RES: Korea's blessing

[Jim heartfield]

In message <LPBBJPLAGKILMCMINFHDAEDACDAA.afenelon at zaz.com.br>, Alexandre
Fenelon <afenelon at zaz.com.br> writes
>
>-It seems South Korea attacked first? What are your sources?
>It´s a fact that the UN recognized the Seoul government as
>the only legitimate govern for Korea. It could be a first
>step for a forced reunification, but it´s difficult to
>believe that the SK Army attacked first. They had very poor
>equipment and morale and no airforce at all... I would say
>instead that both sides were thinking about going to all, but
>the NK Army attacked first.

Myself I'm agnostic, but the sources are MacArthur's biographer who was
present when the message to Tokyo Headquarters was relayed to its second
in command. All this can be seen in IF Stone's Hidden History... . The
other source, of course is the North Korean government, which seems no
less reliable than the South in this question.

Whether it was likely that the South would have attacked first, I have
to say yes it is more than likely, given the stated intentions to do so,
and, more importantly, the desperation of the Rhee regime following its
electoral humiliation, rural revolts and the defection of two army
brigades northwards.

The strongest evidence against is Kruschev's memoir in which he blames
the North Koreans for precipitating the conflict and dragging the USSR
in. However, this source has its drawbacks.

I don't set so much store by who fired the first shot. The important
question is that the USA was already prepared to use the conflict to
justify NSC 68.

-- 
James Heartfield

Great Expectations: the creative industries in the New Economy
is available from Design Agenda, 
4.27 The Beaux Arts Building,
10-18 Manor Gardens,
London, N7 6JT
Price 7.50 GBP + 1GBP p&p