It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

s.korea building a nuke sub

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2004 @ 11:26 AM
link   
I didn't know where to put this in. I wonder what china, n.korea, and japan has to say about this.

english.chosun.com...

feeds.bignewsnetwork.com...




posted on Jan, 27 2004 @ 09:22 PM
link   
Japan and S. Korea are currently disputing over 'a' island. This will or may intensify the situation.

The region is working on or has a Nuclear non-proliferation treaty in that it mentions or may mention that such devices are to be refrained from.....remember, Japan has mentioned that it was or is thinking of building nukes. Its apparent that there will be contention in regards to the 'treaty'.

China will undoubtedly jave something to say.
Russia may simply ignore it but may have something to say also.
The whole Asia Region/Zone is tightening up militarily (ie: Malaysia, Singapore, etc.). This may get interesting in the upcoming years.



regards
seekerof



posted on Jan, 27 2004 @ 09:52 PM
link   
Japan could have hundreds of nukes in a very short time. They have already produced the Plutonium, and tons of it is sitting in storage facilities in Japan. Here is an inventory of Japans Plutonium:

www.jnc.go.jp...

South Korea also has stored Plutonium from it's reactors.

There was a little gem in this article that really stood out.

A high government official said Sunday that he knows the Ministry of Defense and Navy have been actively considering independently building nuclear-powered submarines since last May. He said that this was linked to efforts to build an independent defense in order to insure the nations independent right to survive amidst threats from surrounding great powers after unification.

They plan on unification, and foresee the need to defend themselves afterwards. This would mean America out, and a very powerful Korean nation.

I think that this would be a better alternative than fighting a war with NK, and having American troops looking across the border at both Chinese, and Russian forces while dealing with occupational resistance in a nation where everyone has military training.

As long as we are there they will not unite.

So why are we there?

The real reasons are to prolong the conflict, and create leverage against China.



posted on Jan, 27 2004 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
The real reasons are to prolong the conflict, and create leverage against China.

Can't agree with you on that, at least not totally.
No doubt that the US has used Korea to a certain degree as political leverage with China but that is more or less a biproduct of the primary reason.

The primary reason US troops are in South Korea is the historically stated reason - for the security of South Korea. Rumsfeld shocked the bejesus out of the new S. Korean President by offering to pull out US troops from the Korean peninsula altogether.

President Roh Moo-hyun who was elected on a wave of anti-American troop presence sentiment after a school girl was run over by an American M-1 Abrams found himself backpeddling awfully hard when Rumsfeld made the offer.

The fact is the South Koreans want "reunification" but they don't want to be under the leadership of Pyongyang, which is exactly what would happen if the 37,000 American troops were to pull out.
(Some analysis of the North's troop movements put 1/2 of their 1 million man army in close proximity to the DMZ.)

Currently, reunification strategists in Seoul are hopeful on information/speculation that Kim Jong Il is not well and may actually have a terminal condition... It is said that Kim may be grooming his son to take power in the next couple of years if his health does not improve.

Regarding Leverage...
It could happen that Taiwan might get prodding from Washington to seek a peaceful reunification with the motherland in trade for Chinese leverage/permission to deal with Kim and his nukes.

The problem with the US using force, (aside from Kim's nukes) is the 58,000+ artillery pieces aimed at Seoul. It is said Seoul could be nearly destroyed in the first 24 hours of a conflict with over 1 million casualties... which is why last year Rumsfeld moved the US troops out of Seoul, back across the river and out of artillery range - this was for 2 reasons, 1; protect the troops, and 2; if US Troops arent in/around Seoul it may be that Kim would not hit the city as hard.

Ahnyong hee kashipsheyo~

times.hankooki.com...
www.rferl.org...




[Edited on 28-1-2004 by intelgurl]



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Since when SK is against Japan?



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 07:18 PM
link   
excellent....and so it begins.....MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 07:44 PM
link   
Since when SK is against Japan?

Since Japan invaded Korea in WWII. They killed, raped, robbed, destroyed, and experimented on the people as they pleased there. Koreans share a common hatred of Japan. The sex slave issue is one example of the continuing hatred.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Japan had korea even before ww2, they annexed the peninsula as their own colony in 1910.

The japanese crimes were nothing new to them as they were very brutal against the korean people, there were even evidence being dug up that the japanese assassins raped the last korean queen before they killed her.

Anyways they don't really hate the japanese as much you are probably thinking.




top topics



 
0

log in

join