The sinking of South Korean Corvette Cheonan

getready said:

not likely. internet forums are full of armchair generals that are prone to jumping to conclusions without first hand facts being disclosed. i predict in the next few pages people will start planning shock and awe military strikes and regime change.

Click to expand...

That is the thing! Nobody know what happen. If anyone wanted to discuss how the ship sank - that is fine. It is much better to just discuss the technical expect of things like that and not pointing finger immediately to another third party nation.

rhino123 said:

... please do not degrade the integrity of this forum to some half-fxxk semi witted forum.

Click to expand...

Actually, you degrade the integrity of the forum with your filthy mouth.
I have a feeling that no matter how much proof is brought to bear, that there will always be others that disagree. So be it.

In wartime, you don't need proof beyond a reasonable doubt. North Korea and South Korea are still at war, no peace treaty was ever signed, just a sort of "cease fire".

If anyone else, even you rhino, have a plausible alternative scenario for the sinking of that South Korean vessel, lets hear it. But as I said before, just don't say, "oh, we don't know for sure what happened.", and just leave it at that. That is definitely NOT contributing to the thread.

Everyone knows the North Koreans sank it. Even IF we apply "LA LAW" standards, there IS what's called a Preponderance of the Evidence.

1. North Korea and South Korea are at War. Therefore, hostilities between the two nations are likely.

2. The location of the sinking is extremely close to the naval boarder between the two warring nations. Thus it is likely that conflict between the two nations could occur there. The Naval boarder in question? North Korea and South Korea.

3. There have been exchanges of naval fire with loss of life and naval vessels in the area of the sinking. Again since there was combat there in the very recent past, combat at the time of the sinking is likely. Between what nations was combat taking place? North Korea and South Korea.

4. The sunk South Korean vessel was blown in two. It already has been determined that the cause was an external proximity explosion underneath the ship's engine room. North Korea is one of many nations that possess weapon systems capable to inflict such damage. So, given only these purposely few points, what nation demonstrates, to a Preponderance of the Evidence, guilt? North Korea.

Any further arguing against North Korea's guilt without giving credible alternative scenarios can serve no military purpose. The only reasonable explanation for rhino's intransigence is a political one unless he brings a likely alternative explanation to this thread.

jantxv said:

Actually, you degrade the integrity of the forum with your filthy mouth.
I have a feeling that no matter how much proof is brought to bear, that there will always be others that disagree. So be it.

In wartime, you don't need proof beyond a reasonable doubt. North Korea and South Korea are still at war, no peace treaty was ever signed, just a sort of "cease fire".

If anyone else, even you rhino, have a plausible alternative scenario for the sinking of that South Korean vessel, lets hear it. But as I said before, just don't say, "oh, we don't know for sure what happened.", and just leave it at that. That is definitely NOT contributing to the thread.

Everyone knows the North Koreans sank it. Even IF we apply "LA LAW" standards, there IS what's called a Preponderance of the Evidence.

1. North Korea and South Korea are at War. Therefore, hostilities between the two nations are likely.

2. The location of the sinking is extremely close to the naval boarder between the two warring nations. Thus it is likely that conflict between the two nations could occur there. The Naval boarder in question? North Korea and South Korea.

3. There have been exchanges of naval fire with loss of life and naval vessels in the area of the sinking. Again since there was combat there in the very recent past, combat at the time of the sinking is likely. Between what nations was combat taking place? North Korea and South Korea.

4. The sunk South Korean vessel was blown in two. It already has been determined that the cause was an external proximity explosion underneath the ship's engine room. North Korea is one of many nations that possess weapon systems capable to inflict such damage. So, given only these purposely few points, what nation demonstrates, to a Preponderance of the Evidence, guilt? North Korea.

Any further arguing against North Korea's guilt without giving credible alternative scenarios can serve no military purpose. The only reasonable explanation for rhino's intransigence is a political one unless he brings a likely alternative explanation to this thread.

Click to expand...

Oh... so you are the detective now... by saying that everyone know that the NK is the one who sink the SK ship is a claim that not even the US expert dared to claim. What they are claiming is that they think NK do it... So now you are saying that you are better then these international experts?

By saying that NK is one of those countries that process these weaponries then it must be them is a big assumption, and that is what everyone know. There are huge number of nations in that area who have these weapons - Japan, Russia, China... even countries not that near but had assess to that area has it - US.

SO why must it be NK? If it is NK, why didn't NK admit to it? Guilty driven... that is not what NK is up about. They deny the charge... and seriously if NK is the one who sunk SK ship, why wouldn't they admit? What would they gain by sinking the ship? One had to ask themselves.

We cannot presume who sunk the ship.

And by saying I degrade this forum... I think it is YOU who has the honor.

What I am saying is, we can discuss the technical aspect of how the ship is sunk, maybe look at a number of scenario of how the ship is sunk and by what weapons. But we do not need to pull in another country and point finger that the ship is sunk by whatever country.

And what you have pointed out that in war there is no need for evidence and things like that is just twisting of the real and responsible logic. It is people with your mentality that actually caused real wars and not just flame war in a forum.

So what if NK and SK is in theory, still at war? The main word is 'in theory'. So by your logic, SK should launch an all out attack on NK and resulting in the death of hundreds of thousands just because one of their ship sank and no hard evidence that NK do it... just because they are in theory still at war? That doesn't sound very responsible, right?

So quit shooting your mouth off and calling names to other forum member.

Oh rhino, I'm not in the mood to back down from your challenge. But again, instead of refuting logic you try to confuse the issue. Any impartial third party going over my four points would agree with North Korea's guilt in this continuing war between the two nations of North Korea and South Korea.

The sinking of the South Korean Corvette Cheonan, and the investigations since, are highly publicized.

Again I dare you to put your money where your mouth is rhino, GIVE us a plausible explanation for the sinking of the Cheonan. If you DO NOT have one, kindly refrain from the personal attacks and step aside for some-one that may.

For what-ever reason you may have, rhino, to zip up this thread by asking everyone to ignore the evidence, or side track it with wild goose chases and personal attacks is futile. That is the nature of participatory forums. It is to expose those that try to shut down valid conversation when the conversation exposes the truth.

Anyone else, you are welcome too rhino, have a valid opinion about what nation or weapon systems, or whatever, sank the Cheonan? Let's hear it. I'm especially interested in a nation besides North Korea doing the deed.

This story will not die. The US entered WW1 because of the sinking of one ship that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands rhino. Also, North Korea did place a bomb on a South Korean airliner killing everyone aboard, and yet North Korea has never admitted it. Save your attacks for the less educated rhino.

jantxv said:

1. North Korea and South Korea are at War. Therefore, hostilities between the two nations are likely.

2. The location of the sinking is extremely close to the naval boarder between the two warring nations. Thus it is likely that conflict between the two nations could occur there. The Naval boarder in question? North Korea and South Korea.

3. There have been exchanges of naval fire with loss of life and naval vessels in the area of the sinking. Again since there was combat there in the very recent past, combat at the time of the sinking is likely. Between what nations was combat taking place? North Korea and South Korea.

4. The sunk South Korean vessel was blown in two. It already has been determined that the cause was an external proximity explosion underneath the ship's engine room. North Korea is one of many nations that possess weapon systems capable to inflict such damage. So, given only these purposely few points, what nation demonstrates, to a Preponderance of the Evidence, guilt? North Korea.

Click to expand...

ROFL... don't try to act the lawyer when you don't even know what the words "evidence" and "proof" means.

All you have demonstrated is that North Korea is a likely suspect in this incident. However, you have NOTHING, so far, that can prove North Korea was actually responsible.

Of course, as the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars have demonstrated, the USA doesn't need to have proof before starting wars.

solarz said:

ROFL... don't try to act the lawyer when you don't even know what the words "evidence" and "proof" means.

All you have demonstrated is that North Korea is a likely suspect in this incident. However, you have NOTHING, so far, that can prove North Korea was actually responsible.

Of course, as the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars have demonstrated, the USA doesn't need to have proof before starting wars.

Click to expand...

By your reasoning solarz, nothing can ever be proven, because there is never enough evidence. So tell us solarz, how much more evidence do you need?

Your second statement about the US not needing proof to start wars speaks volumes about your personal agenda on this forum. As I have stated earlier, I believe that many posters on this forum are less interested in military facts and more concerned with politics.

Your statement solarz has proved my point that you ARE more concerned about politics on a site in which politics should be taboo.

As I suspect, there isn't a logical rebuttal of my four points presented thus far. And again I must ask, exactly what kind of proof do the doubters need? If the evidence you need exists, please verbalize it. If you cannot verbalize it, then I doubt your sincerity with extreme prejudice.

jantxv said:

By your reasoning solarz, nothing can ever be proven, because there is never enough evidence. So tell us solarz, how much more evidence do you need?

Your second statement about the US not needing proof to start wars speaks volumes about your personal agenda on this forum. As I have stated earlier, I believe that many posters on this forum are less interested in military facts and more concerned with politics.

Your statement solarz has proved my point that you ARE more concerned about politics on a site in which politics should be taboo.

As I suspect, there isn't a logical rebuttal of my four points presented thus far. And again I must ask, exactly what kind of proof do the doubters need? If the evidence you need exists, please verbalize it. If you cannot verbalize it, then I doubt your sincerity with extreme prejudice.

Click to expand...

LOL, here's what YOUR analysis amounts to:

1- We live on the same street and we hate each other's guts.

2- We've been in shouting matches and even a few fisticuffs in the past.

3- One day, your cat is found dead on the sidewalk on our street. You determined that it did not die of natural causes.

4- Therefore, I killed your cat.

So keep patting yourself on the back for your excellent deductive skills.

As for my statement about the US, it wasn't an opinion, it was fact.

moving on from the personal agenda against NK

here are multiple images from korean news, nothing surprising

jantxv said:

Oh rhino, I'm not in the mood to back down from your challenge. But again, instead of refuting logic you try to confuse the issue. Any impartial third party going over my four points would agree with North Korea's guilt in this continuing war between the two nations of North Korea and South Korea.

The sinking of the South Korean Corvette Cheonan, and the investigations since, are highly publicized.

Again I dare you to put your money where your mouth is rhino, GIVE us a plausible explanation for the sinking of the Cheonan. If you DO NOT have one, kindly refrain from the personal attacks and step aside for some-one that may.

For what-ever reason you may have, rhino, to zip up this thread by asking everyone to ignore the evidence, or side track it with wild goose chases and personal attacks is futile. That is the nature of participatory forums. It is to expose those that try to shut down valid conversation when the conversation exposes the truth.

Anyone else, you are welcome too rhino, have a valid opinion about what nation or weapon systems, or whatever, sank the Cheonan? Let's hear it. I'm especially interested in a nation besides North Korea doing the deed.

This story will not die. The US entered WW1 because of the sinking of one ship that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands rhino. Also, North Korea did place a bomb on a South Korean airliner killing everyone aboard, and yet North Korea has never admitted it. Save your attacks for the less educated rhino.

Click to expand...

Oh... now you are not in the mood of accepting my challenge... as of yet I have issue none... I do not know what you are talking about.

I am just saying that there simply is not enough evidence and proof, just that NK is suspected of doing something doesn't mean they actually did it. And for all that is concern, it might even be SK who blow up their own ship in a conspiracy to start the war for reunifying of the entire Korea (of course that had no evidence too, so it cannot be proven).

All I am saying is that we should wait for the experts in those area to actually determine what is the cause, as I am not the expert I will refrain from pointing fingers as if I am someone who know it.

And, yes, I will not accept your childish and foolish challenge... of puting... what, my money in my mouth of whatever... that is the most stupid way of showing immaturity.

As to I am confusing the fact, I don't find it that confusing, and neither would the rest of the forum member find it. After all, what is so confusing in what I have said? I merely stated that as there are many facts in this explosions of sinking of the SK ship, even SK or US fail to link it completely with NK... so quit your war mongering.

And to your example of US going into WW1 because of the sinking of 1 ship... that is only one cause of why US go into WW1, and the evidence is quite clear who is the culprit... so your examples doesn't stand.

Up till now, no one is sure whether NK actually sink that ship!

And to your example on the bombing of SK airliner (I would request that you do some simple research, not that difficult) and see the result you will get. Even as the NK never actually did admit to it, the evidence had pointed to NK. So actually you do not really need to admit to something as long as enough and overwhelming evidence to proof you are guilty (see the reference for the detailed investigation and the testimony of the culprit which is readily available on the net), so if you are careful enough with your research and coming out of examples, you would have see the difference in the case.

As of date, all we know is that the SK ship has sank, the cause of it was it was torn in two by an external force, most probably from a torpedo (high power), and countries who has this type of torpedoes are NK, China, Japan, US, Russia... I believe even SK had it.

And the abovementioned facts are what we know. So quit acting as if you know everything and fan everyone to have this anti-NK sentiment, and stick to the facts.

As to what sank the SK ship... it is already highly publitise that it might be a torpedo... or even a underwater mine... and that is my opinion... and that is all. I hope what I have said thus far is not that difficult to understand.

So before your senseless taunting of other members, I would suggest you do more research into your examples that you throw, for it would be a shame when others can readily rebuke you.

I'd like to know what kind of activity was happening before and after the incident along the North Korean side of the border. If they are responsible wouldn't there have been some activity anticipating a response? A guy supposedly as paranoid as Kim certainly would've anticpated. The South is not the other side of the coin when it comes to the North. If Sung Yung Moon were from the North, he would be portrayed as the same but he's fortunate to be given the honor of being on the side of "good." I had read that during the Olympics opening ceremony, the Chinese were accused by insulted South Koreans of booing their team entering the stadium that all could hear on TV. Luckily I still had it on my DVR and went back to see and heard no booing at all when the South Koreans walked onto the field. Among other things I've read about South Korean politics and media, I wouldn't be surprised that this is made up or someone is exploiting an accident for political gain.