How do you think Singapore will react to NK ship?
-
SINGAPORE : The US military is tracking a North Korean ship that media reports said is heading for Singapore.
The Kang Nam departed from a port in North Korea on Wednesday and is suspected of carrying weaponry, missile parts or nuclear material.
Responding to media queries, Singapore’s Foreign Ministry said Singapore takes seriously the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and if the allegation is true, the ministry said Singapore will act appropriately.
The Kang Nam is the first vessel to be tracked under new UN sanctions passed last week which bans shipments of arms and nuclear and missile technology to and from North Korea. — CNA /ls
Well so how do you think we will actually act appropriately? And what reasons could there be that the NK ship would be heading our way?
-
secret dealings between sg and dprk?
-
SG will as usual response with noise.
-
Channel NewsAsia. - Saturday, June 20
SINGAPORE : The US military is tracking a North Korean ship that media reports said is heading for Singapore.
The Kang Nam departed from a port in North Korea on Wednesday and is suspected of carrying weaponry, missile parts or nuclear material.
Responding to media queries, Singapore’s Foreign Ministry said Singapore takes seriously the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and if the allegation is true, the ministry said Singapore will act appropriately.
The Kang Nam is the first vessel to be tracked under new UN sanctions passed last week which bans shipments of arms and nuclear and missile technology to and from North Korea. — CNA /ls
North Korea has declared that any country that stop and board a North Korean ship is tantamount to declaring war on North Korea.
Will North Korea send a missile with a nuclear warhead in the direction of this Little Red Dot ?
North Korea President Kim had been insane enough to authorise the assassination of 18 South Korea Government Officials including 4 ministers - when they visited Myanmar in 1984.
Singapore will have to be more alert when words are put to action by the Singapore Navy - as the North Korean ship sails into the waters off Singapore, or when the ship sail pass Singapore to enter into the Malacca Straits.
-
It will say this but do another.
-
Me still the same
i still carry on sailing in my ark
unless that ship bang mine ark
then that kimchi ship prepare to
sink ya
-
For the first time you could see Singapore pleading for a vessel to turn to Pasir Gudang.
-
get ready the war plane?
-
*$&^# lah..
all talk so much dunno what's going on..
simple thing for Singapore to do.. DENY entry to the ship and the goddamned ship cannot do anything at all..
simple right?
all KPKB over such trival things..
-
SG had already deployed 2 of our 12 Ohio Class Trident Submarines into South China Sea. Do u think NK stand a chance?
-
Originally posted by airgrinder:
SG had already deployed 2 of our 12 Ohio Class Trident Submarines into South China Sea. Do u think NK stand a chance?
are u sure, the navy guys who came to my pub told me they are all off duty and no recall, they also said, singapore kam lan one, sure leave it to the US navy.singapore navy where got ohio class, kam lan class only
-
Originally posted by Short Ninja:
For the first time you could see Singapore pleading for a vessel to turn to Pasir Gudang.
: ) -
Originally posted by airgrinder:
SG had already deployed 2 of our 12 Ohio Class Trident Submarines into South China Sea. Do u think NK stand a chance?
How did you know they sent 2 submarines? and NK did say that if anyone tries to stop that ship it would be an act of war... So how will we cope with the war?
-
Originally posted by Yeotsd1995:
How did you know they sent 2 submarines? and NK did say that if anyone tries to stop that ship it would be an act of war... So how will we cope with the war?
these submarines is not going out for war, it just an exercise for an escape route for our top govt official to escape if war broke. When air and land movement is restricted -
0.o lol
if war ever happen between nk and singapore
i am sure all the other kuku country will come protect singapore. its to vaulable to them..
especially the auto industry.. lol
-
True... But why would they want to come to Singapore?
-
Originally posted by youyayu:
0.o lol
if war ever happen between nk and singapore
i am sure all the other kuku country will come protect singapore. its to vaulable to them..
especially the auto industry.. lol
maybe kangNam is sending korea drama series and kimchi to us -
North Korea: “Sanity” at the Brink
by Michael Parenti
June 20, 2009
Nations that chart a self-defining course, seeking to use their land, labor, natural resources, and markets as they see fit, free from the smothering embrace of the US corporate global order, frequently become a target of defamation. Their leaders often have their moral sanity called into question by US officials and US media, as has been the case at one time or another with Castro, Noriega, Ortega, Qaddafi, Aristide, Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, Hugo Chavez, and others.
So it comes as no surprise that the rulers of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK or North Korea) have been routinely described as mentally unbalanced by our policymakers and pundits. Senior Defense Department officials refer to the DPRK as a country "not of this planet," led by "dysfunctional" autocrats. One government official, quoted in the New York Times, wondered aloud "if they are really totally crazy." The New Yorker magazine called them "balmy," and late-night TV host David Letterman got into the act by labeling Kim Jong-il a "madman maniac."
To be sure, there are things about the DPRK that one might wonder about, including its dynastic leadership system, its highly dictatorial one-party rule, and the chaos that seems implanted in the heart of its "planned" economy.
But in its much advertised effort to become a nuclear power, North Korea is actually displaying more sanity than first meets the eye. The Pyongyang leadership seems to know something about US global policy that our own policymakers and pundits have overlooked. In a word, the United States has never attacked or invaded any nation that has a nuclear arsenal.
The countries directly battered by US military actions in recent decades (Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, then again Iraq), along with numerous other states that have been threatened at one time or another for being "anti-American" or "anti-West" (Iran, Cuba, South Yemen, Venezuela, Syria, North Korea, and others) have one thing in common: not one of them has wielded a nuclear deterrence--until now.
Let us provide a little background. Put aside the entire Korean War (1950-53) in which US aerial power destroyed most of the DPRK's infrastructure and tens of thousands of its civilians. Consider more recent events. In the jingoist tide that followed the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President George W. Bush claimed the right to initiate any military action against any "terrorist" nation, organization, or individual of his choosing.Such a claim to arbitrary power--in violation of international law, the UN charter, and the US Constitution--transformed the president into something of an absolute monarch who could exercise life and death power over any quarter of the Earth. Needless to say, numerous nations--the DPRK among them--were considerably discomforted by the US president's elevation to King of the Planet.
It was only in 2008 that President Bush finally removed North Korea from a list of states that allegedly sponsor terrorism. But there remains another more devilishly disquieting hit list that Pyongyang recalls. In December 2001, two months after 9/11, Vice President Dick Cheney referred chillingly to "forty or fifty countries" that might need military disciplining. A month later in his 2002 State of the Union message, President Bush pruned the list down to three especially dangerous culprits: Iraq, Iran, and North Korea, who, he said, composed an "axis of evil."
It was a curious lumping together of three nations that had little in common. In Iraq the leadership was secular, in Iran it was a near Islamic theocracy. And far from being allies, the two countries were serious enemies. Meanwhile the DPRK, had no historical, cultural, or geographical links to either Iraq or Iran. But it could witness what was happening.
The first to get hit was Iraq, nation #1 on the short list of accused evil doers. Before the 2003 US invasion, Iraq had the highest standard of living in the Middle East. But years of war, sanctions, and occupation reduced the country to shambles, its infrastructure shattered and much of its population drenched in blood and misery.
Were it not that Iraq has proven to be such a costly venture, the United States long ago would have been moving against Iran, #2 on the axis-of-evil hit list. As we might expect, Iranian president Mahmoud Amadinijad has been diagnosed in the US media as "dangerously unstable."The Pentagon has announced that thousands of key sites in Iran have been mapped and targeted for aerial attack. All sorts of threats have been directed against Tehran for having pursued an enriched uranium program--which every nation in the world has a right to do. And on a recent Sunday TV program, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that the United States might undertake a "first strike" against Iran to prevent its nuclear weapons development.
Rather than passively await its fate sitting in Washington's crosshairs, nation #3 on the US hit list is trying to pack a deterrence. The DPRK's attempt at self-defense is characterized in US official circles and US media as wild aggression. Secretary Clinton warned that the United States would not be "blackmailed by North Korea." Defense Secretary Robert Gates fulminated, "We will not stand idly by as North Korea builds the capability to wreak destruction on any target in Asia--or on us." The DPRK's nuclear program, Gates warns, is a "harbinger of a dark future."
President Obama condemned North Korea's "belligerent provocative behavior" as posing a "grave threat." In June 2009, the UN Security Council unanimously passed a US-sponsored resolution ratcheting up the financial, trade, and military sanctions against the DPRK, a nation already hard hit by sanctions. In response to the Security Council's action, Kim Jong-il's government announced it would no longer "even think about giving up its nuclear weapons" and would enlarge its efforts to produce more of them.
In his earlier Cairo speech Obama stated, "No single nation should pick and choose which nation holds nuclear weapons." But that is exactly what the United States is trying to do in regard to a benighted North Korea--and Iran. Physicist and political writer Manuel Garcia, Jr., observes that Washington's policy "is to encourage other nations to abide by the terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty--and renounce nuclear weapons--while exempting itself." Others must disarm so that Washington may more easily rule over them, Garcia concludes.
US leaders still refuse to give any guarantee that they will not try to topple Pyongyang's communist government. There is talk of putting the DPRK back on the list of state sponsors of terrorism, though Secretary Clinton admits that evidence is wanting to support such a designation.
From its lonely and precarious perch the North cannot help feeling vulnerable. Consider the intimidating military threat it faces. The DPRK's outdated and ill-equipped army is no match for the conventional forces of the United States, South Korea, and Japan.The United States maintains a large attack base in South Korea. As Paul Sack reminds us in a recent correspondence to the New York Times, at least once a year the US military conducts joint exercises with South Korean forces, practicing a land invasion of the DPRK. The US Air Force maintains a "nuclear umbrella" over South Korea with nuclear arsenals in Okinawa, Guam, and Hawaii. Japan not only says it can produce nuclear bombs within a year, it seems increasingly willing to do so. And the newly installed leadership in South Korea is showing itself to be anything but friendly toward Pyongyang.
The DPRK's nuclear arsenal is a two-edged sword. It can deter attack or invite attack. It may cause US officials to think twice before cinching a tighter knot around the North, or it may cause them to move aggressively toward a confrontation that no one really wants.
After years of encirclement and repeated rebuffs from Washington, years of threat, isolation, and demonization, the Pyongyang leaders are convinced that the best way to resist superpower attack and domination is by developing a nuclear arsenal. It does not really sound so crazy. As already mentioned, the United States does not invade countries that are armed with long-range nuclear missiles (at least not thus far).
Having been pushed to the brink for so long, the North Koreans are now taking a gamble, upping the ante, pursuing an arguably "sane" deterrence policy in the otherwise insane world configured by an overweening and voracious empire.http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14033
Mr. Obama, Tear Down This Empire
-
ZZzzzzz...good for sleeping reading...ZZZzzz...goodnite
-
...However, as we see the American “chessboard”, apart from Iraq, Palestine-Israel conflict and the nuclear issues of the two so-called “axis of evil” countries that need to be addressed, there are always two lines that show from time to time.
One line is actually the latest manifestation of the “Asian version of NATO”.The neo-conservative idealists in the United States and Japan have all along attempted to create an “Asian version of NATO”, with Japan as its axis, flanked by the solid triangular alliance of the United States, Japan and the ROK in the north and the strong alliance of the United States, Japan and Australia in the south, and covering the Taiwan Strait, ASEAN, and even India in South Asia.
If this line is formed, it will serve several purposes. First, solidify the front line of the US deployment in the Pacific region; second, exert deterrent effect on the two potential hotspots in Northeast Asia; third, hedge its bets on China by forming a line of defense and containment against the country, and fourth, enlist its allies to help resolve the thorny issues in the Middle East.
The repeated clamoring over the year by the rightist media in the United States and Japan for the establishment of a so-called “democratic alliance” mainly composed of the United States, Japan, Australia and India, the change of US policy toward India on the nuclear issue, the establishment of “strategic relations” with India by the United States and Japan as well as the enhanced US cooperation with ASEAN (including its military re-deployment in some ASEAN countries) are all directly or indirectly related to this strategy.
The second is a “strategic line” across the Eurasian landmass, which has Israel as its axis, covers Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan and extends through Central Asia and Mongolia to approach the Korean Peninsula.
If this line is cemented, in the Middle East, the United States will be in a stronger position to deal with its old enemies such as Iran and Syria and the Islamic extremists and advance its “Greater Middle East Initiative”; in South Asia, it can contain India, Pakistan and Myanmar while creating more destabilizing factors to the southwest of China; in Central Asia and Northeast Asia, it can counter Russia in its north in collaboration with NATO and work with US-Japan alliance to counter China in its southeast.
This line and its adjacent areas have the richest oil reserve in the world, so the control of this line means the control of the world oil lifeline. It is out of such strategic consideration that the United States launched the anti-terror war, staged “color revolution” in Lebanon and Central Asian countries and engaged in military infiltration in some Central Asian countries, and President Bush and Prime Minister Koizumi visited Mongolia respectively and attempted to make the United States and Japan the third and the fourth “largest neighbors” of Mongolia.
However, the developments over the past year and more show that the two “strategic lines” on the chessboard of the US neo-conservative idealists are very fragile and the realization of the two lines is their wishful thinking.
On the first line, the centrifugal tendency of the ROK has become increasingly apparent this year. It explicitly opposes the Cold War style group activities, and openly claims it wants to play a balancing role in the region. Australia reiterates that it has no intention of “containing China” and stresses that China’s rise is good for both Australia and the whole world.
Even ROK and Australia, two traditional allies of the United States, are moving away and no longer reliable, not to say India and ASEAN countries. India is fostering a “strategic and cooperative partnership for peace and prosperity” with China and ASEAN countries are stepping up the process of establishing a free trade area with China.
As China’s friendly neighbors, they all have a relationship of mutual help and support with China. There is no doubt that they need the cooperation and support of the United States and Japan, but they will not join these two countries in countering China.
The other line will not go far either. First, the axis of the line and a host of flashpoint issues in the Middle East, all weak points for the United States, have pinned the United States down. Second, the Afghan war tends to drag on. Third, the US “color revolution” and military infiltration in Central Asia are not going smoothly. As Central Asian countries become vigilant of the US attempts and the overall strength and world power status of Russia are being restored, they start to fight back against the United States.
As to Mongolia, which sits in between China and Russia and has been a friendly neighbor of both countries, it is unlikely to form synergy with the so-called third and fourth “neighbors”. Fourth, and probably most importantly, under the framework of the thriving Shanghai Cooperation Organization, its member states are engaged in all-round cooperation in security, political, economic, cultural and other areas, and it is by no means easy for outsiders to sow dissension among them...
-
Ships comming to port is usually by advance appointment only.
TT ahead ETA, and cargo manifest, and ETD and forward destination.
Come only when approval is given.
Local agencies to arrange for pilots, tugs, and bunkering.
No approval, how to sail in?
-
Originally posted by Yeotsd1995:
True... But why would they want to come to Singapore?
to use our toilets.
-
NK ship heading Singapore
Singapore navy: SHIT SHIT SHIT WE NO PREPARE ONLY NO DRILL NOW REAL THING DO WHATCaptain: AR SHIT I DUNNO LETS SUICIDE BEFORE THEY KILL US TO SAVE OUR PRIDE
Rest of the navy: YES SIR
Straits time headlines - Mass suicide of Singapore Navy due to overeaction -
North Korean is using Singapore as a third party to test us between US and China. We are just a bait for their game plan. This is why the ship is heading towards Singapore.
-
Test...meaning what?