By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - North Korea fires artillery at a populated South Korean Island

Cross-X on 23 November 2010
Kasz216 said:
Cross-X said:
Kasz216 said:
Cross-X said:
Kasz216 said:

Heck, even North Korea believes the sub was hit by a torpedo!

They just want to offer a different torpedo to try and prove it wasn't theirs.

Ignoring the fact that we already have north korean torpedos.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/149355.html

"The South took the case to the UN Security Council back in June. The international body condemned the deadly attack, but refused to directly blame the North for the tragedy that left 46 sailors dead in late March"

Why would they not directly blame the North Koreans? Because they might piss off the North even more?

No.  Because the Chinese hold a veto on the Security council.

China does not want North and South Korea to fight... because that means tons of refugees will leave North Korea into China.

You've basically bought into Chinese propaganda that was created because they didn't want South Korea to retaliate because they didn't want the economic burden of refugees.

 

See how Egypt completely sells out Palestine for an example.


I mean, can you even come up with  a plausable other culprit?   Even one?

Exactly and South Korea's Lee got pissed about it because the UN wouldn't outright blame North Korea and that fact that the Chinese were siding with North Korea for obvious reasons.

The only alternative is really America. But once again there's no concrete proof to that and the only thing that leads to this is the hypothesizing from the latest link I gave you.

 

 

You do realize the link you posted last actually suggests 9/11 was an inside job.  This is the level you've sunken too.

The US has about as much reason to blow up a South Korean sub as China does.

No America didn't sink the ship and nor was 9/11 an inside job.



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 23 November 2010
Cross-X said:
Kasz216 said:
Cross-X said:
Kasz216 said:
Cross-X said:
Kasz216 said:
Cross-X said:

The point is also that ever since the Chinese revealed that North Korea wasn't involved, South Korea became silent about the situation until the report was released.

 

Also whether the Chinese are right about a US Mine sinking the Ship isn't the point. Point is the North Korean didn't sink the ship.

 


Again, i've yet to see where they "reveal they weren't involved".

You've literally provided no proof.

The attempts at trying to disprove it have actually greatly contradicted each other.

The "struck a reef" arguement holds no weight.

What reason does North Korea have then for firing a Torpedo at a South Korean ship? What makes that so believable?

Yeah, it's not like North Korea would ever attack South Korea.  I don't know what could ever give me the idea that they would... oh wait, the fact that they have before... and have after.... what with that being what this thread is about.  North Korea having just attacked south Korea.

Even NORTH KOREA admits it was a torpedo attack.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/149355.html


So if not North Korea... who did sink their ship with a torpedo that everyone INCLUDING NORTH KOREA believes was fired?

http://www.japanfocus.org/-Tanaka-Sakai/3361

Read the Comments as well.

Involves hypothesizing and yes I cannot provide concrete proof that the North weren't involved however does not mean North Korea actually sunk the ship.

So... you want me to read the comments section?

Or the article that's both suggesting it was a war games accident, yet somehow they were hiding from north korea to shink the ship and in fact attack North Korean ships? (Which the US wouldn't do....)

I mean, is it any suprise such a theory was conceived by a novelist?

They don't actually use torpedo's in war games you know.  Not even "duds".

 

The only real suggestion would be that the US intentionally sunk the sub.


The obvious question being... "Why the hell would they do that?"

The obvious answer being... "There is none, because it does the exact opposite of what the US wants."

The US doesn't want a war to happen anymore then China.  The only difference is china has more reason to lie.

I mean, just admit it.  You were wrong.

I can admit I'm wrong and I will. Not need to further discuss such matter. You proved your point and I tried but didn't have the concrete proof to back up other than hyphothesis' including myself.


You should note that the hyphothesis' aren't just baseless, but mostly disproven or just outright looney.  Like seriously, your last link suggests that the US sunk it to keep South Korea from reconciling with North Korea... and the proof is in the fact that the US is trying to cover it up just like how they covered up 9/11 was an insidejob.

Despite the fact that the US has been trying to activly reconcile North and South Korea for decades.  Heck, North Korea's biggest problems with the peace talks were they were 6 party... and not just the two Koreas the US last time I checked.  Cause they know the US would give more for stable peace.

There literally are no credible hypothesis left outside of a North Korean job.  Even without proof.  There is literally no other country including south korea itself who would of had anything to gain from it.



MDMAniac on 23 November 2010

Lostplanet22 said:

Any legitimate reason to destroy Capitalists is fine with me. 


You must be a Commy then.



Cross-X on 23 November 2010
Kasz216 said:
Cross-X said:
Kasz216 said:
Cross-X said:
Kasz216 said:
Cross-X said:
Kasz216 said:
Cross-X said:

The point is also that ever since the Chinese revealed that North Korea wasn't involved, South Korea became silent about the situation until the report was released.

 

Also whether the Chinese are right about a US Mine sinking the Ship isn't the point. Point is the North Korean didn't sink the ship.

 


Again, i've yet to see where they "reveal they weren't involved".

You've literally provided no proof.

The attempts at trying to disprove it have actually greatly contradicted each other.

The "struck a reef" arguement holds no weight.

What reason does North Korea have then for firing a Torpedo at a South Korean ship? What makes that so believable?

Yeah, it's not like North Korea would ever attack South Korea.  I don't know what could ever give me the idea that they would... oh wait, the fact that they have before... and have after.... what with that being what this thread is about.  North Korea having just attacked south Korea.

Even NORTH KOREA admits it was a torpedo attack.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/149355.html


So if not North Korea... who did sink their ship with a torpedo that everyone INCLUDING NORTH KOREA believes was fired?

http://www.japanfocus.org/-Tanaka-Sakai/3361

Read the Comments as well.

Involves hypothesizing and yes I cannot provide concrete proof that the North weren't involved however does not mean North Korea actually sunk the ship.

So... you want me to read the comments section?

Or the article that's both suggesting it was a war games accident, yet somehow they were hiding from north korea to shink the ship and in fact attack North Korean ships? (Which the US wouldn't do....)

I mean, is it any suprise such a theory was conceived by a novelist?

They don't actually use torpedo's in war games you know.  Not even "duds".

 

The only real suggestion would be that the US intentionally sunk the sub.


The obvious question being... "Why the hell would they do that?"

The obvious answer being... "There is none, because it does the exact opposite of what the US wants."

The US doesn't want a war to happen anymore then China.  The only difference is china has more reason to lie.

I mean, just admit it.  You were wrong.

I can admit I'm wrong and I will. Not need to further discuss such matter. You proved your point and I tried but didn't have the concrete proof to back up other than hyphothesis' including myself.


You should note that the hyphothesis' aren't just baseless, but mostly disproven or just outright looney.  Like seriously, your last link suggests that the US sunk it to keep South Korea from reconciling with North Korea... and the proof is in the fact that the US is trying to cover it up just like how they covered up 9/11 was an insidejob.

Despite the fact that the US has been trying to activly reconcile North and South Korea for decades.

 

There literally are no credible hypothesis left outside of a North Korean job.

Yes it obviously seemed that I was trying to defend myself with that link but with regards to that link, I didn't neccessarily  agree either with the all the guess work and theories. I just posted to see what you thoughts on the theories that person came up with and some of the comments as well.



Kasz216 on 23 November 2010
Cross-X said:
 

Yes it obviously seemed that I was trying to defend myself with that link but with regards to that link, I didn't neccessarily  agree either with the all the guess work and theories. I just posted to see what you thoughts on the theories that person came up with and some of the comments as well.


I can only think of two countries that would ever want to sink a sub like that and make it look like a North Korean sub.

 

1) China, in attempts to break up reunification talks.  This would only happen after relations had been normalized however and it could be portrayed as a "friendly fire accident."

2) Japan, who more then anyone is upset over North Korea have nukes and would no doubt like to take out their Nuclear power plants.  As Japan is a country that actually does have to worry about North Korean Nukes.

Problem being here... Japan know's china is on the UN securities council, and knows China would veto blame and therefore veto retribution.

 

The problem with it being a conspiracy and not a torpedo is that the US, Australia and Sweeden wouldn't evenwant to cover that up.   The US actually probably wishes it was one of their mines.



Around the Network
Lostplanet22 on 23 November 2010
MDMAniac said:

Lostplanet22 said:

Any legitimate reason to destroy Capitalists is fine with me.


You must be a Commy then.

If you even tried to read my whole post you would have found out I was making a point...

And no I am not a communist or an capitalist, I am one of those people in fact who would be against an 100% communist or Capitatlist country that is probably why I live in Europe and love the more socialist countries in Scandinavia.



 

Cross-X on 23 November 2010
Kasz216 said:
Cross-X said:
 

Yes it obviously seemed that I was trying to defend myself with that link but with regards to that link, I didn't neccessarily  agree either with the all the guess work and theories. I just posted to see what you thoughts on the theories that person came up with and some of the comments as well.


I can only think of two countries that would ever want to sink a sub like that and make it look like a North Korean sub.

 

1) China, in attempts to break up reunification talks.  This would only happen after relations had been normalized however and it could be portrayed as a "friendly fire accident."

2) Japan, who more then anyone is upset over North Korea have nukes and would no doubt like to take out their Nuclear power plants.  As Japan is a country that actually does have to worry about North Korean Nukes.

Problem being here... Japan know's china is on the UN securities council, and knows China would veto blame and therefore veto retribution.

 

The problem with it being a conspiracy and not a torpedo is that the US, Australia and Sweeden wouldn't evenwant to cover that up.   The US actually probably wishes it was one of their mines.

But with regards to China, there hardly hasn't been any major reunification talks between North and South pretty much since 2009. Like I said earlier, Lee completely trashed the relationship and opted talk more about imposing sanctions on North Korea rather than Reunification and the two have been going against each other since. So there isn't much to break up by blowing up the South Korean ship.



mai on 23 November 2010
Kasz216 said:

1) China, in attempts to break up reunification talks.  This would only happen after relations had been normalized however and it could be portrayed as a "friendly fire accident."

Why would they want it in the first place?



Kasz216 on 23 November 2010
Cross-X said:
Kasz216 said:
Cross-X said:
 

Yes it obviously seemed that I was trying to defend myself with that link but with regards to that link, I didn't neccessarily  agree either with the all the guess work and theories. I just posted to see what you thoughts on the theories that person came up with and some of the comments as well.


I can only think of two countries that would ever want to sink a sub like that and make it look like a North Korean sub.

 

1) China, in attempts to break up reunification talks.  This would only happen after relations had been normalized however and it could be portrayed as a "friendly fire accident."

2) Japan, who more then anyone is upset over North Korea have nukes and would no doubt like to take out their Nuclear power plants.  As Japan is a country that actually does have to worry about North Korean Nukes.

Problem being here... Japan know's china is on the UN securities council, and knows China would veto blame and therefore veto retribution.

 

The problem with it being a conspiracy and not a torpedo is that the US, Australia and Sweeden wouldn't evenwant to cover that up.   The US actually probably wishes it was one of their mines.

But with regards to China, there hardly hasn't been any major reunification talks between North and South pretty much since 2009. Like I said earlier, Lee completely trashed the relationship and opted talk more about imposing sanctions on North Korea rather than Reunification and the two have been going against each other since. So there isn't much to break up by blowing up the South Korean ship.


That's exactly why it had to of been North Korea.

The only other two countries who would benefit from it... wouldn't.



Kasz216 on 23 November 2010
mai said:
Kasz216 said:

1) China, in attempts to break up reunification talks.  This would only happen after relations had been normalized however and it could be portrayed as a "friendly fire accident."

Why would they want it in the first place?

Relations to be normalized?  I'd think because they'd want to avoid situations like this where refugees may come in.

I'd think China would want North Korea and South Korea to be friendly, but still have enough mistrust to not want to combine.  Do you disagree?