Export thread
North Korea bombs populated South Korean island
#1
Element 117
Element 117
North Korea bombs South Korea's Yeonpyeong Island - Telegraph
North Korea bombs South Korean island
North Korea has bombarded a South Korean island with artillery shells, injuring civilians and soldiers and setting more than 60 properties ablaze.
South Korea's Yeonpueong Island is engulfed in thick smoke after North Korean military launches artillery attack Photo: EPA
By Peter Foster in Beijing 7:17AM GMT 23 Nov 2010
The attack, which comes days after it emerged that North Korea was pressing ahead with its illegal nuclear programme, marks a serious further escalation of tensions on the Korean Peninsular.
South Korea officials said dozens of rounds had landed on Yeonpyeong Island in the Yellow Sea, 50 miles off the South’s northwest coast in an area close a disputed sea border. Other reports suggested as many as 200 shells were fired.
As South Korean forces returned fire, Civilians were evacuated to emergency bunkers, according witnesses quoted by the Seoul-based cable news television channel YTN. Fighter jets were scrambled and an emergency cabinet meeting was called in Seoul.
RELATED ARTICLES
Fighter jets scrambled as North Korea bombs South Korean island 23 Nov 2010
Harry Patch, last British survivor of First World War trenches, dies23 Nov 2010
North Korea has built sophisticated uranium enrichment facility, US scientist says23 Nov 2010
Kim Jong-Un appears alongside his father23 Nov 2010
'Dead' South Korean soldiers turn up for reunion23 Nov 2010
Lieutenant-Colonel David Rose23 Nov 2010
Pictures from the TV channel showed at least four plumes of smoke rising from the island which is the largest in a clutch of smaller islands, with a population of less than 2,000 people.
A South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff official, quoted anonymously by the Associated Press, said dozens of rounds of artillery landed on Yeonpyeong island and confirmed that South Korea had returned fire.
The islands were the scene of two skirmishes between the navies of North and South Korea in 1999 and 2002.
The attack comes after nearly two years of deteriorating relations between the two Koreas, which reached a nadir last March after the sinking of a South Korean corvette, the Cheonan, with the loss of 46 lives.
South Korea has since cut off almost all humanitarian aid to the North, a near bankrupt-state that has been under tight international sanctions since conducting a second nuclear bomb test in 2009 in defiance of UN agreements.
The North has also been facing a degree of political turmoil this year as their ailing leader Kim Jong-il prepares the ground for a dynastic succession that will see power being handed to his youngest son, Kim Jong-un.
North Korea bombs South Korean island
North Korea has bombarded a South Korean island with artillery shells, injuring civilians and soldiers and setting more than 60 properties ablaze.
South Korea's Yeonpueong Island is engulfed in thick smoke after North Korean military launches artillery attack Photo: EPA
By Peter Foster in Beijing 7:17AM GMT 23 Nov 2010
The attack, which comes days after it emerged that North Korea was pressing ahead with its illegal nuclear programme, marks a serious further escalation of tensions on the Korean Peninsular.
South Korea officials said dozens of rounds had landed on Yeonpyeong Island in the Yellow Sea, 50 miles off the South’s northwest coast in an area close a disputed sea border. Other reports suggested as many as 200 shells were fired.
As South Korean forces returned fire, Civilians were evacuated to emergency bunkers, according witnesses quoted by the Seoul-based cable news television channel YTN. Fighter jets were scrambled and an emergency cabinet meeting was called in Seoul.
RELATED ARTICLES
Fighter jets scrambled as North Korea bombs South Korean island 23 Nov 2010
Harry Patch, last British survivor of First World War trenches, dies23 Nov 2010
North Korea has built sophisticated uranium enrichment facility, US scientist says23 Nov 2010
Kim Jong-Un appears alongside his father23 Nov 2010
'Dead' South Korean soldiers turn up for reunion23 Nov 2010
Lieutenant-Colonel David Rose23 Nov 2010
Pictures from the TV channel showed at least four plumes of smoke rising from the island which is the largest in a clutch of smaller islands, with a population of less than 2,000 people.
A South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff official, quoted anonymously by the Associated Press, said dozens of rounds of artillery landed on Yeonpyeong island and confirmed that South Korea had returned fire.
The islands were the scene of two skirmishes between the navies of North and South Korea in 1999 and 2002.
The attack comes after nearly two years of deteriorating relations between the two Koreas, which reached a nadir last March after the sinking of a South Korean corvette, the Cheonan, with the loss of 46 lives.
South Korea has since cut off almost all humanitarian aid to the North, a near bankrupt-state that has been under tight international sanctions since conducting a second nuclear bomb test in 2009 in defiance of UN agreements.
The North has also been facing a degree of political turmoil this year as their ailing leader Kim Jong-il prepares the ground for a dynastic succession that will see power being handed to his youngest son, Kim Jong-un.
#2
Denbrought
Denbrought
I was reading on this just now, I wonder if it'll escalate further.
#3
FnordBear
FnordBear
In a way you have to wonder if someone pulling strings in N Korea is TRYING to get the US involved in a military conflict to force a regime change.
#4
Math242
Math242
Post Apocalyptia HERE WE COME !
#5
Chazwozel
Chazwozel
I don't think it'll escalate into a third world war. Who's N.K.'s biggest ally on principle? China. Who does China depend on for massive exports Europe and the U.S. Every country in the world has no legitimate economical principle to back up North Korea.
The only major concern I would have is South Korea getting nuked into the stone age by Kim Jong iL.
The only major concern I would have is South Korea getting nuked into the stone age by Kim Jong iL.
#6
Chibibar
Chibibar
I have to agree. Economically, China wouldn't back N.K. up. China needs the west for trade (various reason listed on other forums) and vice versa. Going into war would disrupt that.I don't think it'll escalate into a third world war. Who's N.K.'s biggest ally on principle? China. Who does China depend on for massive exports Europe and the U.S. Every country in the world has no legitimate economical principle to back up North Korea.
The only major concern I would have is South Korea getting nuked into the stone age by Kim Jong iL.
#7
Dave
Dave
To the Chinese, NK is the little brother who likes to pick fights with the neighbor kid who also has a big brother. But the two big brothers are business partners.
So until Big Brother China puts their foot down, these shenanigans will continue.
So until Big Brother China puts their foot down, these shenanigans will continue.
#8
CrimsonSoul
CrimsonSoul
If this escalates I don't see N.K. doing well
#9
Siska
Siska
Why does China even like North Korea? Us commies gotta stick together? Should be appearant to even China that North Korea is about as communist as a person eating a pork chop is a vegetarian. China needs to realize this relationship is crap and isn't gonna get better. They should totally dump North Korea in public. Scream that they never liked them anyway, burn all their stuff and find someone that likes only eating salad!
#10
sixpackshaker
sixpackshaker
You guys better hope and pray that this does not escalate. NK on their own will be fairly formidable. They have the ability to shell almost all of South Korea, and lay waste to Seoul. This would be warfare like we have not seen since Korea 60 years ago. NK can likely bring as many men to a fight as we can bring bullets.
Our main hope is that they will be facing us with 1970's Tech. But my real hope is that they will face us with 1950's Tactics.
Our main hope is that they will be facing us with 1970's Tech. But my real hope is that they will face us with 1950's Tactics.
#11
Chibibar
Chibibar
I believe it is more of a territory decision. If Korea are united, it is more likely to be more democratic than communist. This mean the "west" will have another place to setup military base.Why does China even like North Korea? Us commies gotta stick together? Should be appearant to even China that North Korea is about as communist as a person eating a pork chop is a vegetarian. China needs to realize this relationship is crap and isn't gonna get better. They should totally dump North Korea in public. Scream that they never liked them anyway, burn all their stuff and find someone that likes only eating salad!
#12
Azurephoenix
Azurephoenix
This situation sucks... definitely a powder keg waiting to go off.
#13
Iaculus
Iaculus
Part of the problem for China is that if North Korea collapses, they won't only have that democratic, unified Korea mentioned above on their doorstep, but also a massive refugee influx.
#14
Chibibar
Chibibar
It has been like that since the cease fire about 50 years ago (1953 - cease fire right?) The North continue to rattle its saber on and off. I guess China is seeing how far N.K. willing to go before big brother put his foot down.
#15
AshburnerX
AshburnerX
This is likely going to be what causes China to put their foot down. This is a very public, very aggressive, VERY unprovoked attack. China won't back them if South Korea decides to fight back, even if they have US help.It has been like that since the cease fire about 50 years ago (1953 - cease fire right?) The North continue to rattle its saber on and off. I guess China is seeing how far N.K. willing to go before big brother put his foot down.
#16
Chibibar
True, but also China don't want a unified Korea either (like I said, more likely a non-communist country) so China might step in one form or another. I am guessing telling N.K. to simmer down or they will back off for a bit (cut off trade and such) N.K. is nearly broke so they can't afford to piss of their main/only ally.
Chibibar
This is likely going to be what causes China to put their foot down. This is a very public, very aggressive, VERY unprovoked attack. China won't back them if South Korea decides to fight back, even if they have US help.[/QUOTE]It has been like that since the cease fire about 50 years ago (1953 - cease fire right?) The North continue to rattle its saber on and off. I guess China is seeing how far N.K. willing to go before big brother put his foot down.
True, but also China don't want a unified Korea either (like I said, more likely a non-communist country) so China might step in one form or another. I am guessing telling N.K. to simmer down or they will back off for a bit (cut off trade and such) N.K. is nearly broke so they can't afford to piss of their main/only ally.
#18
Espy
Espy
You know, maybe its time to just have it out with those assholes.
It's probably not and things will back down again but... part of me is like, lets just get the inevitable over with already.
It's probably not and things will back down again but... part of me is like, lets just get the inevitable over with already.
#19
TommiR
True, but also China don't want a unified Korea either (like I said, more likely a non-communist country) so China might step in one form or another. I am guessing telling N.K. to simmer down or they will back off for a bit (cut off trade and such) N.K. is nearly broke so they can't afford to piss of their main/only ally.[/QUOTE]
I'm actually not so sure about China necessarily doing anything significant on the issue. As was stated, border incidents in Korea have been rife over the years, the most widely-publicised being the sinking of that ROK warship this March. These things haven't caused China to apply any more significant pressure on North Korea in the past, and I don't really see how the case at hand should be any different. I think stability and influence on the Korean peninsula are what interests China, and although DPRK brinkmanship is probably not really in chinese interests, putting pressure on the North Korean government might not be conducive to achieving those goals. At least not when the incidents are still relatively minor.
TommiR
This is likely going to be what causes China to put their foot down. This is a very public, very aggressive, VERY unprovoked attack. China won't back them if South Korea decides to fight back, even if they have US help.[/QUOTE]It has been like that since the cease fire about 50 years ago (1953 - cease fire right?) The North continue to rattle its saber on and off. I guess China is seeing how far N.K. willing to go before big brother put his foot down.
True, but also China don't want a unified Korea either (like I said, more likely a non-communist country) so China might step in one form or another. I am guessing telling N.K. to simmer down or they will back off for a bit (cut off trade and such) N.K. is nearly broke so they can't afford to piss of their main/only ally.[/QUOTE]
I'm actually not so sure about China necessarily doing anything significant on the issue. As was stated, border incidents in Korea have been rife over the years, the most widely-publicised being the sinking of that ROK warship this March. These things haven't caused China to apply any more significant pressure on North Korea in the past, and I don't really see how the case at hand should be any different. I think stability and influence on the Korean peninsula are what interests China, and although DPRK brinkmanship is probably not really in chinese interests, putting pressure on the North Korean government might not be conducive to achieving those goals. At least not when the incidents are still relatively minor.
#20
sixpackshaker
sixpackshaker
I wonder how this will effect the Starcraft Championships?
#21
Bones
Bones
you know I don't say this very often, but, the whole world ought to get together and give that country's leadership a good old fashion nuking from on high...ya know couple bombardments with a side of cruise missile and MOAB bombs.
but hell I am no authority, my greatest wish is Twinkies that nuke themselves.
but hell I am no authority, my greatest wish is Twinkies that nuke themselves.
#22
Gurpel
So, hypothetically, N. Korea declares total war on S. Korea. What stops America from turning N.Korea into a smoking crater with conventional ordinance?
E: Or for that matter, whats to stop S.Korea from doing the same? The South Korean air force is leagues ahead of the North's. Contrary to what might seem obvious, when you pit a (to use a situationally appropriate analogy) zerg rush of lowtech fighter jets against more modern ones, the modern ones will always win. The only limiting factor on how many MiG-21s an f-16 Fighting Falcon can shoot down is the amount of ordinance it can carry.
And thats a lot of ordinance.
Gurpel
uh huh.You guys better hope and pray that this does not escalate. NK on their own will be fairly formidable. They have the ability to shell almost all of South Korea, and lay waste to Seoul. This would be warfare like we have not seen since Korea 60 years ago. NK can likely bring as many men to a fight as we can bring bullets.
Our main hope is that they will be facing us with 1970's Tech. But my real hope is that they will face us with 1950's Tactics.
So, hypothetically, N. Korea declares total war on S. Korea. What stops America from turning N.Korea into a smoking crater with conventional ordinance?
E: Or for that matter, whats to stop S.Korea from doing the same? The South Korean air force is leagues ahead of the North's. Contrary to what might seem obvious, when you pit a (to use a situationally appropriate analogy) zerg rush of lowtech fighter jets against more modern ones, the modern ones will always win. The only limiting factor on how many MiG-21s an f-16 Fighting Falcon can shoot down is the amount of ordinance it can carry.
And thats a lot of ordinance.
#23
Terrik
uh huh.
So, hypothetically, N. Korea declares total war on S. Korea. What stops America from turning N.Korea into a smoking crater with conventional ordinance?[/QUOTE]
Threats/interference from China maybe?
Terrik
You guys better hope and pray that this does not escalate. NK on their own will be fairly formidable. They have the ability to shell almost all of South Korea, and lay waste to Seoul. This would be warfare like we have not seen since Korea 60 years ago. NK can likely bring as many men to a fight as we can bring bullets.
Our main hope is that they will be facing us with 1970's Tech. But my real hope is that they will face us with 1950's Tactics.
uh huh.
So, hypothetically, N. Korea declares total war on S. Korea. What stops America from turning N.Korea into a smoking crater with conventional ordinance?[/QUOTE]
Threats/interference from China maybe?
#24
Docseverin
Docseverin
Civilians. Same shit that has tied our hands behind our back in the Middle East.
---------- Post added at 02:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:31 AM ----------
So, hypothetically, N. Korea declares total war on S. Korea. What stops America from turning N.Korea into a smoking crater with conventional ordinance?[/QUOTE]
---------- Post added at 02:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:31 AM ----------
uh huh.You guys better hope and pray that this does not escalate. NK on their own will be fairly formidable. They have the ability to shell almost all of South Korea, and lay waste to Seoul. This would be warfare like we have not seen since Korea 60 years ago. NK can likely bring as many men to a fight as we can bring bullets.
Our main hope is that they will be facing us with 1970's Tech. But my real hope is that they will face us with 1950's Tactics.
So, hypothetically, N. Korea declares total war on S. Korea. What stops America from turning N.Korea into a smoking crater with conventional ordinance?[/QUOTE]
#25
strawman
Quite frankly I don't see the hand Obama has been playing in our current military affairs. As far as I can tell he's simply following the recommendations of his subordinates in matters of war. He's certainly been reluctant to push through all those promises he made early on regarding our military, so either he's become more knowledgable about the reality on the ground, or more docile.
Either way I'm very curious to see how he reacts to such a situation.
I hope he doesn't have to, though.
strawman
I think the American public has, to some degree (and despite the right's rhetoric), become gun shy. We are already stuck in the middle east trying to fix the countries we waged war on. If it was going to be wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, then maybe, but we also don't want to leave a power vacuum, nor give North Korea even more reason to lean on China. But I don't think that Obama is keen to become the guy that indirectly badmouthed the choice to enter into wars past, then enters into one himself.What stops America from turning N.Korea into a smoking crater with conventional ordinance?
Quite frankly I don't see the hand Obama has been playing in our current military affairs. As far as I can tell he's simply following the recommendations of his subordinates in matters of war. He's certainly been reluctant to push through all those promises he made early on regarding our military, so either he's become more knowledgable about the reality on the ground, or more docile.
Either way I'm very curious to see how he reacts to such a situation.
I hope he doesn't have to, though.
#26
Gurpel
1. Allow America to do something it is required to by treaty and which is legal under international law
or
2. Go batshit crazy, do a 180 and start a nuclear war.
What you are describing is what happened in a peacekeeping operation against an insurgency. Do you remember what happened 9 years ago when that conflict actually started? Iraq's entire military and government was dismantled in 5 days. The same would happen in an American/north Korean conflict.
and to defend my statement, since about 90% of the DPRK is occupied by military installations, dismantling those would turn it into... a big, smoking crater.
Gurpel
As far as I am aware, all China has done so far is promise that it will defend n.Korea against invasion. If it were to attempt to interfere in the American defense of South Korea, it would probably be an act of war. For the aforementioned reasons, china can not fight a conventional war with America which means that it's only options should the DPRK attack the south areThreats/interference from China maybe?
1. Allow America to do something it is required to by treaty and which is legal under international law
or
2. Go batshit crazy, do a 180 and start a nuclear war.
Civilians. Same shit that has tied our hands behind our back in the Middle East.
What you are describing is what happened in a peacekeeping operation against an insurgency. Do you remember what happened 9 years ago when that conflict actually started? Iraq's entire military and government was dismantled in 5 days. The same would happen in an American/north Korean conflict.
and to defend my statement, since about 90% of the DPRK is occupied by military installations, dismantling those would turn it into... a big, smoking crater.
#27
Espy
Espy
Can't the South pretty well take care of themselves if it came down to it though?
#28
AshburnerX
In other words, the thing keeping America from stomping NK is the thousands/millions who would die in retaliatory strikes against civilian targets. No one would stop us from rolling through the country in that scenario, but the costs are simply far to great. Hence why we've stuck with diplomatic solutions despite the fact they've openly and brazenly murdered Americans over things as stupid as a tree. Though I must admit, Operation Paul Bunyan sounds like something out of a movie.
AshburnerX
Seoul (Capital and Largest City in SK) is well within range of North Korea's artillery. It's been estimated they have more than enough conventional ordnance to level A LOT of the city. Any action America takes it going to be after the fact (so we don't piss of China), so your looking at a scenario where SK loses tens/hundreds of thousands of people in the first barrage. If they get NUKES, we're talking millions.So, hypothetically, N. Korea declares total war on S. Korea. What stops America from turning N.Korea into a smoking crater with conventional ordinance?
In other words, the thing keeping America from stomping NK is the thousands/millions who would die in retaliatory strikes against civilian targets. No one would stop us from rolling through the country in that scenario, but the costs are simply far to great. Hence why we've stuck with diplomatic solutions despite the fact they've openly and brazenly murdered Americans over things as stupid as a tree. Though I must admit, Operation Paul Bunyan sounds like something out of a movie.
#29
Gurpel
Gurpel
If the americans went into North Korea, I firmly believe that they would be able to destroy the DPRK's ability to mount any military action within hours. No retaliation would be possible. The real reason they can't go in is that China is backing N.Korea up with it's nuclear arsenal, plain and simple.In other words, the thing keeping America from stomping NK is the thousands/millions who would die in retaliatory strikes against civilian targets. No one would stop us from rolling through the country in that scenario, but the costs are simply far to great. Hence why we've stuck with diplomatic solutions despite the fact they've openly and brazenly murdered Americans over things as stupid as a tree. Though I must admit, Operation Paul Bunyan sounds like something out of a movie.
#30
Matt²
Matt²
So what happens when/if some little Hitler wannabe comes around and doesn't give a shit about civilians and nukes anyway? (from any side)Civilians. Same shit that has tied our hands behind our back in the Middle East.
#31
Espy
Espy
So what happens when/if some little Hitler wannabe comes around and doesn't give a shit about civilians and nukes anyway? (from any side)[/QUOTE]Civilians. Same shit that has tied our hands behind our back in the Middle East.
#32
AshburnerX
AshburnerX
Gurpel, China won't do shit if NK goes crazy and tries something serious except tighten their borders and turn away refugees. They aren't any more interested in starting of the Apocalypse than anyone else is. The only reason they support NK is because they are a useful buffer to prevent the spread of democracy and western values. They cease to be useful the moment they start hurling missiles into Seoul.
#33
Terrik
If it's to prevent the spread the western values, they're sure doing a piss-poor job of it.
Terrik
*scratches head* I thought it was more because they don't want foreign military bases (Read: US) on their border, which would happen should NK fall.The only reason they support NK is because they are a useful buffer to prevent the spread of democracy and western values.
If it's to prevent the spread the western values, they're sure doing a piss-poor job of it.
#34
Docseverin
What I see as Americas biggest downfall in combat is Americas aversion to commit to the atrocities that come with war when it is viewed in their living rooms and the policy that even one civilian casualty is too many. I know how that comes off but people die in war and civilians are no exception.
Those who don't try to flee to China will be used as human shields (willingly mind you) to prevent the damage of certain places, I would be willing to put a months paycheck on it.
Docseverin
Afghanistan and Iraq...two different wars, so do I remember what happened in 2001 when we invaded and took over? I was serving and had friends who invaded. Then again in March 2003, when shock and awe fell flat because of the targets we could actually hit because of human shields being placed in palaces...Same as before, I can't spit without hitting someone I know who was in the invasion.What you are describing is what happened in a peacekeeping operation against an insurgency. Do you remember what happened 9 years ago when that conflict actually started? Iraq's entire military and government was dismantled in 5 days. The same would happen in an American/north Korean conflict.
What I see as Americas biggest downfall in combat is Americas aversion to commit to the atrocities that come with war when it is viewed in their living rooms and the policy that even one civilian casualty is too many. I know how that comes off but people die in war and civilians are no exception.
Those who don't try to flee to China will be used as human shields (willingly mind you) to prevent the damage of certain places, I would be willing to put a months paycheck on it.
#35
Gurpel
Gurpel
re: your edit
Reason: Came across a bit harsh and self-righteous
No, you are right, I shouldn't have worded that so.. douchily. Sorry.And please do not lecture me on places I have been, and things I have done.
#36
Element 117
Element 117
#37
sixpackshaker
So, hypothetically, N. Korea declares total war on S. Korea. What stops America from turning N.Korea into a smoking crater with conventional ordinance?
E: Or for that matter, whats to stop S.Korea from doing the same? The South Korean air force is leagues ahead of the North's. Contrary to what might seem obvious, when you pit a (to use a situationally appropriate analogy) zerg rush of lowtech fighter jets against more modern ones, the modern ones will always win. The only limiting factor on how many MiG-21s an f-16 Fighting Falcon can shoot down is the amount of ordinance it can carry.
And thats a lot of ordinance.[/QUOTE]
What also ties our hands is the casualties that NK and inflict on SK in a matter of moments with artillery, rocketry/ballistic missiles, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. Their ballistic missile systems can also hit Japan. If they can get off a lucky shot, Alaska or Washington State.
NK has a much better defensive plan than Iraq. NK is mountains and forest, plenty of places to hide tanks. They are dug in like a WWI nightmare. The Chinese and the Soviets have been selling them decent arms for 6 decades.
sixpackshaker
uh huh.You guys better hope and pray that this does not escalate. NK on their own will be fairly formidable. They have the ability to shell almost all of South Korea, and lay waste to Seoul. This would be warfare like we have not seen since Korea 60 years ago. NK can likely bring as many men to a fight as we can bring bullets.
Our main hope is that they will be facing us with 1970's Tech. But my real hope is that they will face us with 1950's Tactics.
So, hypothetically, N. Korea declares total war on S. Korea. What stops America from turning N.Korea into a smoking crater with conventional ordinance?
E: Or for that matter, whats to stop S.Korea from doing the same? The South Korean air force is leagues ahead of the North's. Contrary to what might seem obvious, when you pit a (to use a situationally appropriate analogy) zerg rush of lowtech fighter jets against more modern ones, the modern ones will always win. The only limiting factor on how many MiG-21s an f-16 Fighting Falcon can shoot down is the amount of ordinance it can carry.
And thats a lot of ordinance.[/QUOTE]
What also ties our hands is the casualties that NK and inflict on SK in a matter of moments with artillery, rocketry/ballistic missiles, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. Their ballistic missile systems can also hit Japan. If they can get off a lucky shot, Alaska or Washington State.
NK has a much better defensive plan than Iraq. NK is mountains and forest, plenty of places to hide tanks. They are dug in like a WWI nightmare. The Chinese and the Soviets have been selling them decent arms for 6 decades.
#38
Chibibar
Chibibar
I have to agree with Six. The problem of using nuke or high level weapons to "level the place" is the high level of civilian casualties. Right now the U.S. can't afford more bad press. The U.S. is already on bad sides with many countries for two wars (yea we got threads on those too). U.S. dollar is weakening and the people are not happy.
Can you imagine the chaos when the government decides to "wipe a country off the face of the earth?" it would be a total nightmare.
Also Six is right about weaponry. I'm sure N.K. got some back up plan in case "shit hit the fan" One of the things I learn psychology is that people will go into fight or fright mode when put into a corner. Also human tend to go into "heroic mode" when all other options are moot. i.e. you are gonna die, might as well take as many with you anyway mentality.
I remember a quote from a book called "Alas, Babylon" "When the enemies think they can get away with it, you already lost the war" (regarding having and using nukes as deterrent)
Can you imagine the chaos when the government decides to "wipe a country off the face of the earth?" it would be a total nightmare.
Also Six is right about weaponry. I'm sure N.K. got some back up plan in case "shit hit the fan" One of the things I learn psychology is that people will go into fight or fright mode when put into a corner. Also human tend to go into "heroic mode" when all other options are moot. i.e. you are gonna die, might as well take as many with you anyway mentality.
I remember a quote from a book called "Alas, Babylon" "When the enemies think they can get away with it, you already lost the war" (regarding having and using nukes as deterrent)
#39
TommiR
TommiR
I'm pretty sure a nuclear option is not on the table at the moment. In addition to the reasons stated above and the bad press and strategic high risks involved in nuclear first-use in the region even in a theoretical case of no civilian damage, when you strip away all the posturing, this affair seems like a mere border incident involving an exchange of artillery fire. Given the current situation, I'm having difficulties seeing how any of the parties hope to benefit from military escalation.
I am also not convinced of some of the lower estimates presented here on how much time it would take for conventional forces to reduce the north korean military to a state of incapability of retaliating against south korean targets. In the Gulf War, ground operations were preceded by an aerial bombardment campaign lasting for more than a month, and this was in an operational environment generally considered well-suited to the use of air power - there is little cover on the ground in a desert. The terrain in North Korea is quite different, so I view it as unlikely that the north korean military can be brought to it's knees before they can inflict unacceptable levels of damage to civilian targets down south. Especially since surprise is difficult to achieve, considering how hard it would be to conceal the build-up of forces necessary for a large-scale attack.
I am also not convinced of some of the lower estimates presented here on how much time it would take for conventional forces to reduce the north korean military to a state of incapability of retaliating against south korean targets. In the Gulf War, ground operations were preceded by an aerial bombardment campaign lasting for more than a month, and this was in an operational environment generally considered well-suited to the use of air power - there is little cover on the ground in a desert. The terrain in North Korea is quite different, so I view it as unlikely that the north korean military can be brought to it's knees before they can inflict unacceptable levels of damage to civilian targets down south. Especially since surprise is difficult to achieve, considering how hard it would be to conceal the build-up of forces necessary for a large-scale attack.
#40
Necronic
War with NK would be very very different from Iraq/Afghanistan. It would start as a more conventional war, and it would stay as one much much longer. The good news is that we would definitely have support from both South Korea and Japan (and possibly even Russia?) A better way of looking at it would be that we are supporting them. I don't think that NK would maintain a paramilitary/militia/guerilla force like we have seen in the ME. This is a different kind of situation than the middle east.
The best case scenario would be a pre-emptive highly coordinated strike by SK/US/JP with tacit approval from China (look the other way, make weak statements against it, no intervention) in which we take out all of their air fields and hopefully cripple their navy, as well as getting special forces on the ground to all suspected nuclear weapons facilities. After that I won't say it would be a walk in the park or anything, but with air/naval superiority and no fear of nuclear retaliation a conventional war would be very much in the allies favor.
If a conventional war was won, I have a suspicion that it would end there. Il would surrender/capitulate or there would be a military coup to hand over power to the allies. There simply aren't the resources or morale amongst civilians to maintain a guerilla campaign.
The occupation would be financially much easier on America, as it would be handled by a combination of SK, JP, and China, who finally decide to get in on the party after the war is over. Yet again Russia may throw some troops down, who knows. Since the nation would be have such a crippled infrastructure it would make more sense to have it be absorbed by another nation, which would be either SK or China. This would be a very tricky situation. Obviously SK has claim to it, but where does the 800 pound gorrilla sit?
Long story short, there is a part of me that thinks that we need to jump on the oppurtunity to finish this once and for all. The government is in a downswing right now as Il gets older and a power transition becomes inevitable. There are some recently spurned military leaders still in positions of authority. And most importantly, the longer we wait the more of a nuclear arsenal they will be able to build. The longer they can add to that the more difficult this power shift will be.
Really there isn't a country on this planet I find more terrifying than North Korea.
Necronic
A military paycheck? Hell I'll take that! Seriously though, that is a very scary thought and probably right. In the sense that military bases would be set up with refugee camps around/in them. Or that the bases would move to the middle of civilian areas.DocSeverin said:Those who don't try to flee to China will be used as human shields (willingly mind you) to prevent the damage of certain places, I would be willing to put a months paycheck on it.
War with NK would be very very different from Iraq/Afghanistan. It would start as a more conventional war, and it would stay as one much much longer. The good news is that we would definitely have support from both South Korea and Japan (and possibly even Russia?) A better way of looking at it would be that we are supporting them. I don't think that NK would maintain a paramilitary/militia/guerilla force like we have seen in the ME. This is a different kind of situation than the middle east.
The best case scenario would be a pre-emptive highly coordinated strike by SK/US/JP with tacit approval from China (look the other way, make weak statements against it, no intervention) in which we take out all of their air fields and hopefully cripple their navy, as well as getting special forces on the ground to all suspected nuclear weapons facilities. After that I won't say it would be a walk in the park or anything, but with air/naval superiority and no fear of nuclear retaliation a conventional war would be very much in the allies favor.
If a conventional war was won, I have a suspicion that it would end there. Il would surrender/capitulate or there would be a military coup to hand over power to the allies. There simply aren't the resources or morale amongst civilians to maintain a guerilla campaign.
The occupation would be financially much easier on America, as it would be handled by a combination of SK, JP, and China, who finally decide to get in on the party after the war is over. Yet again Russia may throw some troops down, who knows. Since the nation would be have such a crippled infrastructure it would make more sense to have it be absorbed by another nation, which would be either SK or China. This would be a very tricky situation. Obviously SK has claim to it, but where does the 800 pound gorrilla sit?
Long story short, there is a part of me that thinks that we need to jump on the oppurtunity to finish this once and for all. The government is in a downswing right now as Il gets older and a power transition becomes inevitable. There are some recently spurned military leaders still in positions of authority. And most importantly, the longer we wait the more of a nuclear arsenal they will be able to build. The longer they can add to that the more difficult this power shift will be.
Really there isn't a country on this planet I find more terrifying than North Korea.
#41
sixpackshaker
sixpackshaker
Close, it is not the civilian casualties that we would inflict, but the North on the South. There is just no way to stop all the artillery that they are sitting on before 10's of thousands are killed in Seoul. If we struck the North first, the United States would be blamed for the actions of Mr. Kim.I have to agree with Six. The problem of using nuke or high level weapons to "level the place" is the high level of civilian casualties. Right now the U.S. can't afford more bad press.
#42
Dave
Dave
Necronic has no idea that a military paycheck is not that big. Civilians make more. A lot more.
And according to NK, THEY PROVOKED US!!!
And according to NK, THEY PROVOKED US!!!
#43
sixpackshaker
sixpackshaker
yeah, those shells splashing in the water makes it OK to kill civilians...
#44
AshburnerX
AshburnerX
The biggest issue is the simple fact that NO ONE wants to rebuild North Korea. It's a fairly sizable second/third-world nation with a large population that has been brainwashed to fear and hate outsiders over the last 50 years. It's going to cost TRILLIONS of dollars to restore it's infrastructure, update it's industries, and make it a more hospitable place to live... money which the US and Japan can't afford to spend, South Korea doesn't have, and China needs to grow it's own industries. This all means that even if the current regime is ousted, NK is still basically fucked because no has the means to fix their problems.Obviously SK has claim to it, but where does the 800 pound gorrilla sit?
#45
Necronic
1) If you just absorb NK into SK it would destroy the SK economy (lowered GDP for instance).
2) Even if you made it a protectorate or somehow removed the potentially damaging effects of blending economies, how could you prevent the desire of NKs to immigrate to SK?
3) I heard a story that the few NKs who had escaped to join society in SK were severely behind in education, and in some cases were developmentally disabled from malnultrition. Not only would you be getting a mass immigration that you couldn't handle immediately, it would be of very poorly educated people that wouldn't integrate into a first world economy.
-----------
The only way I could see it working is by hiring the entire NK population to rebuild their own side of the border, with oversight/funding by SK/JP/US/China. The first step would be in building quality schools and hospitals and getting them staffed by SK personell, which would ensure that the next generation would have the tools to operate in SK/1st world economies.
But that then raises the question of how do you pay them, and moreover do you still allow them to immigrate? You can't afford to pay them a wage that is on par with SK economic standards, but on the other hand if you pay them too little then you are turning them into slaves. If you still allow them to immigrate then there is no guarantee that the workforce will stay, if you don't then you have just liberated an entire country only to enslave them.
Necronic
No I knew that, was making a joke. Clearly my jocular skills are at an all time low. I blame poor parenting.Necronic has no idea that a military paycheck is not that big. Civilians make more. A lot more.[/URL]
You have a point. Although, I think both SK and JP could severely reduce the size/cost of their militaries if NK was out of the picture, which could help pay for a rebuilding. It still does raise a lot of questions about how you could possibly rebuild it though:Ashburner said:The biggest issue is the simple fact that NO ONE wants to rebuild North Korea. It's a fairly sizable second/third-world nation with a large population that has been brainwashed to fear and hate outsiders over the last 50 years. It's going to cost TRILLIONS of dollars to restore it's infrastructure, update it's industries, and make it a more hospitable place to live... money which the US and Japan can't afford to spend, South Korea doesn't have, and China needs to grow it's own industries. This all means that even if the current regime is ousted, NK is still basically fucked because no has the means to fix their problems.
1) If you just absorb NK into SK it would destroy the SK economy (lowered GDP for instance).
2) Even if you made it a protectorate or somehow removed the potentially damaging effects of blending economies, how could you prevent the desire of NKs to immigrate to SK?
3) I heard a story that the few NKs who had escaped to join society in SK were severely behind in education, and in some cases were developmentally disabled from malnultrition. Not only would you be getting a mass immigration that you couldn't handle immediately, it would be of very poorly educated people that wouldn't integrate into a first world economy.
-----------
The only way I could see it working is by hiring the entire NK population to rebuild their own side of the border, with oversight/funding by SK/JP/US/China. The first step would be in building quality schools and hospitals and getting them staffed by SK personell, which would ensure that the next generation would have the tools to operate in SK/1st world economies.
But that then raises the question of how do you pay them, and moreover do you still allow them to immigrate? You can't afford to pay them a wage that is on par with SK economic standards, but on the other hand if you pay them too little then you are turning them into slaves. If you still allow them to immigrate then there is no guarantee that the workforce will stay, if you don't then you have just liberated an entire country only to enslave them.
#46
Espy
Espy
Lets send Tyra Banks over there to fix this problem.
#47
Chibibar
This can cause a problem if lots of people either flee or move to a better place than where they are now. I agree that the SK government would have to institute rebuilding program that can hire local NK or SK could go to NK to rebuilt. It will take LOTS of money and resource.
Chibibar
Well.. if SK absorbs them, wouldn't it technically be a single country? also people should be able to move freely within a country right?You have a point. Although, I think both SK and JP could severely reduce the size/cost of their militaries if NK was out of the picture, which could help pay for a rebuilding. It still does raise a lot of questions about how you could possibly rebuild it though:
1) If you just absorb NK into SK it would destroy the SK economy (lowered GDP for instance).
2) Even if you made it a protectorate or somehow removed the potentially damaging effects of blending economies, how could you prevent the desire of NKs to immigrate to SK?
3) I heard a story that the few NKs who had escaped to join society in SK were severely behind in education, and in some cases were developmentally disabled from malnultrition. Not only would you be getting a mass immigration that you couldn't handle immediately, it would be of very poorly educated people that wouldn't integrate into a first world economy.
-----------
The only way I could see it working is by hiring the entire NK population to rebuild their own side of the border, with oversight/funding by SK/JP/US/China. The first step would be in building quality schools and hospitals and getting them staffed by SK personell, which would ensure that the next generation would have the tools to operate in SK/1st world economies.
But that then raises the question of how do you pay them, and moreover do you still allow them to immigrate? You can't afford to pay them a wage that is on par with SK economic standards, but on the other hand if you pay them too little then you are turning them into slaves. If you still allow them to immigrate then there is no guarantee that the workforce will stay, if you don't then you have just liberated an entire country only to enslave them.
This can cause a problem if lots of people either flee or move to a better place than where they are now. I agree that the SK government would have to institute rebuilding program that can hire local NK or SK could go to NK to rebuilt. It will take LOTS of money and resource.
#48
Dave
Dave
People said much the same thing about rebuilding/restoring East Berlin.
#49
Chibibar
---------- Post added at 11:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:11 AM ----------
Chibibar
heh.. so I guess year after year of doing military exercise in the same place (article said yearly event) NK finally had it and attack huh?Necronic has no idea that a military paycheck is not that big. Civilians make more. A lot more.
And according to NK, THEY PROVOKED US!!!
---------- Post added at 11:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:11 AM ----------
But wasn't East Berlin in better shape? (I suck at history)People said much the same thing about rebuilding/restoring East Berlin.
#50
AshburnerX
AshburnerX
East Germany wasn't nearly as big, nor did it have nearly as many people, nor was the indoctrination as strong. It was also in better shape. I'm pretty sure the US was in a better position to help fund a fledgling capitalistic country as well.People said much the same thing about rebuilding/restoring East Berlin.
#51
Necronic
Necronic
Love this quote from China:
For 'communists' they definitely have big business vagueries down pat.We have taken note of relevant reports and express our concern. Relevant facts need to be verified and we hope both parties make more contributions to the stability of the peninsula," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said.
#52
Chibibar
Chibibar
you know that the new wars are not done via weapons anymore. It is all about business.Love this quote from China:
For 'communists' they definitely have big business vagueries down pat.We have taken note of relevant reports and express our concern. Relevant facts need to be verified and we hope both parties make more contributions to the stability of the peninsula," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said.
#53
strawman
The UK initially rose to power due to their success in the "trade wars" which were primarily economic. Similarly the US rose to power due to early industrialization efforts which quickly surpassed Europe in the same way we lost the steel industry to china because we didn't invest in new machines, techniques, and technologies aggressively enough. The same thing is happening now with computer and information technology, though we have yet to see who the winner is going to be.
Economic wars have long been waged.
strawman
you know that the new wars are not done via weapons anymore. It is all about business.[/QUOTE]Love this quote from China:
For 'communists' they definitely have big business vagueries down pat.We have taken note of relevant reports and express our concern. Relevant facts need to be verified and we hope both parties make more contributions to the stability of the peninsula," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said.
The UK initially rose to power due to their success in the "trade wars" which were primarily economic. Similarly the US rose to power due to early industrialization efforts which quickly surpassed Europe in the same way we lost the steel industry to china because we didn't invest in new machines, techniques, and technologies aggressively enough. The same thing is happening now with computer and information technology, though we have yet to see who the winner is going to be.
Economic wars have long been waged.
#54
Iaculus
And it wasn't losing a quarter-million people per year to starvation.
Iaculus
East Germany wasn't nearly as big, nor did it have nearly as many people, nor was the indoctrination as strong. It was also in better shape. I'm pretty sure the US was in a better position to help fund a fledgling capitalistic country as well.[/QUOTE]People said much the same thing about rebuilding/restoring East Berlin.
And it wasn't losing a quarter-million people per year to starvation.
#55
Soliloquy
Soliloquy
I realize I'm about a week late to the discussion, but my view on the matter is this:
North Korea will get off more or less Scott-Free from this, as they do with, say, everything. They're pushing to see just how far they can get away with, and so far nothing they have done, from creating nukes to sinking ships to shooting at civilians, has caused any more punishment to their own country than a few sanctions.
And things will continue this way until North Korea actually invades some part of the south. And maybe it'll even continue after that.
North Korea will get off more or less Scott-Free from this, as they do with, say, everything. They're pushing to see just how far they can get away with, and so far nothing they have done, from creating nukes to sinking ships to shooting at civilians, has caused any more punishment to their own country than a few sanctions.
And things will continue this way until North Korea actually invades some part of the south. And maybe it'll even continue after that.
#56
Dave
Dave
That's because until China does something nobody will dare to do anything. I don't care how much we spend on our military. If China gets it into their heads that they want to go to war I doubt we could stop them.
#57
Terrik
Terrik
However...
China has signalled its readiness to accept Korean reunification and is privately distancing itself from the North Korean regime, according to leaked US embassy cables that reveal senior Beijing figures regard their official ally as a "spoiled child".
The leaked North Korea dispatches detail how:
• South Korea's vice-foreign minister said he was told by two named senior Chinese officials that they believed Korea should be reunified under Seoul's control, and that this view was gaining ground with the leadership in Beijing.
• China's vice-foreign minister told US officials that Pyongyang was behaving like a "spoiled child" to get Washington's attention in April 2009 by carrying out missile tests.
• A Chinese ambassador warned that North Korean nuclear activity was "a threat to the whole world's security".
• Chinese officials assessed that it could cope with an influx of 300,000 North Koreans in the event of serious instability, according to a representative of an international agency, but might need to use the military to seal the border.
In highly sensitive discussions in February this year, the-then South Korean vice-foreign minister, Chun Yung-woo, told a US ambassador, Kathleen Stephens, that younger generation Chinese Communist party leaders no longer regarded North Korea as a useful or reliable ally and would not risk renewed armed conflict on the peninsula, according to a secret cable to Washington.
Chun, who has since been appointed national security adviser to South Korea's president, said North Korea had already collapsed economically.
Political collapse would ensue once Kim Jong-il died, despite the dictator's efforts to obtain Chinese help and to secure the succession for his son, Kim Jong-un.
"Citing private conversations during previous sessions of the six-party talks , Chun claimed [the two high-level officials] believed Korea should be unified under ROK [South Korea] control," Stephens reported.
"The two officials, Chun said, were ready to 'face the new reality' that the DPRK [North Korea] now had little value to China as a buffer state – a view that, since North Korea's first nuclear test in 2006, had reportedly gained traction among senior PRC [People's Republic of China] leaders. Chun argued that in the event of a North Korean collapse, China would clearly 'not welcome' any US military presence north of the DMZ [demilitarised zone]. Again citing his conversations with [the officials], Chun said the PRC would be comfortable with a reunified Korea controlled by Seoul and anchored to the US in a 'benign alliance' – as long as Korea was not hostile towards China. Tremendous trade and labour-export opportunities for Chinese companies, Chun said, would also help 'salve' PRC concerns about … a reunified Korea.
"Chun dismissed the prospect of a possible PRC military intervention in the event of a DPRK collapse, noting that China's strategic economic interests now lie with the United States, Japan and South Korea – not North Korea."
Chun told Stephens China was unable to persuade Pyongyang to change its self-defeating policies – Beijing had "much less influence than most people believe" – and lacked the will to enforce its views.
A senior Chinese official, speaking off the record, also said China's influence with the North was frequently overestimated. But Chinese public opinion was increasingly critical of the North's behaviour, the official said, and that was reflected in changed government thinking.
Previously hidden tensions between Pyongyang and its only ally were also exposed by China's then vice-foreign minister in a meeting in April 2009 with a US embassy official after North Korea blasted a three-stage rocket over Japan into the Pacific. Pyongyang said its purpose was to send a satellite into orbit but the US, South Korea and Japan saw the launch as a test of long-range missile technology
#58
Soliloquy
Soliloquy
I'm worried that the the leaking of this information will worsen the situation. Kim Jong Il now knows that China is likely going to let N. Korea collapse after his death, and I think that makes him more likely to do something truly crazy before he dies.
Though it is comforting to know that a world war will be avoided.
Though it is comforting to know that a world war will be avoided.
#59
TommiR
TommiR
Interesting. Perhaps China is gauging to see what's on offer if they agree to jettison North Korea.
I wonder if the chinese call for emergency talks is a bit of back-pedalling in response to the Wikileaked documents.
Edit:
I wonder if the chinese call for emergency talks is a bit of back-pedalling in response to the Wikileaked documents.
Edit:
Agreed. I think having this info go public is a loss of face to China. Hopefully it won't result in them taking a more pro-DPRK stance to salvage what influence they have there.I'm worried that the the leaking of this information will worsen the situation.
#60
Espy
Espy
Oh Wikileaks. Thank God they leaked this or else this situation might not have gotten any more f-ed up than it already is.
#61
Kiff
I'm not really sure what wikileaks is attempting to accomplish, honestly. Top Secret, Secret, and Classified files are such for a reason.
Kiff
Oh Wikileaks. Thank God they leaked this or else this situation might not have gotten any more f-ed up than it already is.
I'm not really sure what wikileaks is attempting to accomplish, honestly. Top Secret, Secret, and Classified files are such for a reason.
#62
sixpackshaker
sixpackshaker
I am shocked that Wikileaks has not been hit by a cyber, or actual attack.
Lets hope China pushes for a free and economically allied Korea (allied to both US and China.)
Lets hope China pushes for a free and economically allied Korea (allied to both US and China.)
#63
Dave
Dave
Why can't Wikileaks just get shut down? Why is what they are doing NOT treasonous? If you think that these things are not putting lives in danger then you are either naive or humoring yourself.
Let me give you an example of how this could be damaging and dangerous based on things we've already said in this very thread.
Before Wikileaks:
North Korea rattles their saber but won't directly attack. They know that China will back them up against the US so they know they can push so far. Tension is in the area but nothing substantial.
After Wikileaks:
NK knows China is for the dissolution of the country. They have nothing to lose.
Let me give you an example of how this could be damaging and dangerous based on things we've already said in this very thread.
Before Wikileaks:
North Korea rattles their saber but won't directly attack. They know that China will back them up against the US so they know they can push so far. Tension is in the area but nothing substantial.
After Wikileaks:
NK knows China is for the dissolution of the country. They have nothing to lose.
#64
Shakey
Shakey
They have. It hasn't been incredibly successful, but they are getting hit. WikiLeaks reports another electronic disruption - CNN.comI am shocked that Wikileaks has not been hit by a cyber, or actual attack.
Lets hope China pushes for a free and economically allied Korea (allied to both US and China.)
#65
Kiff
Kiff
There is a reason why they hire mathematics, economic, and logic GENIUSES into government think-tanks in order to decommission and declassify information. While I'm all for open government, the reality is that it's not how the world works in the least bit. The operators of wiki-leaks can idealize all they want. It's dangerous to just throw government secrets out into the open.Why can't Wikileaks just get shut down? Why is what they are doing NOT treasonous? If you think that these things are not putting lives in danger then you are either naive or humoring yourself.
Let me give you an example of how this could be damaging and dangerous based on things we've already said in this very thread.
Before Wikileaks:
North Korea rattles their saber but won't directly attack. They know that China will back them up against the US so they know they can push so far. Tension is in the area but nothing substantial.
After Wikileaks:
NK knows China is for the dissolution of the country. They have nothing to lose.
#66
AshburnerX
I think it's public opinion that really determines what is and isn't treason. There IS a reason most people get angry when they read this stuff and it's not because they think it shouldn't have been released... it's because they had no idea just what people were doing IN THEIR NAME. And honestly... if this group can bring to light even one instance of gross injustice, they are alright in my books. After all, lots of people were upset at the folks who exposed the Watergate Scandal and Nixon's illegal activities too.
AshburnerX
Because it's founder is Australian and it's not treason when you do it to other countries? OK, I know your talking about the people leaking the files, but you walked into that one!Why is what they are doing NOT treasonous?
I think it's public opinion that really determines what is and isn't treason. There IS a reason most people get angry when they read this stuff and it's not because they think it shouldn't have been released... it's because they had no idea just what people were doing IN THEIR NAME. And honestly... if this group can bring to light even one instance of gross injustice, they are alright in my books. After all, lots of people were upset at the folks who exposed the Watergate Scandal and Nixon's illegal activities too.
#67
Dave
I think it's public opinion that really determines what is and isn't treason. There IS a reason most people get angry when they read this stuff and it's not because they think it shouldn't have been released... it's because they had no idea just what people were doing IN THEIR NAME. And honestly... if this group can bring to light even one instance of gross injustice, they are alright in my books. After all, lots of people were upset at the folks who exposed the Watergate Scandal and Nixon's illegal activities too.[/QUOTE]
For some reason I thought they were in the US but that's incorrect. They are hosted in Sweden.
Dave
Because it's founder is Australian and it's not treason when you do it to other countries? OK, I know your talking about the people leaking the files, but you walked into that one!Why is what they are doing NOT treasonous?
I think it's public opinion that really determines what is and isn't treason. There IS a reason most people get angry when they read this stuff and it's not because they think it shouldn't have been released... it's because they had no idea just what people were doing IN THEIR NAME. And honestly... if this group can bring to light even one instance of gross injustice, they are alright in my books. After all, lots of people were upset at the folks who exposed the Watergate Scandal and Nixon's illegal activities too.[/QUOTE]
For some reason I thought they were in the US but that's incorrect. They are hosted in Sweden.
#68
Kiff
I think it's public opinion that really determines what is and isn't treason. There IS a reason most people get angry when they read this stuff and it's not because they think it shouldn't have been released... it's because they had no idea just what people were doing IN THEIR NAME. And honestly... if this group can bring to light even one instance of gross injustice, they are alright in my books. After all, lots of people were upset at the folks who exposed the Watergate Scandal and Nixon's illegal activities too.[/QUOTE]
For some reason I thought they were in the US but that's incorrect. They are hosted in Sweden.[/QUOTE]
The U.S. and U.K. feds are trying to crack down and see if what wikileaks is doing breaks international laws.
Kiff
Because it's founder is Australian and it's not treason when you do it to other countries? OK, I know your talking about the people leaking the files, but you walked into that one!Why is what they are doing NOT treasonous?
I think it's public opinion that really determines what is and isn't treason. There IS a reason most people get angry when they read this stuff and it's not because they think it shouldn't have been released... it's because they had no idea just what people were doing IN THEIR NAME. And honestly... if this group can bring to light even one instance of gross injustice, they are alright in my books. After all, lots of people were upset at the folks who exposed the Watergate Scandal and Nixon's illegal activities too.[/QUOTE]
For some reason I thought they were in the US but that's incorrect. They are hosted in Sweden.[/QUOTE]
The U.S. and U.K. feds are trying to crack down and see if what wikileaks is doing breaks international laws.
#69
Azurephoenix
Azurephoenix
Is it ironic that they are hosted in Sweden due to extremely tight privacy laws yet they are busy exposing secret documents themselves?
#70
Chibibar
NK may decides to just push the button KNOWING that big brother (China) is not going to back him up.
Chibibar
This is what I fear. It is like India and Pakistan. When you push a mouse into a corner, that mouse WILL fight back when it realize it has nothing to lose.Why can't Wikileaks just get shut down? Why is what they are doing NOT treasonous? If you think that these things are not putting lives in danger then you are either naive or humoring yourself.
Let me give you an example of how this could be damaging and dangerous based on things we've already said in this very thread.
Before Wikileaks:
North Korea rattles their saber but won't directly attack. They know that China will back them up against the US so they know they can push so far. Tension is in the area but nothing substantial.
After Wikileaks:
NK knows China is for the dissolution of the country. They have nothing to lose.
NK may decides to just push the button KNOWING that big brother (China) is not going to back him up.
#71
Espy
Espy
#72
Chibibar
I think it's public opinion that really determines what is and isn't treason. There IS a reason most people get angry when they read this stuff and it's not because they think it shouldn't have been released... it's because they had no idea just what people were doing IN THEIR NAME. And honestly... if this group can bring to light even one instance of gross injustice, they are alright in my books. After all, lots of people were upset at the folks who exposed the Watergate Scandal and Nixon's illegal activities too.[/QUOTE]
For some reason I thought they were in the US but that's incorrect. They are hosted in Sweden.[/QUOTE]
My theories is that someone must be feeding them these secrets.... maybe this is what U.S. is trying to "dissolve NK" via this method (YAY for conspiracy theory)
I mean these are national state secrets. Aren't they usually lock up and "eyes only" for the select few?? how are these documents get "leaked" into the internet.
You would think after the last major leak of all the U.S. military secrets/memos/docs leaked, the government would plug the hole and prevent this new leak.
I haven't had the chance to read the new stuff, but from the news, these are suppose to be "top top secret eyes only" level isn't it?
Chibibar
Because it's founder is Australian and it's not treason when you do it to other countries? OK, I know your talking about the people leaking the files, but you walked into that one!Why is what they are doing NOT treasonous?
I think it's public opinion that really determines what is and isn't treason. There IS a reason most people get angry when they read this stuff and it's not because they think it shouldn't have been released... it's because they had no idea just what people were doing IN THEIR NAME. And honestly... if this group can bring to light even one instance of gross injustice, they are alright in my books. After all, lots of people were upset at the folks who exposed the Watergate Scandal and Nixon's illegal activities too.[/QUOTE]
For some reason I thought they were in the US but that's incorrect. They are hosted in Sweden.[/QUOTE]
My theories is that someone must be feeding them these secrets.... maybe this is what U.S. is trying to "dissolve NK" via this method (YAY for conspiracy theory)
I mean these are national state secrets. Aren't they usually lock up and "eyes only" for the select few?? how are these documents get "leaked" into the internet.
You would think after the last major leak of all the U.S. military secrets/memos/docs leaked, the government would plug the hole and prevent this new leak.
I haven't had the chance to read the new stuff, but from the news, these are suppose to be "top top secret eyes only" level isn't it?