North Korean Vessel Sink[or Sunk] in Mid-October, North Korea reveals.
14 replies, posted
[quote][B]North Korea has revealed that one of its warships sank last month, killing a number of sailors, in a rare admission of military failure.
[/B]State media reported a visit by leader Kim Jong-un to a naval cemetery for the crew of "submarine chaser No 233".
Photographs showed Mr Kim surrounded by more than a dozen gravestones inscribed with the date 13 October.
The report said the vessel had been performing combat duties but gave no more information about what happened.
"Submarine chaser No 233 fell while performing combat duties in mid-October," state news agency KCNA said.
Images showed Mr Kim, accompanied by several officials, visiting a memorial which included multiple gravestones with images inscribed on them.[/quote]
[URL]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-24800228[/URL]
The ultimate irony for a submarine hunter is to sink; becoming what you have always hated and spent your life hunting.
Maybe it was sunk in a skirmish?
Rayhalo - AMERICAN IMPERIAL BOURGEOIS AGGRESSION DESTROYED PEACEFUL NORTH KOREAN SHIPS.
This isn't him showing compassion for fallen soldiers. This is a warning.
[QUOTE=SexualShark;42763629]Maybe it was sunk in a skirmish?[/QUOTE]
By who? Naval skirmishes in the Korean [I]penis[/I]ular are widely reported in western media, we'd certainly know about it.
Probably an internal incident. Power struggles aren't out of the question.
Or it could have sunk due to mechanical failures and they are playing up the significance of the craft by mentioning its military duties, which probably meant it was on patrol when it sunk on its own.
[QUOTE=G3rman;42763658]Probably an internal incident. Power struggles aren't out of the question.
Or it could have sunk due to mechanical failures and they are playing up the significance of the craft by mentioning its military duties, which probably meant it was on patrol when it sunk on its own.[/QUOTE]Isn't the North Korean navy the least-equipped out of the three branches? Mechanical failure would be imo the most likely explanation.
Man I do miss Rayhalo.
Gotta admit, though, that is a nice memorial
[QUOTE=T553412;42765984]Gotta admit, though, that is a nice memorial[/QUOTE]Monuments and memorials are their speciality; it's not like they let their artists do anything else. Give it a few years, and North Korea will be mostly made up of memorials and monuments.
I wonder what this "submarine chaser" looks like.
[QUOTE=muffinmastah;42767218]I wonder what this "submarine chaser" looks like.[/QUOTE]
Just a bigger ship that can go faster and has more torpedoes and depth charges and sonars and shit
It's designed to blow up other subs, what would you expect
I like how they say "No 233" as to imply they have at least 233 of those things.
[QUOTE=Clavus;42770008]I like how they say "No 233" as to imply they have at least 233 of those things.[/QUOTE]
It's intentional to deceive enemies.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_tank_problem[/url]
(That isn't 100% the same example but it's basically the same concept)
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.