Originally Posted by Jaydelart (Post 838980)

That would essentially be "strike two", as anything close to an act of war from the North

Originally Posted by RealJames (Post 839647)

Could you imagine North America without it's cheap Chinese goods? hah, that's a laugh

Originally Posted by fluffy0000 (Post 839636)

Nothing like sitting behind your'e computer and playing 'armchair general' and rattling your'e toy saber at the evil North Koreans?

Over half of South Korea's population (and more than a third of its GDP) is within range of thousands of North Korean 170mm guns (range of 50 kilometers) and 240 mm multiple rocket launchers (range of 45 kilometers). Actually, North Korea has hundreds of ballistic missiles capable of hitting anywhere in South Korea.

North Korea has the ability to do major damage to the southern capital (where half the population and a quarter of the GDP are), the South Koreans have more to lose than the northerners. Sprawling Seoul is 40-50 kilometers from the North Korea border. The city alone is 600 square kilometers, and the suburbs even larger. There are over 17,000 people per square kilometer (45,000 per square mile) in the city. The southerners know the north has nothing to lose, are desperate and heavily armed. What do you do?

Originally Posted by Heru (Post 839694)

North Korea is out of line but it seems like the south is like daring them to attack.

They do test on disputed border land and then do wargames a few days later. It seems stupid if you want to avoid conflict.

Originally Posted by RobinMask (Post 839700)

The North are going to create conflict regardless. It's better to be prepared for the inevitable rather than foolishly delay it. Look at the numerous attacks in the past few years, or the prisoners that the North has taken for people wandering 'too close/over to the border', and the very fact that they're so isolated and closed off doesn't help their cause, because it only makes people suspicious and concerned. I think the South's response so far (along with America) is quite justified.

Originally Posted by Heru (Post 839703)

How is it justified? "North Korea is going to attack at some point lets provoke them into an attack and then punish North Korea" Is this your justification?

South Korea hasn't exactly made the best moves and the way they've acted is on par with the craziness of North Korea.

Originally Posted by RobinMask (Post 839709)

My justification is that North Korea always provoke, always attack, and their behaviour never changes. Eventually they'll issue forth an attack that can't be ignored, and their latest attack wasn't exactly something easily ignored in itself either. It's better for South Korea to be prepared and ready to respond, that way they can defend themselves when the time comes. If they take your approach of 'just leave it' then one day North Korea will take action and the South won't be ready, they'll instead completely lose and we'll be asking 'why didn't they prepare and get ready when they had a chance?'. It's naive to say 'it could provoke the North, we must stop!', because that only works in the short term. North Korea is going to attack at some point - whether now or later - so even if it's 'provocation' they might as well get ready, because regardless of what they do it'll still lead to the same thing.

Originally Posted by RealJames (Post 839647)

Since when do countries get two free strikes before they are reprimanded for their atrocities?

NK is safe so long as China is backing it.

Could you imagine North America without it's cheap Chinese goods? hah, that's a laugh