In 2010 North Korea attacked South Korea- twice

[cali]

In March of that year it sank a South Korean war ship in the Yellow Sea, killing 46. In November of 2010 it shelled a South Korean Island in response to a SK drill, killing 4.

The U.S. South Korea alliance did not go to war over these incidences.

In 2009 North Korean and South Korean vessels exchanged fire resulting in serious damage to the North Korean vessel.

In fact, skirmishes between the two are not uncommon and will likely happen again, but they haven't, over the past decades, resulted in war.

North Korea may well lash out again over what it views as provocations by S.K, the U.S. and the U.N., but the odds of it actually attacking the U.S. are vanishingly small. Same goes for North Korea launching a full scale attack on South Korea.

Breathless anticipation of this conflict is silly.

[jsr]

1. There will always be skirmishes

to entertain his troops and justify the Spartan state.

[Spider Jerusalem]

2. Yes, but

South Korea may not exercise similar restraint in the face of North Korean provocation as they have in the past. Indeed, they've indicated they won't, and the US is on-board with this. The biggest worry isn't a full scale attack by the North, it's another incident like the sinking of the Cheonan that escalates into all-out war.

[cali]

4. experts, on the whole, do not believe that the prospect of all out war is at all likely

[zappaman]

3. Oh my, time to pay attention...MSNBC is leading

With Korean news...

It is US media after all.

In short...cool down, stop US exercises and return to tje three party talks.

If I said I was surprised I would be lying. The last thing China wants is a war on it's doorstep.

Oh and Xinxhua is the media organ of the party. This was not Paul Krugman at the NYT. This is very close to a diplomatic cable.

I fear this could get hot, easy peachy.

Suffice it to say, as a trained historian this is a trend you should follow, son!