North Korea sank South Korea war ship

[Neubarth]

North Korea needs a spanking. I do not expect anything from the current administration.

Indeed, Ollie!

Galtieri (Sp?) was the dictator of Argentina in 82, and Margaret Thatcher was the Prime Minister of Great Britain. If anybody knows English history, their female leaders usually have the Biggest Balls in their history. Attacking England when they have a woman as Prime Minister would be the same as Poland slapping Hitler in the face in August of 1939. Only an idiot would do something that stupid.

Margie (Maggie) was quoted as saying, if they want war, lets give them a taste of what war is like.

A few hours later the Argentinians lost their prize cruiser. Funny how that works when you have a real leader in office, one who has hairy pair of king sized balls. It was England's game, and they won. Let's hear it for Ms Thatcher

We do not have a leader with large hairy balls right now. In fact, he might be a closet gay.

 

[Shorebreak]

I wouldn't be surprised if both are treading very carefully because it's not making a whole lot of sense right now to either side.

The North knows that the South has a defensive pact with the U.S. And the South knows that the North has a defensive pact with China.

This thing hit the North so hard that Kim actually paid a personal visit to Beijing to work out strategy.

Rather than following the media and talking head approach by considering this only at face value, this "incident" reminds me more of one of those things that some thrid party might involve themselves in so that they could hopefully "provoke" some sort of conflict.

The question to me becomes "Who would benefit geostrategically if the the US and China were drawn into a conflict on the Korean Peninsula?"

Certainly not North Korea or South Korea. And certainly not the US or China.

Which tells me that there's probably a bigger game at play and that the stakes are much larger than a potential conflict in Korea. It also explains why movement/response on the issue is so minimal. The South may spin it in the public spectrum to try to force the North into finalizing a peace treaty, but they know there's more behind this than North Korea and China, they don't want to be forced into a war that they don't want.

what happened. a mistake?

I don't know. A mistake sounds possible but it's probably in the lower end of the probability spectrum.

Going back to what I said in my post, I'd be looking at third party involvement and determining who benefits if the US and China are engaged.

For example, last week Russia completed several strategic agreements that severely weakend the US position in the Middle East. With increasing Chinese requirements for Central Asian energy resources and with the US continuing to push for more control over energy producers in the region, you have to consider Russia. How do recent and current events fare for Russia, who has designs on maintaining a strong global presence, and who is very aware that the senior policy makers in Washington have been working a long-term strategy to eliminate Russian dominance in Eurasia.

In fact, some of our most senior policy makers have published a recommended strategy that draws Russia into conflict with China, thereby minimizing the regional dominance of both of them. I don't think it's out of the question to consider whether or not someone else is playing the same game to minimize US influence in the region - especially in light of the new Turkey/Syria/Iran triangle that Russia has just orchestrated.

 

[Neubarth]

The primary concern is the amount of damage the NK's could do in the first few hours of a conflict. Even keeping it conventional they have a ton of tube artillery that could hit Seoul and the surrounding areas.

As for ground forces the NK armored forces could probably gain some ground. I am unsure as to thier ability for sustained operations, and in addition you would have a situation the US Air force has not seen in a long time. A moblie mechanized army on the offensive, out of the range of thier permanent air defenses, with the fighters having to cover occupied territory.

I think the ground pounders would be hating this situation but the Air Force and Navy Pilots would probably have a field day.

Three carrier task forces in the Sea of Japan would eliminate North Korea as a military power in 72 hours. That is all it would take. If Obama had any balls, they would already be on station.

 

[Shorebreak]

I wouldn't be surprised if both are treading very carefully because it's not making a whole lot of sense right now to either side.

The North knows that the South has a defensive pact with the U.S. And the South knows that the North has a defensive pact with China.

This thing hit the North so hard that Kim actually paid a personal visit to Beijing to work out strategy.

Rather than following the media and talking head approach by considering this only at face value, this "incident" reminds me more of one of those things that some thrid party might involve themselves in so that they could hopefully "provoke" some sort of conflict.

The question to me becomes "Who would benefit geostrategically if the the US and China were drawn into a conflict on the Korean Peninsula?"

Certainly not North Korea or South Korea. And certainly not the US or China.

Which tells me that there's probably a bigger game at play and that the stakes are much larger than a potential conflict in Korea. It also explains why movement/response on the issue is so minimal. The South may spin it in the public spectrum to try to force the North into finalizing a peace treaty, but they know there's more behind this than North Korea and China, they don't want to be forced into a war that they don't want.

Not sure if Im ready to go that deep into a more sinister motive. Occams Razor applies until other data is determined. What is more likely, a nefarious 3rd party organizing WWIII or some trigger happy NK sub commander pickling off a fish at the "enemy"?

Considering the frequency of geo-political subterfuge in contrast to the infrequency of rogue military commanders, Occams Razor actually promotes the need to consider a thrid party.

 

[antagon]

North Korea needs a spanking. I do not expect anything from the current administration.

Indeed, Ollie!

Galtieri (Sp?) was the dictator of Argentina in 82, and Margaret Thatcher was the Prime Minister of Great Britain. If anybody knows English history, their female leaders usually have the Biggest Balls in their history. Attacking England when they have a woman as Prime Minister would be the same as Poland slapping Hitler in the face in August of 1939. Only an idiot would do something that stupid.

Margie (Maggie) was quoted as saying, if they want war, lets give them a taste of what war is like.

A few hours later the Argentinians lost their prize cruiser. Funny how that works when you have a real leader in office, one who has hairy pair of king sized balls. It was England's game, and they won. Let's hear it for Ms Thatcher

We do not have a leader with large hairy balls right now. In fact, he might be a closet gay.

north korea is not argentina, neubarth. south korea is not an island either party could give a shit about, either. your take on the situation and the poise of american leadership makes it hard to respect your capacity for thought... quite similarly to your input on economic matters. while we're up that alley, have you considered what impact a war in a third theater with a more formidable force would have on your already pessimistic US economic outlook?

 

[antagon]

The primary concern is the amount of damage the NK's could do in the first few hours of a conflict. Even keeping it conventional they have a ton of tube artillery that could hit Seoul and the surrounding areas.

As for ground forces the NK armored forces could probably gain some ground. I am unsure as to thier ability for sustained operations, and in addition you would have a situation the US Air force has not seen in a long time. A moblie mechanized army on the offensive, out of the range of thier permanent air defenses, with the fighters having to cover occupied territory.

I think the ground pounders would be hating this situation but the Air Force and Navy Pilots would probably have a field day.

Three carrier task forces in the Sea of Japan would eliminate North Korea as a military power in 72 hours. That is all it would take. If Obama had any balls, they would already be on station.

that is silly.

 

[SFC Ollie]

The primary concern is the amount of damage the NK's could do in the first few hours of a conflict. Even keeping it conventional they have a ton of tube artillery that could hit Seoul and the surrounding areas.

As for ground forces the NK armored forces could probably gain some ground. I am unsure as to thier ability for sustained operations, and in addition you would have a situation the US Air force has not seen in a long time. A moblie mechanized army on the offensive, out of the range of thier permanent air defenses, with the fighters having to cover occupied territory.

I think the ground pounders would be hating this situation but the Air Force and Navy Pilots would probably have a field day.

Three carrier task forces in the Sea of Japan would eliminate North Korea as a military power in 72 hours. That is all it would take. If Obama had any balls, they would already be on station.

that is silly.

It may sound silly to you but he is right. However a third front right now with this administration at the helm.......No thank you. Not if we can avoid it. However North Korea still deserves a spanking not only for this but all their other little escapades this past 2 years. Does anyone get the Idea that things with North Korea are like a test? Each situation they push a little further.......

 

[antagon]

Three carrier task forces in the Sea of Japan would eliminate North Korea as a military power in 72 hours. That is all it would take. If Obama had any balls, they would already be on station.

that is silly.

It may sound silly to you but he is right. However a third front right now with this administration at the helm.......No thank you. Not if we can avoid it. However North Korea still deserves a spanking not only for this but all their other little escapades this past 2 years. Does anyone get the Idea that things with North Korea are like a test? Each situation they push a little further.......

i call bullshit, sarge. establishing air superiority over north korea wont be like iraq. in itself, that presents jeopardy to our placing three carrier groups in the region. moreover, eliminating NKs ground effectiveness will require more than bombing, cruise missiles and shelling. whatever administration you and neubarth would support which would go riding into conflict with north korea would be plumb stupid, not brave, not respectable.

an idiot like mccain, for example, is likely to blow his load prematurely. would that please you war mongers? what purpose benefiting the US or south korea would conflict serve?

this situation provides the standing which could bring to bare greater diplomatic leverage against the north, where countries on the fence with their position relative to the situation (like china) could be pressed to realize their misplaced allegiance. it might be yours and neubarth's military background that makes your positions so inept when it comes to strategy and diplomacy, i dont know the cause. but like the wars in iraq and afghanistan, diplomatic currency is not best spent forcing the hands of your citizens and allies into conflict. it takes a dense skull not to come away from the last decade with out a clue in that respect.

 

[antagon]

I wouldn't be surprised if both are treading very carefully because it's not making a whole lot of sense right now to either side.

The North knows that the South has a defensive pact with the U.S. And the South knows that the North has a defensive pact with China.

This thing hit the North so hard that Kim actually paid a personal visit to Beijing to work out strategy.

Rather than following the media and talking head approach by considering this only at face value, this "incident" reminds me more of one of those things that some thrid party might involve themselves in so that they could hopefully "provoke" some sort of conflict.

The question to me becomes "Who would benefit geostrategically if the the US and China were drawn into a conflict on the Korean Peninsula?"

Certainly not North Korea or South Korea. And certainly not the US or China.

Which tells me that there's probably a bigger game at play and that the stakes are much larger than a potential conflict in Korea. It also explains why movement/response on the issue is so minimal. The South may spin it in the public spectrum to try to force the North into finalizing a peace treaty, but they know there's more behind this than North Korea and China, they don't want to be forced into a war that they don't want.

Not sure if Im ready to go that deep into a more sinister motive. Occams Razor applies until other data is determined. What is more likely, a nefarious 3rd party organizing WWIII or some trigger happy NK sub commander pickling off a fish at the "enemy"?

Considering the frequency of geo-political subterfuge in contrast to the infrequency of rogue military commanders, Occams Razor actually promotes the need to consider a thrid party.

i'll flip a coin on the options... the commander needn't be rogue. the whole regime could merely be reckless or righteous about the north's sovereignty over some patch of water.

alternatively, i wont preclude china in publicly destabilizing pyongyang. they will have the biggest say in any action, simply because their disposition on the matter will define the scope of 'adversary'.

...nor the US. unless we are drawn into war, we could stand to benefit in some sinister ways i've conjured up.

a world of trouble...

 

[SFC Ollie]

that is silly.

It may sound silly to you but he is right. However a third front right now with this administration at the helm.......No thank you. Not if we can avoid it. However North Korea still deserves a spanking not only for this but all their other little escapades this past 2 years. Does anyone get the Idea that things with North Korea are like a test? Each situation they push a little further.......

i call bullshit, sarge. establishing air superiority over north korea wont be like iraq. in itself, that presents jeopardy to our placing three carrier groups in the region. moreover, eliminating NKs ground effectiveness will require more than bombing, cruise missiles and shelling. whatever administration you and neubarth would support which would go riding into conflict with north korea would be plumb stupid, not brave, not respectable.

an idiot like mccain, for example, is likely to blow his load prematurely. would that please you war mongers? what purpose benefiting the US or south korea would conflict serve?

this situation provides the standing which could bring to bare greater diplomatic leverage against the north, where countries on the fence with their position relative to the situation (like china) could be pressed to realize their misplaced allegiance. it might be yours and neubarth's military background that makes your positions so inept when it comes to strategy and diplomacy, i dont know the cause. but like the wars in iraq and afghanistan, diplomatic currency is not best spent forcing the hands of your citizens and allies into conflict. it takes a dense skull not to come away from the last decade with out a clue in that respect.

War monger? Please don't get stupid.

It is not difficult to understand the words "not if we can Avoid it." I do believe that we should, along with the UN, place some very harsh sanctions on North Korea.

What would be even better would be if North Korea actually admitted that one of their commanders made a mistake and they apologized and paid restitution to South Korea and the families who lost loved ones. But i don't see any of that happening either.

 

[CMike]

Perhaps the world knows that we have a pussy for a president?

 

[Neubarth]

i call bullshit, sarge. establishing air superiority over north korea wont be like iraq. in itself, that presents jeopardy to our placing three carrier groups in the region. moreover, eliminating NKs ground effectiveness will require more than bombing, cruise missiles and shelling. whatever administration you and neubarth would support which would go riding into conflict with north korea would be plumb stupid, not brave, not respectable.

an idiot like mccain, for example, is likely to blow his load prematurely. would that please you war mongers? what purpose benefiting the US or south korea would conflict serve?

this situation provides the standing which could bring to bare greater diplomatic leverage against the north, where countries on the fence with their position relative to the situation (like china) could be pressed to realize their misplaced allegiance. it might be yours and neubarth's military background that makes your positions so inept when it comes to strategy and diplomacy, i dont know the cause. but like the wars in iraq and afghanistan, diplomatic currency is not best spent forcing the hands of your citizens and allies into conflict. it takes a dense skull not to come away from the last decade with out a clue in that respect.

The issue is one of projection of presence and of potential power ashore. I never said a thing about attacking North Korea with the Carrier Battle Groups. I just said that we could control the skies over North Korea within 72 hours. Believe me that is all it would take. Our Navy and Marine corp pilots are the best in the world (forgive me Israel, but your pilots do not take off and land on moving ships.) That potential of total war being just off of the coast would be enough to get North Korea from attacking South Korea should things start to flare up. Obama needs to learn how to use the Navy in a situation like this.

 

[Neubarth]

In 1972 -3 I was a Nuc Power Plant Operator onboard the USS Truxtun, DDGN now called a CGN. We were airtraffic control ship for North Vietnam. Anything that flew over NorthViet Nam was controlled by our Air Traffic controllers. We were stationed about ten miles off of the coast of Haiphong harbor and were directing all of the B52s and other bombing runs on that communist country. Migs took off from NV airfields to attack us. Not one ever made it close enough to be a valid threat. The NV pilots were usually riding their parachutes within a minute or two of turning towards our ship.

We had two carrier battle groups out in the Tonkin Gulf that was enough to totally control the skies over VietNam and Cambodia and Laos. You do not mess with Carrier Battle Groups. They bring tremendous force and operational capacity to any nearby country.

 

[Shorebreak]

The attack could also have been a test run.

Imagine what would happen if a very quiet electric submarine were lying in wait for a US carrier task force to pass from one direction while some other naval forces were patrolling nearby. Like Iranian, Russian, Indian, North Korean, etc.

The electric boat sends out a fish (or several fish) from very close range, making evasive maneuvers and countermeasures impossible. To all witnesses and task force participants, it can be seen that the attack came from the direction of the passing naval vessels that are on patrol, and acoustic signatures are tracked directly back to their location.

In the eyes of the US military and the world, the nearby forces would have initiated a deadly attack on a US Carrier that must be responded to immediately. Some third party would be watching us go to war with a nation who was set up to be on the receiving end of an angry US military. At the expense of US lives and dollars.

Some call it far-fetched. I call it something worthy of consideration before jumping head first into a war - especially if the so-called "aggressor" denies guilt in the attack.

 

[ScienceRocks]

If war breaks out. I support nuking the North Korean army until it begs for surrender.

 

[Jos]

The team of South Korean and foreign investigators found traces of explosives used in torpedoes on several parts of the sunken ship as well as pieces of composite metal used in such weapons, South Korea's Yonhap news agency said quoting a senior government official.

South Korean officials have not officially accused the North but made little secret of their belief Pyongyang deliberately torpedoed the 1,200-tonne corvette Cheonan in March near their disputed border in retaliation of a naval firefight last year.

The metallic debris and chemical residue appear to be consistent with a type of torpedo made in Germany, indicating the North may have been trying to disguise its involvement by avoiding arms made by allies China and Russia

Probe concludes torpedo sank South Korea ship: report | Reuters
I wonder which nation gets their submarines (for free) from Germany and has a long history of using false flag dirty tricks to trick other nations into wars?
Dolphin class submarine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Marc39]

The team of South Korean and foreign investigators found traces of explosives used in torpedoes on several parts of the sunken ship as well as pieces of composite metal used in such weapons, South Korea's Yonhap news agency said quoting a senior government official.

South Korean officials have not officially accused the North but made little secret of their belief Pyongyang deliberately torpedoed the 1,200-tonne corvette Cheonan in March near their disputed border in retaliation of a naval firefight last year.

The metallic debris and chemical residue appear to be consistent with a type of torpedo made in Germany, indicating the North may have been trying to disguise its involvement by avoiding arms made by allies China and Russia

Probe concludes torpedo sank South Korea ship: report | Reuters
I wonder which nation gets their submarines (for free) from Germany and has a long history of using false flag dirty tricks to trick other nations into wars?
Dolphin class submarine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jose, is that the same Reuters that got duped by some pranksters?
The Jawa Report: Eleventy-Million Editors at Reuters, CNBC Duped By Leftwing Hoax

Tsk tsk, Jose.

 

[Shorebreak]

If war breaks out. I support nuking the North Korean army until it begs for surrender.

You support forcing a nuclear response against the US from China. Wow. You're a genius.

 

[Jos]

Jose, is that the same Reuters that got duped by some pranksters?
The Jawa Report: Eleventy-Million Editors at Reuters, CNBC Duped By Leftwing Hoax

Tsk tsk, Jose.

Is that the same mypetjawa as andrew maizels one?
see my Avatar, good looking Schmuck, no

 

[Marc39]

Jose, is that the same Reuters that got duped by some pranksters?
The Jawa Report: Eleventy-Million Editors at Reuters, CNBC Duped By Leftwing Hoax

Tsk tsk, Jose.

Is that the same mypetjawa as andrew maizels one?
see my Avatar, good looking Schmuck, no

Sorry I demolished your Reuters link, Jose.
How is Arizona?