoint from which facts are being presented.

C. Flower
22-12-2010, 01:19 PM
Cactus - just curious as to why you left the last two paras out yr cited article

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/no...pers-n27.shtml

Sure it's editorialising...but it's always helpful to know the viewpoint from which facts are being presented.

I thought they added nothing to the information in the first ones.

But I agree, I think the pov of all media is very relevant and I always pay heed to the agenda, whether its Pravda or the Guardian.

C. Flower
24-12-2010, 01:15 AM
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/War-Rhetoric-Rises-Between-Koreas-112400629.html?utm_source=voa_news-twitter-account&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitterfeed (http://www.voanews.com/english/news/War-Rhetoric-Rises-Between-Koreas-112400629.html?utm_source=voa_news-twitter-account&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitterfeed)




North and South Korea have increased their rhetoric against one another as the South conducted more military exercises.

North Korea said Thursday it is ready to use its nuclear deterrent in what it called a "sacred war" if it is provoked. Armed forces minister Kim Yong Chun was quoted by the North Korean news agency as saying that South Korea was deliberately pushing the situation to the brink of war.

South Korean President Lee Myung-bak visited with soldiers at a base near the border Thursday, saying the South should answer any new attack from the North with a powerful counter-attack. Lee said he had been mistaken to think patience can bring peace to the Korean peninsula.

South Korean air and ground forces staged their latest military exercise earlier Thursday, pounding a snowy valley just 30 kilometers from the border with bombs and munitions from tanks, artillery, rocket launchers and F-15 warplanes. Naval forces continued a third day of drills off the country's east coast.

A U.S. State Department spokesman said Thursday the region needs constructive actions, not heated rhetoric from North Korea.

C. Flower
29-12-2010, 12:47 AM
The pressure is coming on from South Korea for reunification with the North in 2011

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2010/12/28/0200000000AEN20101228008700315.HTML

janepaisley
12-01-2011, 11:57 AM
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/china-hiding-military-buildup-cable-20110107-19hq4.html


China hiding military build-up: cable
January 7, 2011

Australia's intelligence agencies believe China is hiding the extent of a massive military build-up that goes beyond national defence and threatens regional stability, the latest WikiLeaks cables show.

A strategic assessment by the agencies found that China's military spending for 2006 was $90 billion - double the $45 billion budget publicly announced by Beijing, Fairfax newspapers report.

"China's longer-term agenda is to develop `comprehensive national power', including a strong military, that is in keeping with its view of itself as a great power," a copy of the secret assessment provided by Foreign Affairs officials to the US embassy in Canberra said.
Advertisement: Story continues below

"We agree that the trend of China's military modernisation is beyond the scope of what would be required for a conflict over Taiwan.

"Arguably China already poses a credible threat to modern militaries operating in the region and will present an even more formidable challenge as its modernisation continues."

The 2006 Australian intelligence assessment was contained in a US embassy cable obtained by WikiLeaks and provided to Fairfax newspapers.

The assessment also warned that factors including China's rising nationalism and difficulties with Japan meant that "miscalculations and minor events could quickly escalate".

C. Flower
21-01-2011, 02:04 AM
The South has accepted on offer of talks from the North.

All to do with the Hu visit to the US.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/south-korea-accepts-norths-talks-proposal-490153.html

C. Flower
11-08-2011, 12:51 AM
SELMEYYA RT @BreakingNews N. Korea disputes S. Korea's claim of artillery exchange near disputed maritime line http://bit.ly/pcttQ3...

Griska
11-08-2011, 01:26 AM
...


North Korea said Thursday the South was simply frightened by noise from nearby building efforts "aimed at improving the standard of people's living."

I like that.
It's like they're calling the south wimps!

C. Flower
21-10-2011, 05:21 PM
Just watching a National Geographic documentary on North Korea.

A striking statistic is that out of 22 cities in North Korea before the war 17 were obliterated by US bombing, a lot of it napalm.

Kev Bar
21-10-2011, 08:43 PM
Just watching a National Geographic documentary on North Korea.

A striking statistic is that out of 22 cities in North Korea before the war 17 were obliterated by US bombing, a lot of it napalm.

One doesn't obliterate with Napalm. One incinerates.

But while we are on the subject, North Korea is the ultimate mafiosa state. I don't think it even really pretends to have an ideology anymore as it leads the world in meth-ampthamine production, currency forgery and smack smuggling.

Just been talking to a friend who is back from there.
The guy in question, Nate Thayer, has been around the block and got to interview Pol Pot.
But he said he was taken aback by the sheer criminal dsyfunctionality of the place.

TotalMayhem
22-12-2011, 01:53 PM
Finnish authorities have seized a British cargo vessel (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57346936/finland-still-probing-patriot-missile-ship/) en route from Germany to South Korea. The cargo, declared as "fireworks", comprised 160 tons of explosives and 69 Patriot air defense missiles.

Surely that makes for one helluva firework.

C. Flower
22-12-2011, 09:45 PM
One doesn't obliterate with Napalm. One incinerates.

But while we are on the subject, North Korea is the ultimate mafiosa state. I don't think it even really pretends to have an ideology anymore as it leads the world in meth-ampthamine production, currency forgery and smack smuggling.

Just been talking to a friend who is back from there.
The guy in question, Nate Thayer, has been around the block and got to interview Pol Pot.
But he said he was taken aback by the sheer criminal dsyfunctionality of the place.

Back from North Korea ? I looked at his bio. Gutsy guy. Is he a spook?

C. Flower
29-03-2013, 08:08 AM
The news this morning saying that two US stealth bombers flew across South Korea in an exercise. I missed the part of the report on the N. Korean response.

There is no way these people are going to be left in peace to run their own country their own way. At all costs they must be coerced to join us in the bliss of the capitalist world.

Quite amazing that N. Korea still exists in its present form.

Count Bobulescu
29-03-2013, 07:50 PM
The news this morning saying that two US stealth bombers flew across South Korea in an exercise. I missed the part of the report on the N. Korean response.

There is no way these people are going to be left in peace to run their own country their own way. At all costs they must be coerced to join us in the bliss of the capitalist world.

Quite amazing that N. Korea still exists in its present form.


Your entry into the current debate beginning with the comment on US overflights of S.Korea, is the equivalent of the US expression of: “you’re a day late and a dollar short”.

The current round of name calling may not have gotten much coverage in European media, but it has been news in the US media for well over a week now. Prior to the US sending the most recent stealth bombers, North Korea had taken a series of provocative statements and actions that raised tensions, including that it would make a pre-emptive nuclear strike against both the US and South Korea, and shutting off communications with South Korea, and announcing it would no longer abide by the Korean war armistice agreement.

Since Kim Jong un/eun (henceforth KJE, [KJ, is a well know US abv. in another context] ) is the new kid on the block and still an unknown entity many are wary of allowing him too much rope lest his elders persuade him he is all powerful.

Sadly, your analysis of the situation as with much of the European left’s analysis of US actions turns out to be rather shallow.

Remember, what may look to you, safely tucked up in Ireland, as unwarranted US aggression may look very different to the people of Seoul who are just 40 miles from the border with NK and a potentially unstable regime.

Here are just a tiny fraction of the recent pieces that ran in WaPo alone, and there’s lots more from other sources.


SEOUL — Raising tensions with South Korea yet again, North Korea on Wednesday cut its last military hotline with Seoul, a link that has been essential to running the last major symbol of inter-Korean cooperation: an industrial complex in the North that employs hundreds of workers from the South.
There was no immediate word about what cutting one of the few remaining official North-South links means for South Korean workers at the Kaesong industrial complex. When the link was last cut, in 2009, many South Koreans were temporarily stranded in the North.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/north-korea-says-it-has-cut-last-military-hotline-with-south/2013/03/27/1061d924-96f7-11e2-97cd-3d8c1afe4f0f_story.html


North Korea, angry over routine U.S.-South Korean drills and recent U.N. sanctions punishing it for its Feb. 12 nuclear test, has vowed to launch a nuclear strike against the United States and repeated its nearly two-decade-old threat to reduce Seoul to a “sea of fire.” Despite the rhetoric, outside weapons analysts have seen no proof that North Korea has mastered the technology needed to build a warhead small enough to mount on a missile.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/in-latest-bellicose-statement-north-korea-puts-artillery-forces-at-highest-combat-posture/2013/03/26/8a868cd2-95e8-11e2-8219-3a24602783a7_story.html

This from March 18.


WASHINGTON — The United States is flying nuclear-capable B-52 bombers on training missions over South Korea to highlight Washington’s commitment to defend an ally amid rising tensions with North Korea, Pentagon officials said Monday.

Pentagon press secretary George Little said one B-52 flew over South Korea on March 8, and the deputy defense secretary, Ashton Carter, said during a visit to Seoul that another bomber mission is scheduled for Tuesday.

Hagel cited three recent developments in North Korea that prompted the Obama administration to act, including a nuclear test in February deemed reckless by Washington and condemned by the United Nations Security Council.

Although not mentioned by Hagel, the North Koreas raised tensions further by threatening last Thursday to pre-emptively attack the U.S. Among its recent declarations, North Korea has said it will no longer recognize the armistice that ended the 1950-53 Korean War, though it has made such remarks before.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/with-north-korean-threats-in-mind-pentagon-highlights-b-52-bomber-flights-over-south-korea/2013/03/18/d7c5c316-8fe7-11e2-9173-7f87cda73b49_story.html

Saoirse go Deo
29-03-2013, 08:05 PM
Are B-52 nuclear bombers not very old school? I assumed the majority of Americas nuclear arsenal was missile based.

But then again I guess fueling a rocket is not as intimidating as flying gigantic airplanes over someones head.

Count Bobulescu
29-03-2013, 08:11 PM
Are B-52 nuclear bombers not very old school? I assumed the majority of Americas nuclear arsenal was missile based.

But then again I guess fueling a rocket is not as intimidating as flying gigantic airplanes over someones head.

I guess you weren't paying attention. The planes flew over SOUTH Korea.

PaddyJoe
29-03-2013, 08:47 PM
I guess you weren't paying attention. The planes flew over SOUTH Korea.

And dropped dummy ordinance on an uninhabited island. Great way to go about easing tensions.

Count Bobulescu
29-03-2013, 09:07 PM
And dropped dummy ordinance on an uninhabited island. Great way to go about easing tensions.

As I believe was stated in one of the WaPo pieces I posted, some, if not all, of the flights were part of a pre-planned annual joint training exercise with South Korea scheduled to continue until April 30. This is the first one since KJE took the reins so naturally there is an element of uncharted waters. You're hardly suggesting they should drop the dummy ordinance on an inhabited location. Seoul perhaps?
I'll post more later.

PaddyJoe
29-03-2013, 09:28 PM
As I believe was stated in one of the WaPo pieces I posted, some, if not all, of the flights were part of a pre-planned annual joint training exercise with South Korea scheduled to continue until April 30. This is the first one since KJE took the reins so naturally there is an element of uncharted waters. You're hardly suggesting they should drop the dummy ordinance on an inhabited location. Seoul perhaps?
I'll post more later.
Well, no:D
But it looks like a move which is designed to escalate tensions rather than ease them. I see Chuck Hagel is already trying to row back and is saying that the exercise wasn't designed to provoke.
Riiight..
As you guys say.
:rolleyes:

C. Flower
29-03-2013, 10:58 PM
Finnish authorities have seized a British cargo vessel (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57346936/finland-still-probing-patriot-missile-ship/) en route from Germany to South Korea. The cargo, declared as "fireworks", comprised 160 tons of explosives and 69 Patriot air defense missiles.

Surely that makes for one helluva firework.

It surely does.

Dojo
29-03-2013, 11:19 PM
The news this morning saying that two US stealth bombers flew across South Korea in an exercise. I missed the part of the report on the N. Korean response.

And?


There is no way these people are going to be left in peace to run their own country their own way. At all costs they must be coerced to join us in the bliss of the capitalist world.

What people? The South Koreans, a country that opts to have US forces on its soil in case of a possible NK attack, again. You're seriously losing it mate.


Quite amazing that N. Korea still exists in its present form.

Don't worry. Kim Jong Un and the Korean Workers Party will put a stop to that.

Dojo
29-03-2013, 11:20 PM
Are B-52 nuclear bombers not very old school? I assumed the majority of Americas nuclear arsenal was missile based.

But then again I guess fueling a rocket is not as intimidating as flying gigantic airplanes over someones head.

It probably would have been more effective if they actually flown over North Korea instead of South Korea. Kind of hard to intimidate someone if they can't see your big flying bomber. :rolleyes:

Dojo
29-03-2013, 11:21 PM
And dropped dummy ordinance on an uninhabited island. Great way to go about easing tensions.

Odd how Pyongyang gets upset only now over these drills despite them occurring EVERY YEAR since the armistice.

Dojo
29-03-2013, 11:23 PM
Well, no:D
But it looks like a move which is designed to escalate tensions rather than ease them. I see Chuck Hagel is already trying to row back and is saying that the exercise wasn't designed to provoke.
Riiight..
As you guys say.
:rolleyes:

Again, these drills take place every year. Strange how the fat bastard leader of North Korea only NOW chooses to throw a temper tantrum over them.

PaddyJoe
29-03-2013, 11:30 PM
Again, these drills take place every year. Strange how the fat bastard leader of North Korea only NOW chooses to throw a temper tantrum over them.
As Count Bob has pointed out a few posts above with a quote from the WaPo this is not a routine operation:

WASHINGTON — The United States is flying nuclear-capable B-52 bombers on training missions over South Korea to highlight Washington’s commitment to defend an ally amid rising tensions with North Korea, Pentagon officials said Monday.

Pentagon press secretary George Little said one B-52 flew over South Korea on March 8, and the deputy defense secretary, Ashton Carter, said during a visit to Seoul that another bomber mission is scheduled for Tuesday.

Hagel cited three recent developments in North Korea that prompted the Obama administration to act, including a nuclear test in February deemed reckless by Washington and condemned by the United Nations Security Counci

C. Flower
29-03-2013, 11:58 PM
Worth reading back over the earlier pages of this thread. The context is a whole series of provocations by the US and thinly veiled regime change plans.
Why not look at who really has form in this region, and who would be more likely to be fearful of attack. (http://japanfocus.org/-Charles_K_-Armstrong/3460)..

Obscene and criminal destruction -


The Korean War, a “limited war” for the US and UN forces, was for Koreans a total war. The human and material resources of North and South Korea were used to their utmost. The physical destruction and loss of life on both sides was almost beyond comprehension, but the North suffered the greater damage, due to American saturation bombing and the scorched-earth policy of the retreating UN forces.1 The US Air Force estimated that North Korea’s destruction was proportionately greater than that of Japan in the Second World War, where the US had turned 64 major cities to rubble and used the atomic bomb to destroy two others. American planes dropped 635,000 tons of bombs on Korea -- that is, essentially on North Korea --including 32,557 tons of napalm, compared to 503,000 tons of bombs dropped in the entire Pacific theatre of World War II.2 The number of Korean dead, injured or missing by war’s end approached three million, ten percent of the overall population. The majority of those killed were in the North, which had half of the population of the South; although the DPRK does not have official figures, possibly twelve to fifteen percent of the population was killed in the war, a figure close to or surpassing the proportion of Soviet citizens killed in World War II.3
The act which inflicted the greatest loss of civilian life in the Korean War by far, one which the North Koreans have claimed ever since was America’s greatest war crime, was the aerial bombardment of North Korean population centers. American control of the skies over Korea was overwhelming. Soviet MIGs, flown by Soviet, Chinese, and North Korean pilots, were sometimes effective against American air power. But under Stalin’s orders, the Soviet fighter planes were strictly limited in number and in the range they were allowed to fly, lest US-Soviet air battles lead to a larger war.4 And in any case, Soviet air support did not come until the end of 1950. During the summer and fall, North Korean air defenses were virtually non-existent. Lightly armed, local self-defense u Lightly armed, local self-defense units in occupied South Korea could only watch and suffer as their towns and villages were obliterated from the air.5 By the end of the war, North Korea claimed that only two modern buildings remained standing in Pyongyang.



http://japanfocus.org/data/pyongyang.png (http://japanfocus.org/data/pyongyang.png)
Pyongyang, 1953



For the Americans, strategic bombing made perfect sense, giving advantage to American technological prowess against the enemy’s numerical superiority. The American command dismissed British concerns that mass bombardment would turn world opinion against them, insisting that air attacks were accurate and civilian casualties limited.6 Russian accusations of indiscriminate attacks on civilian targets did not register with the Americans at all. But for the North Koreans, living in fear of B-29 attacks for nearly three years, including the possibility of atomic bombs, the American air war left a deep and lasting impression.


There were plans by the military to drop over 50 nuclear weapons in 1950, to create a scorched earth zone between north and south.

http://b-29s-over-korea.com/NorthKorea-A-Bomb/US-Planned-To-A-Bomb-N-Korea-In-1950-War_02.html

Newsy
30-03-2013, 12:17 AM
Sky has just reported that North Korea is 'at war' with South Korea.

Newsy
30-03-2013, 12:19 AM
Sky has just reported that North Korea has 'entered a state of war' with South Korea.

PaddyJoe
30-03-2013, 12:26 AM
It's worth recalling that the two Koreas are the result of the US and the Soviet Union haggling over the spoils of war in 1945. The peninsula had been under Japanese occupation since 1910.

Count Bobulescu
30-03-2013, 12:30 AM
Worth reading back over the earlier pages of this thread. The context is a whole series of provocations by the US and thinly veiled regime change plans.
Why not look at who really has form in this region, and who would be more likely to be fearful of attack. (http://japanfocus.org/-Charles_K_-Armstrong/3460)..

Obscene and criminal destruction -



There were plans by the military to drop over 50 nuclear weapons in 1950, to create a scorched earth zone between north and south.

http://b-29s-over-korea.com/NorthKorea-A-Bomb/US-Planned-To-A-Bomb-N-Korea-In-1950-War_02.html

While looking back at history is relevant, the situation today is closer to urgent, so I say why not focus here on what's happening today, as you did this morning. There can be a separate thread to focus on the history for those that are interested. Otherwise, it seems you are trying to divert the thread.

I've said before, that the US military has contemplated plans for almost any scenario you can realistically imagine, including nuking the moon. Doesn't mean they are going to act on them. It's simply a more developed version of "what if" strategising.

Dr. FIVE
30-03-2013, 12:38 AM
why would they nuke the moon? :(

PaddyJoe
30-03-2013, 12:40 AM
While looking back at history is relevant, the situation today is closer to urgent, so I say why not focus here on what's happening today, as you did this morning. There can be a separate thread to focus on the history for those that are interested. Otherwise, it seems you are trying to divert the thread.

I've said before, that the US military has contemplated plans for almost any scenario you can realistically imagine, including nuking the moon. Doesn't mean they are going to act on them. It's simply a more developed version of "what if" strategising.

You could never be accused of trying to take this thread in a certain direction, Count.
;)

Count Bobulescu
30-03-2013, 12:42 AM
why would they nuke the moon? :(

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/28/u-s-had-plans-to-nuke-the-moon/

PaddyJoe
30-03-2013, 12:47 AM
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/28/u-s-had-plans-to-nuke-the-moon/
Weren't you rubbishing documented journalism about US security operations as 'conspiracy theories'?
How does this fit in?

Count Bobulescu
30-03-2013, 01:03 AM
Weren't you rubbishing documented journalism about US security operations as 'conspiracy theories'?
How does this fit in?
You sorely misinterpreted that one, I'm afraid. Suggest you ask the boss. But careful how you go, eggshells and all that.:D

PaddyJoe
30-03-2013, 01:05 AM
You sorely misinterpreted that one, I'm afraid. Suggest you ask the boss. But careful how you go, eggshells and all that.:D
We'll let that slide so. What's the reluctance to recall how we ended up with two Koreas all about?

C. Flower
30-03-2013, 01:08 AM
Sky has just reported that North Korea is 'at war' with South Korea.

That is confusing, as the war of the 1950s was never formally concluded. It was just a cease fire.

Count Bobulescu
30-03-2013, 01:18 AM
The SKY report is likely an interpretation of Friday’s developments Pongyang.

Here’s some more.


NORTH KOREA ORDERS MILITARY READINESS AFTER U.S. PRACTICE RUNS OVER SOUTH KOREA. North Korean state media announced Friday its country’s leader, Kim Jong-un, has ordered his missile units to be ready for a strike on South Korea or the United States, The New York Times reports. South Korea called the move either “preparations for missile tests or just more blustering,” according to The Times. Kim’s order was a response to two U.S. practice flights Thursday of nuclear-capable stealth bombers over South Korea, Reuters reports. Although the U.S. said the annual drills had been previously planned, they come after North Korea recently threatened American bases in the Pacific. North Korea and the U.S. have been involved in a back-and-forth of increasing rhetoric and military posturing since North Korea conducted its third nuclear weapons test in February. But Quartz reports that war remains unlikely as long as this border factory remains open. Read more
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/30/world/asia/kim-jong-un-of-north-korea-orders-missile-readiness.html?hp&_r=0


Top News: North Korea has readied its missile units targeting U.S. military bases in response to a U.S. bombing drill. On Thursday two nuclear-capable B-2 Spirit stealth bombers carried out a practice sortie over South Korea. The bombers dropped inert munitions off the Korean coast.
"We must make clear that these provocations by the North are taken by us very seriously and we'll respond to that," said U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel.
North Korea's state news agency responded by saying that the two countries could only settle their differences by "physical means" and wrote that leader Kim Jong-un had "judged the time has come to settle accounts with the U.S. imperialists in view of the prevailing situation."
A mass rally in support of Kim's call to arms was held in Pyongyang. North Korea has cut all communications with U.S. forces and South Korea.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/29/us-korea-north-idUSBRE92R13R20130329


"North Korea's not that dangerous."
Wrong. There is no threat of war on the Korean peninsula because the United States and South Korea have deterred the regime for over six decades, or so the thinking goes. And the occasional provocation from Pyongyang -- full of sound and fury -- usually ends with it blowing up in its face, signifying nothing. So why worry? Two reasons. First, North Korea has a penchant for testing new South Korean presidents. A new one was just inaugurated in February, and since 1992, the North has welcomed these five new leaders by disturbing the peace. Whether in the form of missile launches, submarine incursions, or naval clashes, these North Korean provocations were met by each newly elected South Korean president with patience rather than pique.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/03/25/think_again_north_korea



North Korea’s rockets are on standby. The US flew two stealth bombers from Missouri to South Korea and back, prompting North Korea to raise its military readiness. But as long as this factory remains open, war is unlikely.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/28/north-korea-standby-attack-us
http://qz.com/68702/as-long-as-this-north-korean-border-factory-stays-open-nuclear-armageddon-is-unlikely/




U.S. SENDS STEALTH BOMBERS OVER SOUTH KOREA. As the rhetoric from North Korea grows more bellicose, the U.S. Air Force has sent two B-2 stealth bombers on a practice bombing run over South Korea, The New York Times reports. The bombers flew nonstop from Missouri’s Whiteman Air Force Base in a move that signals the continuing U.S. commitment to protecting South Korea. Read more
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/29/world/asia/us-begins-stealth-bombing-runs-over-south-korea.html?hp




GET SMART FAST - "Koreas-Tension ... NKorea orders rocket prep after US B-2 drill," by AP's Foster Klug in Seoul : "North Korean leader Kim Jong Un warned Friday that his rocket forces were ready 'to settle accounts with the U.S. [imperialists in view of the prevailing situation],' unleashing a new round of bellicose rhetoric after U.S. nuclear-capable B-2 bombers dropped dummy munitions in joint military drills with South Korea. Kim's warning [is] most likely meant to coerce South Korea into softening its policies, win direct talks and aid from Washington, and strengthen the young leader's credentials and image at home. ... Experts believe the country is years away from developing nuclear-tipped missiles ... Still, there are fears of a localized conflict, such as a naval skirmish in disputed Yellow Sea waters. ...

"Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told reporters Thursday that the decision to send B-2 bombers to join the military drills was part of normal exercises and not intended to provoke North Korea. Hagel acknowledged ... that North Korea's belligerent tones and actions ... have ratcheted up the danger in the region, 'and we have to understand that reality.' ... B-2 stealth bombers flew from a U.S. air base in Missouri and dropped dummy munitions on an uninhabited South Korean island range on Thursday before returning home. ... [N]uclear-capable B-52 bombers participated in the joint military drills. Pyongyang uses the U.S. nuclear arsenal as a justification for its own push for nuclear weapons."


--WSJ A1, "North Korea Warned: U.S. Flies Stealth Bombers Over Peninsula in Show of Might."

--"As U.S. hardens line on North Korea, South may pay," by Reuters' David Chance and Ju-min Park, in Seoul: "Washington's decision to fly B-52 and stealth bomber missions over Korea this week in a warning to Pyongyang risks pushing the North into staging an attack on the South just as its threats may have been on the cusp of dying down. New leaders in Seoul, Beijing and most importantly, an untested 30-year-old in Pyongyang who has to prove he is capable of facing down a perceived threat from the United States, have raised the stakes in a month-long standoff that risks flaring into a conflict. ... With the looming April 15 celebrations to commemorate the birthday of North Korean founder Kim Il Sung, the grandfather of the current ruler, and large chunks of North Korea's peasant army due to head to farms for spring planting, the crisis may have been lurching to a close before the American bombers' flights."


Hagel, Dempsey get serious on North Korea. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Gen. Martin Dempsey, Joint Chiefs chairman, said the U.S. would "unequivocally" defend itself and allies from North Korean attacks, and they rejected the regime's claims that Washington was driving up tensions. The U.S. defense leaders, in their first full Pentagon press conference together since Hagel took office, said they are taking the threats of nuclear war from Kim Jong-Un seriously. "He's the leader of North Korea," Hagel said. The duo also defended their decision to approve a $1 billion increase in ground-based interceptor missile defenses, despite
criticism that North Korea's long-range missiles are not ready for prime time.

Count Bobulescu
30-03-2013, 01:26 AM
We'll let that slide so. What's the reluctance to recall how we ended up with two Koreas all about?

No reluctance at all, just doing it in this thread right now, might be both confusing with present and historical comment intertwining between posts, and render much comment obsolete quickly. By all means do it, but preferably in a thread with history in the title.

C. Flower
30-03-2013, 01:27 AM
While looking back at history is relevant, the situation today is closer to urgent, so I say why not focus here on what's happening today, as you did this morning. There can be a separate thread to focus on the history for those that are interested. Otherwise, it seems you are trying to divert the thread.

I've said before, that the US military has contemplated plans for almost any scenario you can realistically imagine, including nuking the moon. Doesn't mean they are going to act on them. It's simply a more developed version of "what if" strategising.

The situation today is incomprehensible without understanding the history.


The DPRK government never forgot the lesson of North Korea’s vulnerability to American air attack, and for half a century after the Armistice continued to strengthen anti-aircraft defenses, build underground installations, and eventually develop nuclear weapons to ensure that North Korea would not find itself in such a position again. The long-term psychological effect of the war on the whole of North Korean society cannot be overestimated. The war against the United States, more than any other single factor, gave North Koreans a collective sense of anxiety and fear of outside threats that would continue long after the war’s end.
North Korea’s considerable economic achievements since liberation were all but completely wiped out by the war. By 1949, after two years of a planned economy, North Korea had recovery from the post-liberation chaos, and economic output had reached the level of the colonial period.7 Plans for 1950 were to increase output again by a third in the North, and the DPRK leadership had expected further economic gains following integration with the agriculturally more productive South after unification. According to DPRK figures, the war destroyed some 8,700 factories, 5,000 schools, 1,000 hospitals and 600,000 homes.8 Most of the destruction occurred in 1950 and 1951. To escape the bombing, entire factories were moved underground, along with schools, hospitals, government offices, and much of the population. Agriculture was devastated, and famine loomed. Peasants hid underground during the day and came out to farm at night. Destruction of livestock, shortages of seed, farm tools, and fertilizer, and loss of manpower reduced agricultural production to the level of bare subsistence at best. The Nodong Sinmun newspaper referred to 1951 as “the year of unbearable trials,” a phrase revived in the famine years of the 1990s.9 Worse was yet to come. By the fall of 1952, there were no effective targets left for US planes to hit. Every significant town, city and industrial area in North Korea had already been bombed. In the spring of 1953, the Air Force targeted irrigation dams on the Yalu River, both to destroy the North Korean rice crop and to pressure the Chinese, who would have to supply more food aid to the North. Five reservoirs were hit, flooding thousands of acres of farmland, inundating whole towns and laying waste to the essential food source for millions of North Koreans.10 Only emergency assistance from China, the USSR, and other socialist countries prevented widespread famine.


Horrendous war crimes.

Is it any wonder that the North Koreans are deeply suspicious of the US ? And given the multiple indications that the US is after "regime change" since Kim died, are they not correct to be so ?

PaddyJoe
30-03-2013, 01:31 AM
Incredibly hamfisted stuff from this US administration:

--"As U.S. hardens line on North Korea, South may pay," by Reuters' David Chance and Ju-min Park, in Seoul: "Washington's decision to fly B-52 and stealth bomber missions over Korea this week in a warning to Pyongyang risks pushing the North into staging an attack on the South just as its threats may have been on the cusp of dying down. New leaders in Seoul, Beijing and most importantly, an untested 30-year-old in Pyongyang who has to prove he is capable of facing down a perceived threat from the United States, have raised the stakes in a month-long standoff that risks flaring into a conflict.

Count Bobulescu
30-03-2013, 01:32 AM
The situation today is incomprehensible without understanding the history.



Horrendous war crimes.

Is it any wonder that the North Koreans are deeply suspicious of the US ? And given the multiple indications that the US is after "regime change" since Kim died, are they not correct to be so ?

See what I told yis. Please see post #195.

PaddyJoe
30-03-2013, 01:38 AM
See what I told yis. Please see post #195.
It's a bit difficult to discuss Korea without putting it in some kind of historical context. What was that old fashioned Cold War about again?

Count Bobulescu
30-03-2013, 01:41 AM
(
CNN) -- North Korea has entered a "state of war" with neighboring South Korea, according to a report Saturday from the state-run Korean Central News Agency that included a threat to "dissolve" the U.S. mainland.
"Any issues regarding North and South will be treated in accordance to the state of war," North Korea's government said in a special statement carried by KCNA. "... The condition, which was neither war nor peace, has ended.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/29/world/asia/north-korea-us-threats/index.html

C. Flower
30-03-2013, 01:44 AM
See what I told yis. Please see post #195.

I read what you said, but disagree. There is far too little known about the history of the ongoing conflict. Much of what is written about North Korea is ill-informed and much is sadly racist.

C. Flower
30-03-2013, 01:48 AM
(

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/29/world/asia/north-korea-us-threats/index.html

That has been the case since March, noted earlier in the thread.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/30/us-korea-north-war-idUSBRE92T00020130330

Count Bobulescu
30-03-2013, 01:51 AM
Update, 12:50 p.m., EDT: The Associated Press believes that this photo from North Korean state media may have been digitally altered, which has certainly happened before. If it were, that would seem to underscore North Korea’s intent to send a specific propaganda message with the photo.


North Korea’s state media agencies have been releasing a slew of photos showing the country’s actual military build-up, which we are meant to understand is a prelude to war. They are probably bluffing, but you have to admire their attention to detail.
Early on Friday, the Korean Central News Agency released the above photo. Reuters, using the KCNA information, passed on the photo with a caption that began, “North Korean leader Kim Jong Un presides over an urgent operation meeting on the Korean People’s Army Strategic Rocket Force’s performance of duty for firepower strike at the Supreme Command in Pyongyang.” According to Reuters, the large chart on the left bears the title, “Strategic force’s plan to hit the mainland of the U.S.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/03/29/photo-from-kim-jong-uns-war-room-reveals-north-koreas-u-s-mainland-strike-plan/?hpid=z1

random new yorker
30-03-2013, 05:07 PM
Moving out of the 'cannibalism' thread and trying to add some perspective to this discussion..

From the NYT: (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/30/world/asia/in-pyongyang-bluster-fakery-and-real-risks.html?pagewanted=1)

"The cyberattacks and torpedo attack have something in common: Unlike the missile attacks and beach landings that Mr. Kim seems to be suggesting are imminent, they are hard to trace to North Korea, at least immediately. As a result, they are hard to retaliate against, and in fact the South never struck back militarily for the sinking of the Cheonan, even after a commission of inquiry, with experts from outside South Korea, concluded it was the work of a submarine-launched torpedo. "

Also didn't we fly those pretty planes over SOUTH Korean air space?

C. Flower
30-03-2013, 05:29 PM
Moving out of the 'cannibalism' thread and trying to add some perspective to this discussion..

From the NYT: (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/30/world/asia/in-pyongyang-bluster-fakery-and-real-risks.html?pagewanted=1)

"The cyberattacks and torpedo attack have something in common: Unlike the missile attacks and beach landings that Mr. Kim seems to be suggesting are imminent, they are hard to trace to North Korea, at least immediately. As a result, they are hard to retaliate against, and in fact the South never struck back militarily for the sinking of the Cheonan, even after a commission of inquiry, with experts from outside South Korea, concluded it was the work of a submarine-launched torpedo. "

Also didn't we fly those pretty planes over SOUTH Korean air space?

Yes, strangely quiet about that torpedo.

Whose was it, I wonder ?

random new yorker
30-03-2013, 07:09 PM
what about us flying our stealthy planes over friendly skies??

.. reading the other 'cannibalism' thread I think people may be uninformed as to what air space we are flying over ..

Count Bobulescu
30-03-2013, 08:39 PM
The questions quoted immediately below were posted by CF in the North Korean Cannibal thread, in response to a posting by me in that thread. And although the questions have a big fat zero to do with the substance of what I posted in the other thread, or with cannibalism for that matter, but we wont go into that here, I'll respond to it here rather in than the other thread, for reasons that will be apparent to anyone who looks at my post in the other thread, or just looks upthread here to the discussion at posts 185-200 approx. If this abomination continues, I may have to get me one of those fancy new “donate” buttons to help with all the work necessary to correct CF’s and it now seems Ceannaire's also, misconceptions of, and misstatements about US foreign policy.


Permanent US bases in Australia for the first time, and Obama banging on relentlessly about the shift to the East ?
What is all that about then ?

First US bases in OZ. There will be no permanent US military bases in Australia. There will be a permanent presence of US military in Australia, with about 2,500 personnel rotating in and out of Australian military bases.


SYDNEY — The United States will not seek permanent military bases in Australia and nor would hosting one be in Canberra’s interests, Foreign Minister Bob Carr said Aug. 25.

Australia has welcomed long-term ally Washington’s plans for an enhanced naval presence in the Pacific and last year agreed to allow up to 2,500 U.S. Marines to be deployed to a barracks near the northern city of Darwin.
But Carr rejected the idea of a permanent U.S. military base in Australia.

“In fact, the Americans will not seek it because of the cost involved at a time when they are going to have to produce more cuts in their defense spending,” he told Sky News. “And second, because it doesn’t fit with the way they project power. But above all ... it’s not in Australia’s interest.”
Carr said what Canberra liked about U.S. troops training in the country was that it was “in and out.

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120825/DEFREG03/308250002/No-Permanent-U-S-Bases-Australia-Aussie-FM-Says

It’s unclear to me precisely what CF means by the phrase“Obama relentlessly banging on about a shift to the east”. Is this just in relation to military issues or does it also include broader economic issues, but I’ll hazard a guess that this “shift” is in the context of the US military draw down in Europe, which would at least get the geography correct from an Obama/US standpoint. So here are some pieces to be going on with. In this context 2,500 personnel in Oz is small change.


STUTTGART, Germany — It’s official: The Germany-based 170th Infantry Brigade will be inactivated later this year, followed by the 172nd Separate Infantry Brigade next year as part of a broad restructuring of the military force structure in Europe that also calls for the inactivation of two U.S. Air Forces in Europe squadrons and the eventual elimination of the Army’s V Corps from Wiesbaden, Germany, according to Pentagon officials.

As part of the restructuring, the Army garrisons in Schweinfurt and Bamberg will close no later than 2015, U.S. European Command announced. The 81st Fighter Squadron, an A-10 unit consisting of 525 airmen from Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany, and the 603rd Air Control Squadron at Aviano Air Base, Italy, consisting of 336 airmen, will be inactivated by 2013.

“The [Defense] Department will begin a theaterwide capacity analysis as part of a comprehensive consolidation of its overseas infrastructure in light of these force posture changes,” EUCOM stated in a news release. “The result could be further infrastructure adjustments.”

Last month, the Defense Department announced it would be eliminating two heavy brigades in Europe, but that announcement stopped short of naming the specific units. Still, with only two such brigades in Europe, it was no secret that the 170th, based in Baumholder, and 172nd, out of Grafenwöhr and Schweinfurt, were pegged for elimination.

In addition, U.S. Army Europe is slated to lose another 2,500 soldiers from small support units over the next five years, military officials said. For the Army, it all adds up to a 25 percent reduction in manpower in Europe.
Currently, about 80,000 U.S. troops are based in Europe. The changes outlined by the Pentagon will reduce that number by more than 11,000.

http://www.stripes.com/news/pentagon-lays-out-significant-cuts-to-u-s-forces-in-europe-1.168861


WASHINGTON — With word that the Pentagon will bring two combat brigades home from Germany, the Obama administration faces a challenge to convince Atlantic allies that the military’s new orders to refocus on the Asia-Pacific region, while sustaining its role in the Middle East, will not mean abandoning Europe to fit shrinking budgets.

But numbers tell a story. During the height of the cold war, when America’s heavily armored and nuclear-tipped force in Europe comforted allies and deterred the Soviet Union, the Army reached a peak of 277,342 troops on the Continent.

Now, under plans unveiled by Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta on Thursday, the withdrawal of two heavy armor brigades will reduce the Army presence by 10,000 to just 30,000 troops, with a cavalry brigade still based in Germany and an airborne brigade in Italy.

The reductions come as some European leaders and analysts make their case for a sustained American presence on the Continent to deal with uncertainties, including a rambunctious Russia — even as these same NATO allies are unable or unwilling to increase spending for their own defense. (And Germany will have to absorb the pain of lost local revenue as some American bases close there.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/14/world/europe/europe-weighs-implications-of-shrinking-us-troop-presence.html?_r=0

jpc
30-03-2013, 09:22 PM
Can't for the life of me understand the moderators support for a family tyranny.
That parasites off South Korea and the US for its survival on a number of levels.
The only reason the North Koreans remember the war is because it suits their Masters.
The real question to be asked.
What level of escalation/posturing will the Chinese permit?
China and the US are tied comprehensively to each other.
Does anyone here honestly believe the US wants to escalation to a hot war?
Or South Korea?

Count Bobulescu
30-03-2013, 10:49 PM
Below are two pieces that ran Friday, a 5 minute radio discussion, and a 12 minute TV piece divided into a three minute report and a 9 minute discussion that has some mild disagreement.
Do yourself and the rest of the world a favor, and learn how a “mature grown up country” actually deals with a situation like this, and then compare that to some of the ridiculous posturing in these threads.

Radio

http://www.npr.org/2013/03/29/175722027/is-north-koreas-warmongering-rhetoric-as-usual-or-something-to-worry-about

TV

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world/jan-june13/northkorea_03-29.html



Here’s a website that describes itself as providing "informed analysis in and around the DPRK". I’ve not had a chance to look too deeply at it, but it comes with good references.

http://38north.org/

C. Flower
30-03-2013, 10:54 PM
First US bases in OZ. There will be no permanent US military bases in Australia. There will be a permanent presence of US military in Australia, with about 2,500 personnel rotating in and out of Australian military bases.

Well, that is a useful clarification of detail @CountBob. Also, complete baloney, in that it makes no difference to the point being made.

I really find it hard to conceive that someone as well read as yourself could be unaware of Obama's policy of the "Century of the East"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8895726/US-will-shift-focus-from-Middle-East-to-Asia-Pacific-Barack-Obama-declares.html


The expanded engagement in Asia comes amid growing concerns among America's regional allies that its leadership role in the region may be fading – just as China has begun to enhance its military and assert claims to territories in the East and South China Seas.
Mr Obama and Julia Gillard this week unveiled a new military agreement which includes plans to deploy up to 2500 US Marines in Darwin – a move that marked America's most extensive reach into the region since the Vietnam War. The plans drew a frosty response from Beijing and raised concerns that it would unnecessarily stoke tensions with China.
A former senior Australian defence official, Professor Hugh White, from the Australian National University, said the deployment to Darwin was "not a wise move" and could heighten distrust between the US and its potential Asian rival.

C. Flower
30-03-2013, 11:04 PM
Can't for the life of me understand the moderators support for a family tyranny.
That parasites off South Korea and the US for its survival on a number of levels.
The only reason the North Koreans remember the war is because it suits their Masters.
The real question to be asked.
What level of escalation/posturing will the Chinese permit?
China and the US are tied comprehensively to each other.
Does anyone here honestly believe the US wants to escalation to a hot war?
Or South Korea?

You may be mistaking opposition to interference by an outside power for support for a particular regime. But looking at the state of Iraq and Afghanistan would not give me any confidence that US regime change would bring about a better future for North Korea.

In Ireland, the experience of 800 years of colonial misrule have deeply affected outlook. Korea's Cromwellian genocide by the US was well within living memory. Anyone in the north over fifty would have grown up in the devastation left behind after the place was "bombed back to the stone age."

I think you are making a good point about the interdependency between China and the US. But there is a great tension in that interdependency.

jpc
30-03-2013, 11:42 PM
You may be mistaking opposition to interference by an outside power for support for a particular regime. But looking at the state of Iraq and Afghanistan would not give me any confidence that US regime change would bring about a better future for North Korea.

In Ireland, the experience of 800 years of colonial misrule have deeply affected outlook. Korea's Cromwellian genocide by the US was well within living memory. Anyone in the north over fifty would have grown up in the devastation left behind after the place was "bombed back to the stone age."

I think you are making a good point about the interdependency between China and the US. But there is a great tension in that interdependency.


I'm glad you clarified however!
The genocide that you refer to by the US is just as attributable to Stalin as to Harry Truman.
Stalin wasn't know for empathy to anything.
People were statistics.
McArthur demanded to use atomics when the US forces were just hanging on in the south in 1950.
Truman said no and not very long after sent Mc Arthur on his way.

And I truly believe that the very last thing the US want is regime change in NK.
How will anyone afford to sort a nation so damaged ?
Cuba when the day comes will be a cake walk.
E Germany has cost hundreds of Billions.
NK is a failed state before anything starts.
And that is the nightmare for all interests.
And that I suspect is what keeps the NK tyranny intact and belligerent.
WRT Iraq Oil and nutty religious factions have a lot to do with the scene there.
Aghanistan, just don't like outsiders involved in their internecine little squabbles.
As the Greeks, Iranians, English , Russians could have told the US.
A classic, If you don't study history you are doomed to repeat it.

C. Flower
30-03-2013, 11:44 PM
The genocide that you refer to by the US is just as attributable to Stalin as to Harry Truman

In what sense ? It was US bombs that flattened the place.

Ceannaire
30-03-2013, 11:51 PM
And I truly believe that the very last thing the US want is regime change in NK.
How will anyone afford to sort a nation so damaged ?
Cuba when the day comes will be a cake walk.
E Germany has cost hundreds of Billions.
NK is a failed state before anything starts.
And that is the nightmare for all interests.
And that I suspect is what keeps the NK tyranny intact and belligerent.


Although I argued on a different thread that the US does not want war just now, I would certainly argue that regime change would be in their interests if it could come about easily. It would be a strategic benefit to have a US-friendly regime on the border of China.

jpc
31-03-2013, 12:02 AM
In what sense ? It was US bombs that flattened the place.

Out of curiosity.
Given that Stalin armed the NK far, far beyond any thing the SK had.
If the NK invasion of the south had succeed or the US had not intervened.
What would have been the better for the Korean people?
All the peninsula under a family cult tyranny?

Ceannaire
31-03-2013, 12:09 AM
What on earth are you talking about? South Korea was under authoritarian rule too, just that was funded by America. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_South_Korea


You're basically asking which dictatorship was better.

jpc
31-03-2013, 12:19 AM
What on earth are you talking about? South Korea was under authoritarian rule too, just that was funded by America. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_South_Korea


You're basically asking which dictatorship was better.

Fair comment!
TBH SK is looking the better bet at this point.
But Syngman Rhee was a dictator too!
Given what was to the North.
A small touchy feely happy clappy happy democracy wouldn't be around too long back then!

Count Bobulescu
31-03-2013, 12:22 AM
Well, that is a useful clarification of detail @CountBob. Also, complete baloney, in that it makes no difference to the point being made.

I really find it hard to conceive that someone as well read as yourself could be unaware of Obama's policy of the "Century of the East"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8895726/US-will-shift-focus-from-Middle-East-to-Asia-Pacific-Barack-Obama-declares.html


A Google search of the term Obama’s Century of the East produced the following SIX that's right SIX results. When did you last get only SIX results? Please do enlighten us ignoramuses ever so. I'm really beginning to think you just make stuff up out of thin air.


6 results (0.18 seconds)
Search Results

US government intelligence agencies see possible economic ...


peakoil.com/.../us-government-intelligence-agencies-see-possible-eco...
12 posts - 1 author - Dec 12, 2012
This is especially worrisome, given the accelerating financial debt blowout strategy being pursued by President Obama, who has added more ...



March | 2008 | My Dry Fly

mydryfly.wordpress.com/2008/03/
Mar 31, 2008 – Could this century be the century of the East? ... the war will be criticized, Obama and Hillary will promise to bring the troops home immediately.



Muslims Out Number Catholics Worldwide | My Dry Fly

mydryfly.wordpress.com/.../muslims-out-number-catholics-worldwid...
Mar 31, 2008 – We are indeed witnessing the rise of the East, both the Near East and the Far East. Could this century be the century of the East? Time will tell.




The Pirate Organization: Lessons from the Fringes of Capitalism


www.scribd.com/.../The-Pirate-Organization-Lessons-from-the-Fring...
Dec (http://www.scribd.com/.../The-Pirate-Organization-Lessons-from-the-Fring...
Dec) 26, 2012 – ... governments or Obama's buildup of cyberwar capabilities, will help us ..... appearance in the seventeenth century of the East India Company, ...
Newsletter No 417




www.adelaideinstitute.org/newsletters/n417.htm
Sep (http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/newsletters/n417.htm
Sep) 20, 2008 – It is a return to Imperial Rome, to the 18th century of the East India ...... and the purported new leader of the Democratic party, Barack Obama, ...




New 458 Spider, landing flagship showroom in Shanghai - Inside ...

insidechina.onehotspots.com › news
Feb 14, 2012 – Ferrari Shanghai Lujiazui Hall is located in the Pudong Lujiazui financial district, located in known as the century of “the East Champs Elysees ...

Ceannaire
31-03-2013, 12:30 AM
Perhaps try "Obama pivot to Asia", which yields an healthy 1,740,000 results.

C. Flower
31-03-2013, 12:32 AM
A Google search of the term Obama’s Century of the East produced the following SIX that's right SIX results. When did you last get only SIX results? Please do enlighten us ignoramuses ever so. I'm really beginning to think you just make stuff up out of thin air.

That might be because you neither look at what I've linked on this or even you say read some of what you link yourself.


This was all over the media a few months back. I had no difficulty in referring back to it.
WASHINGTON — Two weeks after winning re-election to a second term, President Barack Obama will embark on a four-day, three-nation trip to Southeast Asia as he continues to try to leave his imprint on a region increasingly influenced by China.
Obama will meet with leaders in Thailand, attend the East Asia Summit in Cambodia and become the first U.S. president to visit Myanmar, where he will praise the nation’s shift from military rule to fledgling democracy.
The president, who spent part of his childhood in Indonesia, took office four years ago with a pledge to concentrate on Asia, which he said his predecessor neglected. Although the war in Afghanistan and unrest in the Middle East continue to dominate U.S. foreign policy, Obama signaled earlier this year that he will shift some focus to a region with major challenges and opportunities for the United States. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also will be in the area this week.
Obama’s recent shift is, in part, a response to China’s growing economic and military influence. His trip comes just before China begins its first leadership change in a decade.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/11/14/174638/shifting-focus-to-asia-obama-to.html#storylink=cp

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/11/14/174638/shifting-focus-to-asia-obama-to.html

Count Bobulescu
31-03-2013, 12:37 AM
Perhaps try "Obama pivot to Asia", which yields an healthy 1,740,000 results.

I've no doubt it probably does, but weez talkin "Century of the East" policy.

random new yorker
31-03-2013, 02:25 AM
@ Count, i logged in to tell you 'Thank You for picking up the heavy lifting' with you spry reasoning, numbers and links but this is way way better!!

Count Bobulescu
31-03-2013, 03:07 AM
That might be because you neither look at what I've linked on this or even you say read some of what you link yourself.


Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/11/14/174638/shifting-focus-to-asia-obama-to.html#storylink=cp

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/11/14/174638/shifting-focus-to-asia-obama-to.html

McClatchy and Ceannaire’s term “pivot to Asia” is widely known and understood. Your term, Obama’s “Century of the East” as per Google, clearly is not, and despite your claims to the contrary, I see no mention of it in anything you posted. Could you just post something relevant that uses the term please?

You know very well I read links. The “East” was on the rise long before Obama arrived and will continue after him, so I fail to see anything that links Obama or his policies to the East for a Century. Remember, you did put century of the east in quotes. What is someone supposed to understand by that?

Count Bobulescu
31-03-2013, 03:07 AM
@ Count, i logged in to tell you 'Thank You for picking up the heavy lifting' with you spry reasoning, numbers and links but this is way way better!!

Ta, you're welcome.

Ceannaire
31-03-2013, 05:58 PM
McClatchy and Ceannaire’s term “pivot to Asia” is widely known and understood. Your term, Obama’s “Century of the East” as per Google, clearly is not, and despite your claims to the contrary, I see no mention of it in anything you posted. Could you just post something relevant that uses the term please?

You know very well I read links. The “East” was on the rise long before Obama arrived and will continue after him, so I fail to see anything that links Obama or his policies to the East for a Century. Remember, you did put century of the east in quotes. What is someone supposed to understand by that?


It is a generally accepted fact that the US is adopting a more hardline approach towards China at a time when the latter's influence is on the rise. Whether or not a particular phrase has been used to characterise the phenomenon is an irrelevance.

Count Bobulescu
31-03-2013, 07:24 PM
It is a generally accepted fact that the US is adopting a more hardline approach towards China at a time when the latter's influence is on the rise. Whether or not a particular phrase has been used to characterise the phenomenon is an irrelevance.

I made no claims either way, as to whether the US was adopting a more or less hardline approach to China, so you’ve certainly made an irrelevant comment. However, if someone puts a particular phrase in quotes, as is the case here, what relevance do you think should be applied to it? Do you think it should be ignored,................ as the mad rantings of a lunatic perhaps?

Ceannaire
31-03-2013, 07:37 PM
I made no claims either way, as to whether the US was adopting a more or less hardline approach to China, so you’ve certainly made an irrelevant comment. However, if someone puts a particular phrase in quotes, as is the case here, what relevance do you think should be applied to it? Do you think it should be ignored,................ as the mad rantings of a lunatic perhaps?


As much as the context demands, which, in this case, wasn't very much.

Count Bobulescu
31-03-2013, 08:16 PM
As much as the context demands, which, in this case, wasn't very much.

As I believe you, yourself stated elsewhere when replying to someone else who had accused you of relying too much on upper case your "parody" of Dojo, was for the more "astute" members of the forum. By definition you believe that all members are not all equally "astute". Therefore, in the interests of comity, it is imperative that members express themselves as clearly as possible, which certainly did not happen in the case in point. And we could go round and round, but I have no interest in that.

Count Bobulescu
31-03-2013, 08:20 PM
In an effort to bring this thread back to the topic at hand...............

Here's a short radio piece and a longer article by the same author on the NK economy and more.

http://www.npr.org/2013/03/30/175765559/think-again-about-u-s-impact-on-n-korean-economy



"North Korea's not that dangerous."

Wrong. There is no threat of war on the Korean peninsula because the United States and South Korea have deterred the regime for over six decades, or so the thinking goes. And the occasional provocation from Pyongyang -- full of sound and fury -- usually ends with it blowing up in its face, signifying nothing. So why worry? Two reasons. First, North Korea has a penchant for testing new South Korean presidents. A new one was just inaugurated in February, and since 1992, the North has welcomed these five new leaders by disturbing the peace. Whether in the form of missile launches, submarine incursions, or naval clashes, these North Korean provocations were met by each newly elected South Korean president with patience rather than pique.

The difference today is that South Korea is no longer turning the other cheek. After the North blew up the South Korean navy ship the Cheonan, killing 46 sailors in 2010, Seoul re-wrote the rules of military engagement. It has lost patience and will respond kinetically to any provocation, which could escalate into a larger conflict. Second, North Korea crossed a major technology threshold in December, when it successfully launched a satellite into orbit. Though the satellite later malfunctioned, the North managed to put the payload into orbit with ballistic missile launch technology that is clearly designed to reach the United States.

But there's another point that is often overlooked: North Korea today can threaten all of South Korea and parts of Japan with its conventional missiles and its conventional military. The North can fire 500,000 rounds of artillery on Seoul in the first hour of a conflict. Stability has held for 60 years because the U.S. security alliances with South Korea and Japan make it clear to the North Korean leadership that if they attacked South Korea or Japan, they would lose both the war and their country. And, for half a century, neither side believed that the benefits of starting a major war outweighed the costs. The worry is that the new North Korean leader might not hold to the same logic, given his youth and inexperience.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/03/25/think_again_north_korea

Ceannaire
31-03-2013, 09:26 PM
As I believe you, yourself stated elsewhere when replying to someone else who had accused you of relying too much on upper case your "parody" of Dojo, was for the more "astute" members of the forum. By definition you believe that all members are not all equally "astute". Therefore, in the interests of comity, it is imperative that members express themselves as clearly as possible, which certainly did not happen in the case in point. And we could go round and round, but I have no interest in that.


You are again incorrect in recounting an exchange. Random new yorker did not accuse me of relying too much on capitals; I merely explained why I did so in case there was any ambiguity. My motive was something I considered so obvious that my throw-away remark about how one would have to be astute to understand it was meant sarcastically.

Count Bobulescu
31-03-2013, 09:40 PM
You are again incorrect in recounting an exchange. Random new yorker did not accuse me of relying too much on capitals; I merely explained why I did so in case there was any ambiguity. My motive was something I considered so obvious that my throw-away remark about how one would have to be astute to understand it was meant sarcastically.

Without even checking I absolutely, utterly, accept that your version of the exchange is more accurate than mine. Now lets move on.

Ceannaire
31-03-2013, 09:52 PM
Based on the excerpt, there is an under-emphasis on the fact that North Korea has gone much further in terms of threats and sabre-rattling than on previous occasions. Tearing up the 1953 armistice, cutting off the "hotline" between the two countries, and declaring war are amongst the actions taken that represent a new departure. As they have a relatively new leader, precedent is not as reliable a guide to the future as suggested; it is unclear how much of this is an effort by him to be taken seriously and how much is genuinely threatening.


None of which is to say that the North does genuinely intend to go to war, merely casts doubt on the ease with which we can predict these things.

jpc
31-03-2013, 10:08 PM
Based on the excerpt, there is an under-emphasis on the fact that North Korea has gone much further in terms of threats and sabre-rattling than on previous occasions. Tearing up the 1953 armistice, cutting off the "hotline" between the two countries, and declaring war are amongst the actions taken that represent a new departure. As they have a relatively new leader, precedent is not as reliable a guide to the future as suggested; it is unclear how much of this is an effort by him to be taken seriously and how much is genuinely threatening.


None of which is to say that the North does genuinely intend to go to war, merely casts doubt on the ease with which we can predict these things.

Or is it merely a case that he is bigging it up to extract more concessions in the future?
Just peeing on the bushes so to speak to mark his territory!
He knows how far he will go.
And all out war without a big time backer wouldn't be on his agenda.

Count Bobulescu
31-03-2013, 10:13 PM
This is all the transcript you get with this one. Otherwise its 24 minutes of radio.


Episode 290: North Korea's Illegal Economy
North Korea's exports include illegal drugs, counterfeit U.S. dollars, and giant statues.
Read full post »


Note: This podcast was originally published in 2011. With North Korea in the news again this week, we're re-running it today. (So there are lots of references to KJI)

North Korea relies on charity to feed its starving people. But the country's elites like their luxuries — imported wine, fine china, dancing shoes.
To buy those things, they need foreign currency. (North Korean currency is worthless outside of North Korea.) To get foreign currency, they need to sell things to the outside world. But North Korea's industrial base is a disaster, and the country doesn't grow enough food to feed itself.
On today's Planet Money, we look at the ways North Korea's leaders have managed to keep foreign currency flowing into the country. Their strategies include manufacturing drugs, counterfeiting U.S. dollars, and selling gigantic statues to foreign leaders.
For More: The book Nothing to Envy is an amazing look at the lives of ordinary North Koreans. And this WSJ story has more on North Korea's monument export business.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/03/29/175708549/episode-290-north-koreas-illegal-economy?sc=nl&cc=pmb-20130330

North Korea isn’t the least-visited country in the world. It’s number 16.

The 25 least visited countries in the world, and I’ve been to one of them (Yippee).
.
http://www.garfors.com/2013/01/the-25-least-visited-countries-in-world.html


Reports today that North Korea is in fact closing the factory referenced below.


North Korea’s rockets are on standby. The US flew two stealth bombers from Missouri to South Korea and back, prompting North Korea to raise its military readiness. But as long as this factory remains open, war is unlikely.

http://qz.com/68702/as-long-as-this-...n-is-unlikely/

Count Bobulescu
01-04-2013, 07:30 PM
In an attempt to counter any confusion that might arise The US has sent two F-22 stealth fighters to South Korea, not to be confused with the B2 stealth bombers that flew last week.

Here’s a pic of the fighter

http://chamorrobible.org/images/photos/gpw-200907-UnitedStatesNavy-090622-N-7780S-014-flyby-USAF-F-22A-Raptor-stealth-fighter-jet-Gulf-of-Alaska-USA-20090622-original.jpg
and the bomber.
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1067&bih=525&q=b2+stealth+bomber&oq=b2+stealth+bomber&gs_l=img.12...0.0.3.39340.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0...0 .0...1ac..7.img.BRqIYWGtpBg#imgrc=sGydxfUtm6BCJM%3 A%3BJZARidk6oxFPMM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.aviati onexplorer.com%252FB-2_Stealth_Bomber_USAF.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww .aviationexplorer.com%252Fb-2_facts.htm%3B700%3B447


The United States has sent two F-22 Raptor fighter jets to take part military drills in South Korea, a move that is meant to show U.S. commitment to the defense of the region from its North Korean neighbor, a Pentagon spokesman told the Associated Press.
Also on Monday, South Korean President Park Geun-hye appeared to give her country's military permission to strike back at any attack from the North.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/04/01/175929526/u-s-adds-f-22-fighter-jets-to-military-exercise-in-south-korea

Count Bobulescu
01-04-2013, 07:41 PM
http://www.flickr.com/photos/verpen__uncleralf/3169096171/

That's really bizarre I've made about 20 attempts to post a pic of a stealth bomber that are widely available at google images where I got the fighter pic but they won't accept. I think someone may be trying to tell me something so I give up for now.

jpc
01-04-2013, 08:29 PM
Delivery of A10 Warthogs to the area would show a far bigger expectation of imminent action.
Any action on the peninsula would be far more basic than F22 super dooper jets.

Count Bobulescu
01-04-2013, 08:34 PM
Delivery of A10 Warthogs to the area would show a far bigger expectation of imminent action.
Any action on the peninsula would be far more basic than F22 super dooper jets.

Maybe that's why they only sent two.

Count Bobulescu
01-04-2013, 08:46 PM
Delivery of A10 Warthogs to the area would show a far bigger expectation of imminent action.
Any action on the peninsula would be far more basic than F22 super dooper jets.
f you’re a aircraft ***** you be interested, The F-35 will drain your wallet quickly.


Overall, the most expensive weapons system now being built, the planned purchase of 2,457 aircraft over the next few decades is now expected to cost nearly $400 billion to develop and acquire and that doesn’t include its long-term operating expenses.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/checkpoint-washington/post/cost-overruns-production-delays-mar-aircraft-production/2012/03/30/gIQAak4KQS_blog.html

riposte
01-04-2013, 08:49 PM
Or is it merely a case that he is bigging it up to extract more concessions in the future?
Just peeing on the bushes so to speak to mark his territory!
He knows how far he will go.
And all out war without a big time backer wouldn't be on his agenda.

You seem to know a lot about Kim Jong-un jpc.... did you go to school with him or something ?

jpc
01-04-2013, 08:55 PM
f you’re a aircraft ***** you be interested, The F-35 will drain your wallet quickly.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/checkpoint-washington/post/cost-overruns-production-delays-mar-aircraft-production/2012/03/30/gIQAak4KQS_blog.html

Fair point.
An absolutely pointless aircraft that's designed for a scenario that no longer exists.
If hostilities erupt (Don't think so personally) low tech warfare will be the order of the day.

jpc
01-04-2013, 08:58 PM
You seem to know a lot about Kim Jong-un jpc.... did you go to school with him or something ?

No!
Didn't go to school in Switzerland.

Count Bobulescu
01-04-2013, 09:43 PM
The U.S. flew F-22 steath fighter jets to South Korea yesterday. As tensions become more pronounced between the U.S. and North Korea, the WSJ reports (http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001hmN8G29fM6DvRReVrh0XDmxfSD4e5z_wiL_xhB wdO-bHhxtQZNRckveEYFHpJHqNdNrTzNnftpAftNh2llMLQ6XK3Fat UecUyAGwKNxnOAVNzcKkk-_62KcnHX4-lDIsaeqNtf-qCNzDGfPt8_TS7ohVcyaAe_ItePRewF0NoHADpmuUgjOFvoMA2 2R-n--o) on A-1 this morning that the U.S. deployed the jets -- "among the most expensive and advanced weapons in the Air Force's arsenal" -- to the peninsula on Sunday. "In a conflict with North Korea, F-22s would likely be the first aircraft used. The hard-to-detect fighters could be sent in to take out air defense missiles and radars in advance of bombers aimed at missile launch sites or other targets. They could also be used to escort nuclear-capable B-2 stealth bombers, should these be used in a strike."

And: "The use of F-22s in the training exercise with South Korea...is a signal the U.S. is eager to showcase its most potent weaponry to North Korea."

D'oh! Does it feel like 2002? When it comes to North Korea vs. Iran, it's the North that is the wolf closer to the door. The Journal also publishes a piece this morning about how North Korea has "eclipsed" Iran as a nuclear arms threat. Many will cringe at the notion that in the end, for all the anxiety and political theater over Iran's nuclear capabilities, it's actually North Korea that poses the (much?) bigger threat. The North has built a warhead, has conducted successful medium-range and long-range missile tests, can enrich uranium, and has the ability to use plutonium for a warhead. Iran can only check two of those boxes, having conducted a successful medium-range missile test and has the ability to enrich uranium, the WSJ reports. (http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001hmN8G29fM6Ahh3Omlfmg-bRIbNgWziofnh9Vk3jdz5Z8c-aWTYKNIemzrAZI7dG1O8HoLVoqjC83y8QtaDhpAdydXlofqTcN x3DfaZl3OaPmZ3vUM3rtT0Iuvy_SxBY-eiynUiBK_bL8j1tCdzt6XMJq-f0jVYbLV84wEpqrVeRQdwO5dXDt-5cEAWnNswuK) Evans Revere, a former State official: "By many estimates, North Korea will have the ability to deliver nuclear weapons using long-range ballistic missiles to distant targets within four or five years... [T]his will drastically change the security environment in Asia."

Count Bobulescu
01-04-2013, 10:03 PM
On Monday, Kim convened his country's rubber-stamp parliament to push through the appointment (http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001YSpoVGnWo-QLdRulesfo--pz-tf0jedImy2whi2uKbHDAu8YU7eg6nJJZDrtgNZccksAesGczUh v7G2ILarVm9she4-yA8AOPxIEDCI8HujSvidN8BY43-anKmtaXFYoUeBBsoylIKXxCnUngc0VGufkfkvEEBoH2CfodB3C yqGW61LTXnR7opvr_1ZAkOF8Lwa5q215JQ2AcC652u1YUMzUdr M4_ES6JqcOt_65D9XXHJgbV9ZIBA==) of an economic reformer once sacked for proposing a wage system seen as too close to capitalism. His pivot toward domestic issues may indicate (http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001YSpoVGnWo-SpMMwgTekU64misPl78E5sxp9-Q5vHVrY53G_uJlXg2Fv-tKpyQ7U4hpAbYmNMo2unRp0Xgs3sn3MQUfMGfxvDI2zbKt6iwP bxBUiImXhIAAg9jatE0_KFzD4DsljkRz2vhRu-lv3YVXFEj7bhUOfODRhkwGy5DSNDP1cd0ZaTRTxMWa3dJJ-YIAWw1zDD9ji62pPPuq_gqcWrpnu4OnYGGLUa1sJJrsoUOqfTa HmWXQ==)that he is about to pivot away from a dangerous tactic of military brinksmanship.

Count Bobulescu
01-04-2013, 10:08 PM
Because we do not generally associate the Russian political class with understatement, it was easy to miss Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov’s observation, this week, that things in North Korea could potentially “descend into the spiral of a vicious cycle.” If the Russians—who have vastly more knowledge of the new North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, than we do—are concerned that things are about to get worse, we should brace for a long spring.
The crisis on the Korean peninsula has descended so steadily, amid so many other hot zones competing for attention, and with such a sense of déjà vu about it, that it’s easy to lose sight of how North Korea’s threats to the United States and South Korea are now being made, as Scott Snyder of the Council on Foreign Relations put it, on “unprecedented levels and with greater intensity than ever before.” It is now at its most acute moment in years.

Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/evanosnos/2013/03/the-korean-crisis-kims-dangerous-game.html#ixzz2PFNYA58x

Count Bobulescu
01-04-2013, 10:52 PM
North Korea: What the Neocons Got Right

The neoconservatives got an awful lot wrong over the last decade. But they also got a few things right—namely, that a country's behavior is usually determined by the nature of the regime. Democracies behave toward the outside world in one way, dictatorships quite another. And no better proof exists than North Korea.
In recent days, responding to U.N. sanctions, North Korea has announced a “state of war” with South Korea, and the North’s leader, Kim Jong-un, appeared in front of a map titled "Plans to Attack the Mainland U.S." In response, the Obama administration has shifted more warships to the region.
So if anyone had any remaining doubts, they can now be laid to rest: Nothing has changed inside North Korea. Over there, it is still 1953, and we're not just talking about Kims. The Obama administration had sought to push the North Korean problem to the side with a policy of "strategic patience." But there is little patience of any kind left. Is regime change back on the table? Read more


http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/north-korea-where-the-neocons-are-right-20130401

C. Flower
01-04-2013, 11:06 PM
The amount of bilge being written about this is in the US Press not encouraging.

And


Many will cringe at the notion that in the end, for all the anxiety and political theater over Iran's nuclear capabilities, it's actually North Korea that poses the (much?) bigger threat.

Iran does not have, in the military sense, nuclear capabilities. I thought that Eamon Gilmore was the only person confused about that.

Count Bobulescu
01-04-2013, 11:24 PM
The amount of bilge being written about this is in the US Press not encouraging.

And
Iran does not have, in the military sense, nuclear capabilities. I thought that Eamon Gilmore was the only person confused about that.

Re Bolded please don't hesitate to provide alternative credible sources.

The selective quote excludes context. The very next sentence reads:
it's actually North Korea that poses the (much?) bigger threat. The North has built a warhead, has conducted successful medium-range and long-range missile tests, can enrich uranium, and has the ability to use plutonium for a warhead. Iran can only check two of those boxes,

C. Flower
01-04-2013, 11:36 PM
Re Bolded please don't hesitate to provide alternative credible sources.

The selective quote excludes context. The very next sentence reads:

I'm not sure how that is supposed to help. Anyone who doesn't know that North Korea has tested missiles and has the bombs, and that Iran is nowhere near having a bomb, must either be Eamon Gilmore or living under a rock.

Count Bobulescu
01-04-2013, 11:46 PM
In the piece proper the comparison was being made between Iran/NK in 2002 when the two were more evenly matched, to the position in 2013 where NK has forged ahead.