NKorea warns of war if punished for ship sinking

[Divine Discontent]

Source: AP Yahoo

snip of much longer news article ---

SEOUL, South Korea – South Korea accused North Korea on Thursday of firing a torpedo that sank a naval warship in March, killing 46 sailors in the country's worst military disaster since the Korean War.

President Lee Myung-bak vowed "stern action" for the provocation following the release of long-awaited results from a multinational investigation into the incident. North Korea, reacting swiftly, called the results a fabrication and warned that any retaliation would trigger war.

Investigators said evidence overwhelmingly proves North Korea fired a homing torpedo that caused a massive underwater blast that tore the Cheonan into two on March 26. Fifty-eight sailors were rescued from the frigid Yellow Sea waters near the Koreas' maritime border, but 46 perished.

"(We) will take resolute countermeasures against North Korea and make it admit its wrongdoings through strong international cooperation," Lee told Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in a phone conversation, the presidential office said.

The White House called the sinking an unacceptable "act of aggression" that violates international law and the truce signed in 1953.

Read more: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orange/os-i4-tanker-fire-20100519,0,946235.story

---

It doesn't sound too good, and NK's action was horribly violent and begs a sharp response.

I think NK is probably expecting this will come to blows.

[cliffordu]

1. This could get really ugly really, really fast.

Quicker than the Chinese can put the muzzle back on the north....

[Divine Discontent]

2. yes, that quickly. NK's statement screams we know we're guilty but don't you dare come after us,

we'll bite!

[Ghost Dog]

9. That's so. "North Korea, reacting swiftly" is not normal..

Better send in a crack team of diplomats.

[Posteritatis]

36. Er? North Korea *always* flares up instantly at any accusations leveled at them. (nt)

[Journeyman]

3. I just don't see what the North Koreans sought to gain in this attack . . .

there's been no reports of them using it to their advantage, and no perceptible value in the attack.

Just more bat shit craziness from some truly whacked out freaks. And nothing anyone seems to do makes any difference. We just sputter and falter along, hoping it may get better when the the Senile one finds his place in history. Let's hope we can avoid a confrontation before the happy day.

[Arrowhead2k1]

5. I think they are trying to provoke a war without "blatantly" firing the first shot.

Even though they did fire the first shot, they'll never admit it. As long as they can keep fooling the North Korean people into making the South look like the aggressors in the next episode of the Korean War, they'll have enough internal support to wage it.

[Kurska]

10. Some North Korean sub captain panicked when a ship got close and fired on it

these guys are not chosen because they are smart, party loyalties and other bullshit push the floatsam to the top.

[jberryhill]

18. It could have been a mistake

But admitting mistakes or lack of discipline is not their strong suit.

[Selatius]

20. Admitting mistakes is a weakness of all authoritarian regimes. It's par for the course.

Even if they did make a mistake, there's no turning back now. If South Korea wants it bad enough, it will retaliate against North Korea, and that could mean a huge war.

[mrdmk]

32. Technically, North and South Korea never ended the war, there was an armistice signed

not a peace treaty. In May 2009, North Korea withdrew from the armistice, thus returning an active state of war.

<snip>

The Korean War (1950-53) was a military conflict between the Republic of Korea, supported by the United Nations; and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and People's Republic of China, with air support from the Soviet Union. The war began on 25 June 1950 and an armistice was signed on 27 July 1953. The war was a result of the political division of Korea by agreement of the victorious Allies at the conclusion of the Pacific War. The Korean peninsula had been ruled by Japan prior to the end of the war. In 1945, following the surrender of Japan, American administrators divided the peninsula along the 38th parallel, with United States troops occupying the southern part and Soviet troops occupying the northern part.<22> The failure to hold free elections throughout the Korean Peninsula in 1948 deepened the division between the two sides, and the North established a Communist government. The 38th Parallel increasingly became a political border between the two Koreas. Although reunification negotiations continued in the months preceding the war, tension intensified. Cross-border skirmishes and raids at the 38th Parallel persisted. The situation escalated into open warfare when North Korean forces invaded South Korea on June 25, 1950.<23> It was the first significant armed conflict of the Cold War.<24>

The United Nations, particularly the United States, came to the aid of the South Koreans in repelling the invasion. After early defeats by the North Korean military, when a rapid UN counter-offensive repelled the North Koreans past the 38th Parallel and almost to the Yalu River, the People's Republic of China (PRC) came to the aid of Communist North.<23> With Communist China's entry into the conflict, the fighting took on a more dangerous tone. The rapid Chinese counter-offensive repelled the United Nations forces past the 38th Parallel. The Soviet Union materially aided North Korea and China. The threat of a nuclear world war eventually ceased with an armistice that restored the border between the Koreas at the 38th Parallel and created the Korean Demilitarized Zone, a 2.5-mile (4.0 km) wide buffer zone between the two Koreas. North Korea unilaterally withdrew from the armistice on May 27, 2009, thus returning to a de jure state of war.

<end of snip>

link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War

The strategy is, a good offense is a good defense... My philosophy is, 'In a fight, war, or divorce there is only degrees of losing, there is no winning!'

edit: added link

[Igel]

33. Give it time.

Let's assume it wasn't a mistake. (Even if it were, the implications are the same if nobody can justifiably believe it was a mistake.)

Then there are a few things to be learned or gained from this.

1. Notice S. Korea's attitude. "Oh, no--they killed Kenny." Followed less by sabre-rattling and more by mourning and grief. Every life is precious, and you don't want any of your soldiers to die means that you're going to be very careful in provoking any kind of fighting. Why? Because you value neither honor, nor territory, nor wealth, nor even freedom, more than life. NK won on this point: SK is composed of weak-willed cowards. Honor matters. SK has none. Look for NK to have a lot less respect for SK--okay, okay, "a lot more contempt for SK" is more accurate.

2. The world's on notice. The status quo can't continue. "You don't give us what we want, you have people die. You care about that. If you kill our people, we'll use it to stir up populist and nationalist fervor. We kill your people, you wilt. Now, here's our list." They can up the ante. What we do to them is less than what they can do to us and get away with scot free. Or, rather, believing themselves to have been confirmed in their own righteousness of action.

Then there's speculation: Who knows what sort of internal purpose this may have served? A cause for disposing of some ranking official? A threat of some kind? Perhaps the knowledge gained was to disprove somebody wrong and help determine policy. Perhaps that'll be what the info is used for, regardless of the reason the sinking happened.

[golfguru]

43. It's not what they can gain......it is that they don't have much to lose

their economy is in horrible shape.

[Old Troop]

81. Sometimes I think NK doesn't need a reason that anyone else understands

I think the NK leadership has a terribly distorted view of SK and the west. The attack on the Blue House in '68, the airliner destruction in Thailand, the killing of the SK tourist in the Free Trade Zone. None of these actions and many others have apparent tactical or strategic logic.

[Blacksheep214]

4. It's time to end this!

Let's call the bluff of North Korea and let the South do what they wish. We stay out of it.

This could be the biggest humanitarian action ever. The people are eating weeds fercrissakes!

I don't think their malnourished army can put up any sustained action. Take out the missles and its game over. Easy, eh?

[Arrowhead2k1]

6. We can't just let the South do as they wish. We have a pact.

If they go to war, we go to war. There's no way out of it.

If there was a war with North Korea, you can expect the draft to be reinstated fairly quickly, and I imagine most other western allies would join in to. The question is, which side would China take? They are the reason we lost the first episode of the Korean War afterall.

[proteus_lives]

7. We didn't lose the first episode of the Korean Conflict.

NK launched the war at the command of China/Russia and gained nothing. China intervened and left 400,000 dead in the peninsula.

It was a stalemate because neither side achieved their goals.

[Arrowhead2k1]

8. Right, by lost I mean getting pushed back from Manchuria

and failing to reunify Korea.

[Lurks Often]

19. The draft won't be reinstated

First, it'll take a MINIMUM of 6 months before the first draftee would be ready: Activate Select Service, choose the draftees, ship them to the Basic Training Bases, induction & in-processing, 16-20 weeks of Basic and Advanced training. I happen to think it would be a lot longer because Congress will dither and debate for weeks because Congress knows reinstating the draft would cost most of them their oh so precious seats in the next election. By the time the draftees are over there the conventional part of the war will almost certainly be over.
Second, the military doesn't want draftees
Third, we won't need to draft people. South Korea's army is more then enough, along with the US 2nd Division (and it's attachments) to handle the North Korean Army. Where the US will make the most difference is in the air and at sea.

[Xithras]

49. China has said, many times, that they won't permit it.

They view South Korea as an American client-state, and will not permit an American client-state to exist on their borders.

The difference today is that China wouldn't even have to get involved militarily. They could just declare an embargo against the U.S. and stop buying U.S. debt, and our government and economy would collapse in short order.

That's not hyperbole either. Think about the percentage of modern retail goods that are made in China. Now think of all the dockworkers, truck drivers, rail yard operators, warehouse workers, and retail store employees who would lose their jobs overnight if those goods suddenly went away. Now think of all the people working higher up in those companies who would be laid off as those companied folded up as their sales went into a freefall. Now think of the stock market, and the instant and catastrophic fall it would take as the collapse started.

China has a gun to the head of the American economy, and our government knows it. That's why we'll never invade North Korea.

Plus, North Korea never signed the U.N. Chemical Weapons Convention, and is quite open about the fact that they have one of the worlds largest stockpiles of chemical and nerve gasses. People who think it would be an "easy" war are fooling themselves.

[Psephos]

56. A PRC embargo would invite the repudiation of the US bonds they hold...

...followed by the collapse of their economy as US demand stopped cold. China is extraordinarily dependent on exports, yet its banking system, which capitalizes its frenetic expansion, is remarkably parochial, and under the facade, not subject to GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles). Chinese banking is a hellish labyrinth of bad loans, fake documents, fictitious collateral, and pervasive political corruption. Like a vial of nitroglycerine, it just needs a shock to initiate an explosion.

If China has a gun to the head of the US economy (as you put it), the US has a gun to the head of the Chinese economy. MAD via economic, rather than nuclear, weapons. But MAD all the same.

[Pavulon]

65. China has a trillion reasons not to fuck with the US.

one being all the debt they hold. If they start a war with us, we nullify that. We buy plastic shit from them, thats it. Last time we met them in Korea, we killed a million of chinese.

If anyone uses chem bio, they are truly fucked. We will drop no notice b61 gravity bombs out of jets they cant see. We will then follow up with SLBM and ICBM until they are all dead.

China has zero interest in a shooting war, never mind a nuclear war.

China does have reasons to take over the north.

[New Dawn]

53. China and Russia will not allow another US puppet regime to further encircle them.

That is why they will absolutely never allow an invasion of the DPRK by either the US and/or South Korea. Secondly, there is no reason to believe this latest claim from South Korea. Their right-wing media makes up fake propaganda stories about the North all the time.

[Pavulon]

66. This is not 1975. Neither have the means to

control the situation in the event the north starts a shooting war.

[DRoseDARs]

11. Oh noes, North Korea threatens to get itself obliterated if it keeps this shit up!

That people are sweating this is hilarious. They have 1950's military tech versus modern South Korean and US forces, they may or may not have viable kiloton nukes (duds do not a nuclear arsenal make) that they can't deliver to targets anyway, they have a civilian population that couldn't fight even if threatened by the North Korean military with death if they don't (re:starvation tends to make it physically and psychologically difficult to fight). This isn't something we should be too particularly worried about. This won't be a repeat of the original Korean War. I'd be surprised if China even bothered this time around. Kim Jong Il is nuts and so is his military, China knows this, and they'd probably rather have a stable Korean peninsula with which to be trade partners with when all is said and done. Being rid of KJI and having the Koreas unify under South Korea's economy benefits China far more than militarily occupying a dirt poor satellite, having a pissed-off South Korea, and having an even more pissed-off United States and other global trade partners. Again, this isn't the 1950's. Then Communist China only had gains to make because they weren't mixed in with global trade, now it stands to lose FAR, FAR more than it ever gained helping North Korea the last time around.

[Ghost Dog]

12. We can certainly rely on China behaving rationally.

Which is a relief. Cock-ups apart.

[boppers]

13. If we can count on the soviet bloc (dating myself) as being rational, Kim Jong Il ....

...just signed his death warrant.

This is "suicide by cop".

[David__77]

21. Don't underestimate N. Korea military.

First, they could wage a very skilled guerrilla war and activate and deploy operatives in the south to conduct very serious sabotage. Anyone who thinks the north doesn't have a genuine base of intense (though not huge) support is incorrect. N. Korea does have many modern weapons as well. They are indeed a major exporter of such weapons. Their economy is, essentially, a war economy, which is a major factor in the people's economic misery. A war with N. Korea would not end easily or without enormous costs relative to other recent conflicts.

[Ghost Dog]

27. Of course you realise, David, that a very similar description

could well-apply, at the moment, to the USA itself?

[David__77]

28. That is true to an extent.

But the US has a much more advanced economy, and its military as a percentage of GDP is MUCH lower than N. Korea. Trust me though, I'm no defender us the huge US military spending and adventures abroad.

[Ghost Dog]

29. That's ok, mate.

How many N. Koreans truly believe they live in a genuine (no realistic economics required) 'Socialist Paradise', do you reckon?

We've been warning them for so long now. Of course we'll have to do it.

Just, make sure China is onside.

(And Japan and Russia, natch).

[David__77]

39. I'd say the N. Korea ideology has a 20-30% base of support.

The "paradise" is religious, not economic in nature. N. Korea is no socialist country by any means. A regular person can't get their hands on a book by Marx or Lenin in N. Korea, which is unprecedented in "socialist countries." It is closer to "national socialism" i.e. Nazi ideology. That said, I oppose US intervention in any way. And of course China supports N. Korea as there is a traditional bond plus they do not want US troops lined up on the Chinese border. China would probably like to launch a soft coup to bring N. Korea closer to its ideological orbit of "socialist market economy" while maintaining one-party rule. In 2010, China might not directly intervene, but in a couple more years when it is stronger, it would certainly defend N. Korea.

[Posteritatis]

35. And one doesn't need US-level military tech to drop a shitload of artillery on Seoul. (nt)

[Pavulon]

38. Dont underestimate strategic bombing or NATO. Not been seen since Arc Light

North Korea has NOTHING we can not kill or break in a very rapid manner. I would worry about the millions of dead there during a real war. There is a standing playbook to reduce their military, there has been since 1958.

A war would end there with North Korea, and parts of South Korea in ashes.

[David__77]

40. I do not.

But the cost to Western powers and S. Korea would be extremely high in terms of resources of personnel/civilians. The US would have to use nuclear weapons to even impact the vast underground complexes in N. Korea, which would be a very politically costly act, as well as legitimizing N. Korean use of nuclear weapons.

[Pavulon]

45. NO nuclear weapons would be required to reduce the north

OOB is. Blind them, destroy aa and radar, destroy command and control. Kill the order givers. Soviet model is a centralized command and control, thats why saddam had no army after gw1. Sink everything they float at the same time. There is nothing even close to a naval parity with the US. Anything leaving there is sunk by aircraft or subs. At this point we own the sky and the sea. Destroy aircraft and artillery. Destroy armor. Destroy massed troops. Destroy every dam and power station there (at the same time).

Destroy anything that moves people or supplies. Kill them with aircraft until they surrender or there is no one left to kill.

This would require troops in Japan who are basically just there to fight this war and NATO to be part of holding the south, then squashing the north.

Only variable is china, They have trillions of reasons not to enter a conflict the North STARTS with the US. Hell they may just join in.

North Korea has nothing to gain and literally everything to loose.

[David__77]

54. I think that is a wrong assessment of N. Korean structure.

It is indeed centralized but also flexible. There is a cellular organization, and without higher authority, cells would function autonomously. The model is closer to the old Chinese PLA than the more modern Red Army in some respects. But a lot of this is conjecture. Even Western intelligence agencies lack good information on these matters. I am proceeding from the known ideological orientation of the N. Korean leadership, and analyzing their past practice.

[The Croquist]

31. I disagree

1. You are right that the North Korean nukes are of questionable reliability but they have to be feared.

2. Seoul is within range of North Korean artillery, Seoul has a population of 10 million and the metropolitan area has a population of 23 million.

3. North Korea has an army of over a million men not counting reservists compared to South Korea with half that.

4. South Korea won't simply sit on the DMZ while North Korea destroys Seoul and tens of thousands of it's civilians. The US and South Korea will dominate the air but there are simply too many targets to take them out before the South Korean economy is destroyed and the government politically weakened to the point of failure, nor can the US move assets there fast enough.

I do agree that China is the wild card. Honestly I don't see them truly supporting them in a conflict. They may send troops in but I would bet that the troops would aid a coup more then anything else unless, as I expect, it to go nuke fast.

[Lurks Often]

51. The North Korean artillery is

going to be destroyed much, much faster then any of us think. The North Koreans have no concept of how far ahead of them we are.

As for the million men, the Iraqi's had just as many troops during Desert Storm, some at least as motivated as the North Koreans and it didn't make a damn bit of difference and our capabilities have drastically advanced since 1991.*

My expectation of what will happen if a conventional war starts is similar to what happened in Iraq, but with somewhat higher casualties among US troops, South Korean casualties higher then US and North Korean casualties will be extremely high, look also for mass surrenders on the part of the North Korean troops, especially among the non-elite army units. Keep in mind my comments refer to the conventional war only and not to the potential counter-insurgency issues after the conventional part of the war is over.

* Unfortunately much of the high technology is of least use in counter-insurgency/guerrilla warfare, which is what Iraq and Afghanistan are right now.

[The Croquist]

62. Destroyed by what?

From a war stand point I would think that the best thing that could happen would be an invasion by the North. The DMZ is littered with mines and heavily defended by both sides. The NK army would suffer huge losses trying to cross it.

If instead NK just started hurling missiles and artillery into Seoul that could force South Korea to cross the DMZ in D-Day like fashion exactly where NK expects with huge losses in return. If it does have a couple of Nukes they could bury one there and let the SK army walk to it. I can promise you that if that worked any invasion of NK would end right there. Of course I think that NK would end shortly there after.

The US Air force is going to be hard pressed to get there fast enough to make a difference and supporting them will be even slower. It took us 5 months to move enough troops into place to liberate Kuwait. It took us over a year to get ready to fight Iraq the second time. In the meantime Seoul is being hammered every day. Flying a plane there is the easy part. Having weapons for multiple flights, maintenance crews, equipment and parts to support them will take allot longer. We've got bases in Japan but the Japanese may prove to be a reluctant host.

I'm not saying that NK would win I think they will lose. What I am saying is that this war would be a disaster for everybody.

I agree about your counter-insurgency/guerrilla warfare concerns but will take it a step further. NK has a history of infiltrating the South up to this time. I think that commando / suicide raids would be a huge problem as well.

[Pavulon]

64. They are there now in Japan and on Naval vessels.

This would not be a paint schools and hearts and minds event. It would look like gw1. They go blind, we kill anything that flies. Then we systematically reduce them. With fat bellied b-52's out of diego after they are defenseless from cruise missiles, b2's, and f117

Japan would be happy to support the us in the event the north starts a war. Japan does not like north korea shooting missiles over their homeland.

This would be the first major war since vietnam. The death toll would be horrific for the koreans.

[The Croquist]

68. Diego Garcia is 4,700 miles from North Korea

They can get there, bomb and get back but not fast and often enough to prevent the destruction of Seoul and they have to get there first nor are there enough b-52s, B-1s to do the job conventionally. The F-117 has been retired. The plane of choice I would think would be the A-10 Warthog but you still need to get them there.

The bottom line is that North Korea could start shelling Seoul right now and there is little we can do to stop them. It would be suicidal but that doesn't mean they wouldn't do it.

I would think that Okinawa would be a better choice but that again depends on the Japanese. I agree that Japan is no friend of North Korea but they probably don't want to get hit either and there is a better chance of them getting hit then us. You have to fear the potential of a nuke.

I don't think that US troops would cross into North Korea. I suspect that if the war stayed conventional it would be SK troops and if not, well then for sure it would be SK troops but at that stage does it really matter?

[Pavulon]

76. The plane used would be a low signature like b2, or F-22

either a high capacity or high speed. In conjunction with cruise missiles, maybe some that have little to no radar signature. The a-10 can not operate without air superiority. The others can fly through north korean radar.

Once they have no planes and sams left b-52's drop 100,000 lb sticks of dumb bombs until the desired level of destruction has been reached.

This is probably the most planned event in the military. There has been a changing OOB for this since the end of the korean war.

[OnlinePoker]

71. North Korea has invasion tunnels

4 have been discovered since the 70's with the capability of allowing anything from a regiment to a division to pass through per hour under the DMZ. You can bet there are more that have never been discovered. I can't think of anything worse than the idea of having your escape and resupply routes suddenly vanish with the enemies popping up behind you.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxftBdSlW5Y

[Pavulon]

77. I saw a neat photo in an early 80's national geographic

it showed the underground tributaries feeding the nile. It was taken from space 20 years ago.

[Lurks Often]

72. Destroyed by

the artillery already in place, MLRS (rocket launchers), attack helicopters, B-2's loitering overhead and once the air defenses are gone, B-52's, B-1's and the various other attack aircraft the Navy, Air Force and Marines have. As an example a B-2 can carry up to 80 500lb laser guided bombs, all of which will hit within in 6 feet of where they are aimed, so any cave or hole big enough for the North Koreans to fire rockets or artillery out of, can be hit. With the various satellites, drones and counter battery radar identifying where an artillery round came from, my estimate is that 5-10% of North Korean artillery will be destroyed after every time they fire.

The long waits in both Iraq campaigns were to wait for the ground forces to get in place, not the aviation assets. We have 3 squadrons of F-16's and 1 squadron of A-10's already stationed in South Korea and more aviation assets in Okinawa and Japan and they will start running the big bombers out of Guam within 12 hours or less. Using the Maritime Pre-Positioning Ships based in Guam and Diego Garcia, the Air Force will have enough munitions to keep them supplied for a month and that doesn't count the supplies already in Korea.

I am not saying that this will be quick, easy or painless, because it won't. I merely pointing out that the North Koreans are not nearly as good as most people believe and they are going to be in for a rather nasty surprise if they declare war.

[Lagomorph]

57. The North will....

...make a spectacular show for about 72 hours, then cease to exist in it's present form.

Not just because of American technology, but because the big powers will put an end to the conflict.

[fujiyama]

58. Any disruption to the SK economy will certainly lead to falling markets throughout Asia

and likewise the US and Europe as well.

SK certainly has greater global economic importance and influence than Greece and that country's economic troubles have rippled throughout the world.

The Chinese at this point have nothing at all to gain by supporting the North Koreans. I'd say they could make money, but NK has none. SK is a major trading partner to China as well and I don't see why China would risk that.

[daleo]

52. Yeah, it'll be another cakewalk. n/t

[Ghost Dog]

14. Makes me think about the sinking of the Belgrano.

That war-crime. The version I'm hearing, our submarine captain down there underwater in the South Atlantic got on the phone/blower, all the way up to Madame Thatcher herself, to make sure the order was, um, correct.

According to a technical guy I was speaking with, we then fired several modern (digital?) torpedoes, all of which failed. Finally, we let loose an old-fashioned 1940's-era, like, 'clockwork' torpedo, noisy, up-and-down, which did the nasty job.

Worth thinking about, I reckon.

[Angleae]

44. The sinking of the General Belgrano was not a war crime.

She was a valid military target (a light cruiser).

[The Croquist]

60. I agree 100%

Argentina and Great Brittan were at war and when at war any military target is a valid target.

To call it a "war-crime" is stupidity itself.

By the way, The General Belgrano was accompanied by two escort vessels that were not attacked and rescued 770 of the 1,093 aboard at the time of the sinking.

In 1914 a German submarine sank three cruisers in one action two of which were picking up survivors from the first sinking. 837 of the 2,296 were rescued. The German Submarine was out of torpedoes so it couldn't sink the rescue ships.

That wasn't a "war-crime" either. It was a war.

[Tunkamerica]

15. the link goes to a different story...unless kim jong il drives a truck

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

17. It has started. NK torpedoed a truck on I-4

Those bastards!

:hi:

[jimlup]

16. Not to make light of this serious issue but

They always "warn of war". They are the international version of the "boy who cried wolf".

[David__77]

22. This is nothing new...

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

There have been many border incidents. And there is a state of war between the two states - well, technically, between the US (on bahalf of ROK) and DPRK.

[Lars77]

23. 'North Korean torpedo' sank South's navy ship - report

Source: BBC News

A North Korean submarine's torpedo sank a South Korean navy ship on 26 March causing the deaths 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.

Pyongyang rejected the claim as a "fabrication" and threatened war if sanctions were imposed, say reports.

China has urged both countries to show restraint.

Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10129703.stm

[no_hypocrisy]

24. Three possible responses from N. Korea:

1. We didn't do it.
2. We did it and what are you gonna do about it?
3. We don't know what you're talking about.

[Selatius]

25. There are few cases when an act can be seen as a blatant "Act of War."

North Korea sinking a South Korean warship would clearly be identified as an act of war. Unless North Korea can show evidence that the vessel violated North Korean waters and was repeatedly warned to turn around and go home, North Korea has no leg to stand on as far as not taking responsibility.

[Lars77]

30. They are already at war technically..

Not sure that argument would go down well though.

[struggle4progress]

47. ... Briefers displayed torpedo parts recovered from the Cheonan wreck site: part of a motor, a shaft

and parts of the propeller. Korean writing, with the words “Number 1″ were inscribed on fragments of the weapon. The parts displayed in a glass case were compared and shown to be identical to the blueprint of a 7.35 meter torpedo, obtained from a North Korean weapons export brochure ...
N. Korea denies sinking S. Korea ship
http://news.gnom.es/news/n-korea-denies-sinking-s-korea-ship

[slackmaster]

26. The Korean War has never ended - There has been a truce for 57 years but no peace.

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/korea/kwarmagr072753.html

[Regret My New Name]

34. I support North Korea here...

Just because it will make me wildly unpopular. teeehee :P

[FLPanhandle]

37. I think North Korea wants to provoke a war. Time is not on their side.

That system is doomed to collapse and I bet the military and leadership would rather go out in a bang than in a slow collapse.

[David__77]

41. Maybe true, but people were saying the same thing 20 years ago.

I do not see any more imminent threat to the N. Korean state than 20 years ago, and perhaps less now than then... It could certainly be a discussion we are having in 20 more years.

[FLPanhandle]

46. 20 years ago China was determined to keep N. Korea propped up

Lately even China has gotten fed up with their antics and even approved sanctions against North Korea. The minute China has had enough, that government falls and falls hard.

[David__77]

55. China is "propping it up" now.

China's public actions are one thing. It is biding its time. It will not allow N. Korea to fall.

[FLPanhandle]

69. They'll let it fall slowly. They won't allow a catastrophic collapse ala USSR

But eventually, North Korea if it keeps up it's wierd ways will not be worth the cost.

[protocol rv]

42. I would ignore North Korea

Really ignore them. This means North Korean ships would be invisible, and liable to be run over by larger ships :-)

[struggle4progress]

48. Three years ago, it seemed NK and SK were headed towards normalizing relations; the Bushistas

were, of course, upset by that prospect and did everything they could to derail positive developments

This briefing represents everything the wingnuts really want, and we would do best to avoid a mindless rush into yet another idiotic war

[Lurks Often]

50. Or not

A war with North Korea is the last thing the US and South Korea want. Because when we win and we will win, as a prize we get what's left of North Korea. Fixing what was formerly North Korea is going to take billions, if not trillions of dollars and decades to complete.

[fujiyama]

59. Well said

If reunification in Germany was tough, God I can't even imagine what it would take to fix NK.

I don't see how anyone can afford a war, except ironically NK, which is broke. Of course, they also have nothing to lose which makes them especially dangerous.

[Psephos]

84. Also well said. n/t

[The Croquist]

61. Blame Bush?

It couldn't possibly be North Korea's fault for attacking without warning a ship in peacetime could it be?

[struggle4progress]

73. It certainly would be "North Korea's fault for attacking .. a ship in peacetime"

But I think your answer suggests you do not really understand how the conservatives have played international politics for decades: the "John Bolton style", which ramps up tensions whenever possible, with a "Well, remember, we can fuckin bomb anybody back into the stone age" subtext, was not new with Bolton

One can simultaneously regard the NK regime as undesirable or insane, and yet think that a path of easing tensions between NK and SK could have long-term benefits for everyone. NK and SK had made significant progress, toning down the rhetoric and gradually easing travel restrictions -- and the Bushista hardliners responded by throwing every wrench they could into the machinery

If I have a paranoid, trigger-happy neighbor, and do everything I can do (legally and with a plausible wide-eyed innocence) to keep that person excited, nervous, and upset, then of course it is "not my fault" if that person goes off the rockers and shoots someone; nevertheless, it would remain possible that a different approach might have averted the tragedy

[Pavulon]

80. Yeah, no. They just about started a war when clinton was pres.

they are insane and are fucking around with a reaction that could end in them being incinerated. Like Jim Jones, only crazier.

[jobwithout]

63. Oh for God's sake

Bush did a lot of fucked up shit but this is Kim Jong's fault.

[Pavulon]

67. The north is run by a stroked out madman. If they start a war

they will be wrecked.

[struggle4progress]

74. I don't know exactly what happened here, but assuming that the NK captain

fired without any provocation on the SK vessel, one can still wonder reasonably whether such an event could have occurred if the earlier effort to ease tensions between the countries had continued

Suppose Jack is a paranoid mofo who doesn't get along with his next door Joe, but one day Jack and Joe begin having friendly conversations over the fence every Saturday. After a couple of months of this, I decide it's a bad thing, cuz I know Jack is a paranoid mofo, so I figure out how to derail these friendly conversations. After the conversations end, I make sure everybody who knows Jack regularly hears me say Joe and I can beat the crap out of Jack; word gets back to Jack fast. One night, Jack (who really is a paranoid mofo) shoots out some of Joe's windows. Well, of course, it's really Jack, the paranoid mofo who did that -- but maybe it wouldn't have happened if I hadn't been such a dickhead.

[Pavulon]

79. Lets suppose jack has a nuclear weapon, and suppose his neighbor has thousands

and if jack fucks up millions of people die. These are the stakes. Make no error, and no joke. If the north launches ANYTHING towards the US, Hawaii, or Japan trident D-5 and Minutemen missiles will pass it in the air. If they shoot at china, same deal, they all burn.

Theirs may break up, theirs may be a ploy. It may not even have a warhead. Ours will not fail, and they will be showered with hundreds w-88 warheads in the 200Kt range.

These are the stakes, they are fucking around with the prospect of a thermonuclear war.

[Posteritatis]

70. This may come as a surprise, but the United States isn't the only actor in the world. (nt)

[Phoonzang]

75. So the sub intentionally sunk a S. Korean ship in S. Korean waters

without provocation. Only North Korea can get away with committing a blatant act of war with no real consequences.

[Pavulon]

78. If that has been a us vessel we would be in a shooting war.

China is the key. If they cooperate with the US North Korea is doomed. They may already be cooperating.

[daleo]

82. Well, there was the U.S.S. Liberty

I can't recall much in the way of consequences for that.

[Phoonzang]

83. Well there is that.

The circumstances are rather different though.

[rayofreason]

85. The best thing to do...

...is to humiliate the DPRK. And do it without shooting, which is what Kim Jong Il would like in order to rally the people behind his heir, Kim Jong Un.

How to do this?

Seize DPRK ships on the high seas and hold them for "reparations". Cut off their meager overseas trade and it would hit the pocketbook - no exports, no money for cognac, ipods, and other goodies for the top echelon. The DPRK would be unable to respond in kind - they would only be able to escalate to a shooting war that they would quickly lose. China would never allow that. Instead, China would be forced to engineer a coup by pro-Chinese military elements in the DPRK. There is huge dissatisfaction among the elite with the way things have been going. The botched currency revaluation that caused open public anger was only one of many missteps. The trip by Kim Jong Il to China was a bust. The recently increased border security is likely to result in another famine as black market sources of food become scarce. Kim Jong Il is in bad shape since his stroke and attempts to foist Kim Jong Un on the DPRK are not going well. And the two old boys were passed over. Lots of bad mojo there. And plenty of fuel for palace intrigues and a Chinese-sponsored coup.

It is time for the kleptocratic, democidal DPRK regime that has created the worst shithole on the planet (Mugabe's Zimbabwe is a close second) to go into the dustbin of history.

[roamer65]

86. Sounds like the 1953 ceasefire could end soon if China doesn't get involved.

This is China's sphere of influence and I would completely support a Chinese invasion much like Vietnam's invasion of Cambodia in 1979.