Jump to content


Spartacus

South Korean warship blown in half


9 replies to this topic

#1 Evan Burton

Evan Burton

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,971 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NSW, Australia

Posted 27 March 2010 - 08:17 PM

SHIPS and aircraft searched choppy and frigid seas yesterday for survivors of one of South Korea's worst naval disasters, but hopes faded for 46 seamen missing after an unexplained explosion tore a warship in half.

The tragedy happened near the tense disputed Yellow Sea border with North Korea, scene of bloody naval clashes in 1999 and 2002.

Seoul officials said there was no sign so far that the North was to blame.


Posted Image

Full story:
http://www.smh.com.a...00327-r45k.html

I'm guessing that because it split in half and sank so rapidly that it was a pretty big explosion. Wayward mine, perhaps? Torpedo? Or were they carrying something that exploded (although initial reports say the blast was external)?

#2 John Dolva

John Dolva

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9,522 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Australia
  • Interests:remembering the two towers of 13,000 children that fall down, dying of starvation, preventable diseases, lack of clean water and basic health needs every 1 1/2 hours 24/7/365...
    9/11? Bah...
    ...Viva Che'...
    living in a nice world

Posted 27 March 2010 - 08:52 PM

The intent to extend the paralell has been unrelenting.
Huge sections of South Koreans have had to be dealt with.
The escalations reaching higher and higher peaks are bound to cause such an event. For whatever reason. I think it worthwhile to always keep in mind Nixons aid scribblings after the Kent State massacre ''there is an opportunity in everything''.
It'll be interesting to see how this pans out.

#3 Evan Burton

Evan Burton

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,971 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NSW, Australia

Posted 28 March 2010 - 12:21 AM

It'll also be interesting to see what affect this has on the US troop withdraw from South Korea.

#4 Evan Burton

Evan Burton

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,971 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NSW, Australia

Posted 30 March 2010 - 10:20 AM

Reports are still sketchy, but it is looking more and more likely that it was either a mine or an internal explosion. I can't find diagrammes of the ship's layout, so don't know if the depth charge storage / torpedo storage areas were about amidships.

#5 Evan Burton

Evan Burton

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,971 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NSW, Australia

Posted 25 April 2010 - 08:09 AM

Warship recovered; North Korea still suspect:

http://media.smh.com...;exc_from=strap

Personally, I don't think it is. I have scant evidence to go on, but I am still leaning to a mine or internal explosion.

#6 John Dolva

John Dolva

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9,522 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Australia
  • Interests:remembering the two towers of 13,000 children that fall down, dying of starvation, preventable diseases, lack of clean water and basic health needs every 1 1/2 hours 24/7/365...
    9/11? Bah...
    ...Viva Che'...
    living in a nice world

Posted 25 April 2010 - 06:45 PM

Evan, in what you have come across do you see any reason to see this as a pretext to stay in Korea? Do you think it has any similarities to, for example, the reneging of the paris settlement over the MIA(Viet Nam) issue.

#7 Evan Burton

Evan Burton

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,971 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NSW, Australia

Posted 20 May 2010 - 10:04 AM

http://www.smh.com.a...00520-vhkq.html

The South Koreans are blaming the North, but I am still not convinced. If the purported torpedo hit roughly amidships on the South Korean patrol vessel, and that happened to be where explosives / mines were stored, then I think it might be possible that a torpedo was responsible. At this time, though, I have my doubts.

#8 Christopher Hall

Christopher Hall

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 602 posts

Posted 20 May 2010 - 05:09 PM

Remember the Maine.

#9 John Dolva

John Dolva

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9,522 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Australia
  • Interests:remembering the two towers of 13,000 children that fall down, dying of starvation, preventable diseases, lack of clean water and basic health needs every 1 1/2 hours 24/7/365...
    9/11? Bah...
    ...Viva Che'...
    living in a nice world

Posted 27 July 2010 - 05:11 PM

The intent to extend the paralell has been unrelenting.
Huge sections of South Koreans have had to be dealt with.
The escalations reaching higher and higher peaks are bound to cause such an event. For whatever reason. I think it worthwhile to always keep in mind Nixons aid scribblings after the Kent State massacre ''there is an opportunity in everything''.
It'll be interesting to see how this pans out.


Evan, in what you have come across do you see any reason to see this as a pretext to stay in Korea? Do you think it has any similarities to, for example, the reneging of the paris settlement over the MIA(Viet Nam) issue.

#10 Evan Burton

Evan Burton

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,971 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NSW, Australia

Posted 28 July 2010 - 07:58 AM

Hi John,

It could be the ROK government trying to keep US forces in South Korea. The US wants to pull them out (or at least reduce the numbers significantly) but the ROK government want them to stay.

The area where the incident occurred is deep enough for the subs to operate in, and they are equipped with torpedoes that do have a large warhead so it is possible... but I still am not convinced with respect to the damage. I'm on weak ground but I'm still not convinced.



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users