U.S. commanders ordered killings of Korean refugees: BBC documentary

U.S. military commanders repeatedly ordered the indiscriminate killing of Korean refugees in Nogeun-ri and other parts of the nation during the early days of the 1950-53 Korean War, a team of BBC documentary producers said yesterday.

Senior U.S. army commanders sanctioned killings of Korean refugees, including women and children, by using phrases such as "shoot all refugees," "all refugees are fair game," and "refugees will be dispersed by all available fire, including artillery," according to a press release by the British broadcaster.

"Such deliberate targeting of noncombatants violates the laws of war," Tom Roberts, director of the film, said in the press release.

The vast majority of these incriminating orders and communications, underpinned by newly unearthed military documents, are omitted from the Pentagon's investigative report, he said.

In January last year, the U.S. government admitted U.S. soldiers killed or injured an unconfirmed number of refugees near Nogeun-ri, a hamlet about 200 kilometers south of Seoul, in July in 1950. But it denied U.S. commanders ordered troops to shoot civilians.

Korean survivors claim 121 civilians were killed and 21 were injured in the strafing from aircraft and the shootings in the railroad tunnels near the village.

The BBC documentary details previously unreported incidents of deliberate large-scale killings of Korean refugees by U.S. troops and features new American witnesses and participants in the refugee massacre.

In the documentary, American ex-soldiers who were at Nogeun-ri said the shootings were ordered, and a new witness recalls officers shouting to the infantrymen, "Kill 'em all," according to the filmmakers.

South Korean survivors, interviewed by the filmmakers, described the 25th U.S. Infantry Division's massacre of 82 villagers cowering in a small shrine. Among the victims, 25 were children under the age of 10. The division's commander had ordered that civilians near the warfront be treated as enemies.

In the film, survivors also tell of another slaughter of as many as 400 civilians when U.S. warships, without provocation, furiously shelled a concentration of refugees on an exposed southern beach.

"By picking up where American news reporting left off, we have been able to shed a broader light on a dark underside, a hidden chapter, of a major 20th century war," director Roberts said.

The Nogeun-ri incident was first unveiled by a Pulitzer Prize-winning report by the Associated Press.

After wrapping up a 14-month investigation in 2001, the U.S. government issued a statement of regret but ruled out any compensation for the victims because commanders did not order the shootings.

Last week, South Korea's ruling Millennium Democratic Party (MDP) and survivors urged the U.S. government to reinvestigate the incident, following new evidence that U.S. troops might have been ordered to kill.

George Early, a U.S. veteran of the Korean War, said in a letter his commanding officer threatened to execute him for refusing to shoot at the refugees near Nogeun-ri. The BBC documentary includes Early's testimony.

The U.S. government said it would erect a monument and establish a $750,000 scholarship fund dedicated to all Korean civilians killed during the war. The survivors' group has rejected the offers, saying that they want a monument specifically for the Nogeun-ri victims.

Just a note. Does anyone recall a 1950ish Korean War film with Robert Mitchum as an army colonel in the early days of Korea who calls in an airstrike on a column of refugees being forced at gunpoint to advance on U.S. positions??? I think the flick recently appeared on AMC.

I saw it many years ago on Million Dollar Movie on Ch 9 in NYC so I do not know why the incident under discussion is thought to be so earth shattering. Movie goers knew this stuff happened 45 years ago.BFD

.....I do not know why the incident under discussion is thought to be so earth shattering.

Liberals are constantly learning "new and shocking" information that is already well known by people who know how read books. The TV educated generation has much to learn. In fact they have just about everything to learn. (Except how to fill a bhong.)

I appreciate your comment about the constitution

However, this article by these english people is all wet. Our troops went over to Korea to fight a horrific war for the sake of people who didn't want to be ruled by the communists. There were tremendous sacrifices paid by people who had no direct interest in that war. These people should always be honored. They did not go over there to kill civilians, that wasn't their motivation, if it happened it was inadvertent.

Very few south koreans will do anything but praise the american efforts of 1950-1953.

It was not american strategy nor tactics to just plain kill civilians in an effort to weaken our enemy. By contrast in ww2 the english did exactly that to the germans. They sent their bombers over the objections of the americans to bomb several german cities strictly for the sake of killing civilians. They killed hundreds of thousands in that effort unjustly I would say. The americans refused to participate in this carnage and said the efforts should all go towards military targets instead. The resolution of this conflict between the americans and the english was that the english bombers would go out and do their mission to their targets which included mostly civilians and the american bombers would go on separate missions and bomb their targets which were military, industrial, infrastructure in nature.

The english did not participate in korean war and should not be commenting at all.

In 1943, President Roosevelt resolved only to accept the “unconditional surrender” of Germany and Japan. According to Clodfelter, this set the cornerstone of modern air power doctrine. The civilian leadership gave military strategists permission to end World War II through whatever means they deemed necessary, and planners stressed mass bombings of critical industrial targets or “vital centres” (railways marshalling yards population centres) to deflate the enemy’s war manufacturing capability. Additionally, continual raids took a psychological toll on the foreign civilian populations who became demoralized about the war effort and fearful for their own survival. Success attributed to air power during the 1940s was noted in the post-war United States Strategic Bombing Survey (USSBS): “no nation can long survive the free exploitation of air weapons over its homeland.”.

British troops did serve in Korea, in fact we sent 80,000 men.

Cheers Tony

Just another anti-US hit-piece by the socialists in Britain. Their conclusion closely resmble another piece of crap written by the socialist workers party.

One of the witnesses to this "massacre" has been thoroughly discredited. He was like 35 miles away when he claimed to be at No gun-ri.

Civilians are very naive. They expect soldiers to surgically select their targets. Doesn't happen in the real world. Both N.Korean and N. Vietnamese doctrine called for "co-mingling" of civilians with military. Anyone who thinks they can maintain a PRECISE sight picture while being shot it is pretty damned dumb!

All-in-all, civilian casualties in Vietnam were no higher than any other war. I suspect the same true of Korea. The people of S. Korea are driving cars and eating 4K calories a day. The people of N.Korea are eating their young. Whom is better off?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.