You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
China-Japan-Koreas
S. Korea, U.S. Scale Down Response to Cheonan Sinking
2010-06-07
South Korea and the U.S. are treading carefully in taking steps against North Korea over the sinking of the Navy corvette Cheonan amid a rift between Washington and Beijing about U.S. arms sales to Taiwan.
Always something, isn't it ...
The two allies reportedly agreed to put on hold any measures that could upset China and are giving top priority to persuading the UN Security Council to adopt a strong resolution against the North.

Seoul and Washington agreed in a bilateral security meeting in Singapore on Saturday to postpone a joint military exercise which they had decided to stage as soon as possible until late this month.

Beijing had apparently called for a cancelation or drastic reduction of the scale of the exercise. Beijing has declined a fence-mending visit by U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to express its displeasure at Washington's sale of US$6.4 billion worth of arms to Taiwan.

Gates and Defense Minister Kim Tae-young therefore decided to waffle proceed softly and canceled their scheduled press conference in Singapore. Second Vice Foreign Minister Chun Young-woo may visit Beijing to explain South Korea's position.

According to diplomatic sources in Washington, Seoul is concerned that the UNSC, where China is a permanent member, almost certainly will not may be unable to arrive at a sufficiently strong resolution.

They recall that after a 1996 incursion by North Korea into waters off Gangneung, the UNSC adopted only a chairman's statement, rather than a proper resolution, 12 days after the South Korean government brought the issue up, which only expressed concern and called for the armistice agreement to be upheld. "The UNSC chairman's statement at the time was nothing but a piece of paper that failed to point to the culprit behind the provocation," a diplomat recalled.

The threat of a veto from China, North Korea's staunchest ally, could again rob the UNSC response of any teeth.

Some officials within the U.S. administration are already reportedly in favor of a strongly worded UNSC chairman's statement rather than a watered-down resolution.
As opposed to actually doing anything ...
Posted by:Steve White

#7  Supercavitating torpedoes are very cool but the parts recovered are from a typical counter rotating prop shaft used by torpedoes since forever. Someone suggesting the use of a supercavitating torp might be trying to link to the US ships nearby. A plot by US or SK or a friendly fire incident would pull the NK feet from the fire.
Torpedoes are noisy enough but the supercavitating torp is outrageously loud and detectable. All types I have read about have no terminal guidance and are fired down a bearing at the target. The weapon is referred to as an engagement breaker. Fire in the direction of target and run as fast as ever you can in the opposite direction. Lack of guidance means the preferred warhead is a small nuke.
Posted by: Dogsbody   2010-06-07 21:49  

#6  come on just sink Nork sub already. What's the worst that can happen?
Posted by: HammerHead   2010-06-07 20:34  

#5  Something is odd about this whole deal. I gather that just 75 miles away from the sinking, the US and SKor were conducting Asub operations.

To make matters more interesting, while it was officially stated that the Cheonan was sunk with a heavy torpedo, it has been proposed that it was instead sunk with a much more modern supercavitating torpedo.

Russia provided Iran with such advanced torpedoes, on the assumption they couldn't reverse engineer them, but allegedly they did. And they, Iran, might have in turn sold them to NKor.

According to James G. Zumwalt(*), son of the Admiral, there was tremendous interest around the world to see how a supercavitating torpedo knock-off would perform against a modern warship. This is because it is believed there is no effective defense against them.

Which would keep the US Navy away from the territory of any nation that possesses them. Which might explain why both Iran and NKor are increasingly bold.

(*) Not to be confused with diplomat James P. Zumwalt. James G. is all USMC and a combat vet.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2010-06-07 10:03  

#4  But Bambi had a party to go to!

A man's got to have his priorities!
Posted by: CrazyFool   2010-06-07 08:36  

#3  Wussies.
Reagan would have found a way to arm the Taiwanese, punish NKOR and give China a way to save face all at the same time.
Posted by: bigjim-CA   2010-06-07 03:53  

#2  Well, it's not like the Norks simply murdered forty some people in what would normally be considered an act of war. Uhhh, no, on second thought, it is *exactly* like that.
Posted by: SteveS   2010-06-07 01:03  

#1  Bambi bowed blinked.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2010-06-07 00:44  

00:00