Ingratitude. South Korea is the Most Ungrateful Country in the World.

National Review ^ | 07/12/2011 | Dennis Prager

[jpsb]

Sadly for you Inchon did not fail and MacArthur is credited with one of the most brillant and daring military moves in modern history. Plus as you recall US Forces had their backs up against the sea. They were "trading space for time" and time was running out. You would have preferred another Dunkirk? Because with a lesser commander Dunkirk is what you would have gotten.

Nimitz had the same advantages if not more so and lost far more troops then MacArthur fighting the Japanese. I really hate revisionist history and revisionist historians. When MacArthur arrived in Australia he shocked the entire military establishment saying that the defense of Australia would be fought in New Guinea not Australia. No one, I repeat no one, thought that was possible but that is exactly what MacArthur did. Guess that was another reckless lucky move. By passing heavy enemy strong holds and leaving them in your rear (concidered reckless) was also unheard of at the time, but it worked and saved US lives. I suggest you read some real history and not the revisionist crap put out by Truman apologists and Marxists.

[Williams]

You won’t have economic allies if you abandon them militarily.

[Deb]

I like Dennis Prager, but he acts like he has no idea militant leftists, who love to riot and break stuff, exist all over the world and even in the countries who are our allies. South Korea has an especially nasty group of vocal Marxists.

This is such a non-issue.

[Deb]

Yeah, South Korea is plenty big enough to take on China and God knows Obama is happy to rip up another treaty with an ally and let them be engulfed by Marxism.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: South Korea has an especially nasty group of vocal Marxists.

I would have made the same conclusion you made and simply dismissed it as the Demonstrations of Marxist and not representative of the South Koreans, had it not been for this one little tid-bit in his article :

“two-thirds of South Koreans who, according to a 2002 Gallup-Korea poll, view the United States unfavorably.”

I’ll grant that this poll was done almost 10 years ago. But if they have a similar poll today and the results are the same as it was in 2002, then we cannot simply dismiss this as the rantings of a few Marxists.

[Sherman Logan]

Plus as you recall US Forces had their backs up against the sea. They were "trading space for time" and time was running out. You would have preferred another Dunkirk? Because with a lesser commander Dunkirk is what you would have gotten.

By the time of the Inchon landings the UN had about 140,000 men in the Pusan perimeter while the Norks had a total of 70,000 "besieging" them, if I remember the numbers correctly. The UN forces, by September, were also far better armed and supplied than the Norks, who were at the wrong end of a very long supply line with totally inadequate transport.

Look, you obviously have a better opinion of MacArthur than I do, as a general and as a human being. He had moments of brilliance, though possibly partially due to luck, such as Inchon. He also had disastrous moments of over-confidence where he got his butt whipped by inferior forces due to under-estimating the enemy.

First one: With the US fleet unable to challenge the Japanese fleet, the Philippines were going to fall. But MacArthur's handling of the defense was atrocious.

Second one: Drastically overextending his forces in North Korea and allowing them to be ambushed by the Chicoms.

I'm not sure why bypassing strong points was considered so reckless, when those strongpoints were all on islands. What are the Japs going to do? Make faces at the Americans as they steam by? Once the US controlled the seas, it was all over for the Japs in the strongpoints, just as it was all over for the Philippines and the Americans in the strongpoint of Bataan when the opposite condition prevailed at the start of the war.

There are also serious doubts about MacArthur's ethics, IMO, given his acceptance of half a million dollars ($7.5M today) from the government of the Philippines and his well-known insistence on being given personal credit for everything that happened in his area of command.

[Sherman Logan]

Here’s a blog with a discussion of MacArthur’s claim to the title of great general that I pretty much aqree with.

http://rethinkinghistory.blogspot.com/2010/11/rating-general-douglas-macarthur.html

Quite possibly MacArthur would have been a great person to put in charge of Iraq after the war, but he would have been a terrible choice to lead the invasion.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

Whatever MacArthur’s virtues, his flaws all coalesced into a perfect storm during the winter of 1950’s in the North. His overextention of forces was simply inexcusable, and the syncophants with which he tended to surround himself were deaf to clear warnings from the field. And if not for O.P. Smith essentially disobeying orders by advancing more slowly than directed, it could have been much worse.

[Deb]

I have to say that it surprises me when the US has ANY supporters considering there are almost no conservative voices being heard in our defense ANYWHERE in the World.

The UK has one newspaper (The Telegraph) that is conservative, but no media people (maybe Peter Hitchens). Italy, France, Germany all have one conservative (or "right-leaning") newspaper, but they're never quoted in their media.

BBC International, CNN International, Sky News...all overtly anti-American. The only American pundits you'll see on any of them are Carville, Bob Woodward or Barney Frank.

Side note: In New Zealand, during the past three presidential campaigns, CNN ran the Democratic conventions and blocked the Republicans.

America has no voice in the World. The Soros voices have control of the international opinions the World hears. So when anyone thinks favorably about us, its a miracle.

[jpsb]

"Douglas MacArthur was from an American military family that had done much to expand the American empire. His father was a General, and an important figure in the conquest of the Philippines (he was briefly Governor-General), and in beating their independence movement into submission. MacArthur senior was one of the wave of American imperialists who incorporated Cuba, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, the Philippines, and selected parts of central America and the Chinese coast, into the American imperial expansion, after they had run out of territory to ‘liberate’ from the American Indians.

You really think I am going to waste my time reading this Marxist revisionist history? The above is a far as I got, pure Marxism. I'm sorry I gave that site a hit.

[jpsb]

"And if not for O.P. Smith essentially disobeying orders by advancing more slowly than directed, it could have been much worse."

Yes we wouldn't want to get to the Yalu river until after the Chicoms crossed it would we? Cutting lines of supply is so unfair. You must be a big fan of George McClellan.

[Sherman Logan]

I’m really curious which part of the statement you quote you consider inaccurate. We really did have a faction in favor of American expansion into something resembling an empire in the very late 19th and early 20th centuries.

You don’t think American conquest of the Philippines was imperialistic? What would you call it?

I agree the notion that if had America walked away from the Philippines they would have gone their own way in peace and freedom is silly, as if other empires wouldn’t have snatched them up.

But I find it difficult to apply any term other than imperialism to our actions there.

American imperialism was never unchallenged here (you ought to read what Mark Twain had to say about it!), and it lasted a relatively short time, but it certainly existed.

Attempts to extend this label onto our various actions during the Cold War and thereafter are commie propaganda for the most part, IMO, but we had about a 20 year span there where we behaved imperialistically.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

Yes we wouldn't want to get to the Yalu river until after the Chicoms crossed it would we? Cutting lines of supply is so unfair. You must be a big fan of George McClellan.

You have got to be kidding. I don't think I've ever seen anyone defend MacArthur's approach to the Yalu. So congratulations, I guess.

First, MacArthur wasn't racing to the Yalu to beat the Chinese. He didn't believe the Chinese were going to cross the Yalu period. He and his staff repeatedly rejected/minimized all reports of contact with Chinese forces that contradicted this belief. He completely bought into the Chinese propaganda of it being just a few "volunteers" who crossed on their own initiative. And he personally assured Truman that the Chinese wouldn't intervene on the ground, and if they did, he would crush them. He was horribly wrong.

The only reason for the rush up to the Yalu was so that MacArthur could claim "home by Christmas", which would be a nice feather in the cap of his career. There was no military justification for it at all, nor did he advance any.

But if had believed that the Chinese were going to intervene, ordering the VIII Army and X Corps to race north, with a sixty mile gap in lines creating a gigantic flank along the Taebek Plateau, would have been criminal stupidity. As it turns out, VIII Army was blasted, a U.S. Army division broke, some allied contingents were completely wiped out, and the First Marine Division barely escaped annihilation. And again, only due to General Smith and his staff delaying movement for a couple of days to consolidate before pushing north.

Whatever his other merits as a general, and they are very considerable, the advance to the Yalu was a complete catastrophe for which he deserved full blame.

[Black_Shark]

Actually, since 2008 Hyundai has been remaking their “Hyundai” car brand into a luxury brand and “Kia” as their economy line.

FYi I drive a modded 2008 Hyundai Tiburon GT and not only is the engine phenomenal but the interior is leather bucket seats, etc. Clutch sucks but the new genesis clutch is a “suicide clutch”.

The “crappy Hyundai” no longer applies to the brand as it is today.

[jpsb]

Ok, you got me, I just threw that out to see if where was anyone that actually knew anything on this thread.

After Inchon where were intelligence failures. The only thing I can say in his defense is that everyones' intelligence failed too. No one thought or even guessed that the Chicoms had moved into Korea in mass. But the fault rightly falls on the commanding general so yeah, he takes the hit for the bad intelligence. But I place the blame on Truman's patrolling the Taiwan straights which freed those chicom troops for duty in Korea.

[CodeToad]

“South Korea is plenty big enough to take on China “

It is not our job to protect SK from China.

[Deb]

Yes, it is. We have a treaty.

[CodeToad]

I wasn’t talking legal aspects. I was talking conceptually. This nation has no obligation to even make treaties or anyother agreement to provide defense of other nations.

NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION!
(That also means no representation to those not paying the taxes!)

[Deb]

You’re a real Winston Churchill.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

Heh, well, glad I passed the test. The 1950/51 Korean campaign is one of my huge hobby areas. By the way, a truly great book on a sadly overlooked part of that whole fiasco is "East of Chosin", by Roy Appleman. It follows the story of Task Forth Faith, which was isolated on the east side of the Chosin, separate from the Marines in the south and west. Absolutely heartbreaking story extremely well told. I'm a former Marine, but it really is my favorite book on that campaign. I'd read a ton on that campaign in general, and was aware of what happened to 31/7, but hadn't read about it in true detail until this book.

Actually, Marines had engaged an entire Chinese regiment in October 1950 on the march north to Chosin, and there were a lot of other reports. The problem with MacArthur was that his staff was such a bunch of brown-nosers that wouldn't tell him anything he didn't want to hear. Which, of course, was his own fault for picking those guys.