Posted on 05/12/2010 9:51:41 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld
Does South Korea have any rabble-rousing media magnates on the order of our own William Randolph Hearst?
I ain’t sayin’ nuthin...
The South Korean government is just relaying the truth to the world that North Korea committed an act of war.
Will the South Koreans take a measured military response in kind?
Interesting question. I think that the South Korea is fed up with North Korea getting away with murder. I think that at this point ,all options are on the table. But the U.S. would have to be included in the consultations since there are U.S. troops there
What is your opinion Tiger?
You also need to remember that there is a Mutual Defense Treaty between ROK and the United States
Pres himself also appears to feel double-crossed. All this create a strong push for some kind of action. The relation with China also ran into a problem, because of China's full embrace of Kim Jong-il's visit, and subsequent statements siding with N. Korea over S. Korea.
I think the response will be nonmilitary. There are some strong nonmilitary action which has teeth. The question is whether SK and U.S., especially Obama, would go for it. The trick is to hit China rather than N. Korea by some means China would notice.
I agree. But the days of South Korea blind eye toward North Korea is basically over. It will be more hostile.
Last sentence. Did you mean China wouldn’t notice?
I was talking about SK or U.S. response China would notice. For example, U.S. let SK develop intermediate range ballistic missiles which can hit all coastal Chinese cities. Without nuke warhead. China would notice that and take it seriously.
I dont think that the Zero will go South Korean ballistic missiles.
You are probably right.
Have they analyzed the fragments from the seabed at the site of the Gulf oil leak?
SK has changed its description of the event from an "external explosion" and now call it an "external attack", indicating a directed action by others.
I remain sceptical of a torpedo attack due to the type of damage, or lack of it on the hull sections of the ship, and the incredible targeting required, and the lack of any sonic signal beforehand. A drifting mine would be more likely than a torpedo. An internal explosion fits the damage profile the best.
The USNS Salvor, USS Harpers Ferry and the USS Shiloh along with 24 SK ships were on the scene doing rescue work within hours of the incident. The USS Salvo was there two hours after the event.
If we thought it was a mine we would not have entered the area until it was cleared by a minesweeper. If we thought it was a torpedo we would not have entered the area with a rescue ship, the USNS Salvor, first.....
In those waters you assume a hostile posture and send in warships first. The second ship on scene was the USS Harpers Ferry, a landing ship dock and then, the USS Shiloh, a guided missile cruiser.
No, the 7th fleet with all their knowledge of the conflict in that hot spot, would have gone in heavy if there was any suspicion of hostile acts.
The location where the ship was split is near engine room. Engine room explosion would cause extensive fire damage, and the ship could sink more slowly, according to what experts say.
The location of incident is rather unusual. It is rather shallow sea with exceptionally current. The current itself is said to generate noise which could hamper any sonar detection. Besides, it also has tide which can regularly change the direction of current. With the knowledge of how speed of current changes, when it changes direction, that is, exploiting local environmental features to maximum, NK can conduct operation which would not work in open sea, without extensive hi-tech weaponry.
Korean coastline could offer many unexpected features not readily recognizable by unsuspecting people. Coupled with N. Korea's penchant for developing unusual asymmetric operation, it could get strange, especially if they have crews ready to die(a kind of suicide bomber under the sea.)
Apparently, SK navy discounted such a possibility and so was US navy. It does not fit the conventional profile of warfare.
Yeah, like the UN is going to do anything about it.
Thanks for posting all those pics of the Cheonan.
I've changed my mind. Look at the rust and deformation on the starboard side of the hull amidship. It was definitely an external explosion that likely detonated onboard munitions. But the explosion was not a contact detonation, had to be a proximity mine or torpedo.
Here's the problem with a torpedo: the Cheonan was on a northern heading, the starboard side would have been towards shore. Had to be a mine. Why would we rush into the area, with a salvage ship, without sweeping for mines first?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.