You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: South Korea warns North of 'enormous retaliation' after attack
South Korea warned today that it will unleash "enormous retaliation" if North Korea launches fresh attacks against its territory.
North Korean troops bombarded Yeonpyeong, an island in disputed waters, with dozens of rounds of artillery earlier today, reportedly killing two South Korean soldiers and injuring around 20 people.
Seoul placed its military on its highest non-wartime alert level, scrambling F-16 fighter jets to the western sea and returning fire, officials said. It warned that the attack was a violation of the armistice that ended the Korean war in 1953.
The South Korean president, Lee Myung-bak, who convened an emergency security meeting shortly after the initial bombardment, said an "indiscriminate attack on civilians" could never be tolerated.
"Enormous retaliation should be made, to the extent that [North Korea] cannot make provocations again," he said.
The assault is one of the most serious in the decades since the war, given the involvement of civilians, although previous firefights around the disputed maritime border have resulted in a higher number of casualties.
In a short statement carried by the official KCNA news agency, the North said the South had fired first – presumably in reference to a live-fire drill being carried out as part of annual military exercises. It said it had repeatedly warned the South not to go ahead with the drill.
Analysts said that despite the seriousness of the clash, the situation was unlikely to escalate dramatically given the high stakes involved for all parties.
It comes amid growing international concern over reports that North Korea has a new uranium enrichment facility.
Lee ordered officials to "sternly respond" to North Korea's action but stressed that they had to make sure the "situation would not escalate," an aide said.
Yeonpyeong is only around 75 miles west of the South Korean capital.
Broadcasters showed smoke rising from houses in the attack, and Seoul's YTN television said residents had been evacuated to bunkers after firing broke out, at around 2.30pm. It is thought around 1,200 people live on the island.
Lee Chun-ok, a 54-year-old island resident, said she had been watching TV when she heard sounds of artillery, and a wall and door in her home suddenly collapsed.
"I thought I would die," said Lee, who had been evacuated to the port city of Incheon. "I was really, really terrified, and I'm still terrified."
The White House condemned the attack as "belligerent", adding: "The United States is firmly committed to the defence of our ally … and to the maintenance of regional peace and stability."
In London, William Hague urged Pyongyang to stop further "unprovoked" attacks.
Russia's foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, said there was a "colossal danger" of escalation, Reuters reported. He added: "Those who started this bear a huge responsibility."
China, North Korea's main ally, steered clear of assigning blame. A foreign ministry spokesman, Hong Lei, urged both sides to "do more to contribute to peace and stability in the region".
An unofficial spokesman for North Korea told the Guardian that firing artillery was a "totally justifiable act of self-defence" in response to the sea drills and warned that nuclear war could follow "at any point" unless the exercises stop. Pyongyang has repeatedly issued such threats in the past.
"If the South continues its dangerous behaviour, Seoul will be the next target. It will be a sea of fire," said Kim Myong-chol, executive director of the Centre for Korean-American Peace.
Han Seung-joo, a former South Korean foreign minister, said the "reckless and provocative" act suggested desperation on North Korea's part, and suggested it may be meant to send a message to a domestic audience rather than to the outside world, boosting solidarity and "show[ing] that they can get away with this".
Professor Chu Shulong, an expert on international security at Beijing's Tsinghua University, said it was too early to be sure what had happened.
But he added: "Over the years, North Korea has always been a place that likes to make trouble to get attention from the international community. After they get attention, they can start a new round of negotiations and get supplies from other countries. This is what they have been doing during the past 20 years."
The disputed maritime border has long been a source of friction and has seen repeated skirmishes – in some cases fatal – in recent years.
Relations between the two Koreas have remained especially tense since the South's Cheonan warship sank in March, killing 46 sailors. An international investigation led by Seoul blamed a North Korean torpedo but Pyongyang denies any involvement.
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: South Korea warns North of 'enormous retaliation' after attack
This sort of thing gets me scared for ww3.
Re: South Korea warns North of 'enormous retaliation' after attack
It was bound to happen.
U.S. is stretched too thin right now though. If they want to do Korea II, they need to get out of Afghanistan.
Not necessarily. What they need to do is just kick so much ass before NK can even figure out what happened to them that there is no retaliation. We are too cautious, and as a result end up fucking our military and putting them into difficult situations long term. Apparently we think it's better to invade nicely. I've always believed you beat the crap out of them before they have a chance to respond and limit or destroy their ability to respond.
Re: South Korea warns North of 'enormous retaliation' after attack
Yeah, but that'll never happen with a "feel good" Democrat in office, even if he did say the U.S. would do what it should to defend SK.
Nor should it ever happen. These situations aren't jokes that governments can take lightly. As much as some would love to see the US play world defender and ride their horse right through the center of NK and destroy it there's consequences for doing shit like that. I wonder if China just stands by and watches that happen? Not likely. then you've got a real fucking problem on your hands.
Re: South Korea warns North of 'enormous retaliation' after attack
Actually Bono's right, and that's exactly where the problem lies. This is a throwback situation of democracy vs. communism. This battle could be the U.S. vs. China if both decide to get involved. If that happens, that's gonna an epic showdown that nobody will benefit from.
Re: South Korea warns North of 'enormous retaliation' after attack
I'm operating under the assumption that IF it were to actually happen, the US would have cleared it with China first. China would be unlikely to allow it, so I doubt that it ever happens. I'm talking strictly hypothetically.
Re: South Korea warns North of 'enormous retaliation' after attack
I'm operating under the assumption that IF it were to actually happen, the US would have cleared it with China first. China would be unlikely to allow it, so I doubt that it ever happens. I'm talking strictly hypothetically.
We don't have to clear it with China first. China may virtually own us, but our economies are so tied together that then bringing on an economic collapse for the US would do the same to them.
What the Chinese wont tolerate is a permanent US occupation of the Korean peninsula. It would give us a massive base inches from Chinese soil and they will not let that happen. It undermines the SCO and in the event of that organization ever uniting for a conflict, having a massive US presence in a liberated Korea would be a huge obstacle for them.
Russia is really the only major power we need backing from. We are surrounding them in the west with an expanding NATO, and they sure as hell wont want us surrounding them in the east. However, they have shown support in the past for our stance on Korea, and I think they will in the event of war as well. Concessions will have to be made though, likely our military presence in Europe being minimized and in the event of a coming conflict with Korea, let the EU fend for itself. The backing of Russia will be worth the trade off. EU thinks its more than a paper tiger so let them wake up from that fantasy. They hate us anyways so start putting your own men and women on your front lines and pick up the massive price tag yourself for your defense.
We don't need NATO and/or EU and we don't need China. Main reason to have China involved in a diplomatic role is to prevent any friendly fire incidents igniting a bigger war. We may also have to make some concessions to China as well, specifically if any of this goes to the UN at some point. We may have to let them walk into Taiwan at the time of their choosing. Again, another trade off we can live with. In previous decades, no. Now? Taiwan is worth risking as long as we can finally put an end to this Korean mess.
Its gonna have to make the 1991 and 2003 Iraq "shock and awe" look like a Mayberry picnic. NK should be bombed for months relentlessly with no end in sight. Initial world reaction to it means nothing. Stay the course. Once the smoke clears, turn it into a peacekeeping/humanitarian mission without ever having a major US ground invasion. I know that not using US ground troops is easier said than done, but the fewer risked, the better.
This needs to be a surprise attack as well which could save some lives at the DMZ. Our troops currently stationed there are a trip wire and we gotta use a strategy that increases their chance for survival. Nukes are likely to be used in the conflict at some point anyways, and if I was Obama, tactical nukes would be used near the DMZ in the opening minutes of the war. It accomplishes two things:
Saves American lives
Shows the rest of the world we're not there to fuck around and if you have something to say about it(or feel like doing something about it), same thing might happen to you. The US is spread thin and this will likely be a massive air strike like in 91 with Iraq, piss us off too much while we're spread thin and fighting NK, we may simply use nukes on you and then ask questions later.
Obama may come off as a pussy, but I can assure you that you will not want to fuck with us when this goes down. Its why world leaders are currently begging for restraint during the crisis. They know what's coming if Obama gives the go ahead to start raining shit storms on parades.
Everyone has known that North Korea would eventually have to be dealt with. Its been known for decades. Looks like that moment has arrived.
The Cold War still exists on that peninsula, and to use the words of Reagan, it's time to tear down that wall.
If/when this occurs and we accomplish our goals, it does not need to be a long occupation. While no war happened in that situation, a perfect model would be the reunification of Germany. Destroy that DMZ, the NK leadership, and hundreds of thousands of their ground troops and let both Koreas finally be together as one and become what they should have already been decades ago.
Taking out the NK regime will immediately bring Iran to the negotiating table and all their rhetoric will cease. Iran has much more to lose than North Korea, and will be the final country left of the infamous "Axis of Evil" not dealt with yet.
A Korean war could potentially change how the US conducts such operations. We seem more inclined to operate in regions with tons of resources. Intervening in hot spots where that is not a goal would certainly raise our standing on the global stage and could even alter our foreign policy in the coming decades.
