Report: South Korean navy ship sinking

[Silverbird]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/03/26/south.korea.ship.sinking/index.html?hpt=T2
:worried:

[FAB1]

This is on Drudge as well. Suspecting attack by NK.

They have pulled some survivors (thats good)

But this is bad.

[Silverbird]

May be aiding and abetting the sudden fall in the market...

[FAB1]

May be aiding and abetting the sudden fall in the market...


Yep, thats why I said: this is bad.:laugh:

[Viva_La_Migra]

This is on Drudge as well. Suspecting attack by NK.

They have pulled some survivors (thats good)

But this is bad.
The question is, what will BHO do about it if it turns out North Korea was responsible for the attack?

[Frixxxx]

The question is, what will BHO do about it if it turns out North Korea was responsible for the attack?
A terse warning at the U.N.

But will we stop giving them oil??????

[Birchtree]

After seeing the White Horse Brigade in action in Vietnam the South Koreans can handle anything the North has got. They are trying to prevent the proliferation of arms going to the Iranians and other Arab countries. This action is small potatoes and if the North Koreans are responsible they should have intense fear of retribution.

[Elgallo]

What Birch said! I saw em in action, BADD AZZZZZ Folks they are!

[James48843]

Some news reports are saying another South Korean ship fired earlier in the evening at North Korean targets.

I wonder how that will play out.

[Buster]

It means the NEWS will be all over this and not the Healthcare issue for a change..:rolleyes:

[Viva_La_Migra]

"Yeaaawn...who cares. This is not an American issue. Let the Asians on the other side of the world figure this one out."

Sincerely,

Founding Fathers
and
Framers of the US Constitution.
South Korea is an ally. We should at least send a couple of navy battlegroups to the area.

Unless, of course, you're saying we should dismantle the United Nations and NATO and tell the our allies that we will no longer defend them should they be attacked by hostile forces. I didn't realize you were an isolationist, FWM.

[James48843]

Here are our legal obligations under the 1953 Mutual Defense Treaty with South Korea:


1953 Mutual Defense Treaty

Mutual Defense Treaty between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America
Signed at Washington: October 1, 1953
Entered into Force: November 17, 1954
The Parties to this Treaty,
Reaffirming their desire to live in peace with all governments, and desiring to strengthen the fabric of peace in the Pacific area,
Desiring to declare publicly and formally their common determination to defend themselves against external armed attack so that no potential aggressor could be under the illusion that either of them stands alone in the Pacific area,
Desiring further to strengthen their efforts for collective defense for the preservation of peace and security pending the development of a more comprehensive and effective system of regional security in the Pacific area,
Have agreed as follows:
Article 1
The Parties undertake to settle any international disputes in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations, or obligations assumed by any Party towards the United Nations.
Article 2
The Parties will consult together whenever, in the opinion of either of them, the political independence or security of either of the Parties is threatened by external armed attack. Separately and jointly, by self-help and mutual aid, the Parties will maintain and develop appropriate means to deter armed attack and will take suitable measures in consultation and agreement to implement this Treat and to further its purposes.
Article 3
Each Party recognizes that an armed attack in the Pacific area on either of the Parties in territories now under their respective administrative control, or hereafter recognized by one of the Parties as lawfully brought under the administrative control of the other, would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional processes.
Article 4
The Republic of Korea grants, and the United States of America accepts, the right to dispose United States land, air and sea forces in and about the territory of the Republic of Korea as determined by mutual agreement.
Article 5
This Treaty shall be ratified by the United States of America and the Republic of Korea in accordance with their respective constitutional processes and will come into force when instruments of ratification thereof have been exchanged by them at Washington.
Article 6
This Treaty shall remain in force indefinitely. Either party may terminate it one year after notice has been given to the other Party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned plenipotentiaries have signed this Treaty.
Done in duplicate at Washington, in the Korean and English languages, this first day of October, 1953.
For the Republic of Korea:
(signed) Y.T. Pyun
For the United States of America:
(signed) John Foster Dulles
Understanding of the United States of America
It is the understanding of the United States that neither party is obligated, under Article 3 of the above Treaty, to come to the aid of the other except in case of an external armed attack against such party; nor shall anything in the present Treaty be construed as requiring the United States to give assistance to Korea except in the event of an armed attack against territory which has been recognized by the United States or lawfully brought under the administrative control of the Republic of Korea.

[nnuut]

Hey folks if North Korea touches South Korea we will be there in a skinny minute, a Military Dictatorship (one step above communism and socialism) that has taken many of our boys in the past, but they will NOT attack our friends again without our intervention. We are like that, we take care of our friends like everyone should. Kim Jong II is a nnuut and is abusing his people, he needs to be taken down. If it wasn't for China we would have taken them out years ago. He really needs nuclear weapons!!:cool:

[James48843]

OK Nnnuut- here is the question then-

Exactly who are you planning to send, when you say "We will be there in a skinny minute..."


What units would you send?

Since most of our forces are a little busy, at the moment...

[nnuut]

Navy, for now! Do you think we will just stand by and watch? What are you afraid of, getting beat again?

[nnuut]

Just a minute I forgot just who is the President now, there is no telling what will happen come to think about it? I hope we keep our word to help and protect South Korea but there is no guarantee now!:sick:

[burrocrat]

better be a skinny minute, or else my bowl-o-noodles hunger may have to go unslaked, can't be letting some crazy dick tater interrupt the whole global free trade thing now.

8770

[burrocrat]

now don't no one go postin pictures of them funny potatoes

see post #95 http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/showthread.php?t=7575&page=8

yall want fries with that?

[James48843]

now don't no one go postin pictures of them funny potatoes

see post #95 http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/showthread.php?t=7575&page=8

yall want fries with that?

Ewwww...

Now that's a mental picture I really was not expecting, Burrocrat.

I don't know how you think of these things...:D

[burrocrat]

you didn't google image dictators did you? i tried to warn you. and i don't think of those things, they just come to me. then that trap door from my brain to my mouth usually malfunctions, and here we are.

[James48843]

Navy, for now! Do you think we will just stand by and watch? What are you afraid of, getting beat again?

No- I don't think we'd just stand by and watch. What I was referring to is asking what you think we should send, in response to the sinking of a South Korean Navy Ship.

Because we're stretched a little thin at the moment. We had to take 20,000 U.S. Army out of South Korea since the Iraq War started, just so we could meet our obligations in Iraq, and now the buildup in Afghanistan. That really pared down our forces on-station in Korea.

So if the North Koreans decide to come over the border, it's not like we have a half-million soldiers that we can throw in quickly to repel the attack.

I was just asking- what do you think we COULD send in, should the balloon go up over there.

Currently we have about 25,000 total military personnel in Korea. South Korea has 655,000 active duty, and another 3 million or so reserves. North Korean has 1.1 million active, and 4 million reserves.

If those 4 or 5 million come over the border- it isn't going to be pretty.

Remember Task Force Smith:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Task_Force_Smith

[James48843]

Remember the "Maine"?

What are the chance this incident was caused by the "USS Blackwater"?

Bunch of Mercenaries...funded by Neocon $$, from the Billions they made in Iraq, saved a tiny pocket sub from Iraq and did this??


Now THERE's a stretch.

No, I did not know Iraq had tiny pocket submarines.

Or that Xe, (the company formerly known as Blackwater) had any subs.

I guess you never know, do you?

My guess is more like this- a group of South Korean ships were out playing tag right along the line, one of them shot off a few rounds of a deck gun at a N. Korean ship, and then, the North hit them back with a missile or something. You notice the news isn't talking a great deal about the shots fired BEFORE the South Korean ship was hit. It kind of looks like they are burying that part of it.

We'll have to wait for a while to see what the real facts are. Our government is being pretty quiet about it, as is the South Koreans. Something tells me there is a lot more to the story we haven't heard yet.

[James48843]

Here is what "Voice of America" is saying today:

Dozens Missing From Sunken South Korean Navy Vessel

Kurt Achin | Seoul

South Korea is scrambling to locate at least 46 South Korean military personnel missing after a one of the South's naval patrol vessels sank in a tense maritime area disputed by North Korea. Seoul is investigating what caused the incident, but holding off for now on blaming the North.

South Korean officials say rescuing sailors remains their top priority. One hundred four South Korean navy personnel were on board the patrol ship in waters west of the Korean peninsula Friday night when it was apparently damaged by an explosion and sank.

South Korean President Lee Myung-bak called an emergency meeting of top security officials Saturday, for the second time in a 12-hour period. South Korean authorities say they are investigating "all possibilities" as to why the ship went down, including the scenario that the ship was attacked by North Korea.

The incident occurred near South Korea's Baekryoung island, next to what is called the Northern Limit Line - a maritime border drawn by the United Nations at the signing of an armistice that paused the 1950s Korean War.

North Korea has challenged the legitimacy of the border, and the two sides have fought at least three naval skirmishes in the area in the past 11 years.

Still, South Korean officials are downplaying the notion the ship was attacked by North Korea - in part, because the incident occurred southwest of Baekryoung island, deep in South Korean waters.

Carl Baker, a Korean security specialist and director of Pacific Forum CSIS in Honolulu, agrees a North Korean role seems unlikely.

"You know, it looks to me like it was a naval accident, an unfortunate naval accident, that happened. I mean, it just seems like it was an explosion on the ship. And I'm just kind of skeptical about it being a North Korean attack or something," said Baker.

Baker says the timing of such an attack would be strange, given recent reports of a possible upcoming visit to China by North Korean leader Kim Jong Il and the possible resumption of talks aimed at ending North Korea's nuclear weapons programs.

"If it is... a North Korean attack, it would signal something kind of strange that isn't consistent with all the other news going on at this point," said Baker.

North Korea is also seeking to relieve the pressure international sanctions has put on its sputtering economy - in part, by asking South Korea for a renewal of economic joint projects. Some analysts believe a military attack would contradict those efforts.

http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/asia/Dozens-Missing-From-Sunken-South-Korean-Navy-Vessel--89321222.html