| Submit your comments on this article |
| China-Japan-Koreas |
| Ship Explodes and Sinks off Korea |
| 2012-01-15 |
| South Korean cargo ship has sunk after being rocked by an explosion off the country's west coast, leaving three people dead and eight others missing. The ship usually carried chemicals but was empty when it sank. The incident occurred relatively far from the tense sea border with North Korea and the coast guard doesn't suspect the North was involved. Loose mine? Somebody wanting to impress the new boss? Or just an accident? |
| Posted by:Glenmore |
| #9 Once is an accident, twice might be a coincidence, three times is a pattern. Keep count. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2012-01-15 14:46 |
| #8 yep - a full gas tank is less explosive than a quarter-full one |
| Posted by: Frank G 2012-01-15 13:38 |
| #7 Empty cargo tanks can be more dangerous than full tanks for some substances if air displaces the product when it is pumped out. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2012-01-15 12:56 |
| #6 It's always better to bet on stupidity rather than malice. |
| Posted by: Formerly Dan 2012-01-15 12:53 |
| #5 South Korean merchant mariners aren't exactly at the top of their game. I've seen one on 'Iron Mike' (autopilot) sail right through a naval formation, oblivious to radio calls . Another SKor ship boarded during interdiction ops had its entire crew passed out drunk; again on autopilot. Coastal shipping also tends to be a bit less professional. I'd go with 'accident'. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2012-01-15 11:56 |
| #4 Empty chemical carrier. That's a possible industrial accident afloat. Not saying that's it, but too soon to get any conclusions about Pudge being involved just yet. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2012-01-15 04:45 |
| #3 Their military is going to want to demonstrate that it has not gone soft. It will certainly kill some people in some pointless and stupidly incoherent act that affirms the stupid and incoherent status quo. Seems like killing, maiming only 11 people would represent an step down in their normal level of totally pointless mayhem. My guess is that their Navy wanted to be in the vanguard of a truly insipid series of triumphantly moronic serial murder of innocents. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2012-01-15 01:24 |
| #2 My bet is on loose mine. A sub attack would have chosen a more worthy target. |
| Posted by: gromky 2012-01-15 00:30 |
| #1 The incident occurred relatively far from the tense sea border with North Korea But within mini-sub range? /me suspects Pudge of feeling his oats. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2012-01-15 00:13 |