|
On December 19 2010 01:37 don_kyuhote wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2010 01:28 ImFromPortugal wrote:On December 19 2010 01:26 whitelynx wrote:On December 19 2010 01:22 lowkontrast wrote:So they won't conduct the drill because of bad weather, but a threat of nuclear war doesn't matter? There is no threat of nuclear war. but there is a threat of war and shelling of Seul Threat of starting a war due to a military drill is completely unjustified and stupid. Besides, it's not the first time NK did some tough talks. NK knows if war breaks out, regardless of who starts it, the Kim regime will fall, and that is something, the only thing in fact, that NK is desperately trying to prevent.
It may seem stupid and unjustified in your eyes , but the threat is real,i say thanks for the weather, at least more innocent people wont die.
still all the times NK used force against SK the south koreans responded with more rhetoric.
|
On December 19 2010 01:40 ImFromPortugal wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2010 01:37 don_kyuhote wrote:On December 19 2010 01:28 ImFromPortugal wrote:On December 19 2010 01:26 whitelynx wrote:On December 19 2010 01:22 lowkontrast wrote:So they won't conduct the drill because of bad weather, but a threat of nuclear war doesn't matter? There is no threat of nuclear war. but there is a threat of war and shelling of Seul Threat of starting a war due to a military drill is completely unjustified and stupid. Besides, it's not the first time NK did some tough talks. NK knows if war breaks out, regardless of who starts it, the Kim regime will fall, and that is something, the only thing in fact, that NK is desperately trying to prevent. It may seem stupid and unjustified in your eyes , but the threat is real,i say thanks for the weather, at least more innocent people wont die. still all the times NK used force against SK the south koreans responded with more rhetoric.
Not anymore apparantly.
As far as threat of NK shelling Seoul, it's has always been real. For decades.
And last time when NK threatened to retaliate over a military drill, all they did was shoot 100 artilery shell into open waters of NK shores.
Some retaliation huh?
|
On December 19 2010 01:43 don_kyuhote wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2010 01:40 ImFromPortugal wrote:On December 19 2010 01:37 don_kyuhote wrote:On December 19 2010 01:28 ImFromPortugal wrote:On December 19 2010 01:26 whitelynx wrote:On December 19 2010 01:22 lowkontrast wrote:So they won't conduct the drill because of bad weather, but a threat of nuclear war doesn't matter? There is no threat of nuclear war. but there is a threat of war and shelling of Seul Threat of starting a war due to a military drill is completely unjustified and stupid. Besides, it's not the first time NK did some tough talks. NK knows if war breaks out, regardless of who starts it, the Kim regime will fall, and that is something, the only thing in fact, that NK is desperately trying to prevent. It may seem stupid and unjustified in your eyes , but the threat is real,i say thanks for the weather, at least more innocent people wont die. still all the times NK used force against SK the south koreans responded with more rhetoric. Not anymore apparantly. As far as threat of NK shelling Seoul, it's has always been real. For decades. And last time when NK threatened to retaliate over a military drill, all they did was shoot 100 artilery shell into open waters of NK shores. Some retaliation huh?
that military drill was in a different location.
The last time the south conducted drills in this location south koreans died, dont forget that
|
On December 19 2010 01:36 StorkHwaiting wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2010 01:32 stalking.d00m wrote:
I believe it is mostly China's fault who thinks its a good idea to fight proxy war through N.Korea .
We all know about Korean war and it was like the Vietnam war for China which has made it an prestige issue. Seriously, if Kim jong didn't had the China's backing (ditto for Pakistan) asia would be a lot peaceful place.
PS: I don't blame people of China. I simply meant the 'beloved dictator' of China.
PPS: My full support goes to S.Koreans. How can the people who play Starcraft can ever be bad???? Yes, I suppose if everyone just laid down and allowed the USA and her allies to take over the world, then the world would become a more peaceful place. Of course, sovereignty, border security, national defense, these are all just issues of prestige.
In case you didn't notice it was the N.Korea who breached the peace (with the backing of China) its the N.Korea who shelled the island and who threatens to nuke S.korea every Friday it seems. So it is S.Korea who is valid to raise security concerns as S.Korea has been very peaceful this whole time. It didn't respond militarily to the sinking of ships and hasn't made any military move against N.Kor for killing its civilians. So it is the S.Korea who has behaved in a mature and peaceful way and it is S.korea who is threatened. Also. in case you didn't notice N.Korea is not only bad towards S.Korea it is bad towards its citizens too They frigging sent their FIFA players to COAL MINES after they lost!!! 
|
On December 19 2010 01:54 ImFromPortugal wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2010 01:43 don_kyuhote wrote:On December 19 2010 01:40 ImFromPortugal wrote:On December 19 2010 01:37 don_kyuhote wrote:On December 19 2010 01:28 ImFromPortugal wrote:On December 19 2010 01:26 whitelynx wrote:On December 19 2010 01:22 lowkontrast wrote:So they won't conduct the drill because of bad weather, but a threat of nuclear war doesn't matter? There is no threat of nuclear war. but there is a threat of war and shelling of Seul Threat of starting a war due to a military drill is completely unjustified and stupid. Besides, it's not the first time NK did some tough talks. NK knows if war breaks out, regardless of who starts it, the Kim regime will fall, and that is something, the only thing in fact, that NK is desperately trying to prevent. It may seem stupid and unjustified in your eyes , but the threat is real,i say thanks for the weather, at least more innocent people wont die. still all the times NK used force against SK the south koreans responded with more rhetoric. Not anymore apparantly. As far as threat of NK shelling Seoul, it's has always been real. For decades. And last time when NK threatened to retaliate over a military drill, all they did was shoot 100 artilery shell into open waters of NK shores. Some retaliation huh? that military drill was in a different location. The last time the south conducted drills in this location south koreans died, dont forget that
And all NK manage to accomplish was to stir up more anti-NK sentiments in SK and around the globe.
Last time around, SK was more or less caught off guard; they always get caught off guard.
I'm won't bet that NK will pull the trigger when the entire globe is anxiously watching them.
I'm sure NK is in a dilemma right now. When was the last time NK did something big in the same place with only a month in between?
They always did something, wait until the world forgot about them, then did something again.
|
Sorry guys, but I'm calling bollocks on the drills being cancelled because of weather.
From Twitter at 4:35 AM today:
#ROK defense officials denying live-fire drill on Yeonpyeong will be canceled due to diplomatic pressure following #DPRK retaliation threat. about 2 hours ago via TweetDeck
http://twitter.com/w7voa
EDIT: Also, a fresh threat from the Korean Central News Agency:
Fresh threat via KCNA: "We will settle thoroughly with the U.S. for the extreme crisis & its consequences that arise on Korean Peninsula."
Same link.
|
On December 19 2010 02:13 Blanke wrote:Sorry guys, but I'm calling bollocks on the drills being cancelled because of weather. From Twitter at 4:35 AM today: #ROK defense officials denying live-fire drill on Yeonpyeong will be canceled due to diplomatic pressure following #DPRK retaliation threat. about 2 hours ago via TweetDeck http://twitter.com/w7voa
It's delayed because of fog.
|
On December 19 2010 01:28 ImFromPortugal wrote:
but there is a threat of war and shelling of Seul
Theres only one type of a artillery piece that can reach Seoul and even that cant reach Seouls center, only the "outskirts". On top of that theyd need to extremely close to the border. So thereat to Seoul itself is somewhat limited. Plenty of people close to the border thought.
|
UNITED NATIONS - The UN Security Council will probably convene an emergency session on Saturday on the escalating tension between North and South Korea, council diplomats said.
Diplomats said the meeting was tentatively scheduled for 3 p.m., although it could change.
The meeting was called at the request of Russia
Source
|
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2010/12/18/69/0302000000AEN20101218001300315F.HTML
Island residents concerned about the drills.
The weather delay caught my eye as a possible cop out to give the ROK some time to reconsider, we'll see if they follow through, and we'll see if NK hits them back hard.
PS. the full scale war/retaliations rhetoric hasn't been quite like this for the past 55 years, there's a lot of back and forth and tension is indeed very high. For all the guys saying "blah NK always says this shit", SK doesn't usually say "tough shit we're going to provoke war anyway" whether you think the drills are a provocation of war or not, it's been clearly announced that the sovereign state of NK will aggressively retaliate to the drills.
|
On December 19 2010 03:50 Shigy wrote: the sovereign state of NK
Just a note: In the Western world, North Korea is not going to be a "sovereign state". Sovereign state is more or less defined as "country that it's not okay to invade". Note that Afghanistan and Iraq were not sovereign states, whileas Georgia, which was invaded by Russia and not USA, is a sovereign state.
Just wait and you'll see. North Korea will not be described as a sovereign state when it's being invaded, unless it's Russia or China doing it on their own...
|
On December 19 2010 05:36 iMAniaC wrote:Sovereign state is more or less defined as "country that it's not okay to invade"
Are you being srs.
User was warned for this post
|
Yes. However, after writing a paragraph or so, I deleted it because I don't want to derail the thread to talk about the US rhetoric for Russia's intervention into Georgia, so I'll just stick to a simple "Yes, I'm serious."
However, it might be unfair of me to say so, because coming up with new terms in order to justify whatever, like "sovereign nation" for differentiating invations, or "unlawful combatants" for defining a new group of people that do not deserve the same rights as normal PoW's or normal citizens, was notorious for the Bush administration and Obama hasn't done anything like that (yet), so perhaps he won't try it with North Korea. Or to be more precise, perhaps he won't try it with the rest of the world to justify whatever they'll be doing with North Korea.
|
On December 19 2010 07:05 iMAniaC wrote:
Yes. However, after writing a paragraph or so, I deleted it because I don't want to derail the thread to talk about the US rhetoric for Russia's intervention into Georgia, so I'll just stick to a simple "Yes, I'm serious."
However, it might be unfair of me to say so, because coming up with new terms in order to justify whatever, like "sovereign nation" for differentiating invations, or "unlawful combatants" for defining a new group of people that do not deserve the same rights as normal PoW's or normal citizens, was notorious for the Bush administration and Obama hasn't done anything like that (yet), so perhaps he won't try it with North Korea. Or to be more precise, perhaps he won't try it with the rest of the world to justify whatever they'll be doing with North Korea.
You said that North Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan were not considered sovereign nations because the US said so? I think you need to look up the definition of sovereignty.
And you're concerned that the US government will have to carefully justify actions towards North Korea? Please.
|
Sovereignty is relative. It also comes in two forms, internal and external. You need both to have international sovereignty. For all intensive purposes, North Korea is a sovereign nation. Boarders were drawn after the Korean War, and a precedent set.
The actual phrase sovereignty is a reference to a geographical area in which some authority, democratic or other wise exercises the right to govern (control). In other words, the international system of sovereignty is based around respect. Nations do not have the right to govern in lands that are not there own.
The United States is in slipping regard in the international scene. Internationalism and support for wars abroad have had scattered support that weighed in as majorities and minorities at different times. Externally, the United Kingdom was the only nation to fully support the United State. Most of Europe apposed American intervention in Iraq. This international image has bearing on how the United States proceeds. They have been more or less tolerated for their actions despite disapproval of other nations because of a position of power. What makes this event so much more complex is China, a nation that owns more of the United States debt then any other country as well as a military giant may become involved. This also will greatly effect the United States approach.
Just the opinions of a Public Administration student.
|
Well I got out of the Navy just in time. My friends who are still in, on the good old G.W are working their butts off for an unscheduled deployment because of this mess just so they can sit off the coast of Korea. So glad I got out before this mess being deployed 24/7 working 18+ hour days is the worst.
|
Originally posted by CanadianStarcraft
For all intensive purposes, North Korea is a sovereign nation.
How do you expect anyone to take what you say seriously with grammatical errors like that?
|
On December 19 2010 12:05 kirkybaby wrote:Show nested quote + Originally posted by CanadianStarcraft
For all intensive purposes, North Korea is a sovereign nation. How do you expect anyone to take what you say seriously with grammatical errors like that?
I saw a bunch of gaffes in the statement and just ignored it instead of going nitpicky nazi on his ass. But yeah it didn't hold much water, sovereignty is sovereignty is sovereignty. Maybe it's not as black and white as I'm making it out to be, but someone earlier clearly didn't even know how to define it.
PS North Korea is a member of the UN, I'm not an expert or anything, but sounds like external sovereignty to me.
|
Looks like today is the day. Hopefully all the talk has just been posturing and no retaliation occurs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
