The Korean "police action" circa 1950--1953 is a precursor to U.S.
involvement in French Indo China aka Vietnam.
The two were controversial-hated meat-grinding conflicts, which also
precipitated domestic political change fom Democrats to Republicans as
presidents.
Truman--->Eisenhower
Johnson-->Nixon
Circa 1950--1953, the U.S. atomic bomb was not used, and circa 1960 to
circa 1975, the U.S. nuclear bomb wasn't appplied either.
These were deemed "limited wars" that were resisters of the spreading
of Communism, and resulted in mixed success (Korea) & non-success
(Nam).
The U.S. foreign policy from after WW II to the early 1990s may be
theme- titled as against Stalinism-Maoism-Castro etal styles of
"authoritarian communism"
And my profoundly simplistic point is:
In warfare, ****e happens such as the horrible deaths of innocent
civilians whom are "in the way" or in a war front's proximity.
In both the Iraq and Afghan war "quagmires," an extremely cold-blooded
enemy thrives on the terroristic slaughtering of civilians: It's
surely as loco (nutty) as their (apparent) dark ages social-economic
agenda (apparently Tallibanism).
Collateral (civilian) deaths are hereaby acknowledged 60 years later,
however rationalized.
Some 30,000 U.S. troops paid for by the United States are still over
there.
If and when a South Korean majority wants the U.S. to leave, the
U.S.should exit.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/world/asia/03korea.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
..
|
