# The batttle for Chosin



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

This battle made our leaders understand the necessity of making sure the American Military has the capability to defend our security and interests world-wide against any enemy.  A great documentary.


----------



## there4eyeM (May 10, 2018)

Do we really want to re-examine what the U.S. has done on the Korean peninsula? Please look at General Lemay's comments about the bombardment of the North, for example.


----------



## rightwinger (May 10, 2018)

Chosin was a case where we underestimated political reality

The invasion of the north brought China into the war

MacArthur overplayed his hand without considering what would happen if he triggered China to enter the war


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

There is no doubt MacArthur was wrong in his analysis of what China might do....and not only MacArthur but his staff (including intelligence officers)  simply had little respect for the military capabilities of china....referring to them as laundrymen....their perspective on China was based largely  on China's military performance in WWII which was very poor.

But also...........one must consider all the limitations placed on MacArthur by Truman i.e. refusing to let our AirForce go beyond the Yalu River and knock out China's ability to invade N.Korea etc.etc.  basically the whole fallacious and disastrous policy of 'limited war' was begun by the Truman Administration and a pc  communist ridden state Dept.  which was a huge, huge security leak as in they were thoroughly penetrated by Russian Intelligence agents.


General Douglas MacArthur Defends His Conduct in the War in Korea | Teaching American History


----------



## rightwinger (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> There is no doubt MacArthur was wrong in his analysis of what China might do....and not only MacArthur but his staff (including intelligence officers)  simply had little respect for the military capabilities of china....referring to them as laundrymen....their perspective on China was based largely  on China's military performance in WWII which was very poor.
> 
> But also...........one must consider all the limitations placed on MacArthur by Truman i.e. refusing to let our AirForce go beyond the Yalu River and knock out China's ability to invade N.Korea etc.etc.  basically the whole fallacious and disastrous policy of 'limited war' was begun by the Truman Administration and a pc  communist ridden state Dept.  which was a huge, huge security leak as in they were thoroughly penetrated by Russian Intelligence agents.
> J
> ...


MacArthur was one our most honored Generals and also one of the most inept.

He botched the defense of the Philippines and misdirected the Pacific War to rescue his reputation ....I shall return

Inchon was a stroke of military genius but his invasion of North Korea brought in the Chinese and led to the stalemate we have today

Truman was right to fire him


----------



## there4eyeM (May 10, 2018)

Inchon was a stroke of luck.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 10, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Chosin was a case where we underestimated political reality
> 
> The invasion of the north brought China into the war
> 
> MacArthur overplayed his hand without considering what would happen if he triggered China to enter the war



We didn't invade the North until the North invaded the South and attacked our troops in the process. Then we kicked North Korean and Chinese butt just as we should have except that we stopped too soon. North Korea should not have been allowed continued existence.

China won a delayed victory because it scared our pansy-ass politicians into not even trying to win in Vietnam.


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 10, 2018)

MacArthur was the Donald Trump of the early 1950's. He would not listen to anyone, and considered himself just one step below god. Ike said it best: "I studied dramatics under  MacArthur.".


----------



## Ridgerunner (May 10, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Truman was right to fire him



He didn't get a virgin... Mac had been fired before...

edit:  ok, ok... I screwed up... I was thinking about Gen. Patton getting fored and included him in Mac's tally...

They were both fired just one time...


----------



## rightwinger (May 10, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Chosin was a case where we underestimated political reality
> ...


 
China was willing to have its troops slaughtered.....we were not

That is why we listened to the politicians


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 10, 2018)

None of the United Nations forces, including our own, had the slightest chance of defeating the Chinese forces. Our forces were all mechanized, and could only advance using roads in North Korea. Chinese forces were not, therefor they traveled and fought in the mountains and hills with mostly infantry, and some limited small artillery. They traveled at night to avoid our aircraft. They had little regard for their own lives. They attacked in waves, with the 3rd and 4th wave not even having been issued guns and ammo. They picked that up from dead soldiers. The final wave was a blocking wave with machine guns, with orders to fire at any Chinese troops retreating without orders.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 10, 2018)

Vandalshandle said:


> None of the United Nations forces, including our own, had the slightest chance of defeating the Chinese forces. Our forces were all mechanized, and could only advance using roads in North Korea. Chinese forces were not, therefor they traveled and fought in the mountains and hills with mostly infantry, and some limited small artillery. They traveled at night to avoid our aircraft. They had little regard for their own lives. They attacked in waves, with the 3rd and 4th wave not even having been issued guns and ammo. They picked that up from dead soldiers. The final wave was a blocking wave with machine guns, with orders to fire at any Chinese troops retreating without orders.



Actually we did in fact defeat the Chinese forces badly.


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

there4eyeM said:


> Inchon was a stroke of luck.




A bold move by a tactical genius is more accurate...........anyhow....as someone once said.....better to be lucky than good.

The Inchon landing was opposed as being too risky by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.....but MacArthur's decision(it too extreme courage)to land there demonstrated once again his tactical genius.  Not to forget...................During World War 2, General Douglas MacArthur developed the strategy of island hopping. He would capture certain islands. The Americans would use those islands to get closer to their goal. He would leave Japanese troops to starve on the other islands. He would not waste American lives trying to capture those islands. The objective was to get close enough to Japan to establish bomber bases capable of dropping bombs on Japan.  Brilliant strategy.


The MacArthur Revival | RealClearDefense


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > None of the United Nations forces, including our own, had the slightest chance of defeating the Chinese forces. Our forces were all mechanized, and could only advance using roads in North Korea. Chinese forces were not, therefor they traveled and fought in the mountains and hills with mostly infantry, and some limited small artillery. They traveled at night to avoid our aircraft. They had little regard for their own lives. They attacked in waves, with the 3rd and 4th wave not even having been issued guns and ammo. They picked that up from dead soldiers. The final wave was a blocking wave with machine guns, with orders to fire at any Chinese troops retreating without orders.
> ...



Exactly....the only thing stopping a clear cut victory in Korea was leftwing politicians and leftwing state dept. riddled with soviet spies.   Truman who drank way too much whisky was too fearful of a confrontation with Russia and the famous quote   

Lest we forget the statement by the none to clever Omar Bradley..............'"The wrong war, at the wrong place, at the wrong time, and with the wrong enemy" is General Omar Bradley's *famous* rebuke in his May 15, 1951 Congressional as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the idea of extending the *Korean* War into *China*, as proposed by General Douglas *MacArthur*, the commander of the U.N. ...that was just one example of the prevailing fallacious attitude of the weaklings in Washington who stabbed MacArthur in the back.


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Chosin was a case where we underestimated political reality
> 
> The invasion of the north brought China into the war
> 
> MacArthur overplayed his hand without considering what would happen if he triggered China to enter the war



It is true MacArthur was suprised by China's intervention....but he could have overcome that setback and went on to win a complete victory except for the fact that the Washington politicians lacked the courage to obtain a complete victory not even to mention their implementation of the flawed doctrine of limited warfare.

America's Limited War Doctrine: A Fatal Flaw

Duty, Honor, Country: Douglas MacArthur


----------



## harmonica (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> There is no doubt MacArthur was wrong in his analysis of what China might do....and not only MacArthur but his staff (including intelligence officers)  simply had little respect for the military capabilities of china....referring to them as laundrymen....their perspective on China was based largely  on China's military performance in WWII which was very poor.
> 
> But also...........one must consider all the limitations placed on MacArthur by Truman i.e. refusing to let our AirForce go beyond the Yalu River and knock out China's ability to invade N.Korea etc.etc.  basically the whole fallacious and disastrous policy of 'limited war' was begun by the Truman Administration and a pc  communist ridden state Dept.  which was a huge, huge security leak as in they were thoroughly penetrated by Russian Intelligence agents.
> 
> ...


...the US did not want a war with China--that would've been really stupid---we couldn't beat tiny North Vietnam...you don't want to go dropping A bombs for nothing--especially for a *civil *war....you can't beat China--too big--too many people
...most wars are ''limited''

my father fought at the Chosin
temps down to 30 below [ not wind chill ]...snowy, icy. hilly terrrain
after fighting for 2 days, with little sleep, they went ''cross-country'' in those temps to save Fox Company around 2 Dec

however, so what if the North took over?...North Vietnam took over the South
the communists took over Laos and Cambodia, and Cuba--no big deal


----------



## whitehall (May 10, 2018)

U.S./ U.N forces were in pretty sad shape after the N.K. surprise attack on the South (apparently the CIA was clueless) and U.S. Troops were pushed to the bottom of the peninsula until General MacArthur developed the risky Inchon Landing strategy that cut the N.K. supply lines and isolated N.K. troops. U.S. forces retook the S.K. capital and went on to take the N.K. capital of Pongyang. The conflict was over in less than a year and N.K. ceased to be a threat, but wait. Something happened in the Truman administration and in the mind of the Old Soldier. Red China said that they would enter the conflict if U.S. Troops approached the Yalu River border between Korea and China but why would that happen. MacArthur never spent a single night in Korea, preferring to rely on faulty intelligence supplied by sycophant general Ned Almond and Truman apparently didn't have sense enough or the political courage to tell the old WW1 general to stop. The perfect storm of a winter campaign in a country known for the harshest winters in the world by ill equipped and exhausted U.S. Troops was developing so that MacArthur could fulfill his vow to "piss in the Yalu". It was crazy and ill advised but the media stood behind MacArthur and never wavered and Truman hid under a desk in the White House and the setup for the biggest ambush in history was unraveling. MacArthur's sycophant general tried to goad Marines like General O.P. Smith and Lewis "Chesty" Puller into risky advances until the shit hit the fan at the Chosen. Marine General Puller managed to fight his way out of a trap and took Marine and Army units to safety but the politics had already entered the story. The liberal media still defended Truman and MacArthur even after MacArthur made crazy claims of nuking China and was finally relieved of duty (to a tickertape parade). The damage was done and the conflict lasted three years and ended up in an embarasing truce and we ended up back where we started at the cost of 50,000 American lives.


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

harmonica said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > There is no doubt MacArthur was wrong in his analysis of what China might do....and not only MacArthur but his staff (including intelligence officers)  simply had little respect for the military capabilities of china....referring to them as laundrymen....their perspective on China was based largely  on China's military performance in WWII which was very poor.
> ...



Not a good line of reasoning....anyhow what was your father's thoughts on the Korean stalemate?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (May 10, 2018)

Communist spies in the Administration gave their ChiCom masters valuable Intel


----------



## harmonica (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


sure--go to war with China--that's a good line of reasoning??!
my father never talked about the political side of it


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

whitehall said:


> U.S./ U.N forces were in pretty sad shape after the N.K. surprise attack on the South (apparently the CIA was clueless) and U.S. Troops were pushed to the bottom of the peninsula until General MacArthur developed the risky Inchon Landing strategy that cut the N.K. supply lines and isolated N.K. troops. U.S. forces retook the S.K. capital and went on to take the N.K. capital of Pongyang. The conflict was over in less than a year and N.K. ceased to be a threat, but wait. Something happened in the Truman administration and in the mind of the Old Soldier. Red China said that they would enter the conflict if U.S. Troops approached the Yalu River border between Korea and China but why would that happen. MacArthur never spent a single night in Korea, preferring to rely on faulty intelligence supplied by sycophant general Ned Almond and Truman apparently didn't have sense enough or the political courage to tell the old WW1 general to stop. The perfect storm of a winter campaign in a country known for the harshest winters in the world by ill equipped and exhausted U.S. Troops was developing so that MacArthur could fulfill his vow to "piss in the Yalu". It was crazy and ill advised but the media stood behind MacArthur and never wavered and Truman hid under a desk in the White House and the setup for the biggest ambush in history was unraveling. MacArthur's sycophant general tried to goad Marines like General O.P. Smith and Lewis "Chesty" Puller into risky advances until the shit hit the fan at the Chosen. Marine General Puller managed to fight his way out of a trap and took Marine and Army units to safety but the politics had already entered the story. The liberal media still defended Truman and MacArthur even after MacArthur made crazy claims of nuking China and was finally relieved of duty (to a tickertape parade). The damage was done and the conflict lasted three years and ended up in an embarasing truce and we ended up back where we started at the cost of 50,000 American lives.



You are coinfusing MacArthur with Patton....Mac never promised to piss in the Yalu river.....Patton did promise to piss in the Rhine River and he did piss in the Rhine River and there are photographs of him doing exactly that.


----------



## rightwinger (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...


A prime example of why MacArthur got fired

He just didn’t understand the politics of the situation
We had just lost 400,000 soldiers five years earlier. The American people were not going to tolerate another meat grinder especially in a hell hole like Korea that nobody cared if they existed

We lost 50,000 in Korea because of MacArthurs arrogance


----------



## harmonica (May 10, 2018)

I just went over this in another thread in depth on how Mac really screwed in NKorea
he totally screwed it up


----------



## harmonica (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> > Inchon was a stroke of luck.
> ...


....a ''lot'' of what are thought to be risky landings are that--just thoughts--the big one = D Day
1. the NKs were overstretched and extended when Operation Chromite started--easy to cut them off/etc 
2. the US was the world's foremost expert on amphib ops-
3. the US had naval and air superiority 
it wasn't that risky at all
to be continued


----------



## harmonica (May 10, 2018)

ok here it is again

North Korea
-----
a. the temps got down to 30 BELOW 0 [ not windchill ]
b. snowy, hilly, icy terrain
c. X Corps had virtually 1 MSR  with a and b
!!!!!!!!!!!!!duh duh...this makes just movement extremely slow/etc--
...makes everything slower--movement, refueling, eating. supply, vehicles, etc
easy to cut off the UN troops! 
in 1 book I read, a Marine intel officer said it would've been easy for an enemy to stop the UN troops because of a, b, c 

the USMC general knew it was stupid to go headlong up to the Yalu--
that's why he more or less disobeyed orders not to go fast
he laid depots and kept the unit ''together''
...the USMC was the only large unit not to get it's a$$ kicked--the USMC destroyed many divisions during the Chosin and kept the Chinese from being able to take advantage of their 2nd Offensive victories 
to be continued


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

harmonica said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...



No one wants to go to war but as Dick Cheney recently said China is now America's greatest threat.

Cheney on Threats to U.S.: I Think the Chinese Long-term Are the Most Serious, ...


----------



## rightwinger (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


Economically...yes
Militarily?  No reason to fight


----------



## harmonica (May 10, 2018)

the Chinese kicked UN ass in the *FIRST *Chinese Offense circa October right after the UN crossed [ the only main unit not getting a bloody nose was the USMC ]
--so we have the UN getting it's ass kicked by --the Chinese!!!
--still---it wasn't that big of a failure as the *Second *Offensive---

and Mac fails to believe the Chinese are there in force!!! after the UN got it's a$$ kicked
he *SPLITS *his forces!! with the X Corps on the right
then most of his units are extended/over stretched--as NK was at Inchon
the Chinese withdraw into the mountains
there are 300,000 Chinese in NK at this time

and *after* this--Mac makes the BIG mistake!! he wants to keep going into the COLD, icy, snowy, hilly mountains !!!
he STILL thinks the Chinese are irrelevant !!!
and this creates one of the greatest disasters in American military history when a whole CORPS is thrown off the battle *continent--*along with the 8th getting it's ass kicked and retreating big time

after this huge setback of the First Offensive--any idiot could know that he should not have kept going as he did


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



Nonsense.......what needs to be understood is why America was so weak that the communists felt emboldened to attack S. Korea?


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

harmonica said:


> ok here it is again
> 
> North Korea
> -----
> ...



Neither MacArthur, anyone on his staff including the intelligence officers nor the CIA expected the Chinese to intervene.   It was a surprise and it ended what would have been a short war, a clear victory and the troops home for Christmas.  There are always surprises in war aka the battle of the bulge etc.  

What many have lost sight of is the fact that the Chinese Intervention would have not occurred if MacArthur had been allowed to knock out the bridges over the Yalu River and the Chinese military bases and depots close to Korea...it was the fear mongering and intelligence leaks in Washington that enabled the Chinese intervention.


----------



## harmonica (May 10, 2018)

...the Chinese were going in before the US reached the Yalu
...one of the reason China went in was to protect the hydroelectric dams  that were NOT near the border..



> 3. There was a geographical advantage. The narrow shape of the Korean peninsula and the mountainous area in North Korea would greatly limit the mobility of MacArthur's mechanized forces and ground firepower, and it would be advantageous for China in conducting defensive actions. Though MacArthur could get part of his logistic support from Japan, the greater part of his supplies would have to be transported from America- more than 10,000 miles away. By comparison, China's supply route from home, and from the Soviet Union, would be much shorter.74


http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~lorenzo/Hao Chinas Decision.pdf


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

harmonica said:


> the Chinese kicked UN ass in the *FIRST *Chinese Offense circa October right after the UN crossed [ the only main unit not getting a bloody nose was the USMC ]
> --so we have the UN getting it's ass kicked by --the Chinese!!!
> --still---it wasn't that big of a failure as the *Second *Offensive---
> 
> ...



The marines were well trained....but most Army units after the end of WWII had fallen into a sad state of neglect.  If one watches the video you will see how the battle at the chosin reservoir woke up those in Washington tasked with maintaining our military power...they realized finally that we must maintain adequate and will trained forces to deal with any threat anywhere in the world after the debacle at chosin.


----------



## harmonica (May 10, 2018)

from USMC General Smith--the only unit not to get it's a$$ kicked


> I do not like the prospect of stringing out a Marine division along a *single mountain* road for 120 air miles from Hamhung to the border





> "Although the Chinese have withdrawn to the north, I have *not pressed *Litzenberg to make any rapid advance. Our orders still require us to advance to the Manchurian border.



and finally:


> I believe a winter campaign in the mountains of North Korea is too much to ask of the American soldier or Marine, and I doubt the feasibility of supplying troops in this area during the winter or providing for the evacuation of sick or wounded."


etc etc
Korean War Educator: Chosin Reservoir - Ray Vallowe Research - Chapter 7


----------



## rightwinger (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


Weak?

Who the hell wanted to get into another war less than five years after we fought WWII?

War mongers don’t care if we lose more soldiers......the American people did

Who wants to give their son for S Korea?


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



You do not get it and way too many are on your side....not understanding that strength deters war whilst weakness invites it.


----------



## harmonica (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


you must not have understood my previous post
here:
we lost to the communist:
Vietnam
Laos
Cambodia
Cuba
and---guess what??  the US is ok!
we didn't need to be there..it was a waste
we get involved in too much crap

Bay of Pigs--$$$$ lost
Nicaragua ???!!!

...first we are friends with and helping the Taliban/Afghanis --then we are at war over there
...first we are friends with Iran--then enemies with Iran and friends with Iraq helping Iraq fight Iran
then we go to war with Iraq  !!!!!!!????!! WTF?

we need to stay out of a lot of these insignificant conflicts


----------



## harmonica (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > the Chinese kicked UN ass in the *FIRST *Chinese Offense circa October right after the UN crossed [ the only main unit not getting a bloody nose was the USMC ]
> ...


next time please capitalize Marines ..thanks in advance


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

harmonica said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Isolationism is the most dangerous of all possible foreign policies.  A brief history of American isolationism


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

harmonica said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...



Sorry, my mistake.  I do apologize...For the record...I greatly admire the Marine Corps.


----------



## harmonica (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


..like a lot of men in WW2  Aug 1945 were glad the war was over
..like a lot of Nam vets say--''WTF were we over there for''? and were glad to be out of there
..this was a civil war--not another country attacking an innocent one 
..I'm sure my father was glad to get out of there in 51'


----------



## rightwinger (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


That bullshit has gotten tens of millions needlessly killed


----------



## rightwinger (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


You gotta pick your fights

The gung-ho gotta kill the commie wars were not worth it


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




Our intelligence has failed us many times....we need better intelligence agencies for sure.  Communism during the fifties and sixties was an aggressive ideology that had to be dealt with....accepting a stalemate in Korea was the mistake not fighting the war.  Limited war is a mistake.....as General MacArthur said....there is no substitute for victory.  Likewise in Vietnam....though MacArthur advised LBJ not to get involved ...he did anyhow.  Another case of attempting to fight a limited war....if we are not willing to go all out for victory then I agree we should stay out.


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...





rightwinger said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



You should check your stats before you spout off................American War Deaths Throughout History


----------



## rightwinger (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


Most wars in history do not end in complete and total victory

Combatants tend to fight till they are either worn out or they run out of cash. 

The question needs to be asked....

What are we fighting for? Not, how many do we have to have killed to win?


----------



## rightwinger (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...



I didn’t say just the US

WWI and WWII got 50 million people killed


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 10, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



If the allies has been stronger they could have stopped the Nazis before they even got started....again...another product of American weakness and Isolationism.  Even one good intelligence agent could have gotten rid of Hitler...it was not like he was hiding what his goals were.


----------



## Dan Stubbs (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> This battle made our leaders understand the necessity of making sure the American Military has the capability to defend our security and interests world-wide against any enemy.  A great documentary.


*If we had not been in Korea in the 50's they would have take control of the whole country and made it harder to defend Japan.  Many countries do not teach History of the Japan and Korean wars.  I found it interesting from a Russian Student who was attending school in Tenn, Murfreesboro, that they teach in Russia that Alaska was rented to the USA for 99 years.  Japan: they have not mention of the Japan war and people who visit the Naval Museum in Pensacola are wide eyed when they see a Jap zero displayed. *


----------



## rightwinger (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


Monday morning quarterbacking


----------



## Dan Stubbs (May 10, 2018)

Ridgerunner said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Truman was right to fire him
> ...


*Mr, Polosi is in American Samoa *


----------



## eagle1462010 (May 10, 2018)

Mac wanted to go out with a bang..........Underestimated China.

Rushed to the North without consolidating his forces for that possibility..........Got caught with his pants down.


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 10, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > None of the United Nations forces, including our own, had the slightest chance of defeating the Chinese forces. Our forces were all mechanized, and could only advance using roads in North Korea. Chinese forces were not, therefor they traveled and fought in the mountains and hills with mostly infantry, and some limited small artillery. They traveled at night to avoid our aircraft. They had little regard for their own lives. They attacked in waves, with the 3rd and 4th wave not even having been issued guns and ammo. They picked that up from dead soldiers. The final wave was a blocking wave with machine guns, with orders to fire at any Chinese troops retreating without orders.
> ...



I'll have to get in touch with my high school history teacher. He told me that the Chinese fought us to a stalemate. Even though he was in that war, I guess that he did not realize that we had won.


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 10, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



I am sure that if you had been there, the whole outcome would have been different.....


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 10, 2018)

As an example of the cost of global war, the British were still rationing a lot of food items in 1950, when the Korean war broke out,, as a result of WW2. The US was still trying to fill the housing and automobile shortage caused by WW2. The fact that South Korea was in the US sphere of influence after WW2 was simply due to the fact that somebody in the state Department had drawn a line across the middle of Korea after WW2, thus making them our responsibility. This was especially ironic, because Teddy Roosevelt told Japan during his administration that they would not be stepping on our toes if they took over the entire Korean peninsula, which they did.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 10, 2018)

harmonica said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Bullshit. We did not lose in any of those places. And you might bother to notice that we won the Cold War.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 10, 2018)

Vandalshandle said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



Read. I didn't say we won the the Korean War (although there has never been an official end to that war, just a cease fire) I said we defeated the Chinese forces badly and that is true. They attacked our troops and gained not a damn thing except hundreds of thousands of dead Chinese.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 10, 2018)

Vandalshandle said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



Read. I didn't say we won the the Korean War (although there has never been an official end to that war, just a cease fire) I said we defeated the Chinese forces badly and that is true. They attacked our troops and gained not a damn thing except hundreds of thousands of dead Chinese.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 10, 2018)

Vandalshandle said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



Read. I didn't say we won the the Korean War (although there has never been an official end to that war, just a cease fire) I said we defeated the Chinese forces badly and that is true. They attacked our troops and gained not a damn thing except hundreds of thousands of dead Chinese.


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 11, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...




We are all ears, general Halftrack, on how you would bring  peace and prosperity to our nation, by killing everyone, even though you don't  know a damned thing about the Korean war. I am sure that all of the major military minds of this century who declared that the USA should never get involved in a land war in Asia are wrong, but you are right. I suspect that they teach that at your state's Junior military academy.


----------



## there4eyeM (May 11, 2018)

True strength includes magnanimity, flexibility and compassion. Rigidity leads to over reaction and blindness. 
Generosity and understanding in relations prevents misunderstanding and conflict. A clenched fist all the time is a deformed hand.


----------



## rightwinger (May 11, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


50,000 Americans died

What did we gain?


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 11, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



_What did we gain?_

Honor credibility and retribution against enemies' sneak attacks against our troops. American blood was shed; you think we could retain any credibility by playing the sniveling coward and forswearing our commitment to an ally and running crying to our mommies? We stopped the spread of Communism as we were committed to do.


----------



## rightwinger (May 11, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



Seems like playground retaliation....no need to burn down the whole school

We need to choose our battles more carefully. We are NOT the worlds policeman. This country needs to honor our soldiers. That honor is not national cemeteries and parades once a year
That honor is respecting the comittment they have made to this country and not putting them in harms way just because of some civil war half a world away


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 11, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



OMG! The domino theory! If we don't kill the commies in Vietnam, we will have to kill them in California some day!


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 11, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



_We need to choose our battles more carefully. We are NOT the worlds policeman.
_
In Korea we were attacked first by NK then by China. Often you don't choose to go to war; you are attacked which leaves you no other options. In Vietnam we had committed ourselves to help S.Vietnam defend itself and it was attacked by N. Vietnam which had the committed backing China and the Soviet Union. It was not a civil war. There is nothing honorable about throwing an ally to the wolves or sending troops to far away lands and not giving them the support they need to defend themselves and our allies.
We are not the world's policemen but we do in fact have interests and commitments worldwide as well military bases and embassies that must be protected. Pearl Harbor and 9/11 were reminders that sometimes if you don't police the world the world will police you.


----------



## rightwinger (May 11, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


Bullshit

These were both Cold War, my dick is bigger than your dick conflicts

Cost us 100,000 deaths for no purpose


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 11, 2018)

Vandalshandle said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



The domino theory was perfectly valid as long as Communists intended to rule the world.


----------



## rightwinger (May 11, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


Never happened

We lost 100,000 fighting a domino theory


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 11, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



Unlike us, of course. We would never attempt to manipulate other nations political structure...well, not more than 400-500 times :

Timeline of United States military operations - Wikipedia


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 11, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



BTW, the Chinese had every good reason to believe that MacArthur was not going to stop at the Yalu River, but would invade China on the pretense of seeking to destroy the N. Korean army retreating into China, just like we did in the Mexican War. "General Brasshat" (as Truman called MacArthur) had all but said that is what we should do. Also, Vietnam WAS a civil war. We had agreed to free elections in the South, but reneged, because we would have lost the election to the communists. Also, China and Vietnam have been traditional enemies for hundreds of years. The North got all of their help from the Soviet Union.

I will give the Pentagon credit for one thing, though. During the entire Vietnam era, not one single N. Vietnamese successfully invaded or bombed America, by boat, airplane, canoe, raft, or swimming with water wings.


----------



## harmonica (May 11, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


..we fought in/gave mucho $$$$/etc Nam, Laos, Cambodia--all lost to communism
we tried to stop communism--but did not
..we developed the Bay of Pigs--big stupid loss that not only wasted $$$$, but also embarrassed/etc the US
...remember 1975?


----------



## harmonica (May 11, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


rightwinger is correct--most wars do not end in total victory
you would've wanted total war with China???!!! ???! 
did you not read my previous post!!!!??
we lost Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia to communism---what was the big loss to the US??
no--we did not need to fight communism 
Cuba became ''an communist enemy''
why did we need to fight communism?? so 50,000 could die for nothing?
wasted  BILLIONS$$$ in Nam, Laos, Cambodia


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 11, 2018)

Vandalshandle said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



Good morning Sunshine! All nations do whatever they can to protect themselves and their interests. Always have; always will. Why in the world would anyone think otherwise?


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 11, 2018)

Vandalshandle said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



So China attacked us in self defense when we had given them no cause to do so? Bullshit. After they had staged an unprovoked assault against our troops we were in a de facto war with China and had a valid reason to consider that an option if we so chose. Why give us the excuse if they were worried about it happening?
Free elections did not happen because they could not be held when a multitude of VC/NVA units were in place to assure the results of any such election. Voting with a gun to your head is really not all that "free" is it?
The majority of supplies coming into RSVN came from China. A lesser amount from the USSR. Both had troops-especially pilots- fighting with the NVA. 
No, N. Vietnam did not attack the USA although they certainly did attack and occupy parts of Cambodia Laos and Thailand and attack American facilities including an embassy and American troops and civilians. What's your point?


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 11, 2018)

harmonica said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...



_..we fought in/gave mucho $$$$/etc Nam, Laos, Cambodia--all lost to communism
we tried to stop communism--but did not
_
We fought Communism until the American people-through their pet politicians- decided to stop. We didn't lose anything.


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 12, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



My point is that I am very proud that LBJ and Nixon protected my country from hoards of evil commies, thus preventing them from dropping napalm on my house and children from bombers launched from Cuba, or wherever. Not only that, they did not allow half a million commie solders to invade America and kill 2 or 3 million people. And to top it all off, the USA has now designated Vietnam as a "preferred nation", trading status, which means that I can buy a shirt made in Vietnam for only $25 at Walmart!  I won't even go in to the fact that Vietnam is now a very affordable tourist destination for Americans! And, to achieve all this, they only sacrificed the lives of 58,000 American boys! Maybe this is the period that Trump considers as "Great" to which he wants to MAGA.


----------



## harmonica (May 12, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


...Korea was a win for the US in that the commies did not take over SK--but if you know any history, SK's government was much more stable than South Vietnam....in less than 2 years, SV had 3 changes in the head of state--and many more coups /attempted coups before and after--
one of the coups involved MURDER !!
...the US could not stay in SV forever....and if they invaded NV, they could not stay there forever [ but that wasn't going to happen ]..etc
...do you see what all this means??  Vietnam was unwinnable --totally ..there is no way they could've won in Nam

here's a comparison-contrast
tiny Israel:
 very narrow battle front
surrounded by the Arabs--had to fight on more than one front!!
no retrograde movement because of the Med Sea
OUTNUMBERED immensely in all categories  [troops/tanks/population/etc ]
the US sends *NO *troops/aircraft/naval/etc
yet Israel decisively defeated the Arabs
surrounded:





South Vietnam:
longer front and maneuver room
not massively outnumbered
the US sends 500,000 troops/etc
has naval and air superiority !!!
sends mucho $$$$/equipment/etc
for over* TEN *years the US tries to help SV--but there is no win/etc
NOT surrounded:





don't try to say the military had their hands tied--we bombed NV with more bombs than were used in WW2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
we had air and naval superiority

do you see the difference?

...and, as stated before---the US is not going to win against China


----------



## rightwinger (May 12, 2018)

Vandalshandle said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



I remember the Vietnam era vividly 

We had commies lurking on every corner, stealing our women and drinking our beer.  They were in our schools, in our places of work and in the local 7-11s

We needed to invade Vietnam to fight the red menace


----------



## whitehall (May 12, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > U.S./ U.N forces were in pretty sad shape after the N.K. surprise attack on the South (apparently the CIA was clueless) and U.S. Troops were pushed to the bottom of the peninsula until General MacArthur developed the risky Inchon Landing strategy that cut the N.K. supply lines and isolated N.K. troops. U.S. forces retook the S.K. capital and went on to take the N.K. capital of Pongyang. The conflict was over in less than a year and N.K. ceased to be a threat, but wait. Something happened in the Truman administration and in the mind of the Old Soldier. Red China said that they would enter the conflict if U.S. Troops approached the Yalu River border between Korea and China but why would that happen. MacArthur never spent a single night in Korea, preferring to rely on faulty intelligence supplied by sycophant general Ned Almond and Truman apparently didn't have sense enough or the political courage to tell the old WW1 general to stop. The perfect storm of a winter campaign in a country known for the harshest winters in the world by ill equipped and exhausted U.S. Troops was developing so that MacArthur could fulfill his vow to "piss in the Yalu". It was crazy and ill advised but the media stood behind MacArthur and never wavered and Truman hid under a desk in the White House and the setup for the biggest ambush in history was unraveling. MacArthur's sycophant general tried to goad Marines like General O.P. Smith and Lewis "Chesty" Puller into risky advances until the shit hit the fan at the Chosen. Marine General Puller managed to fight his way out of a trap and took Marine and Army units to safety but the politics had already entered the story. The liberal media still defended Truman and MacArthur even after MacArthur made crazy claims of nuking China and was finally relieved of duty (to a tickertape parade). The damage was done and the conflict lasted three years and ended up in an embarasing truce and we ended up back where we started at the cost of 50,000 American lives.
> ...



What if Mac didn't claim "to piss in the Yalu"? The biggest ambush in history happened because of MacArthur's incompetence or negligence or "senior citizen moment". Mac took his entourage of reporters on a plane trip up to the Yalu to show that the Red Chinese weren't massing at the border but reports indicate that they were camouflaged under the snow and neither Mac nor the reporters had the skill or the eyesight to distinguish winter camouflage. At any rate the Chinese entered the conflict as they promised and MacArthur made wild claims of nuking China and we lost 50,000 (later downsized to around 35,000 by the Clinton DOD) in a three year quagmre that should have been over in less than a year.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 12, 2018)

harmonica said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...



Wrong. We didn't win in Korea because the war never ended and North Korea still exists.
We didn't win in Vietnam because our politicians never allowed the military to fight to win, Micro-managed the war, and was constantly coming up with idiotic ROE.


----------



## rightwinger (May 12, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


We didn’t win because we didn’t want to endure the casualties it would take to win. In both cases we were lied to......this is just a small deployment in a supporting role, we will mop it up by the end of the year

We lost 100,000 young men combined in the two wars......all for nothing


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 12, 2018)

harmonica said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...



All of this is true. But there was one more overriding reason why the Vietnam was was unwinnable. The S. Vietnam government  was thoroughly corrupt, and was not supported by the people. In fact, the entire economy of the South was based on American war money, with the major industry being black market American goods, prostitution, drugs, cigarettes, and anything that they could steal from American war imports.

It really was as simple as that.


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 12, 2018)

As for Korea, the Chinese played MacArthur like a violin. They started working with N. Korea about the time that MacArthur crossed the 38th parallel going north (against President Truman's order's, I might add). They massed thousands of troops on their side of the border. When MacArthur was about halfway through N. Korea, the Chinese began crossing the Yalu in small groups, and headed south down the mountain ridges, They would attack MacArthur in the valley's at night (where thew roads are) and he would drive them off. The N. Koreans would be gone in the morning, and Mac assumed that his superior forces and won yet another battle. Mao knew that Mac was an egocentric narcissist, and would think that he was on the verge of destroying the N. Korean army, so Mac allowed himself to get sucked deeper and deeper into the north. When the Chinese finally attacked in earnest, only one or two days short of the Yalu, Mac was already surrounded and did not know it. In today's vernacular, Mac had already jumped the shark. Being fired was the kindest way to end his career before he fucked things up even worse.


----------



## whitehall (May 12, 2018)

Vietnam was unwinnable because LBJ used a fraudulent "crisis" in the first place and set up the rules so that we could win every battle and still lose the war.. Former college kids and typists and assorted a-holes in the CIA were dictating military strategy and policy while the Generals were forced to sit on the sidelines. Democrat administrations never did trust the Military and crooked regimes like the Kennedy brothers were well used to illegally having the CIA  do their dirty work even when it turned out to be a disaster like the Bay of Pigs.Thanks to the liberal media the whole thing was blamed on Nixon anyway.


----------



## rightwinger (May 12, 2018)

Vietnam was unwinnable because we treated a Civil War into a Cold War


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (May 12, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> > Inchon was a stroke of luck.
> ...


*Brains Instead of Brute Force*

The Pacific War should have been as bloody as the Eastern Front.  Instead, we suffered 1% of the fatalities that the Russians lost.  The big difference was Big Mac.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (May 12, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...


*Follow the Money or You'll Be Led by the Nose
*
That's the selfish-puke Bircher view.  But Truman, the product of a corrupt political machine, wanted to let Communism expand into a credible threat in order to have a specious reason to fund the Military-Industrial Complex.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (May 12, 2018)

whitehall said:


> Vietnam was unwinnable because LBJ used a fraudulent "crisis" in the first place and set up the rules so that we could win every battle and still lose the war.. Former college kids and typists and assorted a-holes in the CIA were dictating military strategy and policy while the Generals were forced to sit on the sidelines. Democrat administrations never did trust the Military and crooked regimes like the Kennedy brothers were well used to illegally having the CIA  do their dirty work even when it turned out to be a disaster like the Bay of Pigs.Thanks to the liberal media the whole thing was blamed on Nixon anyway.


*Epitaph on the Wall:  PROUD TO DIE TAKING A RICHKID'S PLACE*

The purpose of the Vietnam War was to kill off or take the fight out of the bravest sons of the working class.  Mission accomplished


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 12, 2018)

The Sage of Main Street said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



You live in a very strange alternative universe, Street.....

Truman Committee - Wikipedia

"The Truman Committee proved to be one of the most successful investigative efforts ever mounted by the US government: an initial budget of $15,000 was expanded over three years to $360,000 to save an estimated $10–15 billion in military spending and thousands of lives of US servicemen"

Wiki


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 12, 2018)

The Sage of Main Street said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > there4eyeM said:
> ...



I agree....he was incredibly brilliant, first in his class at West Point, outstandingly courageous and he should have lived in the White House.  Yet, he was human and mistakenly believed the Chinese would not enter the Korean War....but nobody did...he cannot be faulted all that much for that mistake.  His legacy is all the American Soldiers lives that were spared in the South Pacific due to his brilliant island hopping campaign.


----------



## harmonica (May 13, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


..even if we called up the reserves and invaded NVietnam [which would've been very stupid to do for a very insignificant civil war ] we could not stay in NV forever
..they would've just started the civil war again when we left and kept up resistance with the US there [ like many countries have done with occupiers --which I will not list for there being so many


----------



## harmonica (May 13, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


again: most wars do not end it total victory
again:
it was a win for the US to keep SK from being over run..our mission was *not* to move into North Korea!! here were the objectives:


> aid the democratic nation in repulsing an invasion by communist North Korea.





> to enforce a United Nations resolution calling for an end to hostilities, and to stem the spread of communism in Asia.





> “immediate cessation of hostilities” and the withdrawal of North Korean forces to the 38th parallel.


and the biggie:::!!


> President Truman announced to the nation and the world that America would intervene in the Korean conflict in order to *prevent the conquest *of an independent nation by communism


Truman orders U.S. forces to Korea - Jun 27, 1950 - HISTORY.com
mission accomplished....
Truman did not want to spread the conflict--he did not want to go into NK if China would get involved


> “would be wrong—tragically wrong—for us to take the initiative in extending the war… Our aim is to avoid the spread of the conflict.


Truman relieves MacArthur of duties in Korea - Apr 11, 1951 - HISTORY.com
this is a win
China wins by keeping the UN/US out of NK
SK wins for staying independent
NK loses by not taking over NK

the US/etc kicked ASS in PG1....totally beat the  Iraq forces--but by your definition it was not a win because it ended in a cease fire

Israel beat the Arabs ASS in the Six Day War...totally beat the Arab forces
 Israel conquered and kept* MORE *land than they had before the war!!
--but by your definition Israel didn't win, because it ended in a cease fire
so, Israel didn't win the Six Day War???


----------



## harmonica (May 13, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


see post # 91 for Vietnam


----------



## harmonica (May 13, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


here--Six Day War cease fire
Cease-fires


----------



## harmonica (May 13, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


but the politicians were part of the ''team''
just like the NV's politicians were part of the ''team''
no--you can't play hindsight 20-20
you play with the players you have
you can't call up minor ''leaguers'' during the game
loss

and there is no proof that the war would've been won with different ROE
we dropped more bombs on Vietnam than in WW2/etc

NV didn't have to Win to win--just not lose....like the American revolutionists


----------



## Unkotare (May 13, 2018)

The Sage of Main Street said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > there4eyeM said:
> ...




Russian fatalities were due to Stalin's stupidity.


----------



## rightwinger (May 13, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> The Sage of Main Street said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


MacArthur was a legend in his own mind. Without his self publicity generation, he never would have survived his failures in the Phillipines. Any other General would have been fired

MacArther, in spite of being informed of the attack on Pearl Harbor 20 hours earlier, was unprepared for the invasion of the Phillipines and had his planes on the ground

After losing the Phillipines, his insistence on “I shall return” cost countless lives in an unnecessary land war in Guinea and the Phillipines

While his attack on Inchon was brilliant, he ignored Truman’s direction to stay below the 38 th parallel. Truman warned an invasion of the north could lead to China’s entry into the war

In invading the north, MacArthur ignored reports that China had troops infiltrating the north and laughed at their fighting ability

At Chosin, his troops were trapped and barely escaped alive

After his defeat, his bluster and arrogance in advocating nukes and an invasion of China cost him his job


One of our WORST Generals


----------



## rightwinger (May 13, 2018)

The Sage of Main Street said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > there4eyeM said:
> ...



The big difference was the atomic bomb


----------



## there4eyeM (May 13, 2018)

How is it that generals who do the obvious thing are thought of as brilliant?
Napoleon was brilliant, finding ways of defeating enemies any other general would have lost to.
Alexander and Hannibal were brilliant.
Schwartzkopf was not brilliant, merely efficient.
MacArthur blew it in the Philippines. Bypassing unneeded islands was merely logical. Real brilliance would have been to do the same thing with Japan itself. No need to invade at the cost of uncountable American lives. Inchon could have gone very wrong, and then there would have been no recourse but capitulation. Later, continuing into a potential enemy trap despite growing suspicion of significant concentration of troops was not brilliant. Expecting that the enemy would not do something he was capable of doing is not only not brilliant, it is the first thing a commander should not do.
Unfortunately, America has a poor track record of having qualified people in the right place at the right time to avoid catastrophe. Fortunately, it has often been blessed with the right people to persevere to a good finish. Truman was not ready to guide a post war America. Roosevelt did a poor job of preparing for his disappearance, though he knew he was going.


----------



## rightwinger (May 13, 2018)

there4eyeM said:


> How is it that generals who do the obvious thing are thought of as brilliant?
> Napoleon was brilliant, finding ways of defeating enemies any other general would have lost to.
> Alexander and Hannibal were brilliant.
> Schwartzkopf was not brilliant, merely efficient.
> ...



MacArthur underestimated the fighting ability of the Japanese then underestimated the fighting ability of the Chinese

His arrogance cost over 50,000 lives unnecessarily


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 13, 2018)

harmonica said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



_"We didn’t win because we didn’t want to endure the casualties it would take to win. In both cases we were lied to."
_
Again, simply untrue. There is nothing sane about the idiotic civilian fantasy that a nation should go to war without being willing to do whatever it takes to win that war even in the case of a non-optional war. Anything less dishonors the troops who sacrifice so much to accomplish the task at hand.

_" ..even if we called up the reserves and invaded NVietnam [which would've been very stupid to do for a very insignificant civil war ] we could not stay in NV forever"_

Again, untrue. The idea that Vietnam was a civil war was never anything other than blatantly obvious Communist propaganda especially after '68 when the VC (which was largely NVA in any case) was essentially wiped out. We long had the men and equipment necessary to win the war and only lacked  civilian political approval. Final control of the war was in the hands of idiots with no slightest idea how one should be fought.

_"...it was a win for the US to keep SK from being over run..our mission was *not* to move into North Korea!! here were the objectives":_

And our missions were being assigned by clueless civilian idiots. 

"...don't try to say the military had their hands tied--we bombed NV with more bombs than were used in WW2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"we had air and naval superiority

Yes, we had it and we were just not allowed to use it effectively.

"...and there is no proof that the war would've been won with different ROE
NV didn't have to Win to win--just not lose....like the American revolutionists"

And no proof we wouldn't have. 
It was absolutely necessary for North Vietnam to launch a bloody imperialistic invasion to conquer South Vietnam in order to win.  And-in the end-that is exactly what we stood aside and allowed them to do. Thanks so much to politicians and the left wing agenda.


----------



## rightwinger (May 13, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


In every war you enter, you need to consider......is the end result worth it?

Jeopardizing the lives of our military personnel for some political posturing is not worth it. Yes....they lie to us
They lie about the reason for being there, they lie about how many casualties, they lie about cost, they lie about duration 
In fact, they will tell us any lie that will get them the war they are asking for


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 13, 2018)

As a matter of fact, even McNamara admitted in his final years that Vietnam was a civil war.


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 13, 2018)

More fun MacArthur facts. He had his corncob pipe designed by a pipe company, just for the image, so that he could always be picked out of a photo in a crowd. Unfortunately, it was virtually impossible to keep lit, so he never smoked it. He used regular pipes to smoke in private. He also had his aids beat up his new hats, and to put sweat stains on them.


----------



## harmonica (May 13, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


we fought for over seven years....helped for over ten
gave SV air and naval superiority ......still a loss

hold it--you said with different ROEs, the outcome would have been different
you made the claim--it's up to you to prove it--not for me to disprove it
when prosecutors make a claim that someone is guilty, it's up to the claimers [ prosecutors, you, ] to prove the claim
...how idiotic = 





> And no proof we wouldn't have.


  so we both have no proof on different ROEs!!!!  so, your initial claim of that is without proof--YET, you claimed it!!!!!....then you claim I have no proof !!! hahahah ...idiotic
so your claim of different  ROEs is a worthless claim


----------



## harmonica (May 13, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


we did NOT '''stand aside'''
500,000 troops/etc
naval/air superiority
airfield construction
BILLION $$$$$
training
etc etc ---no--we did not stand aside
for the last time---SVs government was corrupt and worthless
no way we were going to win the war 
I see you back up your points with ZERO links/evidence 
while I provide evidence


----------



## harmonica (May 13, 2018)

Vandalshandle said:


> As a matter of fact, even McNamara admitted in his final years that Vietnam was a civil war.





> could and should have withdrawn from South Vietnam" in late 1963 after the assassination of President Ngo Dinh Diem or a year or so late


this is just basic common sense--the country you are trying to save murders it's head of state


----------



## harmonica (May 13, 2018)

Morely Safer knew something was ''wrong'' in 1965!!
at the 4:30 mark
if you read about Vietnam, some soldiers and Marines said the same thing


----------



## harmonica (May 13, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> > Inchon was a stroke of luck.
> ...


Mac only started the island hopping AFTER he screwed it up at Buna-Gona
so--he isn't the great intelligent general you think


> there were a number of valuable but* costly lessons* in the conduct of jungle warfare.





> Allied losses in the battle were at a rate higher than that experienced at Guadalcanal.





> Historian Stanley Falk agreed, writing that "the Papuan campaign was one of the costliest Allied victories of the Pacific war in terms of casualties per troops committed.


Battle of Buna–Gona - Wikipedia
anybody can learn by trying something to see if it works
a lowly Lt could think of island hopping--especially after taking mucho casualties


----------



## harmonica (May 13, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


we gained nothing
because in Vietnam it didn't stop the communist from trying to [ and did ] take over
it didn't stop Castro
etc
I ask AGAIN!!--what effect did losing Nam, Cambodia, and Laos [ dominoes ] have on the US?
--many people and countries hated the US for bombing/burning/killing


----------



## rightwinger (May 13, 2018)

harmonica said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


I never claimed they weren’t 

We lied over our reason for being there, we lied about the ability of S Vietnamese forces, we lied about our timeline for being there, lied about our exit strategy

Wrong war


----------



## there4eyeM (May 13, 2018)

harmonica said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


Truth be known, the loss was certain as soon as they were considered 'ours' to lose.


----------



## harmonica (May 13, 2018)

there4eyeM said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


I have asked this on many forums:
...what what major, detrimental effect was there on the US when the communist took over?
..what detrimental effects would there have been on the US if we did not go to war in Nam?
the answers I have received:
ZERO


----------



## harmonica (May 13, 2018)

harmonica said:


> Morely Safer knew something was ''wrong'' in 1965!!
> at the 4:30 mark
> if you read about Vietnam, some soldiers and Marines said the same thing


sorry--the big point in the Safer video is around the 4:20 mark also
he says this action was Vietnam in miniature...that American military might can win the *military* victory---but not the *TOTAL*, political victory---

Safer knew the outcome in 1965!!!!!!!!


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 13, 2018)

...and Nixon ran on the statement that he had a secret plan to end the Vietnam war. Years later, in the David Frost interviews, he admitted that he did not have any such plan.


----------



## rightwinger (May 13, 2018)

harmonica said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Morely Safer knew something was ''wrong'' in 1965!!
> ...


It was Walter Crionkite who ultimately stuck a dagger in it


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 13, 2018)

harmonica said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > there4eyeM said:
> ...





harmonica said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > there4eyeM said:
> ...




Buna-Gona was a learning experience for MacArthur.  I would however not characterize it as you have.

 Casualties on both sides were high – the Allies buried 1,400 Japanese dead, while the Allies lost 620 dead, 2,065 wounded and 132 missing.

Buna, Gona and Sanananda were the first battles in which Allied solders attacked Japanese troops who had had time to dig in. At the start of the campaign the Australians and Americans lacked the heavy weapons that would prove to be essential in the jungle. Air support was not yet effective – only 121 sorties were flown, and after 22 December no more requests were made for close air support. During the campaign the Allies began to learn how to deal with the impressive bunkers that they would find across the Pacific. At the start of the campaign the Allies had not believed that tanks or heavy artillery would be useful in the jungle – by the end of it the campaign it had become clear that both weapons were essential when faced by strong Japanese defensive positions. The lessons learnt at high coast at Buna, Gona and Sanananda would be applied with increasing skill as the Allied advanced across the Pacific. 

Warfare History Network » The Battle Of Buna: Costly For Both Allies and Japanese


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 13, 2018)

harmonica said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...



Cute, but stupid. Where exactly is there any proof of any of your numerous silly statements? I have stated my informed opinion that I believe to be true. That is the best we can do on a forum such as this. Those readers who have some actual knowledge of history need no further proof. Believe what you like; you will anyway.


----------



## rightwinger (May 13, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


Your proof is more emotion


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 13, 2018)

Robert McNamara, on Vietnam:

The Fog of War - Wikipedia

"*Robert McNamara's 11 lessons from Vietnam*
From Robert McNamara's 1995 book "_In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam_".[11]



We misjudged then — and we have since — the geopolitical intentions of our adversaries … and we exaggerated the dangers to the United States of their actions.
We viewed the people and leaders of South Vietnam in terms of our own experience … We totally misjudged the political forces within the country.
We underestimated the power of nationalism to motivate a people to fight and die for their beliefs and values.
Our misjudgments of friend and foe, alike, reflected our profound ignorance of the history, culture, and politics of the people in the area, and the personalities and habits of their leaders.
We failed then — and have since — to recognize the limitations of modern, high-technology military equipment, forces, and doctrine. We failed, as well, to adapt our military tactics to the task of winning the hearts and minds of people from a totally different culture.
We failed to draw Congress and the American people into a full and frank discussion and debate of the pros and cons of a large-scale military involvement … before we initiated the action.
After the action got under way, and unanticipated events forced us off our planned course … we did not fully explain what was happening, and why we were doing what we did.
We did not recognize that neither our people nor our leaders are omniscient. Our judgment of what is in another people's or country's best interest should be put to the test of open discussion in international forums. We do not have the God-given right to shape every nation in our image or as we choose.
We did not hold to the principle that U.S. military action … should be carried out only in conjunction with multinational forces supported fully (and not merely cosmetically) by the international community.
We failed to recognize that in international affairs, as in other aspects of life, there may be problems for which there are no immediate solutions … At times, we may have to live with an imperfect, untidy world.
Underlying many of these errors lay our failure to organize the top echelons of the executive branch to deal effectively with the extraordinarily complex range of political and military issues.
 
These are slightly shortened versions of the text from page 321 to page 323 of his book."


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 13, 2018)

harmonica said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



We most certainly did stand aside while the USSR and China continued to back the North Vietnamese Communists.
We sold out the South Vietnamese. We withdrew our troops, we promised then failed to provide air support while they were being overrun and congress stopped providing supplies and funds while the Communist countries continued to provide North Vietnam with their every whim. Hard to defend yourself when you're out of ammo. We betrayed our ally and all of our own and friendly troops who sacrificed so much there.
All governments lie about matters related to war. Being too truthful simply hands big advantages over to the enemy. Loose lips sink ships. Duh.


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 13, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



See post 120. It appears that the architect of the Vietnam war, Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense during the era, disagrees with you.


----------



## rightwinger (May 13, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


The South Vietnamese sold out us
We provided training, the best equipment in the world, a massive military force, air superiority, a navy and 60,000 American lives

They still lost to an inferior North Vietnamese Force who actually gave a shit


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 13, 2018)

harmonica said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



_we gained nothing
because in Vietnam it didn't stop the communist from trying to [ and did ] take over
_
We did in fact gain continued independence for our South Vietnamese ally. We stopped any take over for as long as we chose to.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 13, 2018)

Vandalshandle said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...



So? Pleased and proud that is mostly true. Does he not admit to his shortcomings with what you have quoted?


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 13, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



The same shortcomings that we still had when we went to war with Afghanistan and Iraq. The same shortcomings that we have by maintaining the ridiculous ban of dealings with Cuba. This country is bound and determined to kick ass just because we have the technology to do it, and then wonder why we are universally hated in the Middle East, and much of Latin America. Our foreign policy has been wrong since the 1950's, and to make it worse, we now have Trump, with no foreign policy at all, except bullying our allies.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (May 14, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


*Evolutionary Duty*

Islam is far worse.  The major powers should unite and wipe the Third World savages off the face of the earth.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (May 14, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


*Not Required Reading*

They appeased Hitler because he was the enemy of Communism and because his ideology wasn't that much different from what the other ruling classes believed in.


----------



## there4eyeM (May 14, 2018)

Politicians sold out American values by becoming so foolishly involved in Vietnam, Korea, Iran and so many other situations.
Vietnam was a catastrophe of misunderstanding on all sides. No one gained except 'defense' producers.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (May 14, 2018)

harmonica said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


*Because of Its Piracy, Ancient Albania Was Permanently Reduced to Practically Nothing*

If an invader is driven back, it must lose territory.  It must be permanently disabled or it will invade again.  You're contradicting yourself if you don't apply your weak retaliation in Korea to Israel's gaining territory after the Six-Day War.  This was also applied to Carthage.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (May 14, 2018)

harmonica said:


> Morely Safer knew something was ''wrong'' in 1965!!
> at the 4:30 mark
> if you read about Vietnam, some soldiers and Marines said the same thing


*The Yellow Yell, and Hollow Fools Follow*

That incident was no different from the mass killing of civilians by our bombers in World War II.  There are no non-combatants in a combat zone.  By harboring Viet Cong, the "civilians" were getting American men killed.  Unpatriotic American sissies who ran away to college dominate the narratives you foolishly parrot.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (May 14, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


*The Boat People Were Chickenhawks
*
The South Vietnamese who weren't collaborators were cowards and crooks.  They were what prevented us from winning; they deserve everything the Communists later did to them.  The unrealistic pose of saving such a worthless people should have been replaced with us alone against the Communists; any native interfering with that would be killed.  They would have quickly learned to stand aside and let us make the Communists give up all of Vietnam because their continuance there would have been hopeless.


----------



## harmonica (May 14, 2018)

The Sage of Main Street said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Morely Safer knew something was ''wrong'' in 1965!!
> ...


we could never win in Vietnam--forget it ----I've linked and stated the many reasons why


----------



## harmonica (May 14, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


so we lost anyway--with 50,000 Americans dead and many more Vietnamese dead for ----nothing....all those dead---for nothing
all the dead and mutilated.....families broken up....homes lost....etc etc


----------



## harmonica (May 14, 2018)

you people are in fairytale land if you think the US could've won in Vietnam


----------



## harmonica (May 14, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


if you read about Vietnam, the NVA were very good
I'm re-reading _Operation Buffalo _about one of the worst ambushes USMC Vietnam
my wife's uncle died there with B 1-9 2nd platoon-the worst hit unit..nearly wiped out
1-9 was called the Walking Dead


----------



## rightwinger (May 14, 2018)

harmonica said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


The NVA gave a shit, they were fighting for their country, fighting for Ho Chi Minh. They fought with very little but still held their own against superior forces

Our strategy was always to turn over the fighting to S Vietnam
They were corrupt and never had the heart


----------



## harmonica (May 14, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


ok--fine...but add the really stupid crap Mac did in the Philippines and Korea--it all adds up


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 14, 2018)

Many of the NVA actually fought because the government would kill their family if they didn't.


----------



## rightwinger (May 14, 2018)

harmonica said:


> TheGreenHornet said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...



Truman wanted MacArthur to stay below the 38 th parallel. He warned about the risk of the Chinese entering the conflict. MacArthur laughed him off. MacArthur knew best

His invasion of the north was a disaster. He ignored reports of Chinese infiltration and laughed off their fighting ability

His arrogance cost us 50,000 lives


----------



## harmonica (May 14, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> Many of the NVA actually fought because the government would kill their family if they didn't.


well--they were good then


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 14, 2018)

'The Party's attack is geared to the wide variety of American life. Communism has something to sell to everybody. And, following this principle, it is the function of mass agitation to exploit all the grievances, hopes, aspirations, prejudices, fears, and ideals of all the special groups that make up our society, social, religious, economic, racial, political. Stir them up. Set one against the other. Divide and conquer. That's the way to soften up a democracy.'


https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/512suSROrLL._AC_US218_.jpg


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 14, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...





rightwinger said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...



MacArthur was correct; Truman was wrong. He is also responsible for our our continued problems with North Korea.


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 15, 2018)

Whatever, doc. All the best military minds were wrong about a land war in Asia. If you had only been there to educate them...


----------



## rightwinger (May 15, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


If he had listened to Truman, he would have secured the 38th parallel and saved 50,000 lives


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 15, 2018)

If Truman had listened to MacArthur there would currently be no NK and China would have become much less aggressive.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 15, 2018)

_Whatever, doc. All the best military minds were wrong about a land war in Asia. If you had only been there to educate them..._
Just goes to show that politicians are NOT military minds.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (May 15, 2018)

harmonica said:


> The Sage of Main Street said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


*An "Expert" Is a Liar for Hire*

Links are part of a chain.  Unshackle yourself.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (May 15, 2018)

harmonica said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


*Going to Modern College Is So Unnatural That They Had to Be Threatened With Death In Vietnam to Get Enough Students*

All self-serving propaganda written by Mamas' Boys who ran away to college because they were afraid to grow up.  Their treason and unmanliness should never be excused.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 15, 2018)

Korean War:

US: 33,652 KIA  (54,246 total dead) ...103204 WIA...  8196 MIA
South Korea: 227,800 KIA...  717,100 WIA ... 43,500 MIA

North Korea: EST. 215,000-350,000 KIA...303,000 WIA ...300,000 MIA/POW
China: 400,000+ KIA...486,000 WIA ... 25,000 MIA ...7110 POW + 14,00 who defected
Soviet Union** *299

https://www.historyguy.com/korean_war_casualties_and_statistics.htm

Since the border ended up roughly where it started territory is no real issue.
I'd say we kicked some ass.


----------



## rightwinger (May 15, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> If Truman had listened to MacArthur there would currently be no NK and China would have become much less aggressive.


If Truman had listened to MacArthur, we would have had over 100,000 dead and would have resorted to using nuclear weapons


----------



## rightwinger (May 15, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> Korean War:
> 
> US: 33,652 KIA  (54,246 total dead) ...103204 WIA...  8196 MIA
> South Korea: 227,800 KIA...  717,100 WIA ... 43,500 MIA
> ...


I’d say we had 54,000 Americans killed for no reason


----------



## there4eyeM (May 15, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > Korean War:
> ...


Not for no reason; for the wrong reasons.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 15, 2018)

Vandalshandle said:


> Whatever, doc. All the best military minds were wrong about a land war in Asia. If you had only been there to educate them...





rightwinger said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > If Truman had listened to MacArthur there would currently be no NK and China would have become much less aggressive.
> ...



Actually we probably would have had far fewer causalities had we used a tactical  nuclear weapon at the Yalu river staging/crossing area.

_I’d say we had 54,000 Americans killed for no reason.
_
And how exactly could we avoid losing troops in the face of unprovoked surprise aggression? How do you choose to not be attacked?


----------



## 9thIDdoc (May 15, 2018)

Vandalshandle said:


> Whatever, doc. All the best military minds were wrong about a land war in Asia. If you had only been there to educate them...





rightwinger said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > If Truman had listened to MacArthur there would currently be no NK and China would have become much less aggressive.
> ...



Actually we probably would have had far fewer causalities had we used a tactical  nuclear weapon at the Yalu river staging/crossing area.

_I’d say we had 54,000 Americans killed for no reason.
_
And how exactly could we avoid losing troops in the face of unprovoked surprise aggression? How do you choose to not be attacked?


----------



## rightwinger (May 15, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > Whatever, doc. All the best military minds were wrong about a land war in Asia. If you had only been there to educate them...
> ...


We could have listened to Truman and stopped at the 38 parallel. We could have secured the border, prevented 50,000 deaths and been in the same situation today


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 15, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > Whatever, doc. All the best military minds were wrong about a land war in Asia. If you had only been there to educate them...
> ...



Doc, if I had known that you were insane, I never would have engaged you in conversation.


----------



## harmonica (May 15, 2018)

9thIDdoc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


a whole corps thrown off the battle continent
the other forces retreating below the parallel
sure--Mac was really correct 
...there were over 300,000 Chinese in Korea and Mac didn't want to believe they were there!  plain and simple--he screwed up big time


----------



## rightwinger (May 15, 2018)

Mao thought MacArthur was crazy and would invade China

MacArthur racing to the Yalu River seemed to affirm it


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 15, 2018)

harmonica said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



McArthur like everyone else  thought China would not enter the war....a mistake but it was not the end of world...at most it was a temporary set back...the real problem was in Washington where there were too many who think like you....aka...no strong resolve to win.  Sen McCarty was right Washington and especially the State Dept. was riddled with communists.  Truman whilst admirable in ways lacked good judgement, feared Russia too much,  drank a lot of  whiskey and made a terrible decision to fire McArthur.  Now today we are reaping the results of Truman's mistake....a powerful totolitarian China outspending us on building their military power and now our number one threat...even though the donkeys howl about Russia.


*Q.* '
What was the security situation in the State Department at the time of McCarthy's Wheeling speech in February 1950?

*A.* Communist infiltration of the State Department began in the 1930s. On September 2, 1939, former Communist Whittaker Chambers provided Assistant Secretary of State Adolph Berle with the names and Communist connections of two dozen spies in the government, including Alger Hiss. Berle took the information to President Roosevelt, but FDR laughed it off. Hiss moved rapidly up the State Department ladder and served as an advisor to Roosevelt at the disastrous Yalta Conference in 1945 that paved the way for the Soviet conquest of Central and Eastern Europe. Hiss also functioned as the secretary general of the founding meeting of the United Nations in San Francisco, helped to draft the UN Charter, and later filled dozens of positions at the UN with American Communists before he was publicly exposed as a Soviet spy by Whittaker Chambers in 1948.

The security problem at the State Department had worsened considerably in 1945 when a merger brought into the State Department thousands of employees from such war agencies as the Office of Strategic Services, the Office of War Information, and the Foreign Economic Administration — all of which were riddled with members of the communist underground. J. Anthony Panuch, the State Department official charged with supervising the 1945 merger, told a Senate committee in 1953 that "the biggest single thing that contributed to the infiltration of the State Department was the merger of 1945. The effects of that are still being felt." In 1947, Secretary of State George Marshall and Under Secretary of State Dean Acheson engineered the firing of Panuch and the removal of every key member of his security staff.'

The Real McCarthy Record







*How Harry Truman Ran a Bourbon-Soaked White House*


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 15, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Mao thought MacArthur was crazy and would invade China
> 
> MacArthur racing to the Yalu River seemed to affirm it




It made all the sense in the world.....China's entry would have been only a temporary set-back if Truman had some balls....he was too fearful of Russia and thus his firing of MacArthur....that was the big mistake of the Korean War.


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 15, 2018)

harmonica said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




Nonsense....MacArthur would have re-grouped easily and if allowed free reign.....aka bombing the bridges across the Yalu River, bombing strategic Chnese military bases close to Korea etc. could have knocked China out of the War...but no Washington wanted a limited war....aka they wanted MacArthur to fight with one hand tied behind him.  The communists had way too much influence in Washington.

General MacArthur would have fixed this mess  | News Letter Journal


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 15, 2018)

It is absolutely amazing how this thread suddenly becomes more historically accurate in so many ways, simply by putting everyone who claims that, "McCarthy was right,", on ignore!


----------



## TheGreenHornet (May 15, 2018)

Vandalshandle said:


> It is absolutely amazing how this thread suddenly becomes more historically accurate in so many ways, simply by putting everyone who claims that, "McCarthy was right,", on ignore!




Pathetic response.....let it be known those who seek the truth will not be intimidated by threats of censorship of any sort.  Why is it that liberals consistently resort to censorship when their case gets weak?   Well, what else have they got?  When the truth is your enemy you have nothing.  Thus they try to hide, try to invoke censorship etc.

Anyhow....now for the truth.    '
THE AMERICAN left has an unexamined past. Like the French conservatives, who went into deep denial about their collaboration with the Nazis a half century ago, American leftists and some of their liberal allies have refused to sort out their own intimate connections with Marxist-Leninism in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s.

In a footnote on page 725 of "Witness," his 1952 classic of American confessional literature, Whittaker Chambers explained how this came to pass. He observed, "It is not the communists, but the ex-communists who have cooperated with the government, who have chiefly suffered..." Writing at the height of the controversy about communists in the U.S. government, Chambers explained, "It is worth noting that not one communist was moved to break with communism under the pressures of the Hiss case. Let those who wonder about communism and the power of its faith ponder that fact."


WAS MCCARTHY RIGHT ABOUT THE LEFT?

WASHINGTON — 'Although Joseph McCarthy was one of the most demonized American politicians of the last century, new information — including half-century-old FBI recordings of Soviet embassy conversations — are showing that McCarthy was right in nearly all his accusations.'
Read more at Most-hated senator was right

Setting the Record on Joe McCarthy Straight


With the advent of nuclear weapons, many civilian think tank warfare theorists believed that direct superpower confrontation had become too dangerous to contemplate.  Thus was born "limited war" in the national lexicon of strategic thinking when the Korean War broke out in 1950 and President Truman limited the war objectives and means in order to avoid nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union. The Korean War began the change in the American concept of war away from total war, or what was called at the time "general war," to a form of war that was more "civilized" and "less dangerous" in the minds of social scientists. 

Read more: Rewriting the Rules of War 
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook


----------



## rightwinger (May 16, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Mao thought MacArthur was crazy and would invade China
> ...


It is like you said in your previous post

Will to win

Winning at what cost?  100,000 lives?  200,000 lives?
Nuclear war?  WWIII?

For Christ sake, we just got out of WWII. The will of the American people to go through another massive war was not not there. Truman wanted a quick and easy conflict. MacArthur pulled him into a war


----------



## harmonica (May 16, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Mao thought MacArthur was crazy and would invade China
> 
> MacArthur racing to the Yalu River seemed to affirm it


agree--
plus:
the US helped the anti-communists 


> After the Japanese surrender, the U.S. transport moved Chinese government armies from the southwest to key cities such as Peking, Tientsin, and Shanghai, and 50,000 U.S. troops landed in China proper.





> In October 1947, an Army Advisory Group was formed to counsel Chiang and $27.7 million in aid was supplied.


..the Chinese wanted NOTHING of US troops on their border so soon after the revolution
..just like we didn't wanted missiles in Cuba
..also, the Chinese wanted to protect the hydroelectric dams in NK because they were getting power from them 


> The dam's generating facilities provided power for much of western North Korea and for the Port Arthur and Dairen regions of northeast China


Chinese Civil War, U.S. Involvement in the - Dictionary definition of Chinese Civil War, U.S. Involvement in the | Encyclopedia.com: FREE online dictionary
Attack on the Sui-ho Dam - Wikipedia


----------



## harmonica (May 16, 2018)

I doubt the smart guys on this thread even know what a corps is


----------



## rightwinger (May 16, 2018)

harmonica said:


> I doubt the smart guys on this thread even know what a corps is



A dead guy?


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 16, 2018)

I find it fascinating the way the Right is fixated on Cuba and N. Korea. Granted, the Soviets putting missiles in Cuba was a threat, but it was way overstated even at the time. The missiles that we forced the Soviets to disable under threat of nuclear war were obsolete in 3 years. We were putting men in orbit by 1965 with ICBM technology. The soviets rocket technology had achieved that even sooner. Even today, the whole ban on doing business with Cuba still exists. You can now take a commercial cruise to Cuba, but you are not allowed to have fun. Recreational shore excursions can not be commercially arranged, but you can have "intercultural exchange" experiences, like having a Cuban dance instructor come on board and teach you to samba. Whenever I think that maybe we are electing people for congress who have any sense, I have to stop and consider things like that. As for N. Korea, The Right wants to nuke them, just because they are constantly shooting their mouth off about bombing Seattle, or something similar.


----------



## harmonica (May 21, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


more unrealistic thinking
way too many people think war is played on a table top
..there is no sure evidence China could've been knocked out of the war by bombing
..they bombed tiny Vietnam with more tonnage than WW2 put together and NVietnam didn't pull out--in fact they won...and China is a little bigger than Vietnam
..


----------



## whitehall (May 25, 2018)

TheGreenHornet said:


> The Sage of Main Street said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreenHornet said:
> ...


Who, MacArthur? He might have been 1st at West Point but it was in the freaking 19th century. MacArthur had a mildly distinguished career in WW1 although he was criticized for being too hesitant to send troops up in a crucial battle. Mac did his duty as COS and retired honorably prior to WW2 when for some reason he was called by FDR to become the commander of troops most likely to be attacked by the Japanese Empire.  Dougout Doug was finished when he lost his entire Army in the Philippines four months into the conflict but for some reason he was brought out of retirement again in his 70's (with an embarrassing combover) by timid WW1 veteran Harry Truman to command Troops in Korea. You have to be a drooling idiot to claim that  McArthur "cannot be faulted" for sending Troops to the biggest ambush in freaking history and then made wild claims to nuke China. Mac was lucky he wasn't hauled out in a freaking straight jacket when Truman finally relieved him of duty.


----------



## Mike Dwight (May 29, 2018)

**another grammar edit**

OK I listened to 90% of everybody on 18 pages... I'm pretty sure this is a history forum. To do justice to history, this history has very little to do with some dumb americans and maybe a few dumb military Koreans. In fact, oh wait, 10 times as many Koreans.Ya! A Korean war about Koreans! but anyway, I read 18 pages of military garbage here.  Here's my response: here's Korea 1900... Korea Under Japanese Colonial Domination

Here's our forum korea of 2018 Korea Under Japanese Colonial Domination.
Korea doesn't want to be stuck between Japan and Russia. It doesn't now want to be stuck between a New Communist Russia and Miguk Americans. 
I can promise you that much, to history and also Koreans. You're like obviously the situation in Korea demanded....  oh wait did you ask a korean, no, dont ask a korean. See, Korea are the unfortunates stuck to the front of the japanese tank again, right.  see there's koreans, then japan, then all the way over here America, don't have to worry about it, communist prevention theory with domino theory, logical conclusion. Sattelite nations!Where are you guys even from army brat families, I personally find out this stuff, oh the Forgotten War I need to look into that for Koreans who are affected, which is true, 2 million dead Koreans is like a holocaust. I don't know how Asia keeps their sanity, I personally think they don't. Its like Russia and Germany. we just have over 20 million dead people between japan and china. political differences perhaps? Anybody outside your country was an unimaginable, vicious enemy in the near past.

I am interested, and I have worked on, humanizing the strange foreign animal that is communism. Where is the one theory? How did it get like it is? I must admit not the slightest connection or interest. Cambodia took away all money, cities, families, forced every person in the fields in communes and shot all indigenous tribes, foreign or different ethnicities, hooray, China endorsed it, our communism is Chinese communism not Vietnamese communism. Bunch of backscratching rulers obviously. Stare at a hippy neighbor in favor of legal marijuana, communist. GDP per capita in former soviet bloc countries rarely breaks 1000 dollars a person, haha, those poor, wait a second... non-economic labor... hmm... Is the brain washing just Universal to it? Freedom of the Press is really lacking. My favorite joke out of all of it is, True Communism has Never been Tried. Have you seen that one? Ya, because a philosophical direction doesn't need accounting with numbers or credibility, Communism wasn't applied correctly in any sort of failure and Communism needs to be done again. Did we all set out to be Reactionaries to the Nazis, nor did we set out to be Capitalists to the communists? Oh don't do all that crazy, wait don't , people can still trade their furs for matchlocks, or no?  The Korean War was safely about Communism, though, correct? Its such a fact I got ahead of myself. Korean literature has allowed this to get a lot more nuanced, I had read a book on the legitimate continuity of the South Korean Government, you should look into the Provisional Government, its all South Korean from 1910 to 1948, the Russian Tank Commander Kim Il Sung just swooped in there for some land grabs 1948.
 Out of the way! The Glorious Capitalist revolution begins anew! Juche theory proves these snowy mountains have everything the Korean people need for ourselves! Under Capitalism! Words! Ideological! Repetition!

Korean War veterans are universal pricks. Here's my evidence. Eisenhower personally rebranded American churches for Liberty! The Presbyterian Church now stands for Liberty! In and Under God and we Trust with God's in my butt! On your dollar! American! Meet a Korean occupation guy in the US army bases in his American tie, I'm also learning Korean with you! Kimosabe! Kimosabe! pricks, I bet I'd meet 10 veterans and get nothing, its cold! They hadn't invented rock radio, I wish I had Vietnam. I offer Korea honorary and automatic recognition to the Bonnie Blue Flag, Hoorah! see pamphlet for details.
It is a sweeping landslide all of Korea is raving mad for, hold the applause please, a protestor who's been in the united states and Californian colleges for the last 20 years ,you all know this guy, Syngman Rhee! I found Jesus in jail ya, he told me marry my german secretary, crush down Korean liberty for America , destroy Korean democracy to not emerge for 30 years, that kind of thing.


----------



## rightwinger (May 29, 2018)

Mike Dwight said:


> OK I listened to 90% of everybody on 18 pages... I want to make sure because I'm pretty sure this is a history forum. This is history without some dumbcrap americans and maybe a few dumb military Koreans, oh wait 10 times as many, ya, a Korean war by Koreans, oh yaaaa. but anyway, I read 18 pages of military garbage I'm like, so, here's Korea 1900... Korea Under Japanese Colonial Domination
> 
> Here's our forum korea of 2018 Korea Under Japanese Colonial Domination.
> 
> ...


Quite a word salad

I can see why you don’t post often


----------



## harmonica (May 29, 2018)

Mike Dwight said:


> OK I listened to 90% of everybody on 18 pages... I want to make sure because I'm pretty sure this is a history forum. This is history without some dumbcrap americans and maybe a few dumb military Koreans, oh wait 10 times as many, ya, a Korean war by Koreans, oh yaaaa. but anyway, I read 18 pages of military garbage I'm like, so, here's Korea 1900... Korea Under Japanese Colonial Domination
> 
> Here's our forum korea of 2018 Korea Under Japanese Colonial Domination.
> 
> ...


what???!!!!!!!!????


----------



## Sunni Man (May 29, 2018)

Mike Dwight said:


> OK I listened to 90% of everybody on 18 pages... I want to make sure because I'm pretty sure this is a history forum. This is history without some dumbcrap americans and maybe a few dumb military Koreans, oh wait 10 times as many, ya, a Korean war by Koreans, oh yaaaa. but anyway, I read 18 pages of military garbage I'm like, so, here's Korea 1900... Korea Under Japanese Colonial Domination
> 
> Here's our forum korea of 2018 Korea Under Japanese Colonial Domination.
> 
> ...


*What the #@^%& *   ...


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 29, 2018)

rightwinger said:


> Mike Dwight said:
> 
> 
> > OK I listened to 90% of everybody on 18 pages... I want to make sure because I'm pretty sure this is a history forum. This is history without some dumbcrap americans and maybe a few dumb military Koreans, oh wait 10 times as many, ya, a Korean war by Koreans, oh yaaaa. but anyway, I read 18 pages of military garbage I'm like, so, here's Korea 1900... Korea Under Japanese Colonial Domination
> ...



I'm going to wait for the Cliff Notes version....


----------



## Mike Dwight (May 29, 2018)

I can try to make it in Cliff Notes. Even Korean Movies have Americans just doing the incoherent Kill the Commies! Its North Korean propaganda too.  Welcome to Dongmakgol is a famous Korean movie. People there hate the ideological hardlines that south Korean president lee myung bak for example, prevents the 4000 year old Korean civilization talking to itself for about 50 years?  I liked my picture representation. Its marketing fact, nowhere more past-clinging to market than United Kingdom or Korea, could sell some stuff with a hanbok in a hanok. Even Korean Americans, affluent California Korean Americans presenting Domino Theory is SO annoying, and that its true too, its Korean patriotic fact. We all need to stick together as anti-communists or each one falls! In Cliff Notes, I wasn't highly enthusiastic on the military tactics post. You know what I hate about it, is watching on the same day, watching 2nd bull run, manasses, 2nd Harper's Ferry, shanendoah you know and the arrows and the directions and he lined up his left flank... 2.5 million political executions is involved in one of these wars. The US Civil war has the arrows and battles from Tennessee to Maryland, the Korean war was flight and persecution. I mean many things in Korean history we simply don't have the words and understanding of, many things. A woman saw the hungry ragged, confederates storming through Maryland, "God Bless your Confederate souls".Got shoes or not but so proud and happy on the enemy territory.

Well, forget getting carried off track with any sort of banter. Good enough pro documentary, about, some little battle, in a foreign land we Still don't want to know, that no one in the war knew. 50,000 dead in korea, 50,000 in Vietnam, hey why'd I lose 5 to ching chong ling long chinaland, that's my question, it's a pretty good question too.


----------



## Vandalshandle (May 29, 2018)

Occasionally, someone appears on this board who has had a recent religious experience, and posts in tongues….


----------



## rightwinger (May 29, 2018)

Mike Dwight said:


> I can try to make it in Cliff Notes. Even Korean Movies have Americans just doing the incoherent Kill the Commies! Its North Korean propaganda too.  Welcome to Dongmakgol is a famous Korean movie. People there hate the ideological hardlines that south Korean president lee myung bak for example, prevents the 4000 year old Korean civilization talking to itself for about 50 years?  I liked my picture representation. Its marketing fact, nowhere more past-clinging to market than United Kingdom or Korea, could sell some stuff with a hanbok in a hanok. Even Korean Americans, affluent California Korean Americans presenting Domino Theory is SO annoying, and that its true too, its Korean patriotic fact. We all need to stick together as anti-communists or each one falls! In Cliff Notes, I wasn't highly enthusiastic on the military tactics post. You know what I hate about it, is watching on the same day, watching 2nd bull run, manasses, 2nd Harper's Ferry, shanendoah you know and the arrows and the directions and he lined up his left flank... 2.5 million political executions is involved in one of these wars. The US Civil war has the arrows and battles from Tennessee to Maryland, the Korean war was flight and persecution. I mean many things in Korean history we simply don't have the words and understanding of, many things. A woman saw the hungry ragged, confederates storming through Maryland, "God Bless your Confederate souls".Got shoes or not but so proud and happy on the enemy territory.
> 
> Well, forget getting carried off track with any sort of banter. Good enough pro documentary, about, some little battle, in a foreign land we Still don't want to know, that no one in the war knew. 50,000 dead in korea, 50,000 in Vietnam, hey why'd I lose 5 to ching chong ling long chinaland, that's my question, it's a pretty good question too.


Are you capable of maintaining a single thought in your head?


----------

