June 21, 1950.

[oldRoger]

The official date of the start of the North Korean Invasion of South Korea is usually given as June 21, 1950. Actually the North Korean Peoples Army (KPA) had been massing for most of June. They were crossing in force by the 21 and the invasion was in full force by the 24.
The US Army Occupation Forces had been pulled out in June of 1949 leaving about 500 US Military Advisors (KMAG).
Kim Il Sung who had been put in charge of NK by Stalin asked Stalin for approval to reunify the Koreas about that time and was given permission.
KMAG was trying to train and equip a South Korean defense force from scratch; most equipment was at the platoon level. There were some 60,000, partially trained ROK soldiers.
The KPA by contrast had as its core 28,000 Korean combat veterans from the Chinese Army which Mao had released when he completed the conquest of China. In addition the KPA had T-34 tanks and an additional 50,000 combat troops, the KPA totaled about 150,000.
They were “advised” by Russian Officers and the NK Air Force had some if not all Russian Pilots.
US Far East Forces were spread all over the Far East and were in occupation and advisory functions. There had been little attempt to train or reequip the US Army especially in the Far East. Problems if any were expected in Europe not the FE.
Because the push-back by the US Military, particularly the Landing at Inchon caught the KPA beyond their logistic capability we started to roll-up the KPA.
Mao entered the war in Sep. 1950 with his “Peoples Volunteer Army” to rescue the KPA and again caught us off guard..

We very nearly lost this one, it was a close run thing.
So we are still in Korea where the Evil Kim, turned the place over to his nutty Son, who we hear is now going to pass the kingdom on to the Grandson.

 

[redlevel]

We very nearly lost this one, it was a close run thing.

Yes, and the fault for that can be laid at the feet of one person: old "The Buck Stops Here" Harry S. Truman.

It never ceases to amaze me that Truman is regularly included in lists of "great" or "near great" presidents. By the time the Korean War started, the US Military establishment was a shambles. Truman fired SecDef Forrestal when F. balked at some of the cuts Truman desired, and replaced him with Louis Johnson. Johnson promised to cut the military budget to the bone, and later bragged that in some instances, he had cut the bone itself. Truman had a special hatred for the USMC for some reason.

He had earlier disbanded the OSS. The new CIA was apparently pretty incompetent, and failed to detect North Korea's intentions. Douglas Macarthur, the "Viceroy of Japan," was just about as culpable as Truman. His intelligence sources failed to uncover the NK plans to invade. Finally, there had been some diplomatic blunders that could possibly have led the Soviets to believe that the US would not be upset over the "Communization" of South Korea.

As a result of all this, our military went into the conflict blind, ill-trained, ill-equipped, and ill-led. Many American soldiers and Marines died as a result of this, and we ended up right where we started. We are paying for it today.

How presidential historians can gloss over this tremendous blemish on Truman's record and include him in the higher ranks of presidents is beyond me. Suppose he had been held to the same standard as GWB is held to?

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

As Margaret Thatcher said "The only dividend of peace is peace." The idea that reductions in defense spending will lead to vast funds that can be spent on social programs is one of those chimeras that people continue to follow despite it having been proved false time and again.
In fairness to Truman, Eisenhower did as much damage to the nation's defense posture. The Army's Pentomic division that broke up the old regiments and destroyed the concepts of lineage and pride in the unit, the idiotic "up or out " promotion policies for officers that has resulted in us not having had a decent general in over 50 years, the over reliance on nuclear weapons that left us woefully unprepared for the complexities of guerilla warfare-I often wonder that if Eisenhower had been in the White House in 1950, would we have done any better.

 

[oldRoger]

Whenever you hear “Peace Dividend” watch-out! The Democrats in power at that time, worrying as they do about reelection, wanted to cut defense spending and get the boys home. The country agreed and the communists took advantage.

The result was 53, 686 killed, which I think includes all of those considered MIA at the time (4759), some of whom it seems certain ended up in Stalin’s hands. May they all RIP.

Since this was my war so to speak, I am sort of sensitive that it seems to be a forgotten one.

 

[Old 44 Guy]

I remember Truman calling the Marines the Navys police force. Sure caught some Hell over that remark. I had 2 classmates killed in Korea.

 

[snakeman32]

That war was before my time. However, I was stationed in Korea back in 2006 when the nut job up north did his first underground nuke test. I was stationed 11 kilometers from the DMZ. It was a tense time over there.


snakeman

 

[deralte]

I was still in high school and had to wait a year before my first war. Got there for the tail end and could only imagine what those before me went through. We had little or nothing to work with and wonder how we did as good as we did. Looks as if our present administration wants to do the same as old Harry.

 

[oldRoger]

One of my friends dropped out of our tiny HS class and joined the Marines, he was killed in 1952.
When I got there it was mostly over, the prisoners were being exchanged, still guerillas in the hills, I was near Seoul, we were allowed out on pass until I think 9 pm, only in pairs, went armed. The equipment we had then was still WWII stuff.
Seoul was a miserable shot up and fought over mess.
A friend of mine was a Signal Corp 1st Lieutenant arrived in Japan 1949, his description of getting his signal co ready and embarked in July to go to Pusan would give you shutters. It’s amazing any of them survived, nothing worked!

 

[Gutpile Charlie]

I remember that day very well. I had been off to school for a summer band rehearsal and when I came home my mother was in tears. She said we were at war in Korea. I had no idea of where Korea was, but I remember that hot, June day....very much like today.

 

[Muley Gil]

"Truman had a special hatred for the USMC for some reason."

Truman served in WW I as an Army artilleryman. The Marine Corps got quite a bit of press during the Great War and the Army as a whole was really POed.

Other than a few advisors, the Marine Corps played no part in the European Theater of the Second World War, thanks to the Army.

When FDR, a former under SecNav, was president, the Navy and the Marine Corps was well represented as White House advisors. Truman didn't like "the wardroom" one bit.

After WW II, Truman tried his best to abolish the Corps.

 

[oldRoger]

Someone else may remember but it seems to me that there was a move afoot in the late 40s to combine the services, thus eliminating the Marines, Coast Guard, etc in favor of one big mess.
This would have suited Truman and others who had visceral feelings about one or the other service.
I think the cost of setting up a separate Air Force had given politicians an idea about how much could be saved by lumping everything together.
And of course we were all going to live happily together and Defense would not be necessary.

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

The Truman Administration's Defense policies were characterized by an obsession with cost cutting and defense policies based too much on wishful thinking and an overly optimistic view of the world. Basically the Air Force, relying on our very short lived atomic monoply, was to carry the war to the Soviet Union, the Army was suppoed to go in and pick up the pieces, the Navy and Marine Corps were seen as anachronisms. Truman claims Bradley told him there would be no more amphibious landings.
Also in January 1950 Secretary of State Dean Acheson made a speech that more or less stated that the US would not defend South Korea, hence the Reds saw that as giving them the green light.