1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Division of South Korea

Discussion in 'History Forum' started by Dr. Bob, Oct 28, 2004.

Top Posters
  1. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,401
    Likes Received:
    553
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Anyone understand the WHY of 38th parallel? At the close of WWII still hundreds of thousands of Japanese in China, Manchuria, Korea, etc. Russia enters the war with a week to go and we allow them to "occupy" Manchuria and N Korea.

    This makes no sense. Why did we just send a few troops up the peninsula and accept the surrender and reestablish a unified nation?

    We KNEW what the Ruskies were doing in Eastern Europe by this time (4 months earlier) in their "sphere of influence". Why did we abandon land to the Soviets?
     
    #1 Dr. Bob, Oct 28, 2004
  2. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    2
    It was the approx front line when the truce was agred to.
     
    #2 billwald, Oct 28, 2004
  3. rsr

    rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    11,864
    Likes Received:
    1,098
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Under the Yalta agreements, China, the Soviet Union and the United states would share "trusteeship" of Korea when the Japanese surrendered. So Americans accepted south of the 38th, the Soviets north. (The 38th, like so many other things, was an arbitrary line and more or less cut the country in half.) That was the arrangement, which was intended to be temporary.

    Truthfully, I don't think Americans gave it that much thought; they didn't really have an interest in Korea (it was much more important to keep the bear's paws off of Japan) and had no deep historical relationship with Korea.
     
    #3 rsr, Oct 28, 2004
  4. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,401
    Likes Received:
    553
    Faith:
    Baptist
    What truce? We're talking end of WWII and Japan still controled all of Korea at that time, right?
     
    #4 Dr. Bob, Oct 28, 2004
  5. CoachC

    CoachC New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    Also we viewed Chiang Kai Shek as the ruler of China at this point. I don't doubt that we gave Chiang to much credit for being able to influence events. It sure didn't work out the best that it could have for the Kuomintang.
     
    #5 CoachC, Oct 28, 2004
  6. Stratiotes

    Stratiotes New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Messages:
    670
    Likes Received:
    0
    Its one of the great "whys?" of history - why did we give away so much to the Soviets when we knew what they were? Why did we stand by and do little to help the Hungarians in their late 1950's uprising?

    Perhaps in the case of splitting Korea we were just so flush with victory that we never dreamed any other nation could possibly be a threat to us if we chose later to change our minds. Perhaps there were plans to influence elections in the north and perhaps the Soviets promised elections - they often made such promises.
     
    #6 Stratiotes, Oct 29, 2004
  7. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    2
    "Under the Yalta agreements, China, the Soviet Union and the United states would share "trusteeship" of Korea when the Japanese surrendered."

    The Koreans were not a party to Yalta.

    Korean War began 1950 or so.
     
    #7 billwald, Oct 29, 2004
  8. mioque

    mioque New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    "why did we give away so much to the Soviets when we knew what they were?"
    "
    Roosevelt seems to have had a bit of a blind spot when it came to Stalin, underestimating the man's evil. Josef seems to have been a true psychopath and those are often very good at being superficially charming. Churchill on the other hand seems to have known exactly what he was up against, but he was also a very cynical realpolitiker when push came to shove.
     
    #8 mioque, Oct 30, 2004
  9. mioque

    mioque New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    billwald
    Korea had already been cut in halve prior to the Korean war. The fight between North-Korea+Communist China vs. the UN only kept the status quo intact.
     
    #9 mioque, Oct 30, 2004
  10. Stratiotes

    Stratiotes New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Messages:
    670
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yalta as Versailles before it, ignored the lesser powers and made decisions for them. Korea was not represented at Yalta but its fate, as the fate of many other "lesser" powers, was in essence determined at Yalta (if not previously in Versailles) without their input. Which is part of what led to further conflict in and of itself there and other places - Veitnam, Iraq/Kuwait, Israel/Arab, come to mind.
     
    #10 Stratiotes, Oct 30, 2004
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...