Ok. I'll give my idea. China takes over their territories - Taiwan and N and S Korea - and the US go back to their isolationist policy. Huh?

Mr James, where I made the assertion that I considered the chapman incident as 'irrelevant' was in the context of assessing 'blame', if I can be so blunt, in the assessment of the current event. The previous incident does not cause me to instantly assume that the current will follow the pattern.

Well I guess, it'd be NK to China and SK to the US, which would not be good for future relations. Especially considering Taiwan. (Maybe US people don't know how potent such words are.)

Well I guess it'd be NK to China and SK to the US, which would not be good for future relations. Especially considering Taiwan. (Maybe US people don't know how potent such words are. Really.)

Still go for the US-go-go-go solution.

Having reread the above, I need a translation from the psychobabble that it appears to be.

Sorry for disjointing the thread. Signing out.

South Korea admitted to firing first. This is yet another frame job. How come nobody condemns South Korea for repeatedly blaming the North for their own provocations?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O33sfN00oDk

They fired *into the ocean* on *their* side of the border in an exercise they've done every year for a number of years.

If you wonder why people don't take you seriously, here's a great example.

Seriously, are you twelve? Or just the latest shell that Diplofool is wearing?

You're the authority on who takes whom seriously?

The media lied about civilians being killed and lied about North Korea firing without provocation. The North Koreans told the South to halt their military drills and the South responded by firing artillery. And these are disputed waters, the Northern Limit Line was imposed by the peninsula by a belligerent party, the UN.

This, in conjunction with the frame-up job with the corvette, and you're claiming I'm 12?

Are you incapable of speaking without insulting people or what?

no, the north did not diplomatically "tell" them to do so. They fired first.

The army warned the South not to fire. The South never listens to northern diplomatic protests anyway. They've long protested southern military exercises in disputed waters. It's not like this is the first time this has happened. The South sank a northern ship in November of last year, nobody said boo. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/southkorea/6536557/North-and-South-Korea-warships-exchange-fire.html

South Korea sank a North Korean merchant vessel in 1999, killing dozens. Nobody said boo.

Lies and more lies.

Russia Today, Putin33? Are you seriously using the RUSSIAN media as a source? The same country that has virtually no press freedoms and kills a journalist every couple of years? Give me a break.

Where is your evidence that the media lied about civilians dying? I can find nothing of the sort. Even if it were the case that civilians had died, which is more likely: the media actively lying on a story that will be exposed within hours, or a mistake due to reporting from a combat zone?

What right does North Korea have to tell the South not to run a military drill in its own territory? You have a funny idea of sovereignty if you think states can make demands like that and then respond with force if they're not met. That's textbook aggression.

Even though the North claims a different maritime border and the ownership of those islands, that doesn't justify attacking. the fact that the line was imposed by the UN is irrelevant since South Korea has exercised control over the islands and waters for going on 60 years. It's the de facto border whether North Korea likes it or not, and according to South Korea the area is firmly under its sovereignty and definitely under its jurisdiction. By your logic Pakistan can shell Indian Kashmir whenever it feels like it, China can shell any of the numerous disputed areas with India (and vice versa), Venezuela can shell half of Guyana, the Philippines can shell Sabah in Malaysia, and even the US could just shell the dozen or so islands that are politely disputed between it and Canada. Think about what kind of a world you would live in if your "ideas" on who's in the wrong here were taken to their logical conclusion.

But you saying that the Cheonan sinking was a frame up takes the cake for silly ideas. What has South Korea gained from the attack? A nervous economy and heightened tensions with a nuclear state. What has North Korea gained? A cemented reputation as a batshit insane regime which will definitely discourage outside interference in the looming succession from Kim Jong Il to his son. Just think about things a bit.

Then again, maybe you are actually are Putin.

I say that because your beliefs show you obviously aren't using the name ironically. You must actually admire that dictator for his methods of governing and ideology rather than just his tendency to shoot whales with crossbows.

I am perfectly capable of engaging in rational debate. Given the idiocy you continue to demonstrate, it is evident that attempting to engage in a reasoned exchange of views is pointless. Therefore, I don't feel an exceptional obligation to do so. When you can demonstrate something approaching an IQ, I will rethink hoe I engage in discourse with you.

Let's take your last post, for example. Although there is plenty to criticize, I'll concentrate on your claim that the South 'lied' about civilian deaths.

Now, you don't really say *how* they're lying, so you either think they hid the initial reports of civilian dead or are now lying that there are dead civilians.

In the case of the first, because people don't have GPS chips stuck up their ass, it's impossible to keep track of everyone. The South Korean government probably had a decent idea of who lived on the island, but it's not like everyone phoned Seoul so they could be checked off a list. Unless you are going to state that a nation should assume someone is dead unless they check in every 24 hours, the only way people can be determined to have passed on is when you're digging through the rubble searching for survivors and find a body.

If, on the other hand, you're going to claim that South Korea is lying about the recovery of the bodies of the dead, you're going to have to cite some evidence of that - and some tinfoil hatter posting a rant on youtube is not 'evidence'. If that is your standard of evidence, they I assume you also believe that the world is run by aliens. Or the Jews. Or the Trilateral Commission. Or all three.

Now, I could refute the rest of your post, but I think I've amply demonstrated why I don't need to. You've yet to demonstrate the ability to even do a cursory attempt to verify what you post before you do so; and since you're not going to bother I fail to see why *I* should.

If you don't want people to assume you're a child then don't act like one.

stratagos +1

It's a bit like talking to a wall that's been reeducated in a gulag.

You people are so damned lazy. All you have is rhetoric and insults, and then summary dismissals of any media according to country of origin, without even clicking on it to see South Korea actually admitting to firing first.

But fine, here's an Associated Press (because there so pro-North Korea) report in which they say South Korea admits to firing first.

"The skirmish began when North Korea warned the South to halt military drills near their sea border, according to South Korean officials. When Seoul refused and began firing artillery into disputed waters — but away from the North Korean shore — the North retaliated by shelling the small island of Yeonpyeong, which houses South Korean military installations and a small civilian population."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101123/ap_on_re_as/as_koreas_clash;_ylt=Apro2..4DeIqySj.uJ8l3ZaROrgF;_ylu=X3oDMTNpbGYzbzhsBGFzc2V0Ay9zL2FwLzIwMTAxMTIzL2FwX29uX3JlX2FzL2FzX2tvcmVhc19jbGFzaARjY29kZQNtcF9lY184XzEwBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMQRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3JpZXMEc2xrA25rb3JlYXRocmVhdA--

That answers none of the points I brought up in my post.

" I can find nothing of the sort. Even if it were the case that civilians had died, which is more likely: the media actively lying on a story that will be exposed within hours, or a mistake due to reporting from a combat zone?"

Considering the media blitz blaming North Korea for the May corvette sinking and all the other nonsense spouted about North Korea that has turned out to be a hoax, I'd say it's a case of the media lying and or being lazy, just like you, and accepting whatever the serial liars in the RoK government say without even bothering to wait for the facts to come out.

Here's the BBC claiming two "civilians" were killed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11827080

Oops, now after everybody's on the brink of war and calling for an aggressive response to the North, they say it's marines who were killed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11833217

So the South Koreans lob a few shells into the water (disputed water), perhaps annoying a few communist fish, and the North Koreans have Carte Blanche to begin firing on civilians? That's rich.

"The South Korean government probably had a decent idea of who lived on the island, but it's not like everyone phoned Seoul so they could be checked off a list. Unless you are going to state that a nation should assume someone is dead unless they check in every 24 hours, the only way people can be determined to have passed on is when you're digging through the rubble searching for survivors and find a body.

If, on the other hand, you're going to claim that South Korea is lying about the recovery of the bodies of the dead, you're going to have to cite some evidence of that - and some tinfoil hatter posting a rant on youtube is not 'evidence'. If that is your standard of evidence, they I assume you also believe that the world is run by aliens. Or the Jews. Or the Trilateral Commission. Or all three."

It's not a lie about the bodies, genius, it's a lie about the civilians vs military. You don't need a "GPS stuck up your ass" to make that determination. Again they just accepted whatever the RoK said about without investigation. So you go off trying to associate me with bizarre conspiracy theories because as usual, you shoot from the hip. Why did they first claim civilians were killed? How did they get that so wrong?

These kind of errors escalate conflicts, it's not some small mistake. It's completely irresponsible.

Regardless the island houses a civilian population. There is always the chance when a government does something that reckless.

"That answers none of the points I brought up in my post."

You lazily whined about the report being from Russia Today. It's reported in the AP and many other places. Your excuses are increasingly pathetic.

The article that you cited said that the South Koreans lobbed afew shells into the ocean duringa training drill. That hardly justifies shelling and occupied island.

"Even though the North claims a different maritime border and the ownership of those islands, that doesn't justify attacking. the fact that the line was imposed by the UN is irrelevant since South Korea has exercised control over the islands and waters for going on 60 years. It's the de facto border whether North Korea likes it or not, and according to South Korea the area is firmly under its sovereignty and definitely under its jurisdiction. By your logic Pakistan can shell Indian Kashmir whenever it feels like it, China can shell any of the numerous disputed areas with India (and vice versa), Venezuela can shell half of Guyana, the Philippines can shell Sabah in Malaysia, and even the US could just shell the dozen or so islands that are politely disputed between it and Canada. Think about what kind of a world you would live in if your "ideas" on who's in the wrong here were taken to their logical conclusion."

Except this argument fails on a number of levels.

1-South Korea has attacked North Korean ships in this disputed area numerous times. So why is it grounds for war in this case, but not in previous acts of South Korean aggression.

2-Formal hostilities have never ended on the Korean peninsula. There is no peace treaty. The maritime boundary of Korea was imposed by the UN flattening Pyongyang and killing over a million people. You cannot expect North Korea to accept this boundary any more than you can expect Palestinians to cease claiming they own the West Bank and Gaza, the Indians to accept Kashmir as Pakistani, the Greeks accept Turkish control of northern Cyprus, or the Somalis accept Ogaden as Ethiopian.

3- If all that mattered was "de facto ownership", then once again, Israel can do whatever the hell it wants in the disputed territories there, ditto India, ditto the Turks in Cyprus,ditto everybody else. It has no responsibility not to refrain from antagonizing the other disputant. That's ridiculous.

4-I'm not saying any of these disputants can fire anytime they want. But if their adversary fires and conducts military exercises despite repeated warnings, you have a right to self-defense. Yes, absolutely. At the very least you cannot be accused of "unprovoked aggression".

Imagine if Russia conducted military exercises off the Kurils near Hokkaido despite repeated Japanese warnings. You people would be calling for incineration of Moscow.

"I'm not saying any of these disputants can fire anytime they want. But if their adversary fires and conducts military exercises despite repeated warnings, you have a right to self-defense. Yes, absolutely. At the very least you cannot be accused of 'unprovoked aggression'"

Yet according to your article the South Koreans weren't firing at anyone. In response the North goes off their rocker and starts killing people. At the very least Pyongyang could use a lesson in appropriate response.

"But you saying that the Cheonan sinking was a frame up takes the cake for silly ideas. What has South Korea gained from the attack? A nervous economy and heightened tensions with a nuclear state. What has North Korea gained? A cemented reputation as a batshit insane regime which will definitely discourage outside interference in the looming succession from Kim Jong Il to his son. Just think about things a bit."

Ah right, South Korea had nothing to gain. Didn't shore up the government's sagging popularity, reinforce US and Japanese support for the South, and alienate the North. Obviously these things didn't benefit the South.

Whereas the North gets threatened sanctions, a stronger US military presence, and more political pressure on China to cut off aid. Yeah, brilliant.

But it's always easy to portray one country as "insane" rather than intelligently consider the facts.

"Imagine if Russia conducted military exercises off the Kurils near Hokkaido despite repeated Japanese warnings. You people would be calling for incineration of Moscow"

No I wouldn't; I'd be calling for a diplomatic resolution to the situation.

When cops hear/see criminals fire shots, do they wait and see where the bullets land before firing back?