Who was the real winner in Korean War? - Page 3




 
--
Boots
 
December 11th, 2004  
godofthunder9010
 
 
(From the second Link Flak88 posted.
Quote:
While the U.S. government acknowledges that atrocities were committed during the war, it previously blamed them all on North Korea, not itself or South Korea. However, as Deane shows, the opposite is closer to the truth. For example, the Syngman Rhee regime "ordered a blood bath in the southern regions retaken from the north after Inchon in the fall of 1950 . . . Gregory Henderson [a U.S. official stationed in Seoul] estimated . . . that probably more than 100,000 were killed without any trial whatsoever when soldiers and the Counter-Intelligence Corps recaptured areas where the left was known to be strong" (96). Deane also highlights the normally overlooked period from October through November 1950, when U.S. and South Korean forces occupied North Korea. The result was a reign of terror. "After reoccupying Pyongyang, the North Koreans claimed that 15,000 people had been massacred there—the bodies filled the courtyard of the main prison and 26 air raid shelters" (101).
This sounds like a propagandist work, or at the very least, it sounds unlikely. It may have happened, but its doubtful. We're talking about the USA doing something completely unprecedented in it's history -- the systematic massacre of 100,000 people. I'd be interested in seeing where the gentleman that wrote the article and book got his information.

As far as North Korean sources -- lets not forget that they barely acknowledge that China helped them at all, so we're talking about a highly suspect source of information.

Did I miss something in the pictures? You said cities in Manchuria were bombed. All I saw was a bombed out bridge, something that nobody is disputing. Regardless of that, why shouldn't Manchuria be bombed after the Chinese invaded? They attacked, after all.
December 11th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 
The bridges were bombed and from the difficult perpendicular approach to the bridge, not parallel.
The bombing of Manchuria really is a piece of propaganda. As far as "war atrocities" in Korea goes, it was committed largely in part by the two Korean sides, North and South Korea. North Koreans killed people in the thousands in execution style... mostly Christians. The South Koreans killed those who were suspected of collaboration. Unfortunately a lot of people who got themselves into "collaborating" had no idea what they were getting themselves into. Remember, education wasn't at its best and people didn't quite know the difference between Capitalism/Democracy and Communism. So heaps of people who just signed the wrong dotted line were executed as well.
Largely the South Korean atrocities were done by the counter-intelligence services. The North Korean ones actually seem to have been done by the regular line soldiers themselves.
Then again I think we live in a world of highly suspect information to begin wtih. Remember, there are a lot of people who believe South Korea started the Korean War, when in fact if you look at the order of battle there is absolutely no way anyone in the right mind would have attacked North Korea with what South Korea had. Not to mention, the North Korean response was a bit too big and well coordinated to call a spontaneous counter attack.

Sticking to the topic: North Korea was the clear loser. South Korea and the UN Forces and China could be considered winners. But mostly I'd say it was a tie.

I don't see how bombing Manchuria has anything to do with this.
December 13th, 2004  
PLAbuddy
 
hoho..there is a proud south korean..
south korean army perfomred kind of crappy in korea war....
without U.S army, it is probably wipped out in 2 weeks by T34s of North Koreans..

and it also performed poorly in the battle with chinese, unless there are americans with them

overall, the impression of south korean army in korean war was a group of forced drafted young men who think they are in the wrong place at the wrong time
--
Boots
December 13th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 
The South Korean Army was quite poor. The RoK 1st Army was the most successful of the RoK Army groups and did pretty well. You should read up on them before you comment. It was hard for the RoK Army to do anything right since it was mostly smashed along the 38th Parallel line, and pretty much everything from that to the Perimeter was grabbing as many soldiers as possible from a fledging retreat.
A key reason for this was that the North Koreans were largely made up of guerillas who fought against the Japanese. The South's were largely peasants, forced laborers and the ones who did have military experience were by in large those who were in the Imperial Japanese Army (either coercedly or voluntarily).
The RoK Marines did quite well but their numbers were very small. After the Korean War, the RoK held all the islands off the coasts of Korea. Many of these were returned later on because they were a chore to hold on to and had absolutely no strategic segnificance.
Also remember that the RoK Army had no tanks at the time, and only had a few APCs. The RoK Air Force was made up of perhaps 3 reconnaissance P-51 Mustangs. Basically, the RoK Army even on the equipment front, was far outclassed by the North Koreans.
There's no proud glorification in the story I tell. Unlike yours or the stuff I've heard from a lot of other Chinese people here. I just tell it like it was. One of my grand father's only weapons were a pair of hand grenades. The other actually did get a rifle. The RoK military would have discintigrated into absolutely nothing had it not been for MacArthur and his Inchon Landing. Remember, even up to that point, the American Army was getting kicked hard by the North Koreans as well. I can't remember which unit.... but one out near Kunsan got wiped out by the North Koreans.
Now look at what I've written and tell me which parts are proud glorifications.

Mind you, our guys later went to Vietnam and served a lot of ass kicking to the Vietnamese Communists, so there. Things got better. Don't believe me? Go look it up.
December 13th, 2004  
Anya1982
 
 

Topic: oi


why argue? it was a war that was on when most of us were not even born...........................didn't us military lose that war though?

its like arguing ww2 you ain't gonna get no where
December 13th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 
No the American's didn't lose it. The fact that South Korea exists proves it.
December 13th, 2004  
Anya1982
 
 

Topic: ???


I am gonna be stupid i thought you alll meant vietnam war...........sorry
December 13th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 
Yeah.. Korea.. Vietnam... what's the difference? Right?
December 13th, 2004  
Anya1982
 
 

Topic: huh??


well usa lost vietnam but korea is in vietnam ain't it? So in some way they same or different I dunno thats why i asked!
December 13th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 
Bloody hell!
Go take a look at the map. South Korea is one of Asia's few actually developed countries along with Japan. South Korea is miles and miles away from Vietnam and unlike Vietnam which is a tropical environment, South Korea is a temperate environment which means it snows in the winter time. The stories of GIs freezing in the 30 degrees below zero temperature... you didn't hear about those in Vietnam!
One less person to make fun of Americans!