Masterfade Posted July 25, 2010 Posted July 25, 2010 I remember reading a report a few weeks back about a Russian investigation on the sinking. At that time they've just finished examining the evidence and promised to release their final report soon. I've never heard of this investigation since. As Russian has very close relationship with North Korea and Putin no doubt would never miss a chance to embarrass Washington, I think it's fair to assume they have not managed to find anything strong to dispute results of the South Korean investigation. As for the supposed 'tension', it's should be clear now NK is a master of brinkmanship and nothing more. One has to wonder why the mainstream press still bother to report whatever hate speech NK is dashing out. The NK problem is going nowhere. North Korea might look mad but Mr.Kim is not stupid. And it will not carry out any of its threats. The South Korean ruling party just suffered a major setback in their mid-term election, which was widely interpreted as a public rebut of its hardline policy toward the North. And the average South Koreans, as far as I know and sadly there's very little coverage on South Korean politics in the international press, do not consider the NK nuclear weapon as a threat to them, especially the younger generation who haven't been through the Korean War. Japan of course has such concern, but if some hastily decided US preemptive invasion lead to a nuclear tipped missile hitting Tokyo that would probably be the end of US-Japan alliance. China currently has no choice but to support NK in order keep the regime from collapse and flooding its border with refugees. A flood of millions or at least hundreds of thousands of North Korean refugees, of which many will be former soldiers of NK's one million strong standing army armed with AK47 and other weapons, will make the boat people problem here in Australia or U.S. Mexico border problem looks like daily chores. U.S. has no real leverage over NK. It can invade NK, and that's about all it can do. And if anything goes wrong with an invasion you can bet all American allies and rivals in the region will blame the U.S. for it. Afterall, despite decades of NK fear mongering it hasn't really caused that much damage to its neighbors. A SK airliner bombed by NK agents, a few Japanese kidnapped and a few Chinese banks robbed by NK soldiers, none of them is comparable to the harm a war can bring to the neighborhood. So there will be a few naval exercises with zero follow-up actions. Then everyone will go back to their daily routine pretending the problem doesn't exist. Meanwhile tens of thousand of North Korean, if not more, will be tortured, killed or starved to death by the regime. It has been reported by the SK press that Kim Jong-il has at most three more years to live and he's depressed and often cries in the night. All the outside world can hope is whoever the successor to Mr.Kim may be, he will have a bit more sense than the current Dear Leader.
Walsingham Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 Please tell me that was a conspiracy. Please. I could use a laugh.Ah, so you believe that the DPRK has submarines which can one-shot corvettes in shallow waters without being detected? The Defense Minister of the South, Kim Tae-young, "ruled out a torpedo attack from North Korea, which would have been spotted by radar." (Washington Post) I don't know what actually happened. It seems likely that there was an old mine from the Korean War which went off (or the ship simply ran aground), and that subsequent investigation has been highly politicized or simply reached an incorrect conclusion. I'm not a naval expert and never have been. But I know enough to know that yes, such an incident can occur. I also know that the blast of a mine in accidental contact is going to be very different from a torpedo. Particularly a mine that is very very old. BUt that's OK. I didn't seriously expect you to gave anything but comradely love for the glorious free state of North Korea. I just wanted you to say so, so I could have a chuckle. "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.
lord of flies Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 I'm not a naval expert and never have been. But I know enough to know that yes, such an incident can occur. I also know that the blast of a mine in accidental contact is going to be very different from a torpedo. Particularly a mine that is very very old.Weird, I could have sworn that you've stated in the past that you're a naval salvage engineer. But I guess that was just a convenient lie, much like your claimed knowledge of how the explosions of mines and torpedoes differ.
Gorgon Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 Well S. Korea did invite a bunch of experts to investigate the incident. It all happened in a very charged atmosphere, but I tend to think they did their jobs. They must have taken current mine design into account when they ruled it out. Of course they could have gotten it wrong, but a N. Korean attack seems like a very likely explanation given the amount of military activity in the area. Na na na na na na ... greg358 from Darksouls 3 PVP is a CHEATER. That is all.
Zoraptor Posted July 27, 2010 Posted July 27, 2010 (edited) While the amount of military activity would make it a 'target rich' environment it would also make it very hard for the North to get a submarine into position. I also know that the blast of a mine in accidental contact is going to be very different from a torpedo. For the love of... You do not need contact for it to be a mine. That is not supposition, it is not inference it is simple fact and has been for seventy odd years. As you appear unable to go to the nice Wikipedia link I handily provided here is the direct quote: These mines are triggered by the influence of a ship or submarine, rather than direct contact. Even in the initial report- yep I actually bothered to read it- the only thing which they state is definitively torpedo is the wreckage they found and everything else they state is consistent with a torpedo (they certainly imply a lot of other evidence as being exclusive but that is standard PR practice in, well, everything). Particularly a mine that is very very old. It wouldn't have to be old. It could also be recent, a malfunctioning 'friendly' one, one from either side that has broken its mooring or numerous other possibilities. Edited July 27, 2010 by Zoraptor
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now