| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Alias
Joined: 24 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:13 pm Post subject: South Korea won't intercept North Korean ships |
 |
|
| Quote: |
South Korea won't join a U.S.-led plan to intercept North Korean ships suspected of carrying weapons, saying Monday it was already doing enough to stem possible weapons proliferation from its communist neighbour.
The plan is part of the sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council on the dictatorship after it conducted a nuclear test on Oct. 9.
"It's basically not necessary to take [new] measures," Park In-kook, a deputy foreign minister, said at a news briefing.
South Korea is worried that stopping the ships could lead to military clashes between the two countries.
Monitoring North Korean shipping would be much more difficult without South Korea, because countries in the initiative can only conduct searches within the territorial waters of participating countries. Ships on the high seas have right of free passage under international law.
|
So what is South Korea doing exactly?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Slep
Joined: 14 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Trying not ot piss off the north |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alias
Joined: 24 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 11:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oh yeah, that sunshine thing.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slep
Joined: 14 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| makes sense. I mean, much better than antagonizing your nuclear armed neighbour |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Slep wrote: |
| makes sense. I mean, much better than antagonizing your nuclear armed neighbour |
Not if it means losing your nuclear umbrella. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wangja
Joined: 17 May 2004
Location: Seoul, Yongsan
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Slep wrote: |
| makes sense. I mean, much better than antagonizing your nuclear armed neighbour |
Not if it means losing your nuclear umbrella. |
What????? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Slep wrote: |
| makes sense. I mean, much better than antagonizing your nuclear armed neighbour |
Not if it means losing your nuclear umbrella. |
Which it won't, so that's moot... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
waggo
Joined: 18 May 2003
Location: pusan baby!
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Slep wrote: |
| makes sense. I mean, much better than antagonizing your nuclear armed neighbour |
The same neighbour who was arming itself atomically whilst the Koreans were falling over themselves trying not to antagonise it into a conventional war.
America should just walk away and let them sort it out for themselves.Just totally ignore the whole area. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps we could argue that it is the very presence of the Yanks that has allowed SK to behave with such suicidal fervor?
USFK out. Koreans need to learn that 5000 years of history and the cure to SARS costs very, very much to defend. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slep
Joined: 14 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Since WW2, can anyone actually provide an example whereby a country getting nukes actually caused a war.
Obviously there's the Israel-Iraq example, but i just don't see any country bombing NK's nukes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Perhaps we could argue that it is the very presence of the Yanks that has allowed SK to behave with such suicidal fervor? |
Precisely. Right now they're like kids playing Gran Turismo 4 -- it doesn't matter if you crash the car, cuz you're not playing for real. If the US pulls out its troops I would bet everything the mood here would change fast enough to break your neck from whiplash. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neil
Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Location: Tokyo
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 7:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
USFK out. Koreans need to learn that 5000 years of history and the cure to SARS costs very, very much to defend. |
Reunification would cost more, which is why Seoul has no interest in the NK regime falling.....hence their keep on keeping on policy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slep
Joined: 14 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 8:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Neil wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
USFK out. Koreans need to learn that 5000 years of history and the cure to SARS costs very, very much to defend. |
Reunification would cost more, which is why Seoul has no interest in the NK regime falling.....hence their keep on keeping on policy. |
Look what happened with Germany. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 8:56 am Post subject: Re: South Korea won't intercept North Korean ships |
|
|
| Alias wrote: |
| Quote: |
South Korea won't join a U.S.-led plan to intercept North Korean ships suspected of carrying weapons, saying Monday it was already doing enough to stem possible weapons proliferation from its communist neighbour.
The plan is part of the sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council on the dictatorship after it conducted a nuclear test on Oct. 9.
"It's basically not necessary to take [new] measures," Park In-kook, a deputy foreign minister, said at a news briefing.
South Korea is worried that stopping the ships could lead to military clashes between the two countries.
Monitoring North Korean shipping would be much more difficult without South Korea, because countries in the initiative can only conduct searches within the territorial waters of participating countries. Ships on the high seas have right of free passage under international law.
|
So what is South Korea doing exactly? |
http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/opinion/200610/kt2006102619345454220.htm
Can't say I'm surprised. That's what happens when you look at the sun for too long. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Slep wrote: |
Since WW2, can anyone actually provide an example whereby a country getting nukes actually caused a war.
Obviously there's the Israel-Iraq example, but i just don't see any country bombing NK's nukes. |
When was there a war between Israel and Iraq? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
