Posted on 07/28/2018 9:46:21 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
“This is historically accurate and appropriate.”
Historically accurate? Unfortunately, yes. Appropriate? No. Those Americans probably did not like the idea of being policemen and cannon fodder for the UN bureaucrats. But it is a convenient face saving dodge from the North Koreans.
How, exactly, do you know that? Pentecostal "Word of Knowledge"?
South Korea is not a nation. It is a state.
Korea is a nation, a very old one.
How do you know that?
Yep, it was a UN operation, authorized by the Security Council while the USSR (Stalin) was boycotting and not on hand to provide a veto. There were many countries involved, but out of all the non-ROK sources we provided more than 90% of the troops, funds, and blood. A few years before I was born my eldest brother, on occupation duty in Japan, largely untrained and wholly inexperienced, was killed during the retreat to the Busan Perimeter. We were always concerned that my dad might make a trip to Independence, MO to “discuss” things with a retired Harry Truman.
Yes. We really don’t know who the remains belong to yet. They may be Americans. But we don’t know yet.
When you go to the DMZ, you will see the flag of the UN. They are the legal entity that conducted the war, the negotiations, and who administer the armistice. The UN deals with the North Koreans, with the United States acting as the designated lead nation.
the only reason the that it worked was that the soviet union and its allies who had veto on the security council chose to not show up for a security council meeting... the united states in a surprise move called for a vote authorizing the police action....the Russians and the Chinese have never boycotted a security council meeting after that vote. It was the one and only time an issue of enforcement has happened against the will of the of a major world power.
You are saying that some are not Americans.
The Red Chinese were not members, Taiwan was. That’s what the Soviet boycott was about.
Matter of fact, I arrived in Japan in 1953 to a Camp Fuji w/a UN flag Flying beside Old Glory!
And...we were awarded UN ribbons too!
+++++++++++++++++
On and on...through the years....
************************************
No, but DNA testing should bring up answers pretty quickly.
The North Koreans had nothing to say how the remains were handled. I’m sure that they were plain boxes when turned over by the NORKS. The flags were draped on the boxes by the honor guard once the aircraft departed Wonson. The use of the UN Flag is a mark of respect to those who contributed combat forces to the war. They were:
Combat forces
South Korea – 590,911
United States – 302,483
Australia – 17,000
United Kingdom – 14,198
Thailand – 6,326
Canada – 6,146
Turkey – 5,453
Philippines – 1,468
New Zealand – 1,385
Ethiopia – 1,271
Greece – 1,263
France – 1,119
Colombia – 1,068
Belgium – 900
South Africa – 826
Netherlands – 819
Luxembourg – 44
I’m a vet who served in peacetime Korea, and I know enough about military history and traditions to be completely OK with the UN flag in this case.
Remains not solidly ID’d. Could be Brits, Canadians, Greeks, Diggers, or one of many other countries that sent token forces to the Korean war.
It’s the historical chain of command at play. It’s correct, smart and respectful to handle it this way.
I have little use for the UN, and it took a freak circumstance of Russia being absent from the Security Council that led to the UN actually accomplishing something good with military forces for once it’s sorry history.
These remains are probably American, but they went into battle in a post nuclear age hoping that the world had finally got smart by getting together to stop armed aggression by communist puppet states. No more Chamberlain style appeasement.
Many UN nations sent token or sometimes more significant forces. The US Korean War forces fought as Americans under American commanders, but the authority that made it all legal was UN, and it was a UN operation.
The fact that the UN has morphed into an America hating leach living on US taxpayer funding isn’t the issue here. To me, it just points out how shocking it is to see the UN flag associated with something honorable involving military action.
It was a long time ago and the UN has gone beyond downhill since, but removing the UN flag from those remains would be too much like the Stars and Bars banning social justice warrior tactics of our domestic Reds. Erasing history to fit current ideas isn’t learning from it.
This is step one. Verifying the bones is next. I’m sure they will get their own section at Arlington when the time comes.
And once they are identified the Americans will be draped with Old Glory, the Brits will be draped with the Unuion Jack etc etc
Take it up with Truman, the Korean War was a UN operation. FYI, I think Truman was a horrible president.
i9f you look I said Russia and its allies. when I said China I was pointing out that china because of what happened has never failed to show up to a meeting of the security council. sorry if the post was confusing. read it and understand how you can think I thought china was on the security council.
Who writes these headlines?
It maybe should read: "The reason the American remains returning from the Korean war are draped in (a) United Nations flag."
Which is irrelevant. They fought under the UN Flag. That is a fact of history, not an opinion. I am sure the American volunteers in WWI fought "for" the US, but they fought under British or French flags.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.