Why Did The United States Went To War In Korea Research Paper

PAGES
4
WORDS
2312
Cite
Related Topics:

¶ … Korean War, just like most other wars in history did not occur in a vacuum. It started because of the North Korean attack on the South Koreans with the belief that they would be able to win the war and communize the whole Korean peninsula (Chang, 2010). The confidence of North Koreans in their ability to win the fight against the South was not based on hope, but on the intense confidence that it will be an easy victory for the North Korean forces in the war (Chang, 2010). As a matter of fact, the North Korean forces were far more superior to the forces of the South in every category of the fighting abilities and capabilities (Chang, 2010). They were well armed with very heavy weapons and equipment the Soviet Union supplied, adequately trained by the cautious guidance of Soviet military education and training personnel, vastly reinforced with the Korean forces and fight leadership, well-matured in the Chinese Civil War (1927-1949) era, and armed with a harmonized fighting plan created by the Soviet military war planners and advisers (Chang, 2010). After judging from the facts, both North Korea and its sponsors, the Communist China and the Soviet Union, predicted an easy victory over South Korea, provided the United States would fail to rapidly intervene with its soldiers (Chang, 2010). With these anxieties and anticipation, South Korea was attacked by North Korea on June 25, 1950, which turned out to be the direct and immediate cause of the Korean War (Chang, 2010). Background

The Korean War (1950- 1953 (UDSR, 1995) was a type of military conflict between the Korean Republic, with the support of the United Nations, and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and the support of the People's Republic of China (PRC), with some military material supplies from the Soviet Union. The War was mainly caused by the physical division of Korea by the Victorious Allies agreement at the conclusion of the Pacific War towards the end of World War 11.

Japan ruled the Korean Peninsula from 1910 until when World War 11 ended. Following Japan's surrender in 1945, the peninsula was divided along the 38th parallel by the American administrator, with the U.S. forces the Southern part and Soviet forces overseeing the northern part (Boose, 1995).

The 1948 failure to hold free and fair elections all through the Korean peninsula, deepened the rift between the two sides, which led to the formation of a Communist government by the North. The 38th parallel continuously became a political boundary that separates the two Korean nations from each other. Although reunification talks went on for months after the war, tension became more intensified. Cross-border raids and skirmishes at the 38th parallel continued. The situation, however, rose to a full blown warfare when the North Korean forces carried out an invasion of South Korea of 25 June 1950 (Devine et al., 2007). This was the first notable armed conflict of the Cold War (Hermes, 2002).

The United Nations, mostly the United States, helped South Korea in resisting the invasion. A fast UN counter-offensive forced back the North Koreans beyond the 38th Parallel and near the Yalu River, and the People's Republic of China (PRC) got involved in the war from the Northern side (Devine et al., 2007). The Chinese launched a serious counter-offensive that forced back the United Nations combined forces back across the 38th Parallel. The Soviet Union gave aid to North Korean as well as the Chinese forces. In 1953, the war ended with an armistice, which re-established the border amid the two Korean sides, as well as, built the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ), a four-kilometer-wide defense zone amid the two Korean sides. There are still some minor fight outbreaks even today.

With external forces sponsoring both North and South Korea, the Korean War could be best described as a proxy war. From the perspective of military science, it combines tactics and strategies of World War 1 and World War 11: it started with a mobile campaign of fast infantry attacks succeeded by airstrikes, but developed into a full scale war in 1951.

Factors in U.S. intervention

The hostile atmosphere that characterizes every Cold War politics was responsible for the United States decision to get involved in the Korean war. A day before the invasion by North Korea, a couple of events made Truman really anxious (Teaching with Documents, 2012). The Soviets, in 1949 released a nuclear bomb, which brought an end to U.S. monopoly on atomic bomb. In Europe, the intervention of the Soviets in Turkey and Greece introduced the Marshal Plan and the place in China, which brought in the Communist party's Mao Zedong to power. Chiang Kai Shek and his Nationalists had before this time moved back to Formosa Island (Taiwan) while their battle with China mainland was sustained (Teaching with Documents, 2012).

Mao made a fast move and got himself aligned with the Soviets, and in 1950, he entered into a truce with Soviets. The Republicans criticized the administration of Truman that he no longer had China's alliance. They blamed him for his failure to provide adequate aid to Chinese citizens. Dean Acheson, the Secretary of State recommended that the government should recognize the Chinese communist government, but his suggestion ended up giving them more missiles to carry out their attacks (Teaching with Documents, 2012). There were internal criticisms also with regards to the commitment of Truman's government to war against communism locally. Joseph McCarthy, the Republican Senator representing Wisconsin had newly begun his notorious search for communists inside the United States Government (Teaching with Documents, 2012). Though McCarthy was simply warming up, Alger Hiss recent trials and the trails of others for spying made the administration of Truman more apprehensive about the anticommunist credentials it paraded (Teaching with Documents, 2012). Both Truman and his advisers were faced with higher domestic pressure to appear stern on communism outside their borders. (Teaching with Documents, 2012). Consequently, when the South was invaded by the North Korean forces, the Truman government took advantage of the opportunity to stand with a noncommunist administration to save them from being invaded by communist forces. In their bid not let go of any other ally to the communist movement and to spice up their anticommunist qualifications, the Truman government saw itself providing security for a nation several worlds away from the United States soil (Teaching with Documents, 2012). Even at that, the response of Truman was much more than a mere reaction to domestic pressure. South Korea's invasion intensified Truman's longtime fear that China and the Soviets planned to spread out the reach of communism all over the Asian continent (Teaching with Documents, 2012). The June 27 statement by Truman shows his deep concern with the aggression of communists and their desire for expansion (Teaching with Documents, 2012). In the statement, Truman claims that, communism was way beyond the merely using subversion to win sovereign nations and will tend to use war and armed invasion. Going by Truman's statement, it is obvious he believed that the North Korean attack was an aspect of a broader scheme by China -- a Communist nation and, by expansion, the Soviets (Teaching with Documents, 2012). The president had the belief that the situation of Korea was comparable to the 1947 Greece scenario (Teaching with Documents, 2012). According to his information to his advisors, he believed that the attack was obviously orchestrated by the Soviets. This was what gave America the moral necessity to take action. If we fail to fight now, no one can accurately predict their action (Teaching with Documents, 2012). His obvious worry over the anticommunist government's future in Asia was evident in his public comment. Truman promised to provide security for Formosa (Taiwan) and protect it from possible attacks. He also promised to provide support for the French Troops in Indochina, a clash that would ultimately become the infamous Vietnam War. However, Truman never wished to fight against the Soviets in a full-blown war (Teaching with Documents, 2012). By putting the whole blames on communism in his statement, instead of blaming the Soviets, Dean Acheson shortly gave an explanation, the administration desired to provide an honorable exit for the Soviets and not start open conflict with Russia (Teaching with Documents, 2012).

Japan was one important facet of the new attitude towards Korea and whether to get involved or not. Especially after China fell to the Communists. Japan on its own seemed to look more like the East Asian important prize that should…

Sources Used in Documents:

References

Boose, Donald W. (1995). Portentous Sideshow: The Korean Occupation Decision. Volume 5, Number 4. Winter 1995-96. Parameters. U.S. Army War College Quarterly. pp. 112-29. OCLC 227845188.

Creative Commons Attribution. (n.d.). Korean War. Retrieved from: http://saylor.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Korean-War.pdf

Devine, Robert A.; Breen, T. H.; Frederickson, George M.; liams, R. Hal; Gross, Adriela J.; Brands, H.W. (2007). America Past and Present 8th Ed. Volume II: Since 1865. Pearson Longman. pp. 819-21. ISBN 0-321-44661-5.

Doug Bandow. (2010). The Role and Responsibilities of the United States in the Korean War: Critical Foreign Policy Decisions by the Truman and Eisenhower Administrations. International Journal of Korean Studies. Vol. XIV, No. 2.
Hermes, Jr., Walter (2002) [1966]. Truce Tent and Fighting Front. United States Army in the Korean War. United States Army Center of Military History. pp. 2, 6-9. Retrieved January 4, 2011 from http://www.history.army.mil/books/korea/truce/fm.htm
Teaching With Documents: The United States Enters the Korean Conflict. (2012). Retrieved from National Archives: http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/korean-conflict/.


Cite this Document:

"Why Did The United States Went To War In Korea" (2016, February 03) Retrieved April 18, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/why-did-the-united-states-went-to-war-in-2156271

"Why Did The United States Went To War In Korea" 03 February 2016. Web.18 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/why-did-the-united-states-went-to-war-in-2156271>

"Why Did The United States Went To War In Korea", 03 February 2016, Accessed.18 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/why-did-the-united-states-went-to-war-in-2156271

Related Documents

The U.S. Army 2d Infantry Division, together with South Korean forces, is likewise poised near the demilitarized zone. The 2d Infantry Division is also supported by massive air power that could easily -- and quickly -- decimate North Korea just as air power was used during the Korean War to level hundreds of North Korean cities, towns and villages. According to Bechtel, "The 2d Infantry Division operates 30 multiple-rocket-launcher

At the same time, there were planners (who shared similar views as Rumsfeld) that this strategy was obsolete. This contention between the two sides would create a conflict in U.S. military strategy. As the country needs a sustainable fighting force that is capable of supporting the challenges of the nation. Yet, the strategies of the past cannot be utilized to fight future wars. Where, the initial successes in Afghanistan

US Decline the Decline of
PAGES 8 WORDS 2692

Bonta states of Rome that, by the first century B.C., sexual mores had been abandoned, and the former sanctity of marriage forgotten. Crime, once almost unknown in Rome, became rampant. In such an environment, Rome became an easy target for political conspiracies like that of Catiline, which exploited the criminal elements in Rome to carry out bribery, blackmail, and assassination. (Bonta 2005. p36) One would not be too hard put

Works Cited http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5014679198 Babuna, Aydin. "National Identity, Islam and Politics in Post-Communist Bosnia-Hercegovina." East European Quarterly 39.4 (2005): 405+. A www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5021483873 Lischer, Sarah Kenyon. "Military Intervention and the Humanitarian "Force Multiplier." Global Governance 13.1 (2007): 99+. A www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5002379425 Mangum, Ronald Scott. "NATO's Attack on Serbia: Anomaly or Emerging Doctrine?." Parameters 30.4 (2000): 40. A www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5002428204 Mertus, Julie a. "Legitimizing the Use of Force in Kosovo." Ethics & International Affairs 15.1 (2001): 133+. A www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5012238644 Petras, James. "The Meaning of War:

United States Engaged in a
PAGES 10 WORDS 3295

Currently the United States consumes more than 19.6 million barrels of oil per day, which is more than 25% of the world's total oil consumption. Through its isolationist policy agenda, the U.S. government has been able to leverage its military and economic might to control most of oil production in South America. Instead of attempting to restructure the financial infrastructure of South American oil producers such as Panama, Ecuador

U.S. Role as 'Policemen of the World' Thesis and Outline Draft Introduction and Thesis currently holds the most important and influential role in international politics and represents a decisive player in all recent international conflicts. This role takes the form of political and military interventions, international and bilateral engagements as well as multilateral brokerage of peace talks. The basic principles of such an approach are the fostering of peaceful, democratic, and secure international