Author Topic: North Korean sub likely sunk South Korea ship with torpedo, investigation finds.  (Read 970 times)

Fury

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21026
  • All aboard the USS Leverage
Washington (CNN) -- The president of South Korea has vowed "resolute" measures against North Korea for its alleged attack on a South Korean warship, South Korea's Yonhap News Agency reported Thursday.

A five-country committee announced Thursday morning in Seoul that they had concluded a North Korean submarine fired a torpedo that sunk the South Korea warship in March.

"(We) will take resolute countermeasures against North Korea and make it admit its wrongdoings through strong international cooperation and return to the international community as a responsible member," President Lee Myung-bak told Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in phone talks, according to Lee's office, Yonhap reported.

The warship, the Cheonan, sank after an explosion ripped it in half on March 26 in disputed waters off North Korea. Forty-six sailors were killed or lost in the incident.


North Korea immediately denied the allegation.

The North Korean National Defense Commission said in a statement to official television that its navy did not torpedo the South Korean ship, calling South Korean Lee Myung-bak "a traitor," Yonhap reported.

The conclusion came from a joint investigation committee composed of American, Australian, British and Swedish and South Korean experts.

The United States has been "deeply and actively involved" in the investigation and "strongly supports its conclusions," Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell said.

Since last month, the U.S. military has believed a North Korean torpedo attack was the most likely cause of the explosion, according to a U.S. military official. The military official said at the time that the blast of an underwater explosion sank the ship, but that the explosive device itself did not come in contact with the hull of the South Korean ship.

The United States has a mutual defense treaty with South Korea and Japan to defend "against any aggression," so if a military confrontation develops, the United States would be responsible for defending South Korea, the official said.

"I don't think it will come to that," the official said. "They know they need to have a response, but there is too much at stake for South Korea to have a confrontation on the Korean peninsula. North Korea has nothing to lose, but South Korea is a serious country with a huge economy."

There are military options for South Korea beyond firing missiles, said John Delury, who studies North and South Korea at the Asia Society.

Anything combative would hurt South Korea economically, Delury said, but the country could increase its naval presence along the line that divides South and North Korea in the waters surrounding the countries. He notes that comes with a risk.

"Those actions could trigger a conflict," he noted.

"It will be interesting to see how South Korean President Lee [Myung-bak] characterizes this incident," said Nicholas Szechenyi, deputy director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington-based think tank.

"A military strike of some sort would be risky because the North Korean regime is so unpredictable," he said. "You have to be careful about military retaliation because North Korea has thousands of artillery pieces pointed towards the south and could bombard Seoul very quickly.'"

The senior U.S. official said that South Korea is expected to "come up with a set of responsible measures" in response, such as action at the U.N. Security Council.

Included in those actions could be a resolution condemning the attack, arguing it violates the U.N. charter, Szechenyi said.

"The problem is that China is a permanent member of the council and tends to take a very soft position on North Korea, so it is an open question whether the resolution will pass or not," he said.

The Chinese will face a lot of pressure from the United States, but it already sent a clear message of solidarity with North Korea when it recently rolled out the red carpet to receive North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, Delury said.

The United States and South Korea could also delay the upcoming transfer of operational control of U.S. and Korean military forces from the United States to South Korea. The transfer is due in April 2012.

"It would be more of a political statement to remind North Korea the U.S. is a steadfast ally of South Korea and will come to its defense," Szechenyi said.
Seoul also has limited economic activity with Pyongyang that could be suspended, including a joint industrial complex and some trade.

North Korean involvement in the attack also would throw doubt on the future of six-party nuclear diplomacy talks involving the United States, South Korea, China, Japan and Russia. China has been pushing for another round of talks, but the senior U.S. official said there will be less interest now in a quick return to the negotiations.

"If the North Koreans are going to continue to misbehave, we have to think whether it makes sense to return to the six-party talks," the official said.

On the other hand, the official suggested the incident might give the United States leverage. China, which hosts the talks and has the closest relationship with North Korea, could be encouraged to get a "better resumption point" in the talks, rather than just pick up where they left off, the official said.

Szechenyi suggested South Korea might also ask the United States to put North Korea back on the list of state sponsors of terror, from which it was removed in 2008 as part of the effort to get the country to stop its nuclear program.

Putting the country back on the terror list would trigger a number of tough economic sanctions against North Korea, he said.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who will visit Seoul next week, will talk with the South Korean government about the investigation, Assistant Secretary Campbell said.

Clinton will also visit Japan and China during her trip, and the North Korean issue is likely to be high on the agenda.

Clinton will have "the closest possible consultations with Japan, China and South Korea about the next phase," Campbell said.

On Monday, President Obama spoke on the phone about the investigation with President Lee.

The president reiterated "the strong and unwavering commitment of the United States to the defense and the well-being of its close friend and ally, the Republic of Korea," a White House statement said about the conversation.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/19/south.korea.ship/index.html?hpt=T1

Those commies look to be getting uppity again. Must not be getting enough attention. Sad that these people will have died for nothing.

Eyeball Chambers

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14348
  • Would you hold still? You're making me fuck up...
I really don't want to be drafted into Korean War II
S

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
saw off your trigger finger, silly.

Fury

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21026
  • All aboard the USS Leverage
I really don't want to be drafted into Korean War II

Not like you'll be writing Beethoven's 9th symphony.

Eyeball Chambers

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14348
  • Would you hold still? You're making me fuck up...
saw off your trigger finger, silly.

Done!  Now I'm wondering how I'm going to feel with no index fingers assuming nothing happens between us and Korea...  :P

Not like you'll be writing Beethoven's 9th symphony.

I don't care if that was a shot, it's funny...

 ;D
S

Skeeter

  • Guest
saw off your trigger finger, silly.

But it will be more difficult to post on GetBig.  :o

powerpack

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3166
  • Time to get Buck wild!
How South Korean ship was sunk
Page last updated at 10:44 GMT, Thursday, 20 May 2010 11:44 UK
E-mail this to a friend Printable version By John Sudworth
BBC News, Seoul
 
 Teams have salvaged the wreckage of the Cheonan from the sea bed It might seem odd that it has taken a six-week-long investigation to produce proof of something as catastrophic as a torpedo strike on a warship.

When it finally came, it was in dramatic form.

A few bits of rusty scrap metal, unveiled in front of the assembled reporters at a press conference marking the publication of the investigation report.

Ever since the South Korean warship, the Cheonan, was split in half by an explosion and began sinking in the darkness with the loss of 46 lives, North Korea has been the prime suspect.

But why has it been so difficult to prove?

Stealth is the name of the game in submarine warfare.

It is entirely plausible that a ship, on routine patrol in its own shallow waters, would not pick up any signs of an enemy sub, or even a torpedo fired from one, on its sonar system.

Continue reading the main story One thing seems to be beyond reasonable doubt, the Cheonan was sunk by North Korea, and South Korea has the evidence to prove it
So the fact that North Korea was not caught in the act has meant that the investigation team has had to embark on a painstaking and slow process, attempting to piece together what happened by examining the shattered wreck of the ship, salvaged in two pieces from the sea bed.

It was announced early on that the Cheonan had been hit by an external "non-contact" explosion.

That ruled out a simple collision with a rock, or an internal malfunction of the ship's own weapons systems.

Whatever sank it had exploded underwater, close to the hull of the ship but not in contact with it.

That is exactly the way that many torpedoes are designed to work, because exploding a few feet away from the ship causes a far more devastating blow than a direct hit.

Sea search
 
The trouble for the investigation team was that many sea mines are designed to explode in exactly the same way.

Could the Cheonan have been sunk as the result of an accidental collision with an unexploded mine left over from the Korean War perhaps?

 The Cheonan was lifted from the sea bed in April It was crucial to find direct evidence of the type of weapon involved.

To that end the South Korean navy even designed its own special nets and they have been dragging them, up to eight times a day, across the seabed close to the site of the sinking.

Just five days ago, they found what they were looking for - the propellers, a propulsion motor and a steering section of a torpedo, a perfect match for a model known to be manufactured and exported by North Korea.

The markings, in Korean script, are said to consistent with those on a previously obtained model.

It was these fragments that were put on display at the news conference. They were clear evidence that the weapon used with such devastating effect was a 1.7 ton torpedo with a net explosive weight of 250kg, and apparent proof of North Korea's involvement.

There is other evidence of course.

The investigation report says that a number of small submarines, escorted by a support ship, left a North Korean naval base in the Yellow Sea a few days prior to the attack and returned a few days after it took place.

The investigation itself was given an added air of impartiality by the presence of 24 foreign experts from America, Australia, Britain and Sweden. They are all said to support the conclusions reached.

To what end?
 
The only big question that remains is why?

Using a submarine to launch an unprovoked attack on another country's warship is such an extraordinary act of aggression with such serious potential consequences.

And despite the difficulties in obtaining proof after the event as outlined above, such an action certainly runs a substantial risk of detection.

Why would North Korea have taken such a calculated risk, and for what purpose?

Some observers have suggested that it may have been a simple act of retaliation.

The Cheonan sank close to the disputed sea boundary between North and South Korean territorial waters, along which the two navies have clashed a number of times in the past decade.

The most recent incident, last November, left a North Korean ship in flames, with reported casualties amongst the crew.

But torpedoing a warship would be a very dramatic response indeed.

Another theory suggests that the incident is a worrying indication of the tensions within the North Korean power structure.

Perhaps the order was given by the ageing and ailing North Korean leader to keep the military on side. Or perhaps the military were acting alone.

The speculation will continue, as will the debate about the appropriate response.

But for now, one thing seems to be beyond reasonable doubt, the Cheonan was sunk by North Korea, and South Korea has the evidence to prove it.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Nothing will happen.  South Korea will probably have to apologize and pony up $$$ whemn ZERO demands it. 

Skip8282

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7004
Nothing will happen.  South Korea will probably have to apologize and pony up $$$ whemn ZERO demands it. 


IDK, I would think they would have to do something lest NK become emboldened.  Maybe not a military response.  Perhaps HH6 can weigh in on some possible options.  Personally, I'd love to see that midget assassinated.

Fury

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21026
  • All aboard the USS Leverage

IDK, I would think they would have to do something lest NK become emboldened.  Maybe not a military response.  Perhaps HH6 can weigh in on some possible options.  Personally, I'd love to see that midget assassinated.

They were talking about having the UN condemn or some shit. Because, as we all know, having an organization that enables terrorists and dictators condemning you means a lot these days.  ::)

Skip8282

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7004
They were talking about having the UN condemn or some shit. Because, as we all know, having an organization that enables terrorists and dictators condemning you means a lot these days.  ::)


Ha, leave it to the UN and they'll probably put the goddamn midget on the human rights council.