Jump to content
The Education Forum

War?


Evan Burton
 Share

Recommended Posts

http://story.northkoreatimes.com/index.php/ct/9/cid/08aysdf7tga9s7f7/id/710973/cs/1/

''...The two Koreas remain technically at war after a ceasefire and not a peace treaty ended the 1950-53 Korean War.''

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As reported in Australia so far it seems that the responses are mixed and the issues complex with various diplomatic avenues being explored.

edit add : as two military men from two countries that fought in the war it would be interesting to read an analysis of the situation if possible.

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that assessments that it is Kim Jong-un who is provoking the situation is likely to be correct. The problem is that with this series of low level attacks, someone in the South may respond with beyond a measured return, sparking an all out war between the two. With the US, Russia and China intervening it would calm down in a few days but the damage will have been done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That seems to me a calm measured response that as a threatened possibility may cool things. But then I'm rather partial to peoples well being.

To speculate, given that Pyonyang claims the Island as within their sea domain it is a leverage point which probably is the reason this event took place there and the reason for it taking place at all may be the earlier FTA discussions. ie. it seems to me at the core of all these things is an economic raison d'e'tre and this area at this point in time of global economic instability is a nexus.

Given that NK itself is a strategic area for all the nations mentioned (I wouldn't leave Japan out of the picture) and that similar areas are in the area (Atsugi, Taiwan) again are in dispute. What could a worst case scenario be? China is ally to NK and wants Taiwan, Russia would be threatened by a US dominated unified Korea as well as wanting to hold on to Atsugi. Could this spiral out of some diplomatic/military control where one will see a significantly redrawn map?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that assessments that it is Kim Jong-un who is provoking the situation is likely to be correct. The problem is that with this series of low level attacks, someone in the South may respond with beyond a measured return, sparking an all out war between the two. With the US, Russia and China intervening it would calm down in a few days but the damage will have been done.

*****************************

Who fired first? The first casualty in war..the truth

http://tv.globalresearch.ca/2010/11/south-korea-admits-firing-shells-north-korea

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who fired first? The first casualty in war..the truth

http://tv.globalresearch.ca/2010/11/south-korea-admits-firing-shells-north-korea

Amazing IF South Korea had made such an admission that Russia Today, which did not cite any sources, would be the only media outlet to report it. Thus I doubt it is true. But even RT said (approximate quote) “but they said it was part of a drill and denied it was directed at the North”. But even if it were true that the fired artillery near the boarder that would not justify attacking civilians. The North said said the South fired first but AFAIK they have not released any evidence they were fired upon at all.

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just found this:

South Korea says it was conducting regular military drills off the west coast before North Korea started firing dozens of shells, but that its firing exercises did not aim to the North.

"We were conducting usual military drills and our test shots were aimed toward the west, not the north," a South Korean military official said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/11/23/3074606.htm

Thus there was no admission by the south that their drills "triggered" the Norths attack.

"The first casualty in war..the truth"

Yes and the culprits are Russia Today and Global Research

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just found this:

South Korea says it was conducting regular military drills off the west coast before North Korea started firing dozens of shells, but that its firing exercises did not aim to the North.

"We were conducting usual military drills and our test shots were aimed toward the west, not the north," a South Korean military official said.

http://www.abc.net.a.../23/3074606.htm

Thus there was no admission by the south that their drills "triggered" the Norths attack.

"The first casualty in war..the truth"

Yes and the culprits are Russia Today and Global Research

NK claims the island is within its teritorial waters. This is a dispute with a history and has not been resolved. A bit like Berlin during the cold war or guantanomo bay in cuba or various US military bases throughout the world. Therefore the firing of weapons in their claimed territory by the nation it is at war with is considered an act of war by them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just found this:

South Korea says it was conducting regular military drills off the west coast before North Korea started firing dozens of shells, but that its firing exercises did not aim to the North.

"We were conducting usual military drills and our test shots were aimed toward the west, not the north," a South Korean military official said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/11/23/3074606.htm

Thus there was no admission by the south that their drills "triggered" the Norths attack.

"The first casualty in war..the truth"

Yes and the culprits are Russia Today and Global Research

7777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777

IS THE U.S INDIRECTLY PROVOKING CHINA?

On Tuesday 23 November 2010 the South Korean military launched an artillery barrage that saw its shells fall into disputed waters close to North Korea. South Korea does not deny it fired first by firing shells into the disputed waters but says the shelling was ‘away from the north’. The North Koreans had already warned the South Koreans that they would consider such an act as a direct provocation and respond accordingly.

With thousands of miles of coastline to the west, south and east that South Korea could have harmlessly fired it shells from, one needs to ask why South Korea chose to fire them knowingly toward and into disputed waters so close to North Korea. One also needs to ask why South Korea did this just days before a major joint military exercise with the US that includes the USS George Washington carrier strike group.

While the exercise had been arranged long before last Tuesdays incident, indeed, according to Pentagon spokesman Marine Col. David Lapan, the USS George Washington carrier strike group had left Japan heading for South Korea for the exercises before Obama and South Korean President Lee Myung-bec had spoken with each other about the incident, the Washington Post is spinning the story to make it seem as though President Obama has sent the carrier fleet to South Korea as a result of the incident. John Pomfret of the Washington Post writes:

In dispatching the aircraft carrier USS George Washington to the Korean Peninsula on Wednesday, the Obama administration said it was putting on a show of U.S. support for South Korea.

It is clear that the South Korean opening barrage so close to North Korea was a deliberate attempt to provoke a major incident. It is also apparent that this whole charade of the crisis being a series of spontaneous events instigated by North Korea has been in reality been concocted by the US and South Korea in order to deliberately point the finger of blame for the incident at North Korea with a view to escalating the crisis. The presence of the carrier strike group in Korean sea is clearly just added provocation.

So, what’s the aim of all this provoking?

At best, it may be just a ploy to get the Chinese to come down hard on their ally North Korea in an effort to put another turn of the screw that puts added pressure on the North Korean regime. In which case it’s just another provocation designed to keep that particular pot boiling for whatever underhanded geo-strategic double-dealing reason the US have dreamt up as they are apt to do from time to time, usually to distract from other problems the US are having.

Or could it be something far more serious and potentially far more dangerous for the world as well as the region.

The US has been very upset about China’s refusal to bend to US demands to revalue the Yuan to favour America’s flagging dollar. The US is also very concerned about China’s increasing power as a global player politically, economically and militarily. Unlike the US, China has not spent too much of its time rattling its sabre around the world in the quest for resources. Instead it simply sends its representatives to whatever country has the resources that China doesn’t have and they do a deal. Simple as that.

The Chinese have quietly been making massive deals with countries all over the planet particularly in the resource rich and, as yet, mostly untapped African continent where they have a huge presence working on all manner of infrastructure projects in exchange for resources. This has also upset the Americans who see their own influence being usurped by China’s.

America has touted itself as the sole remaining superpower since the end of the so-called ‘Cold War’. The reality, however, is that they are no longer the only superpower and the fact is, China snuck up and overtook the US over these last few years and the US resents that.

Challenging China’s proxy, North Korea, is a way of reasserting US hegemony and status.

For the sake of the future of world, China will, for the sake of peace, be mature enough to allow the bully boy on the block to think that he’s still numero uno and let him strut the world stage. But the world now knows differently after the fiasco of Iraq and Afghanistan and every day reveals just how much power the US really has and who the real power player is in the world today.

America should take care about who they provoke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So South Korea firing artillery into the ocean, which is internationally recognized as their territorial water even if North Korea claims it, justifies the North firing on and killing people (including civilians) and causes a great deal of material damage? What bizarre moral relativism!

And AFAIK the only evidence the North warned the South is the former's claim they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So South Korea firing artillery into the ocean, which is internationally recognized as their territorial water even if North Korea claims it, justifies the North firing on and killing people (including civilians) and causes a great deal of material damage? What bizarre moral relativism!

And AFAIK the only evidence the North warned the South is the former's claim they did.

''So South Korea firing artillery into the ocean, which is internationally recognized as their territorial water even if North Korea claims it, justifies the North firing on and killing people (including civilians) and causes a great deal of material damage? What bizarre moral relativism!

indeed. Extrapolate from there to historical global events, recent and past.''

___________________

the operative word being AFAUK.

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Very interesting analysis, Norman.

It makes me contemplate the nation with such huge amounts of natural resources from pre Napoleon, to Hitler, The Imperial Japan, and to the USA. And the very origin of the Korean war in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with the "who started it" claims is that we simply cannot be sure. The DPRK is a totalitarian state run by a dictator, and whose propaganda is legendary.

On the other hand, the ROK could use those same facts to hide their own guilt. The DPRK puts out so much fantasy and disinformation, it would be near impossible to tell when they would be telling the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with the "who started it" claims is that we simply cannot be sure. The DPRK is a totalitarian state run by a dictator, and whose propaganda is legendary.

On the other hand, the ROK could use those same facts to hide their own guilt. The DPRK puts out so much fantasy and disinformation, it would be near impossible to tell when they would be telling the truth.

That part can be disputed. It's not hard to figure out whether the chicken or the egg came first here. It's an illogical inferential jump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...