uh huh. They’ve demonstrated a fissionable weapon as well as long range missile technology. Bolting the two together isn’t rocket science.
Indeed, and all I’m encouraging you to do is follow the Chinese model. The Chinese don’t know what really happened, they’re not afraid to admit it, and they’re not about to make allegations without proof. You, on the other hand, are perfectly willing to jump all over any editorial that happens to mesh with your preconceived views. You are amazingly closed-minded, my friend.
Incidentally, I’m not blaming the South. I don’t know what happened, either. Stating that the South may be at fault is not the same as saying that it most certainly is at fault. I’m sorry if this nuance somehow escapes you.
I hope you’re right. I support the North Korean nuclear program, as it would guarantee their safety from the would-be Imperial overlords.
Nevertheless, it’s not as simple as developing a nuke and sticking it on a missile. You must also make the nuke small enough to fit a regular missile or develop an ICBM capable of carrying a regularly-sized nuke. I haven’t seen any indication that the North has developed either of these two technologies. Once again, I hope I’m wrong, but we simply cannot know at the moment (seeing a pattern yet?).
Sure. You will profess ignorance regarding anything that might remotely be considered a threat to non-totalitarian governments while expressing skepticism of any statement that emanates from a non-totalitarian government.
Seems a pretty clear pattern. 
This is a pathetic analogy. Let’s list the problems:
- South Korea had informed the DPRK of the military exercises;
- it’s not clear (as someone else pointed out) that shots were fired into actual North Korean waters;
- North Korea threatens to take military action in response to everything anybody does against its interests, which makes it impossible to back down in the face of DPRK threats*;
- North Korea does not border the United States or run the waters on the other side of the line;
- there was, AFAIK, no Los Northkoreageles nearby;
and 6) North Korea did not shoot back at the warships but at other, unrelated ground targets.
And for all that, no, territorial waters are not a defensible target. Military action in response to shots fired at water is completely stupid. So even though you stacked your analogy as much as you possibly could in favour of the North Korean position, you have still failed to justify their actions in any way.
*It’s the iterated prisoners’ dilemma, and you seem to be in favour of cooperating every single time when the other side defects every single time. If you’d like me to explain this more fully, I can.
The one where the Chinese said (implied) that “the south did not cause any harm to the North”? Sure.
Nope, wrong again, I deal with probabilities here, and so far looking at many different sources and the evidence so far tell us that the North was the one that screwed up.
Denying that** is** to be closed minded.
So, can you point at images of the damage the South caused to the North? Because what is clear is that the North did not care where their shells landed.
Who will guarantee the safety of the North Korean people from their brutal, sadistic, and tyrannical overlords that have nuclear weapons and starve their own people so that all available funds go the military and upper party echelon?
An ICBM is a long range missile. Nuclear weapons, once miniaturized, can be made to fit in the warhead of any sizable short, medium, or long range missile. North Korea also has plenty of short and medium range missiles. However, since the North Koreans claim to have launched a satellite into orbit from one, the Taepodong-2 could be described as an ICBM. If the Taepodong-2 could carry a decent-sized “communications satellite,” then it could likely carry a non-miniaturized nuclear weapon (although not in a warhead).
If there was only some way to transport you to NK in the spirit of fighting ignorance.
I love the KCNA. Today’s index lists the newest conflict story, “Panmunjom Mission of KPA Sends Notice to U.S. Forces Side,” as second to “Kim Jong Il Visits New Houses and Pyongyang University of Dance.”
I wonder what the local 부동산 listings are for Yodŏk.
Despite you all feverishly dishing Commisar, if this had been another Tonkin like situation, you clearly would have fallen for it like a brick. You would have happily cheered on the bombers. In fact some of you are.
It is certainly disconcerting to see how easily you yanks are led into yet another war.
It would be extremely difficult to stage a false flag provocation, particularly one involving multiple pieces of artillery, from within North Korea, despite all the frothing at the mouth of some of the loons on the BBC talkback forums who seem to think every natural and manmade disaster that happens around the world is some sinister US operation.
Pray tell, bodhisattva, what is the correct and enlightened response us Yanks are not demonstrating?
An aversion to bloodshed, dismemberment, destroyed homes, lives, loss of family members etc… etc…
Instead we see the start of yet more cheering at the prospect of stamping on some more damn furriners.
And that is where you fail, I was actually glad that the now dismissed South Korean commander in charge then did not respond recklessly, IMHO it was a mistake to dismiss him.
So no, as a person that also took part in the protests in the attempt to prevent the Iraq war, I have to tell you that I already did look at history and many different sources to conclude that in this case the bad guys are not the USA or South Korea.
By pattern do you mean that poster blindly following a failed experiment in government? Or do you mean that Western propaganda thing that misleads the (entire) free world again?
Because it would be wrong to support a free country like SK in deferment to the peace loving paradise that is NK?
Shouldn’t be hard getting in and it would allow visitors to concentrate on their political aspirations.
Which side in the current contretemps has so far has displayed a lack of such aversion?
There is a long -lasting dispute regarding the maritime borders between North and South Korea. According to North Korea the maritime borders should proceed along the 48th parallel the same as the land border, however, at the time of the armistice, there was a huge US naval presence that occupied almost all the seas surrounding Korea so they claimed almost all the islands surrounding North Korea and South Korea ended up with a claim on almost all the water surrounding North Korea based on those islands.
On Tuesday, South Korea engaged in well publicized military drills form those islands by lobbing artillery shells into North Korean waters. North Korea showed up and told them they would use force to retaliate if they shot any more artillery into their waters, South Korea kept doing it and North Korea proceeded to shell the military base from which the military exercise was being conducted.
Its not nearly as one sided as we are hearing in our media. South Korea was engaging in provocative activity.
It wasn’t that long ago that people were talking about reunification and all that. Then the current conservative Korean president was elected and he started talking tough and relations soured especially after North Korea tested nuclear weapons. There is plenty of blame on both sides for the breakdown in relations but the major shifts in position have come from the change in administration on the South Korean side not by changes in policy on the North Korean side.
The “provocative” shelling of… empty water which led to them “retaliating” by shooting live ordinance at live human beings.
Sounds pretty one sided.