Reply With QuoteAre you saying that South Korea is completely to blame for the lack of food in North Korea?Originally Posted by Ambassador
While North Korean experts are excitedly entertaining themselves with the idea of how best to sink the next couple of South Korean patrol ships in an unprovoked manner, South Koreans are thinking of how best to save thousands of North Korean lives from their next massive bout of disease and starvation that will repeatedly come again in the coming years who'll keep dying if we decide not to do something.
Against such grander humanitarian responsibility fighting a bunch of pin prick warfare using intentionally restrained weaponry is not very high on the priority list. Most of our weapons are procured knowing well that they'll almost never fight actual warfare in the Korean peninsula beyond deterrence (the weapons will prevent the 'war' from happening, so there will be no wars to fight). From a deterrence perspective, their purpose is primarily to keep conflicts at low intensity level by making a high intensity one very risky for NK to attempt. NK submarines are a significant threat to ROKN patrol ships, that's quite a reasonable conjecture. What's also equally important to note though is that South Korean submarines similarly pose significant, almost unstoppable threat to the entire NK surface fleet should NK choose not to limit its naval provocations to minor skirmishes. Since this strategic environment provides quite a bit of assurance that their naval engagements will not bloom out into some greater clusterfvck unless NK decides to turn irrational (which we find unlikely), Korea can more safely focus on finding peaceful methods to sort out their differences and not resort to extreme means. And, of course, solve its own considerable list of problems at home (NK is pretty much the only country left who willingly escalate an economic collapse/recession simultaneously with a military conlict together), which unfortunately doesn't seem quite true for the North Korean side. Or maybe it thinks economic issues like famine, water and medical shortage aren't really much of a problem. That's kinda sad because NK could clearly solve them if it was willing.
Yet we have people here who are ready to froth at the mouth in the name of some obscure science at the first news that NK managed to score another cheap shot on a South Korean vessel manned by men who, if they see a North Korean, will first think to keep him away from harm than make it come to him. Do you think the average starving North Korean will really celebrate the event if it really happens? Well yeah he totally should, because the next day he would starve again and it's the South's fault.
Are you saying that South Korea is completely to blame for the lack of food in North Korea?
Hell yeah! You know the concept called 'moral obligation'? It can be interpreted in all sort of manners. Including being enlightened how South Korea is to blame for the lack of food in North Korea (and the lack of fish too apparently). More commonly known as brainwashing.
I could be wrong... but if i'm correct this is the forum for "militaryphotos", a forum to speak and dialogue and give and get information of military all around the world..While North Korean experts are excitedly entertaining themselves with the idea of how best to sink the next couple of South Korean patrol ships in an unprovoked manner, South Koreans are thinking of how best to save thousands of North Korean lives from their next massive bout of disease and starvation that will repeatedly come again in the coming years who'll keep dying if we decide not to do something.
Sorry if i keep to have an impartial view of the NK / SK conflict and keeping on a military point of view of debate and speculation..
All the moral stuff (wrote from your own point of view and backing the SK side of the conflict) is not much interesting to me or to the military debate i could say ^^
And so? XD Honestly.... there are tons of military debate and people interested how WWII or Cold War battles were going on... why there should not be people interested at this actual conflict now?Yet we have people here who are ready to froth at the mouth in the name of some obscure science at the first news that NK managed to score another cheap shot on a South Korean vessel manned by men who, if they see a North Korean, will first think to keep him away from harm than make it come to him.
Moreover you keep to show a partial point of view... if it was a NK vessel to think you was so ready to attack someone talking or debate about the sinking? I doubt..
You have an impartial view of what? Since when?
Of course.
'Evil ROK coast guards showing their immorality oppressing the poor NK fishermen!'
Ever ... when there is a new from NK/SK i read sources of both sides, taking both of them in account and considering both at the same level, searching lies and truth in both of them as equal sides of the conflict they're involved. Maybe you, living in one of the sides and being if i'm correct from SK, are automatically adapted to follow the line/point of view of one of the two sides without caring for what the "others" say. But maybe all this is not your fault... i'm wrong or you can't accede into KCNA or Naenara sites? It's this called "freedom of expression"?You have an impartial view of what? Since when?
Of course the NK being a dictatorship do the same blocking the whole internet. But the Block of Nk's sources in Sk should let you think..
They're scared by what they can say? Maybe... or maybe your government want simply keep one side of the coin for every single event related to NK / SK ...
Please??? XDOf course.'Evil ROK coast guards showing their immorality oppressing the poor NK fishermen!' Of course.
Apart for the fun... there were NK patrols firing at SK fishers, the day after you could read spread everywhere in the net as they're "murderers, assassins, criminals, terrorists" and so on...
Unrelated but the news was so small I did not think it warranted its own thread esp since nothing came of it , but yesterday this was posted on Yonhap
would be a big embarrassment if with such high alerts a North Korean Sub was able to slip down across the NLL and into South Korean waters without being detected.The Navy scoured waters off South Korea's east coast following a citizen's report of an object that appeared to be a submarine, but the search turned up nothing unusual, officials said.
A 39-year-old tourist reported to authorities he saw a strange object emerging and then disappearing in waters some 500 meters away from the Gyeongpodae beach in Gangneung, about 240 kilometers east of Seoul, around 6:20 a.m. while taking pictures of the sun rising.
Another question is if it had been a North Korean Sub would the ROK Navy sunk it outright.
I'm being impartial when I say that the act of ROK coast guards driving the NK fishermen away from crossing the border to avert a potential crisis without dealing any intentional harm was carefully executed and rationally justified. There was no hint of malice or immorality on the part of ROK decision makers of all levels during this incident from the ones on the top to the ones who pulled the triggers.
Maybe you should read about what NK itself does to its defectors who try to cross the border from their side. Oh wait, whatever the non-NK media tells you about them is all lies.
Frankly NK patrols have a notorious reputation for shooting to kill unprovoked while ours shoot only for self-defense. Give me one instance where our military patrol killed any North Korean, particularly a civilian, without being shot at first.
Well.. it's happened with the Cheonan sinking...would be a big embarrassment if with such high alerts a North Korean Sub was able to slip down across the NLL and into South Korean waters without being detected.
Shooting at them could have been the perfect spark to ignite a crisis... expecially knowing the low-level of NK patience and moderation.I'm being impartial when I say that the act of ROK coast guards driving the NK fishermen away from crossing the border to avert a potential crisis without dealing any intentional harm was carefully executed and rationally justified. There was no hint of malice or immorality on the part of ROK decision makers of all levels during this incident from the ones on the top to the ones who pulled the triggers.
I've ever said this? It has some points to say me this? Nothing... defectors are dealt with their own laws, that are obviously hard. But this compensate the SK restrictions to sources and news in your country? Only if you admit by logic that South Korea is not a open democracy.Maybe you should read about what NK itself does to its defectors who try to cross the border from their side. Oh wait, whatever the non-NK media tells you about them is all lies.
This lack and the disproportionate use of sources or the "a unnamed desertor reported to an unnamed military officer that according to his friend may have...." to tell everything that happens, happened, may happens or will happens in NK are simply funny: exactly as the NK Stalinist-style propaganda..
From 1999 all the naval border clashes caused military causalities and all the actions are justified by the simple fact that's a LOW CONFLICT war.Frankly NK patrols have a notorious reputation for shooting to kill unprovoked while ours shoot only for self-defense. Give me one instance where our military patrol killed any North Korean, particularly a civilian, without being shot at first.
North Koreans are justified to fight and kills South Koreans as South Korean are justified to do the same... if both parts agreed to understand that there's a conflict in act...
I don't know what SK newspapers tell you, but I can tell you (because of the fact that SK don't let you read it) that NK news sources consider this clashes as an active conflict.. without hiding too much with words of coverage.
And reguarding the only civilain causalities of this conflict (2 SK civilians killed and 3 wounded in the on Yeonpyeong) it was an artillery bombing ... and artillery bombing in recent conflict caused EVER civilian causalities... it's a fault of NK of course, but exactly it is of many other western or pro-western countries that receive not the same international condemnation.
The point it's that NK never attacked a clear civilian target with the high risk of causing losses and with awareness of causing a reaction.
(we're speaking of course of this conflict... if we can go on the past until Korean War, of course we will seen victims between civilans caused by both the sides... even if i could be point that the massacres commited in South Korean by SK forces on civilians hunting for pro-NK and then claiming they were NK massacres was a really dirty affair)
North Korean Special operations missions over the years have resulted in a number of civilian deaths! look at what happened when the DPRK sub got stranded and they tried to make it back to North Korea across land or the the terror bombings and assignations missions sent into the South.
You said it... over the years ^^
That was the cold war conflict with the NK trying to create a guerrilla group in SK central mountains. Operations that often caused losses to both sides including civilians (because despite what's told by US/SK, EU's countries sources are a bit moderate to pick up facts from battle's reports... including the same tactics adopted by SK in counter-guerrilla that in Vietnam caused a number of massacres against civilians: facts revealed only after YEARS and before blamed (as the massacres in SK during the Korean War) as "Red Propaganda")
Moreover the 1996 Gangneung incident was... an incident. The NK team was not supposed to wander for all the Korean peninsula and having ten thousends of men hunting for them made them acte as what they were: special forces that when do their duty care less for civilian causalities.
The point was that the accident wasn't deliberately planned but accidental and the violence of the commandos was aroused by their awareness to fight for survival.
Red I provided recent examples through which the North Korean Military caused civilian casualties through their actions. can you provide any recent examples where the South Korean military through their action has resulted in the direct killing of North Korean Civilians in North Korea..
Probably you've not read what i wrote or you simply don't care ^^Red I provided recent examples through which the North Korean Military caused civilian casualties through their actions. can you provide any recent examples where the South Korean military through their action has resulted in the direct killing of North Korean Civilians in North Korea..
YOU talked first about "over the years", that's meaning the past too... and i've wrote (not you) about both the two single case of "recent" years (if for recent do you mean the last 20years) when NK forces caused civilian causalities: an unplanned accident of special forces that are found to act as they were not with their actions due to a race against time into an exceptional situation (travelling the whole peninsula to return home) and civilian losses could have been avoided if the NK had been treated as survivors of a maritime accident (i may point that the SangO submarine run aground by accident) or at least not hunting them with dogs and helos but seek a dialogue providing them a safe return to NK in exchange for leaving their weapons and not to resist ; and the last bombing accident when the SK too fired against NK land, claiming to have caused "unclear but heavy damages and losses" while all the visual photos of the MLRs positions at Kaemori show how no target was hits and the only shells that hit something fall on Mudo Island: and recently videos (the travel of Kim Jong Un with the boat) show how (as expected) the staff of the island live there with their own families (civilians)... it was only lucky or possibly the poor SK artillery results that despite their own accounts possibly hits only a pair of abandoned magazines...
The risk of hitting civilians was essentially identical in this last accident.
1. the South did not fire directly into North Korea territory but were conducting "routine" artillery practice as they have been conducting for "years" and just as the North also conducts "routine" fire practice from their side. The only difference being is that the North was looking to give the newly rising Kim Jong Un some military strength and clout with the armed forces. The North orchestrated hostility by opening fire "first" on the island and instead of limiting themselves to just targeting the Souths coastal artillery emplacements on one side of the island and support facilities they shelled the town on the other side of the island endangering the lives of many civilians and enforcing the emergency evacuation of the island. The ROK could have re spawned in kind against a number of nearby towns by the artillery bases on the Norths coast but they limited their fire to only at the Norths artillery emplacements.
2. A unit being desperate has no baring on the fact the North Korean commando team killed civilians and also the fact the South Korean government did try to get them to lay down arms and turn themselves in peacefully even tried to get a mediator to talk with them and work out a deal.
1) We're not discussing who started and if it was right... you obviously have not read what i wrote because SK fired at Mudo island that had/have civilians. That was the point, simple....1. the South did not fire directly into North Korea territory but were conducting "routine" artillery practice as they have been conducting for "years" and just as the North also conducts "routine" fire practice from their side. The only difference being is that the North was looking to give the newly rising Kim Jong Un some military strength and clout with the armed forces. The North orchestrated hostility by opening fire "first" on the island and instead of limiting themselves to just targeting the Souths coastal artillery emplacements on one side of the island and support facilities they shelled the town on the other side of the island endangering the lives of many civilians and enforcing the emergency evacuation of the island. The ROK could have re spawned in kind against a number of nearby towns by the artillery bases on the Norths coast but they limited their fire to only at the Norths artillery emplacements.
[/QUOTE]2. A unit being desperate has no baring on the fact the North Korean commando team killed civilians and also the fact the South Korean government did try to get them to lay down arms and turn themselves in peacefully even tried to get a mediator to talk with them and work out a deal.
2)it's baring the fact that wasn't not a planned action but an eventual outcome by a situation in part provoked by the SK military forces that despite their claims (because again i suppose you take the SK accounts as "what happened really") "someone else" say different things. Being a military analyst means giving at the sources the same level of impartiality. Same things i've said before..
Just for curiosity i'm interested to know what do you think about the recent news for the Cheonan situation. Even if i honestly think it was a NK attack, new SK articles put some more details and make it a bit more dubious... read them (are easy to find..)
Posting Permissions
