Cold War/Korean War

[venom_prince91]

Hello.

Im interested in learning about the importance of defence in historic Wars. I'll begin with the question, In relation to defence, how did the Korean war fit into the wider Cold War?

[gf0012-aust]

Originally Posted by venom_prince91

Hello.

Im interested in learning about the importance of defence in historic Wars. I'll begin with the question, In relation to defence, how did the Korean war fit into the wider Cold War?

People have written books on that. ie, its not a trivial question.

it might pay to try and be a little more specific.

superficially though, Korea was the first significant post ww2 armed confrontation of ideologies, it was however the second "conflict" per se. (the 1st being the Berlin Air Lift).

The Korea War is also significant in the sense that it was also tied into the first major decision chaired by the UN Security Council.

[Rich]

Its also important to remember that when Korea had flared up the American military had dwindled down to almost its pre-WW-ll weakness. Most of all the army! Yes we still had a powerful navy, and not such a bad air force, but the conflict that became The Korean War would mostly be fought by land armies.

It was also the war that introduced the term "limited war" due to the spectre of Atomic weapons on the sides of both ideologies. It actually came fairly close to escalating to that end. MacArthur actually received the OK from Truman to use the bomb. At first Truman didn't even know the countries nuclear weapons were in "his" control. Another first was Korea was the first use of a UN coalition with America at its head. The threat of coalition members leaving actually influenced American policy, which probably kept the war aims limited. And prevented the use of nukes.

The Korean war is a fascinating study. I was pretty weak on it until about a year ago when I started boning up on it a little more. In America its called "The Forgotten War" and with some justification. Ive worked with a lot of veterans of Korea and my Dad was one. It was a brutal nasty little war but I believe because we fought it we were able to check communism in Asia without losing the entire theatre.

[chinawhite]

Rich,

Did you by any chance read that book called the forgotten war?. I cant remember exactly what happened but a good read. gives some good insight

[Rich]

No I don't think so. I have a few books on Korea but not that one. Ive heard of it. If you recommend it I think I'll order it. I find the Korean war to be an interesting historical saga. Thank you.

[crazypole]

Though this is not to do with the Korean War, the concept of a limited war was nothing new, having been in use at least since the mid-19th century. For example, the Crimean War is considered to be a limited war. It's objectives were not to capture or destroy a nation, but the landings in the Crimea were to minimise the spread of Russian power around the Black Sea. With this in mind the plan was to quickly capture Sebastopol, destroy the fleet there, and withdraw. IMO the only reason that the Korean War could be called a limited war is that nuclear weaponry was not used.

[Rich]

Thank you Pole. Its true there have always been wars with limited aims but at the same time "wars", prior to Korea, were also limited in destructiveness by restrictions in weaponry. Korea was the first war where the antagonists limited the use of weapons out of fear of their destructive power, ie nukes. It was the first war of the nuclear age, at least the first where both sides had them.

Tho the Chinese didn't know it the coalition had limited its aims to the peninsula out of fear of nuclear escalation. The communists, as it turned out, also had limited aims. Again out of the same fear.

Vietnam was another one. As was the Angola bush war with the RSA after they developed a nuclear capability. The Arab/Israeli wars were limited partially out of fear of superpower intervention and nuclear escalation.

[Snayke]

General MacArthur actually wanted to pre-emptively strike China with nuclear weapons because he believed China was sending forces to North Korea. When they checked the Yalu (Yellow) River when it was frozen over, there was not a troop in sight. MacArthur's persistance in the matter had him dismissed from command.

Although not much has been written on it, there were quite a lot of deaths on both sides. The UN force suffered like 1 million casualties compared to the Communist forces that had 3 million casualties. Unsure if they were deaths or just dead and wounded.

Also, this was the first war where helicopters were used to airlift the wounded. As mentioned above, the Korean War was the first conflict in which the UN had a united force involved. And it being basically a communist vs capitalist war. Really it started off as a civil war, then the US got involved and pushed the Norks back north. China got edgy as they didn't want the US having a strategic point on their border so they helped North Korea. The USSR was also involved, but only in terms of supplies and equipment. Although they did insert several pilots.

This war also saw the introduction of the first American jet fighter model I think. The F86 Sabre or something. Before that, the Chinese had dominated the air. Although massive amounts of aircraft from both sides were shot down by land based AA. Dunno what else to include.

They should make a movie of the Korean war. I don't think there's been a popular movie made about it. There's plenty about the Vietnam War and WW2, why not Korea?! :P

[gf0012-aust]

Originally Posted by Snayke

They should make a movie of the Korean war. I don't think there's been a popular movie made about it. There's plenty about the Vietnam War and WW2, why not Korea?! :P

It's why it's commonly referred to as "the forgotten war"

[LancerMc]

The causality figures for the U.S.A and the UN are as follows:

Deaths
USA - 54,256
UN - 628,833

Missing
USA - 8,177
UN - 470,267

Captured
USA - 7,140
UN - 92,970

It is also important too note that the Korean conflict also saw the use of a lot of new technology. This includes the first major conflict with jet aircraft.

[Rich]

We started the war out with the F-80 shooting star, which against the MIG-15 had its faults. The F-86 Sabre was a more capable airplane. We thumped the enemy pretty well in the air. Most of all the Chinese and NK pilots.

[Snayke]

I found these stats in an encyclopedia:

North Korea/China
Dead or Wounded: 1,467,000
Prisoners: 124,000

South Korea/UN
Dead: 115,567
Wounded: 290,324
Prisoners or Missing: 174,244

The United States lost more than 2,000 aircraft during the Korean War. 1,000 communist planes were shot down as well.

Also, around 1,000,000 South Korean civilians were killed and millions homeless. At the start of the bit for the Korean war, it states "About 580,000 UN and South Korean troops and about 1,600,000 Communist troops were killed or wounded or were reported missing." Hm, I must've misread it a while ago and thought it was a larger war that it was.

ADD: It seems that this was the first war they used helicopters to bring troops into combat as well as using it to evac wounded.

[tphuang]

hmm, I'm pretty sure there wasn't that much Chinese casualty. The North Korean casualty was estimated at 900K. That sounds right, since it pretty much lost effectiveness after the Americans stormed it.

The Chinese claimed that their casualty total was around 400K with 100K death and then a fair bit more frozen to death (I'm serious). In fact, the Chinese books on this proudly stated that it had less casualty than the UN in most of the major battles. Other than that one particular battle where an entire division was surrounded and all became POW. If you want to know all of the Chinese tactics, I would say that reading certain Chinese books on the Korean war would give you a good idea.

[Snayke]

Human flood. :P

And North Korea had 900,000 casualties? o_O

Total North Korean casualties is stated at 624,000. Quoted from this encyclopedia. Total Chinese casualties is at 967,000.

[tphuang]

Originally Posted by Snayke

Human flood. :P

And North Korea had 900,000 casualties? o_O

Total North Korean casualties is stated at 624,000. Quoted from this encyclopedia. Total Chinese casualties is at 967,000.

The contemporary estimates I got seems to be that North Korean had 900K in casualty and PVA also had 900K. That's from reading a 1000 page book on Korean war. But then on the Chinese side, it disagrees with that completely and says the casualty was only 400K. If you consider they only had 2 million PVA soldiers that participated in the entire war. Having half of that as casualty does not make much sense.