Comments on: Koreans believe U.S. most responsible for division: survey

By: xi

xi — Sun, 30 Oct 2005 12:11:48 +0000

The US did unify Korea - then China came into the war. It always amazes me China can do anything they want to Korea and the Koreans never say boo.

Actually, the North almost unified the Korean penisular then Uncle Sam stepped in. Korea would be a unified country if the US hadn’t sent the troops.

By: drbedroom

drbedroom — Fri, 30 Sep 2005 08:50:47 +0000

This is insane!, Who is brain washing Koreans into this Anti-American nonsense? Talk about short term memory loss! South Korea would be living like the Norks if it wasn’t for the United States, Oh and wouldn’t that be a great symbol of unification! The good people of Korea have to defeat the leftist commies, brain washing professers and the radical loons before they turn Beautiful Korea into a “Workers Paradise”.Wake up Korea!!!!

By: lirelou

lirelou — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 22:13:00 +0000

Dear German-American, Why would anyone bother to read a book that has been totally discredited by the opening of the old Soviet archives? A work that even those who greatly admired Stone, must now dismiss with a “well, he was really wrong in his ‘hidden history’, but his ‘I.F. Stone Weekly’ was great”? I’m not sure what level you’re aspiring to.

By: ??????????????

?????????????? — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:30:15 +0000

I’d like to add another level to this conversation.

Have you read I.F. Stone’s “The Hidden History of the Korean War”, originally published by Monthly Review Press and subsequently republished by Little Brown Co.?

If not, I suggest doing so, while noting the source citations for Stone’s information.

The book is now out-of-print, but is obtainable from used book sellers. A source I used recently in order to get a copy for an acquaintance was amazon.com, which has relationships with a number of such book sellers.

The book posits an interesting relationship between Douglas MacArthur, Syngman Rhee ( ?????? / ??? ), and Chiang Kai-shek ( ????? ).

By: I Ching

I Ching — Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:40:21 +0000

Surprisingly, none of the American commentators here have been forthright in looking for the true cause of why the Korean peninsula is divided. It was America??s double-dealing with the commie Soviet Union that led to much of the misery of communism in Asia. The double-dealing occurred at Yalta in 1945 when a secret protocol developed by Roosevelt and Stalin and agreed to by Churchill provided territorial and other concessions to the USSR in the Far East as conditions for Russian entrance into the war against Japan after the defeat of Germany. Not only was this secret protocol unnecessary given the fact that America could have defeated Japan without outside assistance, but America was improperly inducing the Russians to break the neutrality pact that was concluded between Russia and Japan in April 1941 and was valid for five years. Russia had no legitimate reason to invade the Japanese, and worse of all, the invasion would lead to communism in Asia. The Russian attacked the Japanese on August 9, 1945 and contributed a mere seven days to the war against Japan before the Japanese surrendered on August 15, 1945. The Russians rushed to occupy and loot Manchuria and northern Korea of industrial equipments that were then shipped to Russia. Worst yet, the Russians installed communism in both of these areas that in a matter of a few years would result in communist North Korea first in 1948 and then communist China later in 1949. For the mere seven days of fighting assistance the Americans received will arise a geopolitical nightmare that still haunts the Americans, the Chinese, and the Koreans to this day. This is the price that all Americans must pay today because of Roosevelt??s decision to appease communist Soviet Union in 1945. It is the greatest diplomatic blunder in modern Asian history, far exceeding in scope the recent diplomatic blunder of George W. Bush in invading Iraq. In addition, it was the Americans who once aided Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein to fight the Russians and the Iranians in the 1980??s, and now much of America??s military power is tied up in trying to take out both of them.

By: mizar5

mizar5 — Fri, 16 Sep 2005 04:38:30 +0000

America must wake up to the fact that the world has changed since 1950s and she can no longer fight alone. She must learn to appreciate other country??s support, even that of Korea.

Good point, Baduk, and I venture most Americans already understand this - if they have lived through the Vietnam War and Iraq.

By the way, in my discussion with ???????? - I played around in the sandbox of old history. It is necessary to understand the actual historical context. A “fact” out of context is a distortion. Today’s students have actually been mistaught the US sold out Korea, although the context of the agreement is not nearly as strong or influential as the agreements with Great Britain and Russia.

Maintaining the status quo was the way of those Wild West-like times - but no one can convincingly argue that the events of a different era and actions of the dead is reflection on modern nations.

But the most important point is that it is not only meaningless but debilitating to dig up old issues. It serves no purpose other than sewing seeds of new resentment and enmity that is not properly founded - it is erroneous to fault the living for the sins of the dead.

What Koreans today lack is a positive mindset. All the political and social news, debate and issues focus on “who’s to blame?” It does not even provide closure to dig up blameworthy targets. Once you take out your revenge on them, your hatred extends to the next scapegoat, ad infinitim. It poisons your mind. Korea is a nation divided against the rest of the world and against itself by strict party line. It is a foolish road to distruction.

What is needed is a forum to face the future free of the burdens of the past. That is the road to progress. If you took all the energy wasted on blaming others and apply it to positive accomplishments, what progress you will have! All it takes is to stop focusing on the things that divide us and to focus on the common weal.

We will have come of age when this happens.

By: baduk

baduk — Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:09:45 +0000

Paul H.,

When the US gets weak, countries like Russia and China will love to kick us around. Even small countries like DPRK, Iran and France are trying to do exactly that right now.

Since the defeat in VietNam isolationists including yourself are calling all wars to be unnecessary and want the US troops to just stay home. Maybe concentrating on the border patroling against Mexicans?

Keep withdrawing and losing friends (like Taiwan) will have strong consequences to the future of America. The whole country will become “fat,dumb and happy” with no will to fight and no friend to fight with.

Just like New Orleans, the troop will have defense plan all written up on PAPERS only, with no actual means or experiences to back it up.

McArthur and other generals believed the projection of American power and willingness to be on the “offensive” if necessary is the best policy for the national defense. Like Brazillian soccer team, the US has been showing strength all over the world since WWII.

When this stops, the US will be on the defensive, getting attacked by several countries at times. More horrorible attacks than 9/11 will follow. And, with no friends to fight with, the US will surely be isolated as Isolationists want.

America must wake up to the fact that the world has changed since 1950s and she can no longer fight alone. She must learn to appreciate other country’s support, even that of Korea.

By: baduk

baduk — Thu, 15 Sep 2005 08:45:39 +0000

Paul H.,

I think your way thinking led to the 9/11. Calling Korean War and VietNam War (now, some call these wars police actions to hide defeat) to be mistakes. I believe you are a dove at heart.

Stop and think, though. If the U.S. had not fought these wars, USSR and China would have owned the entire Asia along with a half of Europe. USSR could have played the same game that Japan did, eating up islands in the pacific to reach Hawaii.

Your stance of withdrawing entirely from Asia would have produced another Pearl Harbor. Burying your head in the sand, repeating “World is peaceful place and every one is nice. If we don’t bother them, they will not bother us. If we stay away, no one will attack USA” will get us bombed(maybe with A-bombs).

The world is more cruel place than you know.

By: virtual wonderer

virtual wonderer — Thu, 15 Sep 2005 06:53:58 +0000

Lirelou, I think the real problem with Daebak and his line of thinking is not so much in that I disagree with his thesis, but it’s an incomplete picture.

When I ask WWII veterans why they fought or why Korean war veterans fought, they usually give me very idealistic reasons. i.e. for the cause of democracy, freedom, etc.
Just so, when I ask Korean Vietnam veterans, they give me the same sort of idealistic reasons. So there is a very big gap between what we(hoi polloi) think motivated policy makers to do and what motivated volunteer servicemen.

I’m not trying to say that servicemen at that time at that age always had the right idea or even that idealism is always noble, but I do think it’s terribly unfair for people not to recognize this. I’m sure, you of all people must see this and I have only high esteem for you for not having harped back at anyone about it.

By: mizar5

mizar5 — Thu, 15 Sep 2005 06:43:03 +0000

Another way to put it:

“In the ???Taft-Katsura Agreement?? of 1905 Japan declared that it had no desire for the Philippines in return for which the USA pledged not to interfere in Korea.”

Iriye, A., ??From Nationalism to Internationalism??, p. 197