Norks threaten retaliation
So yesterday the South Koreans presented the world with evidence that a North Korean submarine sank the South’s ship – including fragments of a North Korean torpedo. (Stars & Stripes)
Investigators said a 130-ton “midget” North Korean submarine equipped with night vision capabilities entered the Yellow Sea undetected during the night of March 26 and fired a torpedo, causing a shock wave that ripped the ship in half.
North Korea, however, denied involvement on Thursday and accused the South of fabricating the evidence. It warned that any punishment against the North could trigger war.
CNN reports that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton states that North Korea must face consequences for it’s lawless actions;
“I think it’s important to send a clear message to North Korea that provocative actions have consequences,” Clinton said Friday as she began a week-long Asian tour in Tokyo, Japan. “We cannot allow the attack on South Korea to go unanswered by the international community.”
We can all reasonably assume that an answer by the international community will go not much further than stern glances towards the failed kingdom and some empty gestures.
Our buddy, GI Korea at ROKDrop asks why we can’t place the 19th century fiefdom on the State-sponsors of terrorism list. Well, that would be a little too stern for this administration which has been doing it’s level best to do everything exactly the opposite of the previous administration…until that strategy ultimately fails.
North Korea has been complicit in furthering Syria’s nuclear aspirations and helped the Iranians develop missile technology. But, the international community has done nothing but posture in response.
Is it any wonder that the world’s rogues continue to ratchet up their antics when they can depend on toothless rhetoric as their only punishment?
Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Foreign Policy, Terror War
I would think they would want to ADD them to the terror list if they wanted to do just the opposite of the last administration. It was the last administration that removed them from the terror list.
October 2008:
“WASHINGTON — The Bush administration Saturday removed North Korea from its list of state sponsors of terrorism after Pyongyang agreed to allow inspectors access to declared nuclear sites”
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/12/world/fg-norkor12
And precisely what “consequences” is the androgynous one proposing?
That’s as worthless as Blumenthal taking “full responsibility” for his lies about serving in Vietnam… and then doing nothing to indicate that he IS “taking full responsibility…” like withdrawing his campaign.
Without actual and public retaliation, what incentive is there for the Norks to not now, say, use the South Korean navy as a shooting gallery?
The concern is as it always is, just how far will the NK’s go down the road toward open warfare again. Even leaving China out of the equation, the ammount of artillery ammassed on both sides is absolutely staggering and it’s a sure bet Seoul, and other cities, would be reduced to rubble heaps in a matter of hours, if not minutes. Saber rattling is one thing, teasing a junk yard dog is another. I’m afraid that loon on the Northern side of the border, and some of his military commanders, are just crazy enough to go for it. I doubt the Western powers have the resolve to send a REAL message to the NK’s right now in any case.
What would be an appropriate response? We don’t have the resources to declare war on North Korea. What other steps, short of a full invasion, would still send the message without touching off a war?
The response would be to have one or more North Korean submarines go missing. It would be easy to do. North Korean Submarines are all older Soviet Diesel boats, noisy, and not nearly as well maintained as they ought to be.
We know where they are and when they leave port. So do the South Koreans. Have one of our or a South Korean submarine set up an ambush and wait.
North Korea cannot be allowed to get away with such an overt act of war. They keep pushing the envelope, and this time they’ve gone too far. If allowed to skate on this, what will the next action be? Sinking a passenger liner? Shooting down a Korean Airlines passenger jet?
I have 3 or 4 articles on my own site about this situation, if anyone else is interested.
whycantwealljustgetalong: Don’t forget that the Bush Administration had to add the North Koreans to the list before they could remove them. Before that the Clinton Administration had North Korea on the “States which have been fellated by Jimmy Carter” list.
John – agreed. But in your article you point out “Our buddy, GI Korea at ROKDrop asks why we can’t place the 19th century fiefdom on the State-sponsors of terrorism list.”
My answer was that they were on that list. But they were removed from the list. If Obama really wants to be the opposite of Bush, he would then need to add them back to the list.
In my posting I mention that I criticized the Bush administration for removing them in the first place for promises just about everyone knew the North Koreans would not keep and that is ultimately what happened. Also the Bush administration removed them with no pre-conditions such as coming clean on their various terrorists attacks such as the downing of KAL 858 that killed 115 people. Remember everything the Libyans had to do get off the list for bombing Pan Am 103? The North Koreans never accepted responsibility for nothing.
Basically the Bush administration appeasement of North Korea during his second term was a disaster, but I believe the Bush administration just wanted to keep the North Koreans quiet while they focused on the Surge in Iraq.
The Obama administration on the other hand has the benefit of a lot of hindsight and a series provocations since Obama took office and yet the North Koreans are still not added to the list. If this latest provocation doesn’t add them to the list why have this list in the first place?