Red herring you say? Why does it seem like a pretty exact parallel to me?

[OFK: Because you lack critical thinking skills?]

I mean, you did just use “uncertainty” as some sort of proof, or at least some sort of justification, did you not? I don’t recall the mentioning of such uncertainty in the justifications Bush and his cohort presented to the country for the invasion of Iraq.

Interesting news coming out of Russia these days, seems like they disagree with the results of this so called international investigation as well. So whose words should I believe?

[OFK: You've obviously made your mind up. You don't need me to tell you. It's Pravda for you!]

America and its allies, or Russia and China? I suppose the best way is to look at the evidence and arguments from each side. I already know your stance on the American argument, what are your rebukes for the Russian and Chinese arguments?

[OFK: Yawwwn.]

No. Korea’s govt. gains immensely on the only stage that matters to them: projection of power, standing up to the US and South Korea, demonstrating to their own population their ability to strike the fist, legitimizing “the General” KJI’s claims to military ability, and shoring up it’s crumbling foundation of support from the general population.

Just as there are people who refuse to believe anything about North Korean wrongdoing on the Korean Left, there are, as you say, people whose first reflex is to think of NK wrongdoing. But there are also quite a few of us who try to find out the facts first.

My first reaction to the Cheonan was “not even the North Koreans would be this crazy.” I would have thought it was either some kind of accident or a loose mine. There were some early facts that could implicate a torpedo attack by the North Koreans.

The time and date of the sinking was the most troubling. South Korea’s most experienced submariner wrote an early article about the treacherous tides off the west coast of Korea. He said that the time the Cheonan sank was precisely the narrow window (a matter of hours or even minutes) when the tides in that region are calm enough to reliably launch a torpedo attack from a small sub. He also noted that the phase of the moon that night provided just enough light to see the Cheonan from any of the angles a sub could have fired a torpedo. He concluded that if any submariner had decided to ambush a South Korean ship, that night and that time would be one of the very few times a month that it would be feasible.

When the Cheonan was recovered, the evidence was increasingly damning. When the torpedo parts were a smoking gun. There is very little alternative explanation why North Korean torpedo parts would end up where they were found.

As for a deliberate attack by the Americans with a North Korean torpedo, intending to frame the North Koreans there are absolutely no facts to support such a claim even though there is extensive scrutiny and many people in Korea are trying extremely hard to discredit the South Korean government.

The idea that since the US invaded Iraq on flimsy evidence, they are capable of committing an atrocity of this scale is not a sensible comparison. During the build up to the Iraq war, there were many people within the US who questioned the presence of WMDs in Iraq and the whole process. Even Colin Powell’s presentation at the Security Council was criticized as soon as he made it. If the affair with Iraq and WMDs is to be compared to the Cheonan attack at all, the reasonable conclusion is that it would be exceedingly difficult for the Americans to pull off anything clandestinely.

What seems to be going on is that as the claims by people who do not want to believe the South Korean government are becoming increasingly far-fetched, as other explanations such as the accidental sinking hypotheses are becoming less likely. I am quite certain that when North Korea’s archives are uncovered and the current leadership is sitting on trial at the Hague, we will learn the whole truth. While the big picture will be the same, the details will probably be quite surprising.

Did you apply the same line of reasoning to WMD’s in Iraq? It seems like people fell for the exact same line of reasoning, that “they did it before, why can’t they do it now” rather than any type of hard proof to start a war. The poster above me mentioned that the U.S. and its allies have a serious credibility problem, is it really any surprise after the whole Iraq fiasco? If the interest is in finding out the truth, why didn’t this “multilateral” investigation group include say Russia or China? Even if we accept their findings, there is no conclusive proof of its conclusions based on those findings without using the same line of faulty reasoning.

The U.S. could fabricate enough evidence to start a war, which I, like most other Americans, found very hard to believe until after years and years of search for the ephemeral WMD’s in Iraq. Don’t forget that. So using the same line of reasoning, that “they did it before, so why can’t they do it now,” why can’t the U.S. do it again?

The problem is that many here start with the assumption of NK wrongdoing and U.S./SK clean hands, and the investigation did nothing to change that so it somehow serve as proof now. Note that there were many “leaks” implicating NK prior to the release of the findings of the investigation to ensure the spread of such an assumption. But if the assumption from the start was that NK had the clean hands while the U.S./SK were at fault, then you’ll see the findings of the investigation in the exact opposite light.

[Your analogy is a red herring. In 2003, Saddam Hussein still controlled all of the sites where the CIA believed WMD's were made and stored, and still exercised control by terror over all of the witnesses who knew all of the critical information. In circumstances where the evidence and witnesses under under the control of a regime that is determined to evade transparency and verification, certainty is impossible, and uncertainty about dangerous and untrustworthy regimes raises the risk of miscalculation and war. Saddam Hussein deliberately created that uncertainty. He wanted the Iranians and Americans to believe he had usable WMD stockpiles and didn't believe the U.S. would invade. And Saddam, who still had all the means to reconstitute his WMD programs until March 2003, intended to do precisely that.

There is no such uncertainty in the case of the Cheonan, which was sunk in South Korean waters, and where an international investigation that included neutral-nation experts had full access to the witnesses and evidence. In that case, the uncertainties are reversed, at least to rational minds. But of course, those who are absolutely determined to disbelieve what's proven beyond a reasonable doubt, may. - Joshua]

So although it is meaningless to try to speculate what goes on in the inner Court of Pyongyang, there are definitely some factions within it that tries to kill South Korean sailors. Given that history, along with the evidence that a North Korean torpedo was used, it would definitely be unreasonable to believe that North Korea is being framed.

The idea that one would even put the US and NK on the same level in that “given the inconclusive evidence, it’s more reasonable (?!) to suspect the Americans than the North Koreans” makes me wonder if I exist in the same reality as David. It is not reasonable to suspect the Americans or South Koreans, even with an accidental firing because it would be exceedingly difficult to keep the sub crew and chain of command quiet about the incident.

I do believe the “German residue” turned out to be one of many unverified rumors. But even if the torpedo turned out to be German, and instead of North Korean parts we found pieces of a German torpedo, I would have thought most Koreans would suspect that the North Koreans used a German torpedo to disguise the attack before they would suspect the South Koreans of covering up an accidental firing.

What was truly troubling about the reaction of many South Koreans was how many of us were willing to suspect the worst motives and behavior on the part of the South Korean military and the US. The only reason so many unverified rumors spread so rapidly seems to be because many of us were willing to believe them. South Korea’s military and its US allied forces seem to have a serious credibility problem.

What did it gain? Foreign exchange from sales of a proven reliable torpedo. This homing torpedo apparently has a device (which the US, UK, Russia and China have, but protect as a major secret) that moves its point of impact from the stern to the very middle of the ship, and explodes it below the hull. The warhead is large, and capable of breaking a well-built military vessel in two at its strongest point. These are significant selling points. Iran will buy, and becomes a major anti-ship force in the Gulf thereby.

As for reasonable doubt — what about good evidence? The chalked numeral #1 in Hangul DPRK-style is a dead giveaway. No one would’ve expected the steel drag net to bring the housing up, so this notation has every likelihood of being genuine. The steel drag net was itself an unprecedented response. It was good technology.

As for contradictions — no Western nation with a free press would ever today seek to explode its own vessel, and kill its own citizens. The USA hasn’t gained anything, since Obama appears resolute in not forcing the issue with Russia and China. Indeed, its failure to support the SoKo government when it needs support may’ve lost it kudos.

Personally, I am still dubious that the torpedo was launched from a small submarine. I prefer to believe it was a wholly new weapon, a rocket-launched tube containing a “throw-away” homing torpedo, which would be a huge generator of foreign exchange for the DPRK — but I accept I’m out in left field here.

There is ample evidence that the DPRK sank Cheonan and murdered 45 of its crew, and none to the contrary.

The fact that German chemicals and metallic residues were found inside the ship, something that NK’s have no access to(note the difference between that and the NK torpedo, which much of the world has access to) but a SK sub in the area DOES have access to, only further corroborate my theory. Obviously, this is just a theory, but it’s no less believable than the theory the investigation group passed on as “proof”.

[Your entire theory is based on one unnamed source's statement that some of the explosive residue inside the wreckage was "consistent with a type of torpedo made in Germany." That is not in fact a statement that "German chemicals and metallic residues were found inside the ship," but by all means, show me some reliable source that backs your assertion. What you're seizing on is one anonymous statement among dozens of anonymous statements by uninformed people running their mouths and saying dozens of things that, more often than not, turned out to be false. The multilateral investigation made no such findings. So in other words, you credit an anonymous South Korean official and you discredit the report of a panel of international experts. That sounds pretty stoned to me. - Joshua]

You asked what part of the doubt is reasonable, well let me show you: Given what has happened(i.e. the sinking of Cheonan and the laying of blame on NK), do you find the current situation entirely predictable(i.e. the drawing together of the U.S. and SK and increased American presence in East Asia with SK encouragement)? I do, and even if you don’t, I think you would at least admit that it is reasonable that some people think so. Now, with that established, it is very reasonable that whoever caused this incident predicted similarly, and thus whoever it is would be somebody who stands to gain the most and lost the least from this incident, is it not true?

So who gained and who lost? Let’s take a look at NK first. What has it gained? Nothing. Really, I can’t think of a thing that they’ve gained from this. Unlike prior incidents across the 38th, NK has DENIED involvement and thus the incident is of not even propaganda value for them. Now what about the U.S.? At a time when the South Koreans wanted the American soldiers out of their countries, at a time when the lease for the American base is almost up, it gave them a perfect opportunity to re-establish their presence in East Asia. What have they lost? Nothing. What have they gained? A stronger foothold in East Asia at a time when both SK and the Okinawans wanted the opposite.

In solving a crime, none can be proven in court without a motive. In this case, the North Koreans have no motive, while the Americans do.

[Thank you for that advice, Sherlock. As a guy who's tried dozens of actual felony cases to juries, I'll give you some complimentary advice -- there is no rule of evidence or procedure that says the prosecution has to prove a motive to get a conviction. In this case, however, the motives are clear enough. Not to wreck the premise of your Chomsky comic book plot line, but extending this same impeccable logic, then why did North Korea test two nukes, let 2 million people starve to death, kill Park Wang-Ja, or try to assassinate Hwang Jang Yop? All of those things are clearly also contrary to North Korea's rational interest, too, aren't they? Was North Korea framed for all those things, too? I mean, everyone in the world was begging North Korea to normalize trade relations and let them pour in aid. Seems the logical course of action would have been to take the loot. Let me suggest an alternative explanation: they might just be assholes. - Joshua]

One reason I am an avid supporter of the Pax Americana is that I feel it offers the greatest amount of security for which the least amount of interference (or “control”) is yielded. The US offers a reliable security package that Japan, China, and Russia would never provide, and it’s one where South Korea’s (or a united Korea’s) economic and democratic success is the reward its benefactor wants.

Sure, I’m couching it in rosy terms (and not everything is perfect), but it’s not a stretch.