After much pondering, Dan R Allen favored us with:
Define "win" John.
To me this is like asking me to define "is." Obviously, "win" means to defeat the enemy. Did we defeat the North Koreans? No. Did we defeat the Chinese? No.

No battle plan ever survives first contact with the enemy. We went into Korea with a limited plan; do not allow the Communists to take over Korea.
And that is the whole problem. Nations have no business going to war with a "limited plan." Do you think that either the North Koreans or China had a "limited plan?" Talking about a "limited plan" is talking about pulling your punches. And in any fight, pulling your punches is the road to defeat such as we suffered in Vietnam.

When the Chinese entered the battle the scope completely changed . Truman was not willing to throw us into another full-scale war with all of the negative impacts it would have at home.
Truman was a traitor to his country and a betrayer of the men who served under him in battle. And if "negative impacts" were going to keep us from going for a victory, then we never should have gone into Korea in the first place. Victory is the ONLY moral objective in a war. First, may darn sure you are justified in going to war, and second, win it or die trying.

Korea was an undeclared, ie. unconstitutional, police action. We had no business there, especially as part of a UN operation. And all of the top civilian leaders who put us there and then didn't let us take the war to the enemy are going to burn in hell unless they repented.

The Korean war needed to stay within the initial scope of denying the Communists all of Korea.
Wrong. The only morally acceptable "initial scope" should have been defeating North Korea for their incursion into the south. And China should have known up front that if they interfered they would have to deal with us in a full scale war.

The truth of the matter is, we had people in our government that were on the side of North Korea and China. That is why they conducted the war the way they did. The same thing happened in Vietnam.

If a country isn't going to go all out to win a war, it should stay out of it in the first place. Anything else is a betrayal of the men who fight, their families, their communities, and the nation.

You know what would make a good story? Something
about a clown who make people happy, but inside he's
real sad. Also, he has severe diarrhea. --Jack Handy
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// ///

This email was sent to:

Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!

Reply via email to