It's a matter of mindset. WW2 was seen as an event that threatened the country. Vietnam was seen as unnecessary. Korea happens at the peak of US military might, so the people aren't threatened. Many of the soldiers were just a little too young for WW2 and still had a sense of duty. Besides, it was a shorter war. It was so close to WW2 that the veterans were often classified together.From a technology perspective its basically an extension of WW2, with some swept wing jet fighters on top. In contrast Vietnam was an entirely different generation of technology which generates interest.
The South surpassed the North per capita in the mid 70s, not the late 80s.That’s a consequence of the late 1980s. Prior to the 1980s and as a result of the Korean War Korea was split between a modernised people’s democracy in the north and a backward, authoritarian South.
Some of the Korean vets also had resentment towards Vietnamese vets in popular consciousness and memory. Especially during recession in late 70s.The Korean War seems to have become a footnote in modern history, overshadowed by its large-scale predecessor World War II and its more infamous dark successor Vietnam. Well, up to 3 million people died in this "footnote", so you have to wonder how it got swept under the rug of modern culture. Granted, this obviously isn't the case in the Koreas themselves, but outside of that it's rather obscure.
My guesses for why are the following:
That being said, I do lament not really having any major Korean War media. The war would've made for a great story, especially with having North Korea almost take the peninsula, only for the South assisted by a US-led UN force make the counterattack, and then China comes in and all hell breaks loose. Watching a video by The Armchair Historian really made it look intense.
- As mentioned, the fact that it was so soon after the global scale World War II meant it would play second fiddle in relevance. And that its successor was Vietnam, a dark hour in American history, put memories of Korea on the backburner.
- The war as we know it lasted just over three years, but much of action within it was just over one year. After the initial push by North Korea to the edge and almost taking the South, the American-led counterattack pushed the North Koreans back up to China, where the Chinese then sent their entire army to overwhelm the UN forces back to the original border. Essentially, the remaining 2/3's of the war had been border conflicts and sporadic attacks. Tellingly, the vast majority of casualties were in the first year, rather than the next two. With that, there's no grand conclusion. On that note...
- It ended in what was basically a stalemate. No epic final battle of any kind, just ending one day on a boring old ceasefire. Nothing was accomplished in the war by the end. As such, it's hard to paint it as a triumph like WWII, or a tragedy like Vietnam. It just came and went.
But those are my guesses. Any other reason why this has been swept under the rug?
No clue about that specific story, but there was a flair up in violence along the DMZ during the Vietnam War, during which KPA forces tried (and failed) to ignite a communist insurgency in the south.I heard a story from the Vietnam War era. It said there was some resentment against the US in/near the military bases in Korea. One story says a South Korean boy took a grenade, approached a US soldier and killed them both when it exploded. Was that kind of encounter true?
Would have helped maybe if the italicized part were a link to some reference to M.A.S.H. Ought to be the movie not the TV series since the TV show used the music of the referenced song as the theme, but omitted the pointed words.Well OP if you’re that hurt about the absence of Korean War media then suicide is painless.
lol, you complain about a lack of pop culture about the Korean War
someone posts about the most famous piece of Korean War pop-culture, and the reference sails over your head
have you thought that perhaps your OP was flawed
I certainly got the joke too, but then again I am the child of a Vietnam vet, remember when my dad was gone to fly his 100 missions (plus, it turns out) over NVN (out of Thailand, not a RVN base to be sure), and paid a lot of attention to the whole hawk/dove controversy. Also MASH the TV show debuted when I was 10 or so--didn't see the movie until I went to college in the '80s.I got the joke, and I thought it was pretty funny. However, since the line, taken literally, is basically advising someone to kill themselves, it really goes down badly if the other person doesn't get the reference.
It's a matter of mindset. WW2 was seen as an event that threatened the country. Vietnam was seen as unnecessary. Korea happens at the peak of US military might, so the people aren't threatened. Many of the soldiers were just a little too young for WW2 and still had a sense of duty. Besides, it was a shorter war. It was so close to WW2 that the veterans were often classified together.
Introduction for body armor with some Marine units, but other than a few jets, it was near all WWII leftovers.I don't disagree with that as an overall assessment. My contention is that the technology used in the Vietnam War generates its own interest; it was the first extensive use of guided missiles, mach 2 combat aircraft, a new generation of AFVs, helicopter assault etc. Regardless of how the war itself is seen overall this technology is worth looking at, whereas in Korea apart of swept wing jets little new technology was used.
Even up until the 1970's it was a Totalitarian Communist State not a democracy. Like almost all countries called "People's Republics" or "Democratic Republics" it was a People's Republic of Tyranny . It was richer mostly because the Japanese developed the north considerably more prior to WW2.Until the 1970's North Korea really was best Korea, after that it tanked really fast and South Korea became a prosperous democracy.
But by 1953, USAF had done to the DPRK what they had done to Imperial Japan in 1945. Nearly all that infrastructure had been bombed to bits.It was richer mostly because the Japanese developed the north considerably more prior to WW2.
It is considerably easier to rebuild infrastructure than to build it the first time. The people who built it know how, while the people who didn't have to spend time learning how.But by 1953, USAF had done to the DPRK what they had done to Imperial Japan in 1945. Nearly all that infrastructure had been bombed to bits.
They were running on Soviet aid and largese til Kim decided to buddy up with Mao. DPRK plateaued, while the ROK finally passed the North in GDP by the early 1970s, and never looked back, while the North doubled down on what they saw a more Pure Korean way forward with Juche, Autarky mated with the Cult of Personality to a new Royal Line and leave standard Marxism–Leninism to the past
They moved from the nominal Socialism inherent in Communism to just Nationalism with a Great Man© ® ™ showingthe way the the Chosen Korean People
looks like your ignorance caught you up kidThe fuck man? I only said I wouldn't mind an epic Korean War movie. What's your problem?
Hey man, what gives? I missed the Mash reference because it's only something I've heard of as it's old. And dude, the wording was pretty bad.looks like your ignorance caught you up kid
suicide is (the) painless option for you ... or maybe you can Kling(er) onto to some credibility rather than talking a load of horse puckey