<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: ROK&#8217;s New Amphibious Assault Ships</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/</link>
	<description>Korea... in Blog Format</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 12 Oct 2008 06:17:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: SomeguyinKorea</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112386</link>
		<dc:creator>SomeguyinKorea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2007 03:11:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112386</guid>
		<description>"OK, if a conflict breaks out with N. Korea yes they will be used to launch an amphibious assault on N. Korea, but in the meantime, what is the ROKN going to use them for?"

Well, everything of strategic importance in North Korea has long been targeted by conventional and non-conventional weapons.  The real war would be over in a matter of minutes.  

The boats wouldn't be used for launching an assault as much as for sending troops that would secure the ports in order to ensure the eventual flow of food aid, sending troops who will attempt to disarm pockets of North Korean soldiers terrorizing the general population and those who are unaware that they've lost the war, and prevent work-camp guards from executing the prisoners.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;OK, if a conflict breaks out with N. Korea yes they will be used to launch an amphibious assault on N. Korea, but in the meantime, what is the ROKN going to use them for?&#8221;</p>
<p>Well, everything of strategic importance in North Korea has long been targeted by conventional and non-conventional weapons.  The real war would be over in a matter of minutes.  </p>
<p>The boats wouldn&#8217;t be used for launching an assault as much as for sending troops that would secure the ports in order to ensure the eventual flow of food aid, sending troops who will attempt to disarm pockets of North Korean soldiers terrorizing the general population and those who are unaware that they&#8217;ve lost the war, and prevent work-camp guards from executing the prisoners.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mins0306</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112368</link>
		<dc:creator>mins0306</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2007 00:59:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112368</guid>
		<description>The ROKN is buying the new phibs to replace its LSTs and address a shortfall in amphibious capabilities.

But Kunsanpcv, has asked some pointed questions.  It seems that no one in the ROKN has clearly stated what the mission of these ships are.  OK, if a conflict breaks out with N. Korea yes they will be used to launch an amphibious assault on N. Korea, but in the meantime, what is the ROKN going to use them for?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The ROKN is buying the new phibs to replace its LSTs and address a shortfall in amphibious capabilities.</p>
<p>But Kunsanpcv, has asked some pointed questions.  It seems that no one in the ROKN has clearly stated what the mission of these ships are.  OK, if a conflict breaks out with N. Korea yes they will be used to launch an amphibious assault on N. Korea, but in the meantime, what is the ROKN going to use them for?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WangKon936</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112366</link>
		<dc:creator>WangKon936</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2007 00:41:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112366</guid>
		<description>Ummm.... a ROK marine brigade against the PLA army?  I respect the ROK marines and all, would be like one grasshopper against an ant colony.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ummm&#8230;. a ROK marine brigade against the PLA army?  I respect the ROK marines and all, would be like one grasshopper against an ant colony.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kunsanpcv</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112365</link>
		<dc:creator>Kunsanpcv</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2007 00:34:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112365</guid>
		<description>Just what is the mission of these ships?  Who are you going to use them against?  Are these for international peace-keeping duties or a future invasion of the PRC to take back Koguryo?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just what is the mission of these ships?  Who are you going to use them against?  Are these for international peace-keeping duties or a future invasion of the PRC to take back Koguryo?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: captbbq</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112276</link>
		<dc:creator>captbbq</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2007 07:36:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112276</guid>
		<description>The first question that popped into my head was "will this be able to transport LSFs?" (Hovercraft landing ships similar to the US LCACs) and it was answered half way down the article, that apparently "no they can't". They will use traditional landing craft, however this part was so typical of Korean fatalism:
&lt;blockquote&gt;공 의원은 "차기상륙함에 탑재되는 LCM은 모래사장이나 바위가 있는 해안에 상륙할 수 없기 때문에 해안에서 다소 떨어진 곳에 병력을 내려놓아야 한다"면서 "우리 해병대는 2025년까지 1940년대의 군사교리에 따라 작전을 할 수 밖에 없을 것"이라고 주장했다.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

or (in so many words) "Oh, pathetic, sniveling, wretched Korea, we have no choice but to deploy our marines until 2025 the same way we did in 1940, BOO-F'ing-HOO" 

well, no bucks, no Buck Rogers my friends...

But fret not, the old style isn;t all that bad. They talk about how great the LSFs are as compared to traditional "Landing Craft Mechanized" (LCM) with regards to having a wider range of areas with which to go ashore, and the greater speed, but neglect to mention range. Those hovercrafts suck up fuel like its going out of style, and thus can't go that far from the ship, and lets not forget about maintenance and operational costs. The LCM/LCU type craft allow the LPD (the new ship in question) to have a greater standoff range while delivering its goods.

And lets not forget the US has its new San Antonio class LPD which is the same concept, but much bigger size as this while the much older USS Iwojima is more analogous to the shiney new LDH Dokdo.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The first question that popped into my head was &#8220;will this be able to transport LSFs?&#8221; (Hovercraft landing ships similar to the US LCACs) and it was answered half way down the article, that apparently &#8220;no they can&#8217;t&#8221;. They will use traditional landing craft, however this part was so typical of Korean fatalism:</p>
<blockquote><p>공 의원은 &#8220;차기상륙함에 탑재되는 LCM은 모래사장이나 바위가 있는 해안에 상륙할 수 없기 때문에 해안에서 다소 떨어진 곳에 병력을 내려놓아야 한다&#8221;면서 &#8220;우리 해병대는 2025년까지 1940년대의 군사교리에 따라 작전을 할 수 밖에 없을 것&#8221;이라고 주장했다.</p></blockquote>
<p>or (in so many words) &#8220;Oh, pathetic, sniveling, wretched Korea, we have no choice but to deploy our marines until 2025 the same way we did in 1940, BOO-F&#8217;ing-HOO&#8221; </p>
<p>well, no bucks, no Buck Rogers my friends&#8230;</p>
<p>But fret not, the old style isn;t all that bad. They talk about how great the LSFs are as compared to traditional &#8220;Landing Craft Mechanized&#8221; (LCM) with regards to having a wider range of areas with which to go ashore, and the greater speed, but neglect to mention range. Those hovercrafts suck up fuel like its going out of style, and thus can&#8217;t go that far from the ship, and lets not forget about maintenance and operational costs. The LCM/LCU type craft allow the LPD (the new ship in question) to have a greater standoff range while delivering its goods.</p>
<p>And lets not forget the US has its new San Antonio class LPD which is the same concept, but much bigger size as this while the much older USS Iwojima is more analogous to the shiney new LDH Dokdo.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mins0306</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112266</link>
		<dc:creator>mins0306</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2007 07:13:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112266</guid>
		<description>#1.

Yes he did.  He charged that the ship cannot accomodate the &lt;a href="http://bemil.chosun.com/brd/view.html?tb=BEMIL104&#38;pn=1&#38;num=973" rel="nofollow"&gt; LSF-2&lt;/a&gt;(Korean version of the U.S. LCAC) in its well deck.

But still that's no excuse for what he did.  Although I do admit that there isn't anything about the ship to entail it being classified.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#1.</p>
<p>Yes he did.  He charged that the ship cannot accomodate the <a href="http://bemil.chosun.com/brd/view.html?tb=BEMIL104&amp;pn=1&amp;num=973" rel="nofollow"> LSF-2</a>(Korean version of the U.S. LCAC) in its well deck.</p>
<p>But still that&#8217;s no excuse for what he did.  Although I do admit that there isn&#8217;t anything about the ship to entail it being classified.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sperwer</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112260</link>
		<dc:creator>Sperwer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2007 07:00:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/10/10/roks-new-amphibious-assault-ships/#comment-112260</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Just one question.  Why is a GNP Assemblyman and not the ROKN showing this ship to the public?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I believe that the National Assemblyman has charged that the new ships are too small to accomodate (in the wet well?) the (new?) landing craft.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Just one question.  Why is a GNP Assemblyman and not the ROKN showing this ship to the public?</p></blockquote>
<p>I believe that the National Assemblyman has charged that the new ships are too small to accomodate (in the wet well?) the (new?) landing craft.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
