From the Chosun Ilbo.
Every newspaper, blog, and scroll at the bottom of the TV has already reported on South Korea's announcement on Thursday morning, Korean time, that the North is responsible for the sinking of the Cheonan.
From the JoongAng Ilbo:
A North Korean torpedo was responsible for sinking the South Korean Navy warship Cheonan in the western waters south of the inter-Korean maritime border, South Korea’s Defense Ministry announced today.
North Korea immediately challenged the report and threatened to go to war if the South retaliates or imposes sanctions. The North's highest power organ, the National Defense Commission, chaired by leader Kim Jong-il, also said it intends to send a verification team to South Korea to disprove the probe's findings.
And from the Chosun Ilbo:
A high-ranking government official said the evidence discovered at the scene includes a pair of propellers, propulsion shaft and four rudders of a torpedo. "The propulsion shaft bears the serial number '1' and the Korean letter meaning number." More numbers are believed to have followed those designations, but investigators were apparently unable to decipher the serial number more precisely. One source said the Korean letter meaning number, which was part of the serial number, was engraved in a font commonly seen in North Korean propaganda material.
And from the Wall Street Journal:
The government in Pyongyang responded even before the South Korean news conference Thursday ended, and was typically extreme. "Our army and people will promptly react to any 'punishment' and 'retaliation' and to any 'sanctions' infringing upon our state interests with various forms of tough measures including an all-out war," said a statement attributed to the North's National Defense Commission. North Korea often uses harsh rhetoric and has threatened war in the past, along with "merciless beatings" and even turning South Korea into a "sea of fire."
Be careful what you write about the sinking online, says one ministry via the Korea Times:
The government will take stern measures against people who spread "groundless rumors" about the sunken frigate Cheonan through Internet portals and other mediums.
Maeng Hyung-kyu, minister of public administration and security, held an emergency meeting following the military's announcement on the cause of the Cheonan sinking Thursday and ordered a crackdown on rumors being spread through cyberspace.
More available via a Google search.
To teachers currently there, and to applicants considering it, does this latest act of North Korean aggression influence your decision to stay in, or go to, South Korea?
17 comments:
The South has their dick in their hand. What are they going to say or do? Nothing. Just keep that dick in their hand.
I like the North's recent rant that if the south attacks it, it will be an act of war. Errr. Wait. You can South Korea at will but how dare the South strikes back?
Some magazine put it in interesting perspective: a third world nation has spent the last 20 years pushing around and cajoling and kill the soldiers of one of the world's richest economies... with no end in sight.
I think SK might be doing something right in that it's slowly collecting the evidence, has an international team on its side, it will probably take this to the UN security council (where china sits) and it will demand the UN security council do something. China can hardly expect to be taken seriously as an international power and while it lets a third world nation that sits like a pimple on its ass commit acts of war time and time again.
Does it influence my opinion to go? Not at all. July 26 here I come.
Curious when the nationwide candlelight rallies will be, and if teachers will encourage their students to participate this time around. Or is that only when the United States does something wrong?
A couple of Korean people I have spoken with don't believe that North Korea had anything to do with this, and supposedly there's an internet following that believes so as well. Supposedly, since the elections are coming up, the Korean government is using this to bla bla bla the way George Bush bla bla terrorism bla Afghanistan bla. I couldn't follow their argument very well.
Anyhow, their words, not mine (including the bla blas)
Eat Your Kimchi wrote:
supposedly there's an internet following that believes so as well.
About them Internet followings, see here.
Puffin Watch wrote:
I like the North's recent rant that if the south attacks it, it will be an act of war. Errr. Wait. You can South Korea at will but how dare the South strikes back?
Seriously, I could make a pages-long list of the things that North Korean media has declared would be an act of war. I think me saying this might even be an act of war.
Anyhoo... I think ROK's plan to beef up defense against it happening again right away while carefully and meticulously investigating so that no one could criticize a rush to judgement was the best thing possible: If this act was meant to precipitate a violent response from South Korea, it failed. Instead it has China actually squirming, while the rest of the world is getting ready to slap some serious stuff on Pyongyang and nobody would object to the US and ROK boarding vessels of every ship that comes south of the 38th parallel of the NLL.
Even Japan's leftist PM is completely behind South Korea. It's time to punish their legal and illegal trade and their merchant marine.
Even Japan's leftist PM is completely behind South Korea. It's time to punish their legal and illegal trade and their merchant marine.
"North Korea, you've been a crappy member of the world, you may no longer use the world's oceans."
That would be pretty funny and an interesting response.
It actually involves, I believe, several UN resolutions and the policing of EEZ waters. Stepping up that enforcement would hurt North Korea in a serious and humiliating way, but at a low enough threshold to not invite an attack on a civilian population center.
Going from North Korea's east coast to any waters outside the East Sea/Sea of Japan involves going through one of just a few narrow passages of water.
A recent Hankyoreh article unsurprisingly brings up some questions raised by the findings:
http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/421856.html
A couple interesting incidents where NK killed US soldiers and the US response:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EC-121_shootdown_incident
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axe_Murder_Incident
What of the North's proposal to send representatives from its National Defence Commission to consider the evidence? They do seem quite keen to prove they had no hand in it if they are willing to go that far.
The North's offer to send an investigative team sounds more like a gambit to split opinion in South Korea along ideological lines and the international community along spheres of influence and interest. This offer is a red herring. Remember three things; One, it's doubtful that the North has the technical ability to investigate this in the first place, Second, the DPRK excels at playing two sides against the middle and winning almost every time. Considering the corner they've painted themselves into on this occasion they have nothing to lose. Third, why would anyone invite the prime criminal suspect to assist in an investigation?
First point: In what way? Everything has already been pulled from the water has it not? Surely that would be the most difficult to do on limited resources.
Second point: "Considering the corner they've painted themselves into on this occasion they have nothing to lose."
Of course they have nothing to lose. The DPRK is a small, poor country up against a much larger adversary. If they did indeed sink the Cheonan, they must have done so without caring what the consequences would be. What more hurt can possibly be done to the country anyway? Why even sink the ship in the first place? If one puts faith in the mainstream right-wing media here, there's little to go on except hearsay from some informant that the Chosun Ilbo is always conveniently able to call on.
As for the third point, this is a dispute between countries, not individuals, and part of a larger ideological conflict.
Anyway, I can't see how ignoring a request like this is a good thing. Just the same old same old from Lee Myung Bak.
Act of war? They are still at war.
And it seems that the last two months were used to find evidence pointing to North Korea as if it were originally considered an accident (ie, showing the incomptetence of the ROK Navy) then there would be North Koreans taking part in the investigation.
The world revolves in the opposite direction here. First we have the conclusion then we find evidence to support that conclusion while ignoring contradicting evidence.
First we have the conclusion then we find evidence to support that conclusion while ignoring contradicting evidence.
I wonder what evidence you have to support your claim the international body started with a conclusion first? If you could point to any published documents of their methodology, that would be great.
It seems to me there are two ways one goes about this:
1) Well, of course it was a NK attack, so Swedes, find that evidence!
2) We have several hypotheses on the table. We have this evidence before us. What hypothesis is best supported by the evidence?
then there would be North Koreans taking part in the investigation.
Given an NK attack is one of the hypotheses, I'm not sure why you should allow them. Do you allow an accused person's defense team to be part of the forensic investigation of a murder?
What Puffin Man said.
Anyway, it seems to me that the skeptics are thinking about this as if it's a hypothetical: They're asking, "Why would the North do this?" and offering up a case why the North wouldn't do such a thing.
But what has to be addressed is that it actually happened: Someone did do it, and you need to answer to that reality.
It seems to me when two of your ships have already been attacked by the North (not to mention various other attacks like blowing up a SK airliner, and attacking the Blue House), a ship that explodes in the same part of the sea it's reasonable that the North could be behind this third attack. Add in the North seems to think it came off the loser in the last two attacks. The one before world cup was I believe a clear SK victory. The one during world cup resulted in SK deaths but it would appear the NK took more losses than thought. So it might seem wise to try a third attack with a sub as NK has demonstrated zero skill with surface warfare.
Of course it could be a false flag attack, but then that's ultimately an unfalsifiable hypothesis. If you have positive evidence for it, table it. And articulate what it would take to falsify your belief in a false flag attack. If any evidence that counters it just means spinning a bigger conspiracy then you're removing yourself from the venue of fact, logic, and evidence. You're just anomaly hunting. Anomaly hunting puts you in league with 9/11 truthers and UFO nuts.
Anyway, Joji, I'll await your positive evidence to back your claim. Forgive me if I don't simply take your hand waving and authority on this matter. K?
Post a Comment