North Korea severs all ties with South Korea

Status
Not open for further replies.
kokonut said:
Calm down, grasshopper. I am not hoping for war. I'm saying the stage is quickly being set up for a war.
Click to expand...

Me too, it was a biggest serious due NK has nuclear weapon.

I don't want Samsung, Kia, LG, Hyundai and other Korean companies to be gone if Seoul is wipe off from map.
 
Jiro said:
yes. My parents grew up with this kind of same ole' NK's empty threats for decades. nothing new.
Click to expand...
N. Korea torpedoed a S. Korea ship and killed 46 sailors--that's not an empty threat--that's aggressive action.
 
North Korea torpedoed a South Korea ship in N. K. territory zone?
 
Reba said:
N. Korea torpedoed a S. Korea ship and killed 46 sailors--that's not an empty threat--that's aggressive action.
Click to expand...

Yep, S. Korea has'em dead to rights to fight back too. But noooo, the US has to step in and say, "Uh, uh!" :nono:

Yiz
 
It doesn't help that both countries are well-known to scapegoat its own mistakes or its own military exercises on each others.
 
Last edited:
Foxrac said:
Me too, it was a biggest serious due NK has nuclear weapon.

I don't want Samsung, Kia, LG, Hyundai and other Korean companies to be gone if Seoul is wipe off from map.
Click to expand...

You both have missed an important point that I mentioned earlier.

They are AT WAR; however, their ceasefire has been holding since 1953.
 
Royale said:
You both have missed an important point that I mentioned earlier.

They are AT WAR; however, their ceasefire has been holding since 1953.
Click to expand...

I already know about NK and SK are still war but just ceasefire.
 
Reba said:
N. Korea torpedoed a S. Korea ship and killed 46 sailors--that's not an empty threat--that's aggressive action.
Click to expand...

again - nothing new. NK has done something lot worse than this and no serious war happened.

example:

1. 1979: "10.26 incident" where SK President was assassinated by Korean CIA agents. Rumor was that they colluded with NK
2. 1987: Korean Air Boeing 707 bomb by North Korean spy
3. 1996: Kangnung submarine infiltration
4. 2002: North Korea admitted to kidnapping 13 Japanese citizens to train its spies
5. 2010: 2 NK spies were caught and arrested for attempting to assassinate high-ranking NK defector
6. Since armistice treaty, there has been dozens cases of North Korean infiltrations
 
Jiro said:
yes. My parents grew up with this kind of same ole' NK's empty threats for decades. nothing new.
Click to expand...


What if it isn't this time around?


Imagine people having heard the same threat for decades. They shrug off the threat like usual. But North Korea, this time, follows through?

It's better to be safe than sorry.
 
DGirl101 said:
What if it isn't this time around?


Imagine people having heard the same threat for decades. They shrug off the threat like usual. But North Korea, this time, follows through?

It's better to be safe than sorry.
Click to expand...

see above.
 
Reba said:
N. Korea torpedoed a S. Korea ship and killed 46 sailors--that's not an empty threat--that's aggressive action.
Click to expand...

Just passing word of mouth from what I've heard of this on the asian coast.

The N. Koreans are angry at the South putting the blame on them. They believe it's the Americans.

Found a link to back up my statement in english, if you want to read it here:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/LE05Dg01.html
 
yizuman said:
Yep, S. Korea has'em dead to rights to fight back too. But noooo, the US has to step in and say, "Uh, uh!" :nono:

Yiz
Click to expand...

no. not really. you're confused.

US assured SK that US is behind its back and will support SK's decision. Japan extended its support too. SK has not decided to attack.
 
Jiro said:
again - nothing new. NK has done something lot worse than this and no serious war happened.

example:

1. 1979: "10.26 incident" where SK President was assassinated by Korean CIA agents. Rumor was that they colluded with NK
2. 1987: Korean Air Boeing 707 bomb by North Korean spy
3. 1996: Kangnung submarine infiltration
4. 2002: North Korea admitted to kidnapping 13 Japanese citizens to train its spies
5. 2010: 2 NK spies were caught and arrested for attempting to assassinate high-ranking NK defector
6. Since armistice treaty, there has been dozens cases of North Korean infiltrations
Click to expand...


sheesh....
 
Jiro said:
no. not really. you're confused.

US assured SK that US is behind its back and will support SK's decision. Japan extended its support too. SK has not decided to attack.
Click to expand...

Ok good. To be frank, I'm sick of Kim Jung Il playing games, putting people in SK on constant edge as well as the neighboring countries.

Those deaths from the SK sailors was senseless to begin with, but at the same time, those poor sailors knew what they signed up for, just not something I would gather that was expected. Nonetheless, hats off to the brave sailors who gave their lives for freedom.

Yiz
 
yizuman said:
Ok good. To be frank, I'm sick of Kim Jung Il playing games, putting people in SK on constant edge as well as the neighboring countries.

Those deaths from the SK sailors was senseless to begin with, but at the same time, those poor sailors knew what they signed up for, just not something I would gather that was expected. Nonetheless, hats off to the brave sailors who gave their lives for freedom.

Yiz
Click to expand...

we are not on the edge. we ignored him. it's you people who are being :Ohno: whenever he makes a fuss
 
War on the Korean Peninsula: Thinking the Unthinkable
Seoul has already made it clear that it will not seek military retaliation, and Washington and Beijing have said all the right things about trying to ensure that "cooler heads" prevail, as China's State Councilor, Dai Bingguo, said in talks with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Beijing on Tuesday. But all concerned parties understand that at a moment of high tension, the possibility of hot war breaking out is not negligible.

How might a shooting war start? Defense analysts and military sources in Seoul and Washington agree that an outright, all-out attack by either side is unlikely. Even a nuclear armed North, a Seoul-based defense analyst says, "would not risk an all-out war because it would be the end of the regime. Period, full stop." But there are ways in which smaller skirmishes could break out, and if they aren't contained, they could conceivably lead to disaster. Here are three that are uppermost in defense planners' minds:
Click to expand...

nothing to see here. nothing going on here. back to your bed! :zzz:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top