SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post

joegrundman · 10-06-10, 02:59 AM

It suits an awful lot of people for the official conclusion to be "most likely, but not conclusively proven, to be the North Koreans".

For S.Korea, it avoids further analysis of what may be more embarrassing, but without being an outright Causus Belli that demands escalation. The last thing the S.Koreans want is war with the North. For many reasons. Firstly, it would cost a lot in blood and treasure, and at risk is Seoul which is very close to the border. If you've ever been there and walked around the old city walls you will see the large number of air defense sites in operation and practising daily.

In addition, the North is still a part of Korea! This means something to S.Koreans who do not wish to see a N.Korea ravaged severely by a massive high-intensity war, and nor do they relish the prospect of being the successor state to a destroyed N.Korea (they are even ambiguous about the prospect of being the successor to an un-destroyed but economically poor N.Korea in the event of peaceful unification)

It doesn't suit the N.Koreans to attack the Cheonan deliberately. The entire N.Korea foreign policy is based on holding the South to ransom with the threat of war. Anything that compels S.Korea to threaten war back is completely counter-productive for N.Korea. Yet if people believe them capable of successfully attacking a moving, pinging, modern warvessel with a single warshot and blowing it clean in half - it doesn't hurt them if people fear their capability.

It doesn't suit China to attack the boat, or have N.K do it. They have no wish to antagonise anything. Their model of peaceful rise has been highly successful by anyone's yardstick. What do they gain by seriously rocking the boat? But since the torpedo is a Chinese design( i believe), it doesn't hurt them for people to believe their torpedoes are proven and highly effective.

It isn't the USA. The USA doesn't do this sort of covert act of war, unless it's part of an imminent/contemporaneous overt war. Also the US doesn't kill its allies except by accident. But anyway, if it was the US, the US would already be at war with N.Korea - in fact it most likely would be over one way or another by now and the US would be in the followon phase of screwing up the occupation and badly attempting to mollify the S.Koreans/Japanese for any heavy damage they incurred.

It doesn't suit the USA for N.K to really have done it, since it forces escalation at a time when the US military is already stretched, war weariness is growing, and the financial situation is troubling. (And N.K doesn't hold out the prospect of oil to alleviate the economic situation)

But it doesn't hurt the USA to pin the blame on the N.Koreans. May put them on the defensive, provides another bargaining chip and allows the US/SK wargames to proceed with N.Korea a bit too defensive to do anything about it. Also diverts difficult questions about what may really have happened.

And it's just not the Japanese (except for accident) - they have nothing to gain by antagonising N.Korea or S.Korea, or China, or the USA.

So having decided that no actor officially sanctioned an attack, this leaves accidental attack, or plain accident.

Can collisions do this much damage? If there is anyway that this could have caused the damage then i rate this as the most likely culprit.

Is it possible that a submarine simulated attack actually fired a warshot by accident- even a N.Korea simulated attack gatecrashing the wargames?

10-06-10, 02:59 AM	#12
joegrundman Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 2,689 Downloads: 34 Uploads: 0	It suits an awful lot of people for the official conclusion to be "most likely, but not conclusively proven, to be the North Koreans". For S.Korea, it avoids further analysis of what may be more embarrassing, but without being an outright Causus Belli that demands escalation. The last thing the S.Koreans want is war with the North. For many reasons. Firstly, it would cost a lot in blood and treasure, and at risk is Seoul which is very close to the border. If you've ever been there and walked around the old city walls you will see the large number of air defense sites in operation and practising daily. In addition, the North is still a part of Korea! This means something to S.Koreans who do not wish to see a N.Korea ravaged severely by a massive high-intensity war, and nor do they relish the prospect of being the successor state to a destroyed N.Korea (they are even ambiguous about the prospect of being the successor to an un-destroyed but economically poor N.Korea in the event of peaceful unification) It doesn't suit the N.Koreans to attack the Cheonan deliberately. The entire N.Korea foreign policy is based on holding the South to ransom with the threat of war. Anything that compels S.Korea to threaten war back is completely counter-productive for N.Korea. Yet if people believe them capable of successfully attacking a moving, pinging, modern warvessel with a single warshot and blowing it clean in half - it doesn't hurt them if people fear their capability. It doesn't suit China to attack the boat, or have N.K do it. They have no wish to antagonise anything. Their model of peaceful rise has been highly successful by anyone's yardstick. What do they gain by seriously rocking the boat? But since the torpedo is a Chinese design( i believe), it doesn't hurt them for people to believe their torpedoes are proven and highly effective. It isn't the USA. The USA doesn't do this sort of covert act of war, unless it's part of an imminent/contemporaneous overt war. Also the US doesn't kill its allies except by accident. But anyway, if it was the US, the US would already be at war with N.Korea - in fact it most likely would be over one way or another by now and the US would be in the followon phase of screwing up the occupation and badly attempting to mollify the S.Koreans/Japanese for any heavy damage they incurred. It doesn't suit the USA for N.K to really have done it, since it forces escalation at a time when the US military is already stretched, war weariness is growing, and the financial situation is troubling. (And N.K doesn't hold out the prospect of oil to alleviate the economic situation) But it doesn't hurt the USA to pin the blame on the N.Koreans. May put them on the defensive, provides another bargaining chip and allows the US/SK wargames to proceed with N.Korea a bit too defensive to do anything about it. Also diverts difficult questions about what may really have happened. And it's just not the Japanese (except for accident) - they have nothing to gain by antagonising N.Korea or S.Korea, or China, or the USA. So having decided that no actor officially sanctioned an attack, this leaves accidental attack, or plain accident. Can collisions do this much damage? If there is anyway that this could have caused the damage then i rate this as the most likely culprit. Is it possible that a submarine simulated attack actually fired a warshot by accident- even a N.Korea simulated attack gatecrashing the wargames? __________________ "Enemy submarines are to be called U-Boats. The term submarine is to be reserved for Allied under water vessels. U-Boats are those dastardly villains who sink our ships, while submarines are those gallant and noble craft which sink theirs." Winston Churchill Last edited by joegrundman; 10-06-10 at 05:34 AM.