N. Korea attacks S. Korean island, killing 2 marines

[TenPenny]

I agree, the North Korean response was excessive. But if any South Korea shells landed on the North Korean side of the border first,

What border?

 

[JLM]

What border?

I was always under the impression there is only one border between North and South Korea.

I know its easy for me, sitting across the Pacific from the Korea Peninsula to say this, but I hope the South Koreans and Americans continue to be reluctant to engage the North Koreans. Its like dealing with a child: rewarding bad behaviour only encourages more bad behaviour. So far this year the North Koreans have sunk a South Korean destroyer in international water and now shelled a South Korean island. The only discussions should be about the reparations the North makes to the South for these acts.

They may need an incentive. :smile:

 

[TenPenny]

I was always under the impression there is only one border between North and South Korea.

I was always under the impression that there isn't so much a border between them, as a demilitarized zone separating them, since the war never ended.

 

[Blackleaf]

If there's going to be a World War III, Korea is where it'll most likely start.

 

[JLM]

If there's going to be a World War III, Korea is where it'll most likely start.

Maybe everyone else should just keep their noses out of it and let them sort it out between themselves. Western people think differently than Orientals.

I was always under the impression that there isn't so much a border between them, as a demilitarized zone separating them, since the war never ended.

Maybe you're right.

 

[earth_as_one]

I'm against lynchings. Before awarding reparations one way or the other we need to know who did what to whom first. If a single South Korean shell drifted just across the North Korean border first, starting this exchange, then South Korea should pay reparations to the North who likely also suffered casualties.

Its critical to know how the incident unfolded. Both sides claim the other started it. Both sides have about zero reliability. I doubt we'll ever have enough information to know who did what to whom first.

I see the current situation as avoidable. South Korea and North Korea should agree not to conduct live fire exercises within an agreed distance from each others borders.

 

[Blackleaf]

The United States has sent the mighty USS George Washington aircraft carrier to take part in war games with the South Koreans.

Here are a couple of interesting facts: the number of crew on the George Washington is equal to one-fifth of the crew of the entire Royal Navy. And the number of fast jets onboard that ship are equal in number to HALF of the RAF's entire fleet of fast jets.

 

[earth_as_one]

I guess the US would be pissed if the North Koreans sank it. I hope the Americans take care not to turn this into a hot war or allow the North Koreans to turn this into a hot war.

 

[Unforgiven]

I'm against lynchings. Before awarding reparations one way or the other we need to know who did what to whom first. If a single South Korean shell drifted just across the North Korean border first, starting this exchange, then South Korea should pay reparations to the North who likely also suffered casualties.

Its critical to know how the incident unfolded. Both sides claim the other started it. Both sides have about zero reliability. I doubt we'll ever have enough information to know who did what to whom first.

I see the current situation as avoidable. South Korea and North Korea should agree not to conduct live fire exercises within an agreed distance from each others borders.

That creates a quagmire when one side, like North Korea, has no intention of talking at all. Seeing as how Korea is one nation split apart it's not so easy to conduct like fire exercises anywhere that aren't close to each other's boarders.

Even if a South Korean shell crossed slightly into North Korea there is no justification in shelling an island clearly in the territory of and occupied by South Korea killing two civilians and two marines.

So hinging any action at all on who did what first, the aggression has stop. North Korea has no intention of lowering it's level of aggression one iota. So while you sit on your hands wishing for what is never going to be forthcoming, people die. **** that noise.

 

[earth_as_one]

That creates a quagmire when one side, like North Korea, has no intention of talking at all. Seeing as how Korea is one nation split apart it's not so easy to conduct like fire exercises anywhere that aren't close to each other's boarders.

Even if a South Korean shell crossed slightly into North Korea there is no justification in shelling an island clearly in the territory of and occupied by South Korea killing two civilians and two marines.

So hinging any action at all on who did what first, the aggression has stop. North Korea has no intention of lowering it's level of aggression one iota. So while you sit on your hands wishing for what is never going to be forthcoming, people die. **** that noise.

You mean like how Canada doesn't talk to terrorists or insane dictators? I agree with you. We should engage our adversaries in dialogue, even when they are terrorists or insane dictators.

South Korea is big enough that they have lots of space on the other side of the pennisula or out in the Pacific ocean to conduct live fire exercises that don't affect North Korean fishing and commercial navigation. I also question the wisdom of conducting live fire exercises a few millimeters from the border of an insane dictator. I agree with sacking the South Korean defense minister.

This incident didn't happen in isolation. These two adversaries have over five decades of pulling fast ones on each other. Would you suggest starting a war?

 

[ironsides]

I know its easy for me, sitting across the Pacific from the Korea Peninsula to say this, but I hope the South Koreans and Americans continue to be reluctant to engage the North Koreans. Its like dealing with a child: rewarding bad behaviour only encourages more bad behaviour. So far this year the North Koreans have sunk a South Korean destroyer in international water and now shelled a South Korean island. The only discussions should be about the reparations the North makes to the South for these acts.

Everything depends on what N. Korea does now. They have put the whole region on alert. I like others do not expect S. Korea to retaliate militarily for this incident, but as was mentioned earlier how many times can a country have its people killed without retaliating.

 

[CUBert]

apparently many of you still believe that it's fact north korea torpedoed the south korean navy ship, you'd be wrong.

VOA | US Professors Raise Doubts About Report on South Korean Ship Sinking | Asia | English

there's just not enough sufficient proof.




this is pretty funny though

 

[ironsides]

Doesn't do to much to help their cause though. Whether it was a mine or torpedo, they put it there and the evidence is building up. North Korea is a rogue nation just like Libya was. (Muammar al-Gaddafi saw the light and was reborn, nothing like a F-14 to show the way. Did you know Hornets eat hummingbirds.)

 

[Machjo]

I agree, the North Korean response was excessive. But if any South Korea shells landed on the North Korean side of the border first, then North Korea's excessive response was legal. I'm not sure about justified or reasonable. If you fire at someone's territory, they have a legal right to fire back, especially while the rules of war apply. There is no way to tell directly if South Korea accidentally dropped a few shells across the line, but the South Korean defense minister's immediate resignation sort of hints indirectly that South Korea may be a fault or screwed up.

Right now, the war games are back on. For the next four days, the USS George Washington carrier group are playing live fire exercises with the South Koreans in the same area. Let's hope the Americans don't do something dumb or give the North Koreans a chance to do something dumb.

I could be wrong here and would have to look it up. But ot the best of my knowledge, though a country has a right to defend its territory, it is legally bound by international conventions to use the minimum force required. Again, I'd have to look it up, but it would make sense. If that's the case, then while South Korea would certainly be taken to task for its stupidity, North Korea too would be grilled as to whether it actually made an attempt to communicate to the South of its displeasure via diplomatic means (it's not like they need an interpretor or anything), and if so what was the response from the South, and if not why not.

As far as I can tell, the North just started firing. If so, that's way too excessive. Again, I'm not excusing the South here, but merely saying the North did not help matter either.

Millions have already died in North Korean famine and oppression.........

A war to completely liberate North Korea could only help the people there. They have absolutely NOTHING to lose.

The problem is the likelyhood that war would cost the lives of tens....or hundreds of thousands of South Koreans.....who have lots to lose.....thanks to liberty, capitalism, and the USA (to say nothing of Canada and the other UN forces in the 1950-53 war)

You're starting to sound a little Kiplingesque there.

 

[earth_as_one]

I could be wrong here and would have to look it up. But ot the best of my knowledge, though a country has a right to defend its territory, it is legally bound by international conventions to use the minimum force required. Again, I'd have to look it up, but it would make sense. If that's the case, then while South Korea would certainly be taken to task for its stupidity, North Korea too would be grilled as to whether it actually made an attempt to communicate to the South of its displeasure via diplomatic means (it's not like they need an interpretor or anything), and if so what was the response from the South, and if not why not.

As far as I can tell, the North just started firing. If so, that's way too excessive. Again, I'm not excusing the South here, but merely saying the North did not help matter either.



You're starting to sound a little Kiplingesque there.

As far as I can tell, North Korea just started firing after a four and half hour barrage of high explosives on their doorstep.

I agree that the minimum force required would be a rational response. If that's what we expect from our adversaries, should the same standards apply to us and our allies?

 

[ironsides]

"The skirmish began when Pyongyang warned the South to halt military drills in the area, according to South Korean officials. When Seoul refused, the North bombarded the small South Korean-held island of Yeonpyeong, which houses military installations and a small civilian population.
South Korea returned fire and dispatched fighter jets in response, and said there could be considerable North Korean casualties as troops unleashed intense retaliatory fire. The supreme military command in Pyongyang threatened more strikes if the South crossed their maritime border by "even 0.001 millimeter," according to the North's official Korean Central News Agency."

All the retaliatory fire took time, especially launching the jets. North Korea pulled a "Pearl Harbor" on S. Korea with the exception that S. Korea was better prepared, but not enough I guess since South Korean Defense Minister Kim Tae Young had to resign.
"Government officials in Seoul called the bombardments "inhumane atrocities" that violated the 1953 armistice halting the Korean War. The two sides technically remain at war because a peace treaty was never signed."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/north-south-korea-exchange-fire-2-marines-killed/


Time Line for Attack

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2632995/posts

"The skirmish began when Pyongyang warned the South to halt military drills in the area, according to South Korean officials. When Seoul refused, the North bombarded the small South Korean-held island of Yeonpyeong, which houses military installations and a small civilian population.
South Korea returned fire and dispatched fighter jets in response, and said there could be considerable North Korean casualties as troops unleashed intense retaliatory fire. The supreme military command in Pyongyang threatened more strikes if the South crossed their maritime border by "even 0.001 millimeter," according to the North's official Korean Central News Agency."

All the retaliatory fire took time, especially launching the jets. North Korea pulled a "Pearl Harbor" on S. Korea with the exception that S. Korea was better prepared, but not enough I guess since South Korean Defense Minister Kim Tae Young had to resign.
"Government officials in Seoul called the bombardments "inhumane atrocities" that violated the 1953 armistice halting the Korean War. The two sides technically remain at war because a peace treaty was never signed."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/north-south-korea-exchange-fire-2-marines-killed/


Time Line for Attack

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2632995/posts

Even comes with comments.

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

North Korea should be bombed excessively if it launches another aggression against the South. In fact the sooner they unseat this nutcase and work toward reunification of North and South the better for everyone, and especially the Koreans.

 

[Goober]

North Korea should be bombed excessively if it launches another aggression against the South. In fact the sooner they unseat this nutcase and work toward reunification of North and South the better for everyone, and especially the Koreans.

The North has enough Artillery, well dug in to level Seoul - Then the have nukes - and the last thing either China or the South wants is the North to collapse in the same way that East Germany and the rest of the bloc did - i was in Germany when the wall fell.
I think my support as a NATO Soldier and my direct contribution by consuming massive amounts of Warsteiner, from the Keg are really not considered as they should be, in context of course, my singular role in supporting the West Germans, their economy by consuming copious qty's of beer and the indirect correlation as to how it relates to the collapse on the USSR. I would also include all NATO Soldiers who also consumed, great wines and beer, food and women.

Yes sadly that key component is overlooked by the historians. But the truth is out there as Fox Mulder would say.

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

China needs to reign this idiot in before he destabilizes the entire region. My guess is as long as people make excuses for this activity and Countries fail to do something decisive this will continue until an all out war is inevitable.

 

[earth_as_one]

"The skirmish began when Pyongyang warned the South to halt military drills in the area, according to South Korean officials. When Seoul refused, the North bombarded the small South Korean-held island of Yeonpyeong, which houses military installations and a small civilian population.
South Korea returned fire and dispatched fighter jets in response, and said there could be considerable North Korean casualties as troops unleashed intense retaliatory fire. The supreme military command in Pyongyang threatened more strikes if the South crossed their maritime border by "even 0.001 millimeter," according to the North's official Korean Central News Agency."

All the retaliatory fire took time, especially launching the jets. North Korea pulled a "Pearl Harbor" on S. Korea with the exception that S. Korea was better prepared, but not enough I guess since South Korean Defense Minister Kim Tae Young had to resign.
"Government officials in Seoul called the bombardments "inhumane atrocities" that violated the 1953 armistice halting the Korean War. The two sides technically remain at war because a peace treaty was never signed."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/north-south-korea-exchange-fire-2-marines-killed/

Time Line for Attack

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2632995/posts



Even comes with comments.

Your link is crap. It completely ignores the impact this live fire exercise had on North Korea, makes it sound like North Korea started firing at the beginning of the exercise not a significant time later...

How about a real time line with times?

Actual events:

08:20: North sends a telex message requesting a halt to the South's artillery training exercise.
10:00: South starts the artillery training exercise.
14:34: North starts firing shells (around 150, of which about 60 land on Yeonpyeong)
14:38: South conducts emergency sorties with two KF-16 fighters.
14:40: South deploys four F-15K fighters.
14:46: South conducts another emergency sortie with two KF-16 fighters.
14:47: South fires back with the first round of K-9 howitzers (50 shells).
14:50: The highest alert (Alert Jindotgae Hana) ever given for a local provocation is issued.
14:55: North stops firing temporarily.
15:12: North starts firing for the second time (20 shells, all of which landed on the island).
15:25: South resumes firing back with K-9 howitzers (30 shells).
15:30: South telexes the North's military general level talk representative requesting an immediate halt to artillery shelling.
15:40 – 16:00: The South's Joint Chiefs of Staff Han Min-gu and USFK Commander Walter L. Sharp have a video conference (a review of cooperative crisis management).

10:00 until 14:34 is four hours and thirty four minutes.

I will go out on a limb her and surmise that South Korea knew their live fire exercise, which would effectively shut down a navigable waterway in North Korea for the duration, would piss off the North Koreans. If South Korea accidentally or deliberately dropped a single shell on the North Korean side of border, then I'd say South Korea is responsible for the consequences. I have no idea if that's what happened, but the immediate resignation of the South Korean defense minister is a huge clue this was either deliberate or a accident on the part of the South Koreans.