NP Rank:
S Korea’s defense chief resignation not a sign of strength
In fact, South Koreas defense chief resignation indicates confusion and the exact reaction that North Korea would desire. Since officials are saying South Korea was unprepared, it indicates they really were not on the offensive in this engagement as the North accused. More likely, this is a highly staged and coordinated act of China and its puppet regime.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/25/AR2010112500513.html?hpid=topnews
“SKorea's defense chief resigns over NKorea attack
By HYUNG-JIN KIM and KWANG-TAE KIM
The Associated Press
Thursday, November 25, 2010; 9:14 AMYEONPYEONG ISLAND, South Korea -- South Korea's defense minister resigned Thursday amid intense criticism two days after a North Korean artillery attack killed four people on a small island near the Koreas' disputed frontier.
The move came as President Lee Myung-bak vowed to send more troops to the front-line South Korean island and as residents tried to salvage belongings from the blackened wreckage of their homes. Pyongyang warned of additional attacks if provoked.
Hours before Defense Minister Kim Tae-young's resignation, lawmakers had lashed out at the government, claiming officials were unprepared for Tuesday's attack and that the military response to the North's barrage was too slow. Even those in Lee's ruling party demanded Kim's dismissal as well as those of military leaders and some presidential aides.
Lee accepted Kim's resignation and a new defense chief will be announced Friday, presidential chief of staff Yim Tae-hee said.
Skirmishes between the Korean militaries are not uncommon, but North Korea's heavy bombardment of Yeonpyeong Island was the first on a civilian area, raising fears of an escalation that could lead to a new war on the Korean peninsula. South Korean troops had returned fire and scrambled fighter jets in response.
Seoul and Washington ratcheted up pressure on China to rein in its ally North Korea, and China on Thursday urged both sides to show restraint.
Reporters allowed for the first time onto the island found streets strewn with broken glass and charred debris. Blackened beer bottles lay beside what was left of a supermarket as coast guard officers patrolled in pairs past deserted offices and schools used by relief workers for meetings and meals.
Many residents fled as quickly as they could, but restaurant owner Lee In-ku, 46, joined a handful of villagers trying to salvage belongings from half-destroyed homes.
"It was a sea of fire," Lee said of Tuesday's attack. "Many houses were burning and many people were just running around in confusion. It was real chaos."
At an emergency meeting in Seoul on Thursday, President Lee ordered top-level weapons for troops manning the tense Yellow Sea, a presidential aide said.
"We should not ease our sense of crisis in preparation for the possibility of another provocation by North Korea," presidential spokesman Hong Sang-pyo quoted Lee as saying. "A provocation like this can recur any time."
Hong said South Korea will sharply raise the number of ground troops on Yeonpyeong and four other islands, reversing a 2006 decision to draw down forces. He declined to discuss specifics but said troops there currently are about 4,000.”



Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (5)
at 09:42 on November 25th, 2010
The ongoing war between Chinese puppet and American stooge in the region may escalate into war of attrition.US empire knows well that North Korea is neither Iraq nor Afghanistan.Thretening gestures,adopted by belligerent US won't succeed in coercing in North Korea.What can be acheived across a table,can not be through armed conflicts.Permanent solution of this regional problem,aggravated by intervention of China and US empire,lies in unification of two Koreas,like that of South and North Yemen.
at 11:06 on November 25th, 2010
Let's say unification is a desirable outcome.
From whose viewpoint? Does North want to unify with the South and vice versa?
Let's say yes?
North Korea: Communist dictatorship led by something akin to a royal family, where the family also assumes some sort of holy or religiously spirited piety. The economy is not self-sufficient and is solely dependent upon China for its survival.
South Korea: A democratic republic with a healthy entrepreneurial economy, a free society. South Korea is allied with the free world and citizens enjoy happiness.
Do you think that free people are going to negotiate to give up their freedom in exchange for unification with the North? No way.
The only way for unification to work is for China to stand down and stop interfering, and for the dictatorship to collapse.
at 05:52 on November 26th, 2010
YJ.Unification movement has to be initiated by people on both sides of the border.We live by the myth that elected governments represent people,and non-elected do not.As a matter of fact,historical records of past and present government available,no government,whatever may be its form has ever represented people.Every government on earth does represent certain vested interests,domestic or foreign or both.What people want, a government never.I
The first and foremost imperative for unification is non-intervention by US and China.UN General Assembly resolutions are waste papers,Security Council has five permanent bandits and any resolution by any permanent member for withdrawl of foreign troops from Korean soil will see its demise at the hands of a veto since two bandits are deeply involved in Korean affairs.
What Korea needs at the moment is a leader of Ho Chi Minh's or Mao'stature who can inspire Koreans to unite.
How East and West Germany were united?Governments are one thing,people another.In my opinion this point has no substance that people who have lived under one kind of government can not live under different kind of government.Pakistan,since its inception has alternated between democracy and military rule.China has now two economic systems.What difference does it make to a slave,whosoever is his master.
at 13:40 on November 26th, 2010
Why a leader aligned with communism? Why not a leader of free people stature?
Why not of Gandhi stature or Golda Meir or FDR?
Let's just put all G20 leaders on the table:
Julia Gillard, David Cameron, Silvio Berlusconi, Angela Merkel, Nicolas Sarkozy, Herman Van Rompuy, José Manuel, Barroso Recep, Tayyip Erdoğan, Dmitry Medvedev, Abdullah Susilo, Bambang Yudhoyono, Manmohan Singh, Lee Myung-bak, Naoto KanHu Jintao, Luiz Inácio, Lula da Silva, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, Barack Obama, Felipe Calderón, Stephen Harper, Jacob Zuma
at 11:57 on November 25th, 2010
Kim "ill" Young and his brood are anything but royalty. Not that that is any achievement in of itself.