• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

actually Cheonan sank by CIA to move Koreans towards waring tension

MM_DURAI

Alfrescian
Loyal
In the seabed of Yellow Sea around 38 deg North there are lots of weapons fired in the past decades of wars and trainings. Even accidentally sunk or faulty and drifted micro submarines of both North & South Koreas had been recovered from the Yellow Sea by both sides.

It is easy enough for CIA to fake a North Korean attack by using a North Korean torpedo fired from e.g. US Submarine to sink Cheonan in order to make Korean peninsular go towards hostile direction for the calculated political and strategic gains wanted needed by White House.

It is easy to frame Pyongyang because everyone will be easily convinced once the South Koreans pointed their finger towards the north. Few will even have any second thoughts.

With China emerging strong and competitive against US economy, the White House really need waring atmosphere and emergencies near PRC to impede their fast economic development & growing of military and diplomatic powers.

A war between North & South Korea is perfect for purpose of throwing heavy burdens and potential damages on PRC. Any way the current South Korean president ex-Daewoo CEO is so stupid and pro-USA, it is easy to stir and manipulate him to go to waring hostility with Kim of Pyongyang.

Firing an old torpedo at Cheonan from under the sea is easy. Too easy for CIA. Sinking is better still.

:wink::rolleyes:
 

flkyflky

Alfrescian
Loyal
a military analyst questions the authencity of the torpedos, because the markings do not resemble DPRK....most like instigated by some organisation/countries who want to create tension around PRCs..:biggrin:

war is definitely coming from the look of it...those schemers have succeded why because people are rash and stupid and filled with self interests like proping up the oil prices.

who will die for such causes? stupid people like you and me...:biggrin:

If you observed the ELECTIONS in South Korea is not far. The last Presidential Election was 2007. It is near due. Parliamentary Election is also.

The stir of this issue is fabricated for political aims and fried up for political purposes.
 

Ramseth

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Could even be China, that'd be the expert at framing North Korea knowing or making most of North Korea's weapons. Why? Start a Korean War again to draw the US Navy away from Taiwan Straits to Korean peninsula, then invade and retake Taiwan.

Hard-to-believe theory? The first Korean War was fanned by China. The Chinese reason about not wanting US troops at Yalu River border was pure crap. US, if they wanted to, could invade China easily from South Korea, Japan or Taiwan anytime.

The real reason for fanning the Korean War was of course Taiwan. China's war objective wasn't to defend 38th Parallel for North Korea or the Yalu River border for itself. It was to fan and backup North Korea in overrunning the entire South Korea. The trouble was that they failed and had to settle back at the 38th Parallel.

What has this got to do with Taiwan? Without South Korea, US Navy would be blockaded out of half of Japan Sea in peacetime routine patrol. China then could consider a serious sudden invasion of Taiwan with realistic chance of winning. US not stupid and China not stupid too. Any China invasion of Taiwan would most probably start at Okinawa, Japan. That's why the control of the entire Korean peninsula is basic requirement. That's why US refusing to leave Okinawa.
 

Sperminator

Alfrescian
Loyal
Dear Ramseth,

Excellent analysis!

Currently, USA is spending something like USD 1 Trillion annually just to maintain it's 100s overseas bases.

Since their Economy could not sustain such a huge liability, they have to cut back on non-strategic theatres of war.

CHINA is definitely a big threat of USA.

And there will be no way, USA would budge from Taiwan, Okinawa, South Korea.

These line of defense is simply too good for USA to corner off China... this by itself is a very strong blockade against China.

Should China be able to regain control of Taiwan...

China would be able to position its NAVY FLEET, and have a strategic advantage over the PACIFIC....

Straight from TAIWAN all the way to the EAST... it's USA...

In between, there are many Pacific Islands, and in WWII, USA had suffered large casulties in taking all the Pacific Islands from Japan... USA have many WAR experience, and the best WAR is WAR that is won without fighting.

From my opinion, I don't think KIM JONG IL is so stupid to incite a war with South Korea, when his country is suffering from massive, hyper-inflation, and his people going hungry... this doesn't sound right.

Knowing pretty well that USA is backing South Korea.

In fact, KIM JONG IL did mention that they are not responsible of the sinking of the ship.

Does this sound the same from IRAQ war? When USA accused Saddam Hussien that IRAQ possess weapons of mass destruction, when there were none?

Saddam Hussien did broadcast to the world that "HE DO NOT HAVE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION"

Even to the day of his hanging, he insist that he do not have...

Scenarios;

If it's USA's CIA that sunk the ship, what's the true objective?

If it's CHINA's Action that sunk the ship, what's the true objective?

I guess we can only speculate... I tend to believe that it's USA that is doing these dirty actions...
 

Sperminator

Alfrescian
Loyal
Dear Teekee,

Thanks for your analysis.

Here are some of my views.

For Central Asia, I my theory is that there is a RESOURCE WAR going around with EUROPE (IMF is very active there), USA (World Bank as well), UN (i don't really know what's UN's true intention), RUSSIA, and of course CHINA.

CHINA's growth rate is need energy to sustain it. And viewing that Petroleum and Natural Gas is going to be scarce in it's own country, they need to make sure that they have continuous supply of these RESOURCES, and stock it up via their massive USD incurred through trade surpluses. ENERGY is a National Security.

Right now, EUROPE is having their own issues in their massive debts crisis, and WAR is definitely out of the question for them.

USA is still a military might.

Positioning of forces in Afganistan, and Pakistan is to build pipelines from CENTRAL ASIA, and siphon off these natural resources, and to be transported back to USA.

Likewise, for IRAQ, the intention is siphoning the OIL, and send it back to USA for stocking up. Besides, since OPEC uses USD to quote OIL, it's as good as USA is having FREE RESOURCES by printing FIAT DOLLARS.

In the history of China, it's always a culture that talks about non-invasion...

However, the western culture is always talking about EMPIRE BUILDING...

For the rest of the nations like Myanmar, Thailand, I really do not know what's going there, care to share more?

For area like Tibet, it's a very convenient location of USA to position their ICBMs legally, when Tibet gains independence, therefore CHINA will NEVER allow TIBET to gain independence.

For Xin Jiang, it's a choke point for the PIPELINES to distribute Petroleum and Natural Gas to inlands of CHINA... losing Xin Jiang means losing the Pipelines.

For Qinghai, it's more of a HAARP in action to cause Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao to come back to China faster, as during that time, Hu Jintao was at Brasilia negotiating with the BRIC +South Africa Nations...

Who could cause earthquake and volcanos?

Remember the period of time, when europe have cancelled over 100,000 flights? Richard Branson says that the airplane engines could take in alot of dust and still fly... this fact itself make me think that the Volcano is indeed the action of HAARP, and the EUROPE nations know, that's why 100,000 flights were cancelled.

HAARP is known to create severe navigation disruption, and the airplanes could be lost, as the fundamental of HAARP is electro-magnetic waves, and with 1 Gigawatt of power shooting to the Ionosphere, it's not difficult to believe that the Navigation Systems of airplanes would be disrupted...

Now the question is why HAARP is triggered?
 

Ramseth

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
In fact, KIM JONG IL did mention that they are not responsible of the sinking of the ship.

I tend to believe him. There's nothing in it for him. If he wanted to, might as well start an all-out war, no need for such hide-and-seek provocation.

Saddam Hussien did broadcast to the world that "HE DO NOT HAVE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION"

He probably wanted but didn't get it anyway. Didn't matter, US and UK simply wanted to invade Iraq and remove him. They were happy with him during 80s when he held down Iran in a long-drawn war. Later, they were pissed off by him for turning against them. That's all. Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were US and UK allies too during Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

If it's USA's CIA that sunk the ship, what's the true objective?

It's possible but very unlikely. US has been quite happy with the status quo and quite diligent maintaining it. No reason to rock it except if it's to lend a pretext to invading North Korea and reunifying Korea. That's also hard to believe and even South Korea won't do that; win or lose, they'd get nuked for sure if they try. That much North Korea has made clear.

If it's CHINA's Action that sunk the ship, what's the true objective?

If it's China, the purpose is of course to fan another Korean War. Whether North or South Korea prevails, China has nothing to lose. But the pressure on US and Taiwan and even Japan would be tremendously advantageous to China in both military and diplomacy weightage. US can't nuke China. In the 1950s war, US threatened when China didn't have nuke, but even so China was too big to nuke effectively. Today, one nuke landing in China would mean the whole of South Korea and Japan becoming post-historic radioactive wastelands. South Korea and Japan know that too.

It's also obvious who taught North Korea how to make nukes.
 

PEE_APE_PEE

Alfrescian
Loyal
Could even be China, that'd be the expert at framing North Korea knowing or making most of North Korea's weapons. Why? Start a Korean War again to draw the US Navy away from Taiwan Straits to Korean peninsula, then invade and retake Taiwan.

Hard-to-believe theory? The first Korean War was fanned by China. The Chinese reason about not wanting US troops at Yalu River border was pure crap. US, if they wanted to, could invade China easily from South Korea, Japan or Taiwan anytime.

The real reason for fanning the Korean War was of course Taiwan. China's war objective wasn't to defend 38th Parallel for North Korea or the Yalu River border for itself. It was to fan and backup North Korea in overrunning the entire South Korea. The trouble was that they failed and had to settle back at the 38th Parallel.

What has this got to do with Taiwan? Without South Korea, US Navy would be blockaded out of half of Japan Sea in peacetime routine patrol. China then could consider a serious sudden invasion of Taiwan with realistic chance of winning. US not stupid and China not stupid too. Any China invasion of Taiwan would most probably start at Okinawa, Japan. That's why the control of the entire Korean peninsula is basic requirement. That's why US refusing to leave Okinawa.


It can be Japs.

Japs need to have the Koreans kept divided, in order to stand a chance to survive. If Korean (north + south) united like East & West Germany Japan stand to LOSE BIG TIME in strategic balance and economic competition and political and diplomatic interest. A united and stronger Korea will threaten Japan and next to itself Japan already feel the most uneasy to be next to PRC & Russia. Japan see Koreans as their DEFAULT suckers in their region. Because 2 divided Koreas are smaller and surely weaker than Japan. A United Korea with nuclear missiles and fearless soldiers from north and financial and industrial power from the south, will match Japan down. South Korea alone already took away much key business interests from Japan, during all these years. Samsung Hyundai LG Daewoo etc took lots of Business from Nissan Toyota Mitsubishi JVC Sony NEC.

How can Japs keep Koreans divided? They sank Cheonan to frame the North Koreans and let the Korean brothers to war each other! BINGO!
 

mee_siam_hum

Alfrescian
Loyal
If you observed the ELECTIONS in South Korea is not far. The last Presidential Election was 2007. It is near due. Parliamentary Election is also.

The stir of this issue is fabricated for political aims and fried up for political purposes.

The Yuri Party of ex-president Kim Dae Zong had a very popular Sun Shine Policy which made good ties and relations with the North Koreans.

They are staging up hostility against North Korea right now to ensure that Yuri Party is not getting votes. The ship might be sabotaged by themselves to sink.
 

AWARENESS

Alfrescian
Loyal
Korea
May 5, 2010

Pyongyang sees US role in Cheonan sinking
By Kim Myong Chol ,The Asia Times


Despite its strong denial of any involvement and expressions of sympathy for lost fellow Koreans, fingers are being pointed at North Korea over the tragic sinking of the 1,200-ton South Korean corvette Cheonan in the West Sea or Yellow Sea on the night of March 26.

"A North Korean torpedo attack was the most likely cause for the sinking of a South Korean warship last month," an unnamed US military official told CNN on April 26. Up to 46 of the ship's 104 sailors were killed in the sinking.

Apparently, North Korea is being set up as the fall guy in an incident that is so mysterious that a Los Angeles Times April 26 story datelined Seoul was headlined, "James Bond Theories Arise in Korean Ship Sinking".

So far, no hard evidence has been produced linking North Korea
to the disaster. However, this has not stopped media and experts from holding the North responsible. The South Korean daily Chosun Ilbo wrote on April 29, "It is difficult to imagine a country other than North Korea launching a torpedo attack against a South Korean warship."

Revealing circumstantial evidence
Is it possible that North Korea carried out the daring act of torpedoing a South Korean corvette participating in a US-South Korean war exercise? The answer is a categorical no. The circumstantial evidence is quite revealing, showing who is the more likely culprit.

Mission impossible
There are four important points that make it clear that a North Korean submarine did not sink the South Korean corvette.

Fact 1.North Korean submarines are not stealthy enough to penetrate heavily guarded South Korean waters at night and remain undetected by the highly touted anti-submarine warfare units of the American and South Korean forces. A North Korean submarine would be unable to outmaneuver an awesome array of high-tech Aegis warships, identify the corvette Cheonan and then slice it in two with a torpedo before escaping unscathed, leaving no trace of its identity.

Fact 2. The sinking took place not in North Korean waters but well inside tightly guarded South Korean waters, where a slow-moving North Korean submarine would have great difficulty operating covertly and safely, unless it was equipped with AIP (air-independent propulsion) technology.

Fact 2: The disaster took place precisely in the waters where what the Pentagon has called "one of the world's largest simulated exercises" was underway. This war exercise, known as "Key Resolve/Foal Eagle" did not end on March 18 as was reported but actually ran from March 18 to April 30.

Fact 3: The Key Resolve/Foal Eagle exercise on the West Sea near the Northern Limit Line (NLL) was aimed at keeping a more watchful eye on North Korea as well as training for the destruction of weapons of mass destruction in the North. It involved scores of shiny, ultra-modern US and South Korean warships equipped with the latest technology.

Among the fleet were four Aegis ships: the USS Shiloh (CG-67), a 9,600-ton Ticonderoga class cruiser, the USS Curtis Wilbur (DDG-54), a 6,800-ton Arleigh Burke class guided-missile destroyer, the USS Lassen, a 9,200-ton Arleigh Burke class guided-missile destroyer and Sejong the Great, a 8,500-ton South Korean guided-missile destroyer.

The four surface ships are the most important assets of the two navies, and have multi-mission platforms capable of conducting various tasks, such as anti-submarine warfare. There is every likelihood that they were supported by nuclear-powered US submarines and a South Korean "Type 214" submarine that uses AIP technology.

The sinking of the Cheonan has made headlines around the world. If indeed it was a US accident, it is an embarrassing indictment of the accuracy of the expensive weapons systems of the US, the world's leading arms exporter. It has also cost the Americans credibility as the South's superpower guardian. Ironically, this has made North Korean-made weapons more attractive on the international market.

The South Koreans and the Americans charging the North Koreans with the sinking of the naval vessel in South Korean waters only highlights the poor performance of their expensive Aegis warships, as well as the futility of the US-South Korean joint war games and the US military presence in Korea.

Fact 4: Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg said on March 30 that he doubted there was North Korean involvement in the sinking: "Obviously the full investigation needs to go forward. But to my knowledge, there's no reason to believe or to be concerned that that may have been the cause."

General Walter Sharp, US Forces Korea (USFK) commander, also saw no link between North Korea and the sinking. In an April 6 press conference, he said: "We, as Combined Forces Command and the ROK [Republic of Korea] Joint Chief of Staff, watch North Korea very closely every single day of the year and we continue to do that right now. And again, as this has been said, we see no unusual activity at this time."

No motivation for vengeance
There have been misplaced reports that the sinking was an act of retaliation for a naval skirmish in November last year "in which the North came off worse", as reported by the Times of London on April 22.

As a North Korean navy officer, Kim Gwang-il, recalled on North Korean television on Armed Forces Day, April 25: "[In that incident] a warship of our navy single-handedly faced up to several enemy warships, to guard the NLL ... [The North's warship] inflicted merciless blows on them in a show of the might of the heroic Korean People's Army (KPA) Navy."

The first duty of the KPA is to prevent war while jealously safeguarding the territorial air, sea and land of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, as this safeguards the peace and security of the Korean Peninsula.

The Korean People's Army Navy would not attack South Korean or American warships unless provoked, since these vessels carry innocent soldiers on the high seas. True, the KPA Navy would be justified in torpedoing a US Aegis ship or a nuclear-powered submarine if one were caught red-handed. But the KPA Navy would not stoop to infringing on South Korean waters to attack a South Korean ship at random, unless it had returned there after committing hostile acts against North Korea.

Friendly fire
Seven facts indicate friendly fire as the most likely cause of the naval disaster. It may be no exaggeration to say that the South Korean president and his military leaders have shed crocodile tears over the dead South Korean sailors.

A torpedo could have been launched from any of the American or South Korean warships or warplanes taking part in the Foal Eagle exercise alongside the hapless Cheonan.

The four Aegis ships and most South Korean warships carry Mark 46 torpedoes, which have improved shallow-water performance for anti-submarine warfare and anti-ship operations.

General Sharp had issued on March 4 a five-point safety message warning that "a single accident can undermine the training benefits you will receive during KR/FE '10. Remain vigilant and engaged."

It appears that Sharp's warning came true, and the US repeated the kind of friendly fire incident for which it is notorious in Iraq and Afghanistan.

After the ship disaster happened on the night of March 26, Sharp promptly cut a visit to Washington to testify at congress to fly back to Seoul, according to the March 30 edition of Kyonggi Ilbo.

President Barack Obama then called his South Korean counterpart on April 1, ostensibly to express condolences over the ship disaster, but also to offer him the privilege of hosting the next nuclear security summit in 2012, as was reported by Joong Ang Ilbo on April 14.

Obama made this offer one week before he and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed a nuclear arms reduction treaty in Prague, and two weeks before the 2010 nuclear security summit took place in Washington.

When Obama announced his decision to select South Korea as host of the next major nuclear security summit in 2012, Agence France-Presse reported that "the announcement surprised many". Most observers presumed that Russia would lead the next meeting.

The most plausible explanation is that Obama offered South Korea the summit due to an overriding need to mollify otherwise possible South Korean resentment at the friendly fire sinking, while covering up the US's involvement in a friendly fire torpedo attack. Most probably, Sharp reported to Obama the potentially disastrous consequences of the public discovering the true nature of the incident. This would likely lead to a massive wave of anti-American sentiment and put Obama and South Korean President Lee Myung-bak in an extremely awkward situation.

Obama must have felt relieved at the South Korean president's ready acceptance of his offer of compensation. One article carried in the April 14 edition of Joong Ang Ilbo was headlined "Veep Biden Says LMB [Lee Myung-bak] Is Obama's Favorite Man". The comment was made by Biden on April 12, one day before the nuclear summit.

Sharp unexpectedly attended the April 3 funeral of a South Korean rescue diver, Han Ju Ho, who died while participating in the search for missing sailors from the corvette. Sharp was seen consoling the bereaved family in an unprecedented expression of sympathy.

Joong Ang Ilbo reported on April 27 that the South Korean government would deal strictly with rumors rampant on the Internet that a collision with a US nuclear submarine had caused the sinking.

The best solution is for the South Korean government team investigating the ship disaster to find an old mine responsible. It is easy to falsely accuse North Korea, but public pressure will mount for military reprisals against North Korea, which will promptly react by turning Seoul into a sea of fire in less than five minutes. North Korea would not flinch from using nuclear arms in the event of US involvement.

[Kim Myong Chol is author of a number of books and papers in Korean, Japanese and English on North Korea, including Kim Jong-il's Strategy for Reunification. He has a PhD from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's Academy of Social Sciences and is often called an "unofficial" spokesman of Kim Jong-il and North Korea. ]
 

Einfield

Alfrescian
Loyal
Fact 1 :
So call Facts and evidence can be fabricated. Whatever is presented is what some interested party want the international community to believe.

Fact 2:
Mad man Kim is the crazy one who often boast about his ability to inflict huge losses to the South, at least that is what he try to Brainwash his people, if he sink this warship, he will be boasting it right in your face, this time he actually denies it.

Fact 3:

Don't forget how US fabricated facts, figures and Intel "Evidence" to the UN, presented by the very credible Colin Powell at the UN security council, which lead to the invasion of Iraq and Hanging of Saddam, Today, they say maybe CIA mislead them but who cares or seek accountability? Bush Jr Hang the bugger that his daddy hate, case close. Now we are seeing US high profile politicians all putting pressure and legitimizing the "Findings" and calling for blood, it's starting all over again.

Fact 4:

China cannot afford a war now or any disruption to their economic growth, Taiwan under Ma is going to sign EGFA with them and that have a stabilizing effect for both countries, if China want to retake Taiwan by force, it will do so when Taiwan seek independence.

BUT if China economy is on the blink of collapse and the communist party is having difficulty holding on to power, then they will start a war just to divert the attention and flame nationalism to stay in power, But that is not the situation now.

Fact 5:

US politicians always view China as a Major Thread, Economically, Militarily and future competition for resources and influence in Central Asia oil rich nations, if china is thrown into chaos or engage in arms race, it is good for US economy, especially Defense industries, Don't forget US pull out of the Great Depression in the 30s through WW2.


Fact 6:

A unified Korea is bad for Japan, If South prevail, it will become a huge economic threat, if North prevail, it will be a Military menace, either way it is not to Japan's interest.

Fact 7:

Future warfare is not about naval blockade, having US bases in Okinawa or S Korea is of no significant if China is determine to take on the US, Nuke warhead will be launch at the military base and at US homeland all at the same time, the only way to win when 2 super power clash, is preemptive strike, empty your Nuke Arsenal at one go, when the dust settle, the last man standing is the winner.

It is so devastating, it actually have a deterrent effect because no one knows how it will end, there is a high possibility that there's no winner at all.
 

yellowarse

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
http://www.rttnews.com/ArticleView.aspx?id=1328583

Russian Probe Sees No N Korea Hand In Cheonan Sinking
6/9/2010 2:13 AM ET
(RTTNews) - In what could be a morale-booster for North Korea in its stand-off with South Korea--and, by extension, the U.S.,-- Russian naval experts who inquired into the sinking of a South Korean warship March 26, found unconvincing the arguments put forward by a four-nation team of investigators, blaming Pyongyang for the tragedy, an Interfax-AVN news wire report, quoting an anonymous Russian Navy source, said Tuesday.

The revelation followed the return Monday of a team of four Russian Navy submarine and torpedo experts to Moscow after making an independent assessment of the March 26 sinking of the 1,200-ton South Korean Navy corvette "Cheonan" near the disputed Yellow Sea border, in which 46 sailors drowned.

The report said the experts had not found convincing evidence that a heavy torpedo fired by a North Korean submarine sank the South Korean vessel.

"After examining the available evidence and the ship wreckage, Russian experts came to the conclusion that a number of arguments adduced by the international investigation team in favor of the DPRK's (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) involvement in the corvette-sinking were not weighty enough," the Russian Navy source said.

A report by a team of investigators from Australia, Britain, Sweden and the United States, who pieced together portions of the South Korean warship's wreckage, and published last month, said there was overwhelming evidence that a North Korean submarine fired a heavy torpedo to sink the South Korean vessel.

The report concludes: "The evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that the torpedo was fired by a North Korean submarine. There is no other plausible explanation."

However, there was no official confirmation from Moscow on its naval experts' findings with Russia's Armed Forces Chief of Staff Marshal Nikolai Makarov saying that only the Foreign Ministry would make an official statement on the issue after the experts presented their report.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev accepted Seoul's offer to send specialists at May-end as he believed it was important to be sure of the cause of the sinking of the warship before taking action.

Immediately after the incident, Russia called on all sides to show restraint amid fears that a further escalation of tensions on the Korean peninsula could develop into a military crisis.

by RTT Staff Writer

For comments and feedback: contact [email protected]
 

yellowarse

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
By Kim Myong Choi

Did the U.S. sink the Cheonan?

Despite its strong denial of any involvement and expressions of sympathy for lost fellow Koreans, fingers are being pointed at North Korea over the tragic sinking of the 1,200-ton South Korean corvette Cheonan in the West Sea or Yellow Sea on the night of March 26.

"A North Korean torpedo attack was the most likely cause for the sinking of a South Korean warship last month," an unnamed US military official told CNN on April 26. Up to 46 of the ship's 104 sailors were killed in the sinking.

Apparently, North Korea is being set up as the fall guy in an incident that is so mysterious that a Los Angeles Times April 26 story datelined Seoul was headlined, "James Bond Theories Arise in Korean Ship Sinking".

So far, no hard evidence has been produced linking North Korea to the disaster. However, this has not stopped media and experts from holding the North responsible. The South Korean daily Chosun Ilbo wrote on April 29, "It is difficult to imagine a country other than North Korea launching a torpedo attack against a South Korean warship."

Revealing circumstantial evidence
Is it possible that North Korea carried out the daring act of torpedoing a South Korean corvette participating in a US-South Korean war exercise? The answer is a categorical no. The circumstantial evidence is quite revealing, showing who is the more likely culprit.

Mission impossible
There are four important points that make it clear that a North Korean submarine did not sink the South Korean corvette.

Fact 1.North Korean submarines are not stealthy enough to penetrate heavily guarded South Korean waters at night and remain undetected by the highly touted anti-submarine warfare units of the American and South Korean forces. A North Korean submarine would be unable to outmaneuver an awesome array of high-tech Aegis warships, identify the corvette Cheonan and then slice it in two with a torpedo before escaping unscathed, leaving no trace of its identity.

Fact 2. The sinking took place not in North Korean waters but well inside tightly guarded South Korean waters, where a slow-moving North Korean submarine would have great difficulty operating covertly and safely, unless it was equipped with AIP (air-independent propulsion) technology.

Fact 2: The disaster took place precisely in the waters where what the Pentagon has called "one of the world's largest simulated exercises" was underway. This war exercise, known as "Key Resolve/Foal Eagle" did not end on March 18 as was reported but actually ran from March 18 to April 30.

Fact 3: The Key Resolve/Foal Eagle exercise on the West Sea near the Northern Limit Line (NLL) was aimed at keeping a more watchful eye on North Korea as well as training for the destruction of weapons of mass destruction in the North. It involved scores of shiny, ultra-modern US and South Korean warships equipped with the latest technology.

Among the fleet were four Aegis ships: the USS Shiloh (CG-67), a 9,600-ton Ticonderoga class cruiser, the USS Curtis Wilbur (DDG-54), a 6,800-ton Arleigh Burke class guided-missile destroyer, the USS Lassen, a 9,200-ton Arleigh Burke class guided-missile destroyer and Sejong the Great, a 8,500-ton South Korean guided-missile destroyer.

The four surface ships are the most important assets of the two navies, and have multi-mission platforms capable of conducting various tasks, such as anti-submarine warfare. There is every likelihood that they were supported by nuclear-powered US submarines and a South Korean "Type 214" submarine that uses AIP technology.

The sinking of the Cheonan has made headlines around the world. If indeed it was a US accident, it is an embarrassing indictment of the accuracy of the expensive weapons systems of the US, the world's leading arms exporter. It has also cost the Americans credibility as the South's superpower guardian. Ironically, this has made North Korean-made weapons more attractive on the international market.

The South Koreans and the Americans charging the North Koreans with the sinking of the naval vessel in South Korean waters only highlights the poor performance of their expensive Aegis warships, as well as the futility of the US-South Korean joint war games and the US military presence in Korea.

Fact 4: Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg said on March 30 that he doubted there was North Korean involvement in the sinking: "Obviously the full investigation needs to go forward. But to my knowledge, there's no reason to believe or to be concerned that that may have been the cause."

General Walter Sharp, US Forces Korea (USFK) commander, also saw no link between North Korea and the sinking. In an April 6 press conference, he said: "We, as Combined Forces Command and the ROK Republic of Korea Joint Chief of Staff, watch North Korea very closely every single day of the year and we continue to do that right now. And again, as this has been said, we see no unusual activity at this time."

No motivation for vengeance
There have been misplaced reports that the sinking was an act of retaliation for a naval skirmish in November last year "in which the North came off worse", as reported by the Times of London on April 22.

As a North Korean navy officer, Kim Gwang-il, recalled on North Korean television on Armed Forces Day, April 25: "In that incident a warship of our navy single-handedly faced up to several enemy warships, to guard the NLL ... The North's warship inflicted merciless blows on them in a show of the might of the heroic Korean People's Army (KPA) Navy."

The first duty of the KPA is to prevent war while jealously safeguarding the territorial air, sea and land of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, as this safeguards the peace and security of the Korean Peninsula.

The Korean People's Army Navy would not attack South Korean or American warships unless provoked, since these vessels carry innocent soldiers on the high seas. True, the KPA Navy would be justified in torpedoing a US Aegis ship or a nuclear-powered submarine if one were caught red-handed. But the KPA Navy would not stoop to infringing on South Korean waters to attack a South Korean ship at random, unless it had returned there after committing hostile acts against North Korea.

Friendly fire
Seven facts indicate friendly fire as the most likely cause of the naval disaster. It may be no exaggeration to say that the South Korean president and his military leaders have shed crocodile tears over the dead South Korean sailors.

A torpedo could have been launched from any of the American or South Korean warships or warplanes taking part in the Foal Eagle exercise alongside the hapless Cheonan.

The four Aegis ships and most South Korean warships carry Mark 46 torpedoes, which have improved shallow-water performance for anti-submarine warfare and anti-ship operations.

General Sharp had issued on March 4 a five-point safety message warning that "a single accident can undermine the training benefits you will receive during KR/FE '10. Remain vigilant and engaged."

It appears that Sharp's warning came true, and the US repeated the kind of friendly fire incident for which it is notorious in Iraq and Afghanistan.

After the ship disaster happened on the night of March 26, Sharp promptly cut a visit to Washington to testify at congress to fly back to Seoul, according to the March 30 edition of Kyonggi Ilbo.

President Barack Obama then called his South Korean counterpart on April 1, ostensibly to express condolences over the ship disaster, but also to offer him the privilege of hosting the next nuclear security summit in 2012, as was reported by Joong Ang Ilbo on April 14.

Obama made this offer one week before he and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed a nuclear arms reduction treaty in Prague, and two weeks before the 2010 nuclear security summit took place in Washington.

When Obama announced his decision to select South Korea as host of the next major nuclear security summit in 2012, Agence France-Presse reported that "the announcement surprised many". Most observers presumed that Russia would lead the next meeting.

The most plausible explanation is that Obama offered South Korea the summit due to an overriding need to mollify otherwise possible South Korean resentment at the friendly fire sinking, while covering up the US's involvement in a friendly fire torpedo attack. Most probably, Sharp reported to Obama the potentially disastrous consequences of the public discovering the true nature of the incident. This would likely lead to a massive wave of anti-American sentiment and put Obama and South Korean President Lee Myung-bak in an extremely awkward situation.

Obama must have felt relieved at the South Korean president's ready acceptance of his offer of compensation. One article carried in the April 14 edition of Joong Ang Ilbo was headlined "Veep Biden Says LMB Lee Myung-bak Is Obama's Favorite Man". The comment was made by Biden on April 12, one day before the nuclear summit.

Sharp unexpectedly attended the April 3 funeral of a South Korean rescue diver, Han Ju Ho, who died while participating in the search for missing sailors from the corvette. Sharp was seen consoling the bereaved family in an unprecedented expression of sympathy.

Joong Ang Ilbo reported on April 27 that the South Korean government would deal strictly with rumors rampant on the Internet that a collision with a US nuclear submarine had caused the sinking.

The best solution is for the South Korean government team investigating the ship disaster to find an old mine responsible. It is easy to falsely accuse North Korea, but public pressure will mount for military reprisals against North Korea, which will promptly react by turning Seoul into a sea of fire in less than five minutes. North Korea would not flinch from using nuclear arms in the event of US involvement.

Kim Myong Chol is author of a number of books and papers in Korean, Japanese and English on North Korea, including Kim Jong-il's Strategy for Reunification. He has a PhD from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's Academy of Social Sciences and is often called an "unofficial" spokesman of Kim Jong-il and North Korea.
 

Sideswipe

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
The major powers might have their proxies fight out the wars again like the past.

Soviet Union and Japan had secret treaties before 1910 to jointly annex Korea peninsula with their dividing line at 38th parallel. August 1945, US and Soviet agreed to divide Korea at 38th parallel. It was Marshall who decided for US the dividing line which was chosen by Russian foreign office nearly fifty years ago.
many historians have asked why not the 37th or 39h parallel? why had it to be the 38th? why Marshall restored Russia's pre-1904 claims on North Korea.
 

longbow

Alfrescian
Loyal
I do not think China wants a war. It wants status Quo. To have that tension at DMZ. Always a huge bargaining chip against the US. War would mean destruction of NK and when all is done, US troops might be stationed right next to Yalu River in front of China. Not something that they want!

War may also drive millions of refugees into China creating a headache.

To understand Chinese aims - look at economic growth, better living standards for all. That is what Beijing wants. War is bad for business.

Danger to China is not external. It is from within. There are huge inbalances in wealth, large population over large area. Furthermore communications infra is modern. So easy to start some racial/religious fire which maybe hard to put out. Beijing has been shoving money into the poorer regions.

Was just in Taiwan last month. Country is economically unified with China with much of its industrial base in China. Do not see likelihood of serious conflict. As it is countries in region are trying to plug into China's economy. Japan's largest export (not import!) partner is China.

Tibet has nothing to do with ICBM. Tibet controls much of the water source for China and further south, India. China's control of Tibet means it could turn off the water for India if it should choose to do so - very strategic.

No idea who sank Cheonan.
 
Top