Jesus, I didn’t even know it was that bad. Like I said, I don’t know how Korea is in general outside of “North bad, South good”, so I had no idea South Korea was even a dictatorship at a point.
The US brought someone from the US who was long removed from Korea just to be their local dictator.
The US destroyed most cities in the north and killed more than a million Koreans, mostly civilians. There are a lot of statements from the US generals saying that their objective was to just destroy the whole country and kill as many Koreans as possible indiscriminately.
Had MacArthur had his way, Hiroshima would look like a safe haven compared to Pyongyang. He suggested using nukes “tactically” in North Korea to take out strategic infrastructure like bridges and tunnels. But that’s kind of like bringing a cannon to hunt sparrows. This was the US’ most celebrated general at the time on account of his success in the Pacific Theatre during WW2 and enormous success defending South Korea; what he said could really only be overruled by the President, which is ultimately what happened.
The top brass didn’t care about civilian casualties. That much is obvious when they suggest using full-blown nukes just to take out bridges.
“Immovable Object: North Korea’s 70 Years At War with American Power” by A.B. Abrams comes to mind. It mostly uses Western or SK sources and documents published/declassified and the resulting picture is so cruel you won’t sleep for nights
Jesus, I didn’t even know it was that bad. Like I said, I don’t know how Korea is in general outside of “North bad, South good”, so I had no idea South Korea was even a dictatorship at a point.
Thanks for the very brief crash course :)
The US brought someone from the US who was long removed from Korea just to be their local dictator.
The US destroyed most cities in the north and killed more than a million Koreans, mostly civilians. There are a lot of statements from the US generals saying that their objective was to just destroy the whole country and kill as many Koreans as possible indiscriminately.
Had MacArthur had his way, Hiroshima would look like a safe haven compared to Pyongyang. He suggested using nukes “tactically” in North Korea to take out strategic infrastructure like bridges and tunnels. But that’s kind of like bringing a cannon to hunt sparrows. This was the US’ most celebrated general at the time on account of his success in the Pacific Theatre during WW2 and enormous success defending South Korea; what he said could really only be overruled by the President, which is ultimately what happened.
The top brass didn’t care about civilian casualties. That much is obvious when they suggest using full-blown nukes just to take out bridges.
Do you know of any books detailing all these facts? Trying to build up my knowledge collection before even these events are misrepresented.
“Immovable Object: North Korea’s 70 Years At War with American Power” by A.B. Abrams comes to mind. It mostly uses Western or SK sources and documents published/declassified and the resulting picture is so cruel you won’t sleep for nights