Beijing suspects false flag attack on South Korean corvette

Miscellaneous Current Events
1

Very interesting. North Korea has little to gain from sinking a South Korean ship. The North Korean military uses outdated equipment which would do poorly in a conventional war, and the North desperately needs foreign trade, which is now potentially at risk due to this fiasco. Also, there is little domestic propaganda value to be gained from a cowardly sneak attack followed by denials. Here’s an alternative analysis;

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_5930.shtml

Beijing suspects false flag attack on South Korean corvette

By Wayne Madsen
Online Journal Contributing Writer

(WMR) – WMR’s intelligence sources in Asia suspect that the March attack on the South Korean Navy anti-submarine warfare (ASW) corvette, the Cheonan*,* was a false flag attack designed to appear as coming from North Korea.

One of the main purposes for increasing tensions on the Korean peninsula was to apply pressure on Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama to reverse course on moving the U.S. Marine Corps base off Okinawa. Hatoyama has admitted that the tensions over the sinking of the Cheonan played a large part in his decision to allow the U.S. Marines to remain on Okinawa. Hatoyama’s decision has resulted in a split in the ruling center-left coalition government, a development welcome in Washington, with Mizuho Fukushima, the Social Democratic Party leader threatening to bolt the coalition over the Okinawa reversal.

The Cheonan was sunk near Baengnyeong Island, a westernmost spot that is far from the South Korean coast, but opposite the North Korean coast. The island is heavily militarized and within artillery fire range of North Korean coastal defenses, which lie across a narrow channel.

The Cheonan*,* an ASW corvette, was decked out with state-of-the-art sonar, plus it was operating in waters with extensive hydrophone sonar arrays and acoustic underwater sensors. There is no South Korean sonar or audio evidence of a torpedo, submarine or mini-sub in the area. Since there is next to no shipping in the channel, the sea was silent at the time of the sinking.

However, Baengnyeong Island hosts a joint US-South Korea military intelligence base and the US Navy SEALS operate out of the base. In addition, four U.S. Navy ships were in the area, part of the joint U.S-South Korean Exercise Foal Eagle, during the sinking of the Cheonan*.* An investigation of the suspect torpedo’s metallic and chemical fingerprints show it to be of German manufacture. There are suspicions that the US Navy SEALS maintains a sampling of European torpedoes for sake of plausible deniability for false flag attacks. Also, Berlin does not sell torpedoes to North Korea, however, Germany does maintain a close joint submarine and submarine weapons development program with Israel.

The presence of the USNS Salvor*,* one of the participants in Foal Eagle, so close to Baengnyeong Island during the sinking of the South Korean corvette also raises questions.

The Salvor*,* a civilian Navy salvage ship, which participated in mine laying activities for the Thai Marines in the Gulf of Thailand in 2006, was present near the time of the blast with a complement of 12 deep sea divers.

Beijing, satisfied with North Korea’s Kim Jong Il’s claim of innocence after a hurried train trip from Pyongyang to Beijing, suspects the U.S. Navy’s role in the Cheonan’s sinking, with particular suspicion on the role of the Salvor*.* The suspicions are as follows:

  1. The Salvor engaged in a seabed mine-installation operation, in other words, attaching horizontally fired anti-submarine mines on the sea floor in the channel.

  2. The Salvor was doing routine inspection and maintenance on seabed mines, and put them into an electronic active mode (hair trigger release) as part of the inspection program.

  3. A SEALS diver attached a magnetic mine to the Cheonan*,* as part of a covert program aimed at influencing public opinion in South Korea, Japan and China.

The Korean peninsula tensions have conveniently overshadowed all other agenda items on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visits to Beijing and Seoul.

2

Very interesting and a great find. Well done.

So, the US Warhawks benefit from this tension between S. and N. Korea by now convincing Japan to keep US military bases in Japan.

And it appears that the attack against S. Korea could very well have been a false flag event setup by the US government and S. Korea.

Interesting.

Not suprising in the least bit.

At this point, its not really even about if the US Military Industrial Complex is involved in almost every major conflict around the world, but how and finding the proof we need.

3

I’m not sure this is from a trustworthy source. Anyhow, the article claims:

An investigation of the suspect torpedo’s metallic and chemical fingerprints show it to be of German manufacture.

Then it is talking about SEAL divers attaching magnetic mines to the ship…

4

“I’m not sure this is from a trustworthy source. Anyhow, the article claims:”

Would it suprise you, though, to find out this attack was a false flag carried out by the military industrial complex?

5

The MIC should be useful as describing the process, not the sole cause of the false flag, otherwise you’re blaming an abstraction while the actual culprits get away: the operating agents of this administration (recent nominees, hires at various levels of bureaucracy, etc.).

I realize it’s short to use the abstraction, but in everyday conversation, it seems less credible than to say “A false flag by our military, which would fit nicley into the objections to Japan trying to get less US prescence in Okinawa, might useful in persuading them that a volatile situation between NK & SK merits their further involvement in Okinawa. Every government has its interests in the rest of the world, so it’s naive to think that just because it’s our government, it is exempted from non-public entanglements largely executed to gain leverage in global affairs.”

6

Would it suprise you, though, to find out this attack was a false flag carried out by the military industrial complex?

Of course not. There’s plenty of documented false flag attacks on the part of the US. I just don’t find this evidence to be credible.

7

“it’s naive to think that just because it’s our government, it is exempted from non-public entanglements”

the problem is, the US MIC seems to be involved in so many wars, assasinations, etc. And there are quite a few false flags they have staged…and some events that although, not publicly accepted yet as a false flag, look to have US MIC involvement. And all of these events benefit the US MIC. How lucky of them.

At this point, I’m sick of it…people are sick of it. People are waking up and they don’t care anymore about being ridicouled.

by the way…can someone fix the quote thing…it doesn’t work on this computer…not on either of my laptops, not on my computer at home…

8

Quote has been erratic for a while there, I’m afraid. I’m using Chromium on a modern comp, & it doesn’t work. You’ll have to suffice using raw BBcode for now to make quotes if the Quote link doesn’t work:


*replace '{' with '['

{quote user="UserName" }

{/quote}
9

In this particular incident it would for me at least. North Korea and the South have a long history of antagonism dating back to the formation of radical PC’s even before the PRK provisional government (the north in particular lent itself toward more Chinese influence owning to its proximity to it), and the South and North have a long history over the past sixty years of firing at one another. I think people are looking into things further than the reality actually extends; were the two to engage in war the military or government of the South would not be in the most favorable of circumstances owning to the Capital’s proximity to the border with there North.

The DPRK has several thousand artillery positions staggered around the DMZ with which to bombard Seoul unremittingly at all hours of the day; given the mountainous geography of the region many of these are built into hillsides, mobile artillery platforms etc, and are fairly easy to camouflage. The military strategy is a somewhat more realist version of that Syria has developed (at least theoretically) toward Israel after the 1982 war; i.e. large scale air and artillery bombardment in the opening stages of conflict to cause as much damage as possible.

The point being that were war to erupt many South Koreans would initially die and much of the government would be hampered by having artillery rounds land around its offices; I suspect that you would probably see the first use of tactical nuclear weapons in a modern war by the US to destroy North Korea artillery emplacements along the border while other strikes are launched against “suspected” nuclear sites and sites that are “of interest” (military bases, power plants, major infrastructure), China would likely go into panic mode and North Korea would probably (if it still had the capacity) initiate nuclear strikes against immediate targets in the South, Japan, etc (how successful they would be is something else entirely, as the JMSDF and USN both carry SM-3’s capable of shooting down ballistic missiles and satellites and South Korea itself is peppered with PAC-3’s capable of doing the same.)

Speaking specifically on the USS Salvor, the Northern Limit Line region of Korea at sea is already peppered with mines layed by both sides; the fact that Cheonan was in such proximity to the Northern Coast also makes it susceptible to land-based torpedo installations, never mind sonar is never a failsafe (ask the crew of the ARA General Belgrano or the INS Khukri, and North Korea minisubs have actually already traveled through this “failsafe” sensor net and landed in the South), and even then the article questions the research of the South Koreans and then assume it to be correct when talking about acoustic measurements by the South Koreans (if they did have them it would undoubtedly be covered up IMO).

I think this whole incident is just Korea being Korea.

10

Actually as long as only the north has nukes, it will try to capitalize on those as long as it can. So perhaps it was indeed a willful northern action to build up some siege mentality (Israel’s favorite trick). Who knows, perhaps the regime is near collapsing and they have to resort to such things to prolong its life.

On the other hand a false flag would also be possible, but if and only if the yanks where confident of shooting down northern nukes. The Patriot-3 is far form capable and I myself would not count on that, while SM-3 are, well on the sea while Seoul is just to close to the border. And lets not even mention artillery shells, cruise missile or even just transporting warheads in subs to some port or even in trucks! So, realistic chances of stopping every nuke the north could fire are every low.

But who knows, perhaps special forces could secure the missiles prior to launch. Other that this, I see no other way in which a nuclear conclusion would be avoided, and hence no gain for the US form provoking the north. Its just to risky.

And finally, if indeed war breaks out and the South wins, is the US really interested in a string, unified Korea? It looks as they’ve taken every step to keep the regime alive and prevent an union. China and Japan certainly feel the same. So, no one but the south itself would be interested in a war culminating in unification. So the US false flag does not appear to be too strongly vase. Too much trouble for a base.

11

The North Korean border on the DMZ is so well fortified with so many soldiers and artillery guns aimed at the South Korean border ready at a moments notice that any conventional campaign against it, even with the latest technology, is going to be a bloodbath. While it is inevitable that the North Koreans cannot win a way against South Korea and the United States, the terrible prospects for what would happen if war did break out (not to mention the fact that China would probably get involved one way or another which may lead to two of the most militarily powerful nations in the world launching uncoordinated campaigns into North Korean) is enough to give North Korea some leverage against any would-be belligerents.

No its not “very interesting”, its exactly would I expected conspiracy theorists to do seeing that many believe that if there is any military action done in the world, the United States must be somehow behind it.

Conveniently? I don’t think that this is convenient at all for either China or the United States. Not only does it bring up the prickly issue of China’s support for the despotic regime, but it also brings up fears regarding the future stability of North Korean.

12

Kim Jong-Il has a very good reason to attack South Korea. It helps him re-assert his authority over his generals. He wants to name his son as his succesor and in order to get the top military brass to go along with it he ordered an attack to make sure they fall in line. He’s insane - just because the US is an enemy of North Korea doesn’t mean that this was the result of a false-flag operation. There is just no legitimate proof to justify that position.

13

The problem I find is that both a false flag & the non-false flag story fit fairly well. The earlier considering the use of creating narratives in post-modern society (to justify military action), the later because NK & SK are still technically & have been for quite a while, in a state of war.

The later story is less glamorous, so I can understand why people would want the earlier one to be true (more complex, ties into resentment for the Military Industrial Complex & The State, etc.)

14

South Korean religious leaders question conclusions of the Cheonan sinking investigation

http://www.dmzhawaii.org/?p=7166

May 28, 2010

Nothing is covered up that will not become known” Luke 12:2

We, PROK, who have been praying for democracy, peace, and life of Korean society, raise some points responding to the JIG’s announcement of the conclusion of its investigation that says South Korean Navy ship Cheonan sank by a North Korean submarine attack with a heavy torpedo.

First of all, we point out that JIG’s investigation cannot be fair and objective from the beginning. The Ministry of National Defense and the military, which are the most responsible for the incident took control over the whole investigation. They also made a hasty announcement to meet the first day of the campaign for the coming election on June 2, which left suspicions about the background. If there is any intention to take advantage of 46 young sailors’ deaths for any political purpose, it will kill them again.

JIG’s announcement did not explain anything but left so many questions among Korean people. Now we are asking the following questions.

  1. We cannot understand why the crucial moment of sinking is missing from the footage (TOD). The JIG must also release the records of radio messages exchanged and Cheonan’s CCTV recordings.

  2. If Cheonan had sunk due to a shockwave and bubble effect by an underwater torpedo explosion, there must be any eyewitness of the giant water pillar. Moreover, most survivors are not suffering from torn eardrums, intestinal damages, fractures, or lacerations which are the general symptoms of torpedo explosion.

  3. There were 13 Korean and US up-to-date ships at the West Sea near the scene. They were conducting a joint military drill at that time. Among those 13 ships are Cheonan, a warship to detect and fight with the submarines, torpedoes, airplanes, and missiles, and another warship Aegis specialized in dealing with submarines. Why couldn’t any of the super modern ships detect the attack of the North Korean submarines or torpedo?

  4. Why was late petty officer Han Joo-ho searching the third location, not the bow or the stern where the sailors were? Why did the American ambassador and the commander of American Army in Korea attend the memorial service for him to express condolences and pay comport money to his family? The JIG must give a clear explanation to the wide spread suspicions of probable clash between the US and Korean ships or mistaken firing between the two.

  5. Why have the survivors been strictly separated and controlled since the tragedy happened? Why are they not allowed to say anything about it, though they know the truth best?

According to JIG’s announcement, a North Korean submarine attacked Cheonan with a heavy torpedo and escaped without being detected at all. It means President Lee who is in charge of national security should take full responsibility for what happened and apologize to Korean people. The minister of defense, the joint chief of staff, and the naval chief of staff should do the same thing.

JIG’s announcement did not answer any of the questions but left more suspicions. Now is the time for the Korean leaders to stop shifting responsibilities but taking them. They have to organize a new investigation group including civilian experts and opposition parties to find the whole truth answering all the questions above.

Once again we express our deepest condolences to the families of the late sailors as we promise to do our best to reveal the truth and take the follow-up measures.

May 20, 2010

Rev. Kwon Young-Joung

Peace and Reunification Committee

Rev. Jeon Byung-Saeng

Church and Society Committee

The Presbyterian Church in the Republic of Korea

15

Analysts question Korea torpedo incident

Jeff Stein - Washington Post

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/spy-talk/2010/05/asian_analysts_question_korea_torpedo_incident.html

How is it that a submarine of a fifth-rate power was able to penetrate a U.S.-South Korean naval exercise and sink a ship that was designed for anti-submarine warfare?

Such questions are being fueled by suggestions in the South Korean and Japanese media that the naval exercise was intended to provoke the North to attack. The resulting public outcry in the South, according to this analysis, would bolster support for a conservative government in Seoul that is opposed to reconciliation efforts.

As fanciful as it may sound to Western ears, the case that OperationFoal Eagle was designed to provoke the North has been underscored by constant references in regional media to charts showing the location where the ship was sunk – in waters close to, and claimed by, North Korea.

"Baengnyeong Island is only 20 kilometers from North Korea in an area that the North claims as its maritime territory, except for the South Korean territorial sea around the island,” Japanese journalist Tanaka Sakai wrote in the left-leaning Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus.

He called the sinking of the ship “an enigma.”

"The Cheonan was a patrol boat whose mission was to survey with radar and sonar the enemy’s submarines, torpedoes, and aircraft … " Sakai wrote.

“If North Korean submarines and torpedoes were approaching, the Cheonan should have been able to sense it quickly and take measures to counterattack or evade. Moreover, on the day the Cheonan sank, US and ROK military exercises were under way, so it could be anticipated that North Korean submarines would move south to conduct surveillance. It is hard to imagine that the Cheonan sonar forces were not on alert.”

The liberal Hankyoreh newspaper in Seoul echoed a similar theme.

“A joint South Korean-U.S. naval exercise involving several Aegis warships was underway at the time, and the Cheonan was a patrol combat corvette (PCC) that specialized in anti-submarine warfare. The question remains whether it would be possible for a North Korean submarine to infiltrate the maritime cordon at a time when security reached its tightest level and without detection by the Cheonan,” it reported.

American spy satellites were also monitoring the exercise, “so the U.S. would have known that North Korean submarines had left their ports on a mission,” adds Scott Snyder, director of Center for U.S.-Korea Policy at the Asia Foundation.

“The route the North Korean submarines apparently took was from the East Sea, not directly from the North across the NLL,” or Northern Limit Line, the sea boundary unilaterally imposed by Seoul. “Essentially, they went the roundabout way and came at the ROK vessel from behind,” he said.

But Bruce Klingner, chief of the CIA’s Korea Branch in the 1990s, said “anti-submarine operations are far more difficult than is often realized.

“Beyond the obvious difficulty in tracking something that is designed to operate quietly, navies are confronted with natural acoustical phenomena as shallow, noisy littoral waters and layers of water salinity which can provide cover for submarines.”

Moreover, says Terence Roehrig, a professor at the Naval War College, “the Cheonan was an older Pohang-class corvette and not one of these [newer] ships.”

“Satellite and communications coverage of sub bases can tell when subs have left base…” adds Bruce Bechtol, Jr., professor of international relations at the Marine Corps Command and Staff College. “It cannot tell locations of submarines once they are at sea – unless they surface or communicate.”

“A mini-submarine like the type that is assessed to have penetrated the NLL is designed specifically for covert maneuvering in shallow waters like those that exist off of the west coast of the Korean Peninsula,” he said.

“It appears from the reports that [the South Korean Ministry of Defense] has released that a submarine departed port off the west coast of North Korea, accompanied by a support vessel. The submarine perhaps could have come fairly close to the NLL using diesel power, then switched to battery power, which is much quieter,” Bechtol added. “The submarine could have then slipped past the NLL at an appropriate time and waited for a ROK ship to approach.”

Suspicions about what happened, Bechtol said, are unwarranted.

“The fact of the matter is, a submarine did infiltrate into South Korean waters – and they have done so in the past fairly frequently," he said.

"It is their mission.”