North Korea demolishes liaison office as tensions rise

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  sister-mary-agnes-ample-bottom  •  4 weeks ago  •  49 comments

By:   MSN

North Korea demolishes liaison office as tensions rise
Earlier this month, North Korea threatened to permanently shut the liaison office with South Korea.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



North Korea admitted Tuesday to bombing an inter-Korean liaison office building just north of the border with South Korea as tensions continue to escalate on the Korean peninsula.

South Korea's Unification Ministry, which handles relations with North Korea, confirmed to NBC News that the liaison office in the North Korean border town of Kaesong was demolished "by bombing" on Tuesday afternoon local time.

"We confirm that NK demolished the inter-Korean liaison office in Gaesong Industrial Complex by bombing at 14:49 KST (01:49 ET)," a spokesperson said.

North Korean state news agency, KCNA, also reported Tuesday that the joint liaison office was "completely ruined."

South Korea's national security council has convened a meeting in the wake of the office's destruction, a spokesperson for the country's presidential office told NBC News.

The country's Ministry of Defense said it was monitoring North Korean military movement around the clock and is maintaining "resolute military posture."

"We are making full effort to manage the situation stably so that the situation does not escalate into a military crisis," the ministry said in a statement. "If North Korea carries out military provocation, our military will respond with powerful force," it added.

On Friday, North Korea said it was pulling away from its relationship with the U.S. two years after a historic handshake between Trump and Kim Jong Un in Singapore and nearly a year after Trump took an unprecedented step onto North Korean soil, saying there had been no actual improvement in ties.

Earlier this month, North Korea threatened to permanently shut the liaison office with South Korea as it condemned its rival for failing to prevent activists from sending anti-North Korean leaflets across the border.

Last week, North Korea cited the same reasons for axing all communications with South Korea, a move analysts believe could be an attempt to manufacture a crisis and force concessions from its neighbor.

Before South Korea's announcement that the liaison office was demolished, KCNA reported Tuesday that North Korea's military threatened to move back into zones that were demilitarized under inter-Korean peace agreements in the past as the country continued to dial up pressure on Seoul amid stalled nuclear negotiations with the Trump administration.

The General Staff of the Korean People's Army said it's reviewing a ruling party recommendation to advance into unspecified border areas that had been demilitarized under agreements with the South, which would "turn the front line into a fortress."

On Sunday, South Korea convened an emergency security meeting after North Korean leader's Kim Jong Un's sister, Kim Yo Jong, one of his top aides, threatened military action against South Korea.

In a statement carried Saturday by KCNA, Kim Yo Jong said she would leave the decision to take the next step of retaliation against South Korea to North Korea's military.

She also threatened to demolish the "useless" inter-Korean liaison office at the time.

South Korea's Defense Ministry responded to Kim's comments by saying it was seriously assessing the situation and carefully monitoring North Korean movements.

North Korea's close ally, China, has urged peace and stability on the Korean peninsula on Tuesday amid the latest round of escalations, according to state news agency China News.

Experts have previously told NBC News that North Korea is trying to ratchet up tensions with the South as nuclear talks with Washington remain deadlocked after Kim Jong Un's last summit with President Donald Trump in 2019 broke down without an agreement, and North Korea desperately needs relief in the face of harsh U.S.-led sanctions and the coronavirus pandemic.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
1  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom    4 weeks ago

South Korea's Unification Ministry, which handles relations with North Korea, confirmed to NBC News that the liaison office in the North Korean border town of Kaesong was demolished "by bombing" on Tuesday afternoon local time.

 
 
 
devangelical
1.1  devangelical  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1    4 weeks ago

there's probably some ongoing discussion in peking about a change in NK management

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
1.1.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  devangelical @1.1    4 weeks ago

There is always some wishful thinking, but they do like having NK as a thorn in the the side of the US at the same time......  one that they can make a call to NK to start trouble with upon demand.

 
 
 
Kavika
2  Kavika     4 weeks ago

This is certainly not unexpected. NK has a long history of this and I doubt that China would let NK collapse because of the sanctions. China does not need or want tens of thousands of NK trying to get into China which is what would happen if NK collapsed. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.1  Split Personality  replied to  Kavika @2    4 weeks ago

Do you think they intended to ruin the high rise to the right?  It looks like the whole face of that building collapses because of the overkill used on the Liaison Building.

Too funny.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
2.1.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Split Personality @2.1    4 weeks ago

"Think you've got enough dynamite there Butch...?"

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.1.2  Split Personality  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2.1.1    4 weeks ago

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
2.1.3  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Split Personality @2.1.2    4 weeks ago

Classic!

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
2.1.4  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Split Personality @2.1    4 weeks ago

I wonder how many may have died thanks to the little asshole's temper tantrum.

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.1.5  Split Personality  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @2.1.4    4 weeks ago

Seems like a very likely possibility.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
3  FLYNAVY1    4 weeks ago

NK is looking for concessions from someone.  This is their historical pattern.

  1. Throw tantrum.
  2. Blame everyone else for the problem.
  3. Get concessions for promise to stop throwing tantrum
  4. Break promise.
  5. Repeat.

Someday, I hope in my lifetime, we will see the people rise up against their government and their Army support those people.  What comes after that I trust will be better for them than what they have now.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
4  Paula Bartholomew    4 weeks ago

Trump's little Rocket Man needs a serious time out.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
4.1  SteevieGee  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4    4 weeks ago

Speaking of Trump where is he?  Our troops are literally right there on the border and not a peep. (tweet?)  Too busy worrying about football players having first amendment rights?  Busy burning Bolton's book?  I know, he's in Tulsa prepping for his incel [deleted] covid bugchaser f*g fest.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
4.1.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  SteevieGee @4.1    4 weeks ago

Re-election is all that matters to the Trumpsters.... anything not associated with that isn't worth Trumps time except for a couple of weekend tweets.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5  JohnRussell    4 weeks ago

Trump will never go to war with North Korea. He needs someplace to run to when the law catches up to him. 

Also he is in an all dictator love affair with Little Rocket Man. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
5.1  Ozzwald  replied to  JohnRussell @5    4 weeks ago
Trump will never go to war with North Korea. He needs someplace to run to when the law catches up to him.  Also he is in an all dictator love affair with Little Rocket Man.

Somehow, I think, that if North and South ever start up again, Trump's response will be Tweeting that it is only a small skirmish (lead by ANTIFA no doubt) and no need for the US to get involved. 

Downplaying and ignoring seems to be his only response to any emergency.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.2  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @5    4 weeks ago

140071356-352-k887361.jpg

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
5.2.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2    4 weeks ago

OMFG....like gross me out already!

 
 
 
SteevieGee
5.2.2  SteevieGee  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2    4 weeks ago

Ewww.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
5.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @5    4 weeks ago

law catches up to him

Exactly which laws has he broken?  (Keep in mind hurting your feelings and beating democrats don't count.)

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.3.1  Texan1211  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.3    4 weeks ago
Exactly which laws has he broken? 

Maybe they are going to take another swing at that oldie-but-goodie-----collusion?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
5.3.2  Ozzwald  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.3    4 weeks ago
 
 
 
bugsy
5.3.3  bugsy  replied to  Ozzwald @5.3.2    4 weeks ago

This opinion article is from October last year. If these laws that the writer says was "broken", why were none of them specifically cited during the impeachment hearings? Everything the libs threw at Trump for impeachment was broad with zero specifics. Basically, all the articles said were "we don't like Trump, so we have to try and throw him out of office, even though we know we have absolutely nothing on him".

 
 
 
Ozzwald
5.3.4  Ozzwald  replied to  bugsy @5.3.3    4 weeks ago
This opinion article is from October last year.

So?

If these laws that the writer says was "broken", why were none of them specifically cited during the impeachment hearings? 

Pelosi's decision. 

They also ignored the Obstruction of Justice violations as outlined in Mueller's report, the Emolument Clause violations, Campaign Finance Law violations, and Obstruction of Congress violations...among others.

Everything the libs threw at Trump for impeachment was broad with zero specifics.

They threw 1 thing at him, and impeached him because of it.  If you truly believe there were "zero specifics" (which I doubt), then you were hiding in a cave the entire time.

Basically, all the articles said were "we don't like Trump, so we have to try and throw him out of office, even though we know we have absolutely nothing on him".

WTF are you talking about????  Since you used quotes, I challenge you to provide 3 articles that specifically state what you claim.

 
 
 
bugsy
5.3.5  bugsy  replied to  Ozzwald @5.3.4    4 weeks ago
They also ignored the Obstruction of Justice violations as outlined in Mueller's report, the Emolument Clause violations, Campaign Finance Law violations, and Obstruction of Congress violations...among others.

They ignored it because they KNEW they had nothing on him.

"Since you used quotes, I challenge you to provide 3 articles that specifically state what you claim"

Who cares what you challenge. The words and actions of liberals over the past 4 years is pretty much the same as what my quote was.

THAT you can't challenge..

 
 
 
Krishna
5.3.6  Krishna  replied to  bugsy @5.3.3    4 weeks ago
This opinion article is from October last year

And he's broken several more since....

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
5.3.7  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ozzwald @5.3.2    4 weeks ago

So you give me a bloggers list.  Nothing definitive, just something that somebody told somebody that told somebody.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
5.3.8  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ozzwald @5.3.4    4 weeks ago

FFS.  Trump was investigated since before he took office.  If there were something then he would have been charged.  You know that as well as I do.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
5.3.9  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Krishna @5.3.6    4 weeks ago

And those would be exactly?  

 
 
 
Ozzwald
5.3.10  Ozzwald  replied to  bugsy @5.3.5    4 weeks ago
They ignored it because they KNEW they had nothing on him.

Really???

Obstruction of Justice  = Read the Mueller report, he outlines the crimes and presented the facts on each one.

Emolument Clause  = He upped the rent on where secret service had to stay in the Trump Tower and Mar-a-Lago, for 1 small example.

Campaign Finance Law  = Stormy Daniels ring a bell?

Obstruction of Congress  = Remember him telling his aides NOT TO obey the House's subpoenas?

Who cares what you challenge.

In other words, you lied.  Color me surprised.......jrSmiley_92_smiley_image.png

The words and actions of liberals over the past 4 years is pretty much the same as what my quote was.

Moving the goalposts because you can't back up your lie?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
5.3.11  Ozzwald  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.3.8    4 weeks ago
If there were something then he would have been charged.  You know that as well as I do.

And so did he.

Trump Abruptly Orders 46 Obama-Era Prosecutors to Resign

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
5.3.12  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ozzwald @5.3.11    4 weeks ago

Being there are no charges looks more like you're just pissing into the wind.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
5.3.13  Ozzwald  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.3.12    4 weeks ago
 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
5.3.14  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Ozzwald @5.3.13    4 weeks ago
There cannot be charges, DOJ policy and Bill Barr make sure of that.

These Trump defenders sound just like Nixon's apologists, defending him all the way out the door. Then, years later when we had mountains of documents released that proved how deep the criminality went they acted like they knew it all along and Nixon was just one bad apple among their Republican heroes. They won't change, they can't change. They have been stuck with their heads up their asses for so long that their backbones have atrophied, if they tried to remove their heads they would just slink to the floor like the spineless cowards they are.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
5.3.15  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ozzwald @5.3.13    4 weeks ago
There cannot be charges, DOJ policy and Bill Barr make sure of that.

Keep telling yourself that.  The investigation was 100% Democrat partisan bullshit based solely on the mutterings of the 2016 loser and false information provided by that loser's campaign.  All that time, not a single conviction for what he was supposed to be investigating.  Not to mention that some of those "convictions" are being overturned due to Democrats illegal activity.  But sure, it's Barr's fault.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
5.3.16  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.3    4 weeks ago

Although it was pre POTUS, you might want to look up  the Fair Housing Act of 1968 which both he and his father were in violation of and got busted over.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
5.3.17  Ozzwald  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.3.15    4 weeks ago
Keep telling yourself that.

Trying to rewrite history again?

A SITTING PRESIDENT’S AMENABILITY TO INDICTMENT AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION

Date of Issuance: 
Monday, October 16, 2000
Headnotes: 

The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
5.3.18  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Ozzwald @5.3.17    4 weeks ago

That is why he wanted to be POTUS, to delay the inevitable prison time.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
5.3.19  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @5.3.16    4 weeks ago

So obviously it wasn't enough of a problem during the campaign or the Democrats would have tried to use it.  Instead they went with fiction.

 
 
 
Texan1211
6  Texan1211    4 weeks ago

Kind of surprised that the left isn't cheering for this.

This might mean that at least one of their dire predictions for a Trump Presidency is a little closer to happening---a war Trump starts!

 
 
 
devangelical
6.1  devangelical  replied to  Texan1211 @6    4 weeks ago

POS/POTUS has already started a war.......... here, and he's losing it on 3 fronts.

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @6.1    4 weeks ago
POS/POTUS has already started a war.......... here, and he's losing it on 3 fronts.

Complete nonsense.

 
 
 
bugsy
6.2  bugsy  replied to  Texan1211 @6    4 weeks ago
Kind of surprised that the left isn't cheering for this.

Actually, they were probably hoping it was the White House that was targeted.

Man would that give the left one hell of a tingle up their leg.

 
 
 
Tessylo
7  Tessylo    4 weeks ago

99127643_126645272363195_267955703858069504_o.jpg?_nc_cat=101&_nc_sid=1cb0a9&_nc_ohc=6SEaeo0TsgoAX-OhKBW&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=1150b17af73d4a384b787d63c691f43c&oe=5F0F7953

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
7.1  Larry Hampton  replied to  Tessylo @7    4 weeks ago

Tessylo I would love to get a hold of one of those. Where did you find it?

 
 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
7.1.3  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Larry Hampton @7.1    4 weeks ago

DOPE would also work.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
7.1.4  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @7.1.3    4 weeks ago

Ha!!

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
8  Thrawn 31    4 weeks ago

WTF? Weren't Trump and Kim sucking each other off and in love? Bad breakup? Did Trump cheat on Kim too? 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

shona1
1776  Traditional American
Raven Wing


33 visitors