Why did America fail in Korea?

The language barrier.

>>34388055
Lack of Plutonium

>>34388069
We didn't (culturally)enrich them

They didn't give MacArthur the nukes he asked for.

>>34388069
>>34388111

North Korea had already been turned into the surface of the moon by conventional bombing

What more would nukes have done than turn the world against America?

Too many SJW's in the ranks.

>>34388119
Silly Anon; the nukes were for Beijing.

And Moscow.

>>34388119
make a nice light-show north of the Yalu?

>>34388055

The Chinese sent wave after wave of their own men until our killbots shut down.

I wish we could guide the chinks' ability to dedicate their entire being into a single task into something productive, like a space elevator made entirely of people. Have them just stand on each other's shoulders and heave shit into space.

>>34388127
Even better, it's authoritarian

>>34388182
Hell, the fastest growing economy in the world seems a pretty productive task to me.

If I remember correctly, there was a lot of bullshit going on between the military and Congress, Truman wanted to downsize everything to fund some meme project that would effectively beef up the Air Force enough to make the Army and Marines obsolete.

Obviously this was retarded but it didn't stop Truman from really down sizing the Army and almost dissolving the Marine Corps. What you got was reservist and draftees who got rush through training making up the bulk of the fighting force in Korea for the Army and the Marines.

It really showed as the war progressed too, the US pretty much wasn't ready for a "Police Action" to turn into a full blown war.

>>34388143
is it sad i get this?

>>34388298
No its not, Zapp

Same reason we failed to achieve all objectives in Vietnam. Politicans.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=9Hn9xAaKUbw

>>34388252
No longer accurate.

The US didn't send a very large force, they had kinda got their fill of war in WWII. Even for the population being super patriotic at the time public opinion was against fighting more azns.

>>34388055
>Hordes of commie zipperhead chinks that pushed the UN from tha Yalu to the 38th Parallel
>US higher wouldn't give MacArthur the nukes to bomb the commies back into the stone age

File: IMG_0162.jpg (70KB, 400x266px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 400x266px

>>34388127

They aren't doing all that much better desu.

File: Gangnam-Style-Seoul-South-Korea..jpg (598KB, 1599x1065px) Image search: [Google]

598KB, 1599x1065px

>>34390368
>not that much better
>GDP per capita: 27,221.52 USD (2015)
>Gross domestic product: 1.378 trillion USD (2015)
>GDP growth rate: 2.6% annual change (2015)
>Gross national income: 1.756 trillion PPP dollars (2015)
>GNI per capita: 34,700 PPP dollars (2015)

>>34388055
The benevolent, freedom-loving government of the USA didn't see the point in killing millions of Chinese just to secure a nation of dirt farms and mountains for democracy.

We just settled for wiping out a sizeable share of their military and setting them back another 20 years from becoming a global power.

File: battle buldge dog.jpg (88KB, 960x711px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 960x711px

The south Koreans fucked up. We would of won if the dam Chinese didn't get involved we weren't expecting them .

>war to push North Korea out of South Korea
>Why did America fail in Korea?

The fuck?

>>34391892
>The south Koreans fucked up.

They already completed their objective in taking back their territory. What laid beyond was the U.S. and "Nato" forces decision.

>>34388252
Gotta hand it to the ethiopians.

>>34388055

Because it was believed that if we had finished the job then China and Russia would have escalated even more.

>>34388055
>Why did America fail in Korea?

They did not.

>>34388124
The plane with nuke wouldn't make it to moscow

>>34388055
There wasn't enough women or people of color in frontline infantry roles.

File: 0_79a0f_8e2db292_XL.jpg (147KB, 544x800px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 544x800px

>>34388055
America didn't fail in Korea. And USSR didn't. And China. None of them had actual goal to win that war. North and South wanted victory, all others had their own geopolitical goals which were not completely coincided with goals of DRPK and ROK.
>If 'Muricans run so fast from Koreans, imagine what would happened in Europe

>>34388055
Weak willed politicians, same reason every recent war has ended at best in a stalemate.

>>34388344
>muh politicians crys that butthurt amerifat once again
Korea was different America was conventionally pushed back to the current border between both Koreas not some ambiguous commie hunting in villages
>inb4 muh nukes
stop being an edgy 16 year old

File: McArthur.jpg (42KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 500x500px

>>34394311
>Muh nukes
>Implying this man was an edgy 16 year old

>>34394402
no but he was a veteran of the two biggest wars in human history and out of touch with the future too which the world and war was headed as well as the consequences of using nuclear weaponry and anyone who cant see that with over half a centuries hindsight is mentally deficient

>>34388055
Their goal was to push back the North Koreans after they captured most of South Korea.
They did pretty well, then got greedy and tried to take North Korean territory, after which China got involved and checked the UN advances.

Also don't forget it wasn't just the US fighting. There were a bunch of UN nations involved, notably the British and Canada.

>>34394402

McArthur was a blowhard who was rightfully fired. Dougout doug got too big for his britches.

>>34394442
At least he wasn't a chicken shit surrender monkey like the leaders since him have been.

>>34394431
>>34394442
I don't know man, I would rather appreciate a world without chinks even if that causes many American lives

>>34391892
> No you dumb human, I don't want your hand. I won't you to let me in! I'm freezing my balls out here

>>34394459
>I would rather appreciate a world without chinks
You don't use any Asian electronics? phone? car? chips in your computer?
No Sun Tzu?
No paper, printing, compasses, gunpowder?

None of these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_inventions

>>34394474
If it wasn't for the chinks, Jap, Euro, American companies would have came up with whatever the fuck they are making

>>34394431
Veteran of the last war America won, the way war was headed clearly was not good for us, maybe we should have stuck with what worked.

>>34394492
>Jap
Japs are chinks though.

Its possible euros would have come up with things like gunpowder and compasses, but China got there first. America as you know it would still be native Indians if the development of the compass was delayed by 300 years...

File: 1234132319147.jpg (255KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 1920x1080px

>>34394159
>implying that we were unable to bomb the Russians at literally any point after WWII

anon pls, youre embarrassing yourself.

>>34394550
Yep, both sides could nuke each other into oblivion. mutually assured destruction.

Thankfully politicians were smart enough to prevent that.

>>34388055
politicians and an ungodly amount of chinks

ITT: delusion

>>34388086
With uranium!

>>34388298
>Is it sad that I get a reference from a hugely popular televised series from the creator of one of the most popular and long running TV series.
No. Everyone gets it, they're just not crowing about it.

>>34394515
>gunpowder, compasses

hold your horses china man, no one said they shouldn't have existed from the get go. I'm talking about in the 20th century. They should have ceased to exist in the 20th century.

>implying the korean war ever ended

World's longest cease fire, brochacho. Victor is yet to be decided.

>>34388055
Because 50 gorillion chinks came running across the Yalu and they couldn't make bullets fast enough

>>34394784
you said
>I would rather appreciate a world without chinks even if that causes many American lives
Just thought I'd show you how ignorant that statement is, but looks like ignorance is in your blood so not much point in trying to make you aware of it.
You should look at finishing your sentences, although it does belie your intelligence which helps us identify and discard your posts.

File: 1497272154879.jpg (68KB, 915x1024px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 915x1024px

>>34388055
Not worth at the moment desu. The US has been in a siege with North Korea since the end of the war. NK is one of the last nations with a nationalized economic system and currency. North Korea knows it's days are numbered. Every child in the nation grows up learning that the western imperialists will be back to finish the job. Continuing the war in Korea as an effort to establish further western influence in Asia was proving impossible to continue without provoking a larger conflict with China and the Soviet Union. Korea was an ideal location to establish presence considering it's close proximity to Japan, however it's close proximity to China is what turned the conflict into stalemate. The Korean Armistice Agreement is the armistice which serves to insure a complete cessation of hostilities between the North and South, but the war is technically not resolved. As conflict turned to stalemate US efforts moved to South Vietnam. Vietnam's further distance from China and the Soviet Union rendered it less prepared to receive aid from it's allied Communist states. However, diplomatic policy forbid the US from entering North Vietnam, or the bordering nations of Laos and Cambodia. The US was crippled and forced to fight a purely "defensive war". As arms and military aid inevitably flooded into the north through it's bordering nations, and the US remained unable to escalate to an offensive war, US efforts in the country were ceased completely. However, US presence in South Korea remains strong to this day. For 63 years the US has been in a stalemate with the North. Since the end of these conflicts the east and west are engaged in a war of economics. Waging proxy wars over various economic strongholds without confronting each other in direct conflict. The Korea questions will likely not be resolved while Chinese power remains in the region.

>>34394564

>Yep, both sides could nuke each other into oblivion.

Not post WWII - Korean War they couldn't.

There weren't many nuclear bombs, and the US had more by like, 10:1.

>>34388143
Absolutely underrated. Give this man a medal. Make it gaudy in case he goes clubbing later.

>>34388055
China

>>34394515
Naw, japs are nips.

Because it was one of the many pointless and wasteful conflicts post-World War 2 america has been sending thousands to get injured and die in?

File: dynamite.png (191KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 400x400px

>>34388298
>is it sad i get this?

File: hqdefault.jpg (7KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 480x360px

>>34388055
truman was too much of a pussy wimp to let macarthur cross the 38th parallel

>>34395112
>underrated post

>>34394431
He's as much of a loser cuck then your grammar there buddy.

>>34395065
Yeah could have just sent one B-29 and finished it in one afternoon.

A combination of the following: Misguided military policy at the highest level due to everyone overestimating the value of strategic bombing. Again. This meant massive cuts to the Army and Marine Corps.
Not enough experienced infantry due to aforementioned budget cuts. Thanks USAF, you flying penis pillagers.
Sino-Soviet intervention. Funny how the Chicoms didn't want a US backed country immediately next door.

Tldr: a literal wave of chicoms swarming down from China to overwhelm an unprepared and underfunded US/UN force. Oh and the USAF faffing about before suddenly having the rug yanked out from underneath them in the 60s.

File: President-George-W.-Bush-Mission-Accomplished.jpg (32KB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 600x338px

I wouldn't say we failed and you can't loose a "police action" lol. We accomplished the mission that the Pussy in Chief wanted at the time. The old saying "History repeats itself" seems appropriate.

>>34395701
>loose

>Why did America fail in Korea?

It didn't. Korea was and remains a strategic backwater. Devoting more resources and troops to an open-ended war would have weakened defences in Europe.

Stalemate was perfectly acceptable. The idea of wars needing to end in victory parades doesn't gibe with history. Wars are usually more in the nature of periodic adjustments.

SK was rescued by UN forces and is thriving today.

>>34395739
not an argument.

>>34388055
what people never realize about the Korean War is that it was never even about Korea at all.

>>34394311
We were only conventionally pushed back until ridgeway's meatgrinder, where the Chinese realized that surprise human wave tactics don't really work if the enemy has more artillery shells than you have men.
After that it was a stalemate, and the only country that failed to achieve their main war goal was North Korea, since they failed to take South Korea.

>fail in korea

Are you fucking stupid? NK invaded SK to conquer it. It failed. SK kept its independence. We didn't lose the Korean war.

>>34388055
The US gave in to stop the fighting. The US had killed 14% of the population and destroyed 85% of their buildings. America could have destroyed them if they weren't afraid of losing more men and weapons and starting WWIII with Russia.

>>34388055
>Why did Americans only achieve their main war goal of protecting South Korea and fail to achieve the optional goal of conquering North Korea?

FTFY, that's what you're actually asking

>>34394784

And yet we're here and we only get stronger.

What's it like being triggered by reality?

>>34388055
because we didn't field our military properly to hammer the chinks from the chinese coast line and threaten a mainland invasion that would've kept them from massing troops in the south.

Could've easily postured an invasion force that would've created a 2 front war for the chinese.

But leadership were pussies and didn't push the strategic advantage we held then over an impoverished and weakened foe over whom we held total dominance. unwilling to commit the resources and lives at a larger scale to make the sacrifices of those in Korea mean something. political cowardice.

>>34394515
Just ignore him. He's a racist /pol/ manbaby.

File: Knipsel.jpg (101KB, 555x717px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 555x717px

>>34394564
>Yep, both sides could nuke each other into oblivion. mutually assured destruction.
No they could not. USA could tear Russia a new one, but not completely destroy it. Russia couldn't do anything to return the favor.

>>34394872
>There weren't many nuclear bombs, and the US had more by like, 10:1.
By the end of 1953, USA had 1436 nukes compared to the USSR's 120, for a 12:1 ratio.
By the beginning of the war, it would've been ever worse: USA had 369 bombs in 1950, compared to the USSR's 5. That's a ratio of 73:1.

Also, the US had proven that it could deliver and effectively deploy a nuke. The USSR did not, and had to rely on copycat B-29's (Tu-4) until they finally got the Tu-95 in 1952.

https://web.archive.org/web/20081119090924/http://thebulletin.metapress.com/content/c4120650912x74k7/fulltext.pdf

Looking at the data, the US had a 10:1 ratio of nukes up until 1957. In 1957, they clearly ramped up production and kept the ratio above 10:1 until 1962. This means that, up the the early sixties, the US would clearly have dominated a nuclear exchange, and the MAD theory would not have applied then: the Soviet nuclear arsenal was simply too small to Assure Destruction.

>>34388055
Herro fifty cent party!

Everyone failed.

The UN failed, but importantly, one major regional player was absent; Japan. They were wary of more conflict (understandably), so contributed nothing more than materiel. Despite, I believe, the US being fairly keen on them stepping up and making contributions militarily.

>>34388252
Hard to compete with borderline slave labor.

>>34394817
you talk like a fag and your shit's all retarded

>>34396307
Most importantly was that the Soviets had no viable method of delivery to CONUS until at least 57

File: sheep looking at you.gif (2MB, 260x192px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 260x192px

>>34394474
>You don't use any Asian electronics? phone? car? chips in your computer?
All designed elsewhere. Chinese manufacturing can be reproduced elsewhere (just not as cheap).
>No Sun Tzu? No paper, printing, compasses, gunpowder?
All pre-1950 and irrelevant to nukes in Korea. Show me anything of consequence the Chinese have produced (outside of cheap manufacturing post-1950.

>>34388055
>fail

wtf ?

USA stopped the gdamn commies

if USA hadn't jumped in their wouldn't be a South Korea today, it would all be that fat little faggot boy commie hell

>>34394402
was he /ourguy/?
repressed weeaboo tendencies
pipe
sunglasses inside at night, because when you as cool as him, the sun shines on you 24 hours a day
hated the chinks
mommy issues

>>34394817
God you're such a faggot.

>>34394564
The US would have trounced the USSR up until the mid to late 1960's.
Even during the Cuban missile crisis, the US would have fucked the Soviets asshole out of the frame.

>>34388055
>Why did America fail in Korea?
We didn't, we fulfilled our obligation.

If you asking why korea turned out like it did it's a combination of domestic soviet subversion and the norks violating their word.

>>34388055
MacArthur being a pompous ass, failing to heed any Chinese warning and circumventing the chain of command with idiotic requests for nukes.

>>34388055
The Chinese came in and pushed back an already weakened fighting force. if MacArthur had gotten his nukes, the american american flag would be flying in NK

File: 14184341_828932270540942_4154153694603303069_n.png (750KB, 512x960px) Image search: [Google]

750KB, 512x960px

>>34394474
>>34394515

>>34395796
No, but you are a moron.

>>34400130

And then the west went on to invent the Frankfurt school of thought, multiculturalism. political correctness, gay pride, fat acceptance, cuckhold porn, 60something genders and ipened their borders to muslims

>>34400559
The (((west))).

>>34388119
Kept more Chinese infantry from streaming into the theater. Also likely made the Russians kick start WW3 by rolling into west Germany.

>>34394402
No, he was an edgy 70 year old.

>>34394441
Plus Anzac, turks, and a few south africans

>>34396497
I tell people this whenever someone says that we lost the Korean War

>>34388055
The actual millions of troops that China what on us. Also we didn't really fail it's not like it was veitnam

>>34394474
Ducking shill. Take you fifty cents and leave

>>34388055
I didn't realize Korea had been unified under a communist government. First I've heard of this.

>>34401600
Well, the South just elected one, so it's a matter of time now.

>>34388055
The US picked a fight on China's doorstep without preparing to fight China.

>>34396176
i don't know, tell me about it Economic Bubble Boy :^)

>>34396307
>1984
>62,753 nukes were in existence on the planet at the same time
holy shit, how are we still alive?