| Papers [1-14] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 8] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 —> | Search results on "KOREAN WAR AFTERMATH": |
|
|
The Korean War and Its Aftermath, 2006.
An analysis of the literary works of Pak Wan-so and Cho Chong-rae.
8,450 words (approx. 33.8 pages), 5 sources, MLA, £ 124.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper studies the fictional works of Pak Wan-so and Cho-Chong-rae to illuminate the history and aftermath of the Korean War. The author acknowledges that using works of fiction as historical references is controversial. However, she maintains that these authors accurately and intentionally represent what it was like to live during these tumultuous times and give the reader a vicarious experience of the challenges of war for Koreans. The paper focuses on female author Pak Wan-so's "The Naked Tree", which depicts the effects of the Korean War on the emotional lives of its survivors and their journey from despair to optimism. Next, the paper turns to Cho Chong-rae's powerful anti-war message in "Playing with Fire", about the moral ambiguities of war and its debilitating effects on the personal moralities of those who survived it. Issues examined include the destabilization of family life and a national period of disillusionment and questioning. Also studied is Korea's relationship with the United States and Korean attitudes toward America.
From the Paper
"In The Naked Tree by Pak Wan-so (Pak Wan-so, The Naked Tree, pages 1-188. Trans. Yu Young-nam. East Asia Program, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York: 1995.) Pak depicts Kyong-a's, the female protagonist's, struggle to overcome the sense of hopelessness that permeates war torn South Korea. Everywhere Kyong-a turns she witnesses the irrecoverable damage done by the war on individual lives that profoundly alters her sense of being. Both Kyong-a and her mother experience incredible tragedy and struggle to recover. Pak seems to ask how did the war affect the emotional lives of women who lost relatives? Her answer is hopeful; yet, because of the trajectory of history it is intertwined with memories of irrecoverable loss. Ultimately, Pak suggests that the memories of the damage done by the war have left their imprint on the families who have survived and is a testimony to their strength as well to their suffering."
| |
|
The Korean War and the Korean War Veterans' Memorial, 2005.
This paper discusses the forgotten war, the Korean War, and describes the Korean War Veterans' Memorial.
1,050 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 3 sources, MLA, £ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, although statistically the Korean War took more lives than the Vietnam War, the Korean War has been branded as America's "Forgotten War" because it was over-shined by two "greater" wars, the Second World War and the Vietnam War, which dragged on for more than a decade. The author points out that the Korean War is important because it (1) started the end of the communist expansion in the world, (2) laid the ground for the entry of democracy in the states in Eastern Europe and Russia and (3) began the American foreign policy of military intervention to gain or maintain security, freedom and democracy in the world resulting in a number of military conflicts which continues today. The paper describes in detail the Korean War Veterans' Memorial, adjacent to the Lincoln Memorial directly across the reflecting pool from the Vietnam Veterans' Memorial in Washington, D.C., which was dedicated in 1995 by Bill Clinton and Kim Young Sam, then presidents of the U.S. and South Korea.
From the Paper
"The symbolisms in the memorial are brilliant pictures of a war that will never be forgotten. For as long as the memorial continues to exist, the memories of a war, which advanced freedom at the cost of the lives of millions of people, will eternally be thought of and etched in the minds of guests. Moreover, this memorial also serves as a reminder that freedom, though sweet and liberating, must never be taken for granted and must certainly be forever guarded, secured and remain dear in our hearts. It must also be remembered that there are still countries in the world that do not enjoy the rights given by a true democracy. The pursuit for the expansion of democracy must certainly not be abandoned. Still, millions of people are yearning for a free, equal state where social, economic and political justice stands and endures."
| |
|
Examines possible reasons for US entry into the Korean War (1950-53), with reference to several political science theories, such as balance of power and public opinion theories.US Involvement in the Korean War, 2001.
1,560 words (approx. 6.2 pages), 7 sources, £ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Examines possible reasons for US entry into the Korean War (1950-53), with reference to several political science theories, such as balance of power and public opinion theories.
From the Paper
"The most apparent theory behind the United States? involvement in the Korean War must be the balance of power theory. Russia was obviously the most threatening side in the Korean War, therefore the states aligned against the Soviet Union. The United States was resolved to contain Russian influence, and prevent threats to world peace and the independence and stability of other nations by resorting to collective security arrangements and acting through the United Nations."
| |
|
The Korean War Verses Other Wars in American History, 2000.
Compares the Korean War, which was fought for ideological reasons, to other wars in American history.
2,275 words (approx. 9.1 pages), 5 sources, £ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The Korean War is a war that many people will never forget. All wars in American history fought before the Korean War was based on either national survival or the gain of territory. A strong conflict was created between the Soviet Union and the United States. The conflict was so strong that wars were fought in the midst of this cold war. The Korean War was the first American war that was not fought for national survival, for territory, for manifest destiny or for hegemony. ?Korea was the first ideological war.?"
| |
|
The Korean War, 2008.
This paper uses the primary paradigms in international relations to enhance our understanding of the Korean War.
3,502 words (approx. 14.0 pages), 9 sources, MLA, £ 68.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines the Korean War through the lens of three of the major paradigms in international relations: realism, world society and theory of dependence. The paper shows how no one paradigm of international relations exactly fits all aspects of the Korean conflict. The paper explains how we must therefore consider a convergence of paradigms to fully understand this war.
Outline:
Introduction
The Primary Paradigms
The Korean War: A Realist Analysis
The Korean War: A Dependency Theory Analysis
The Korean War: World Society Theory
Analysis
From the Paper
"There exist a number of different paradigms to explain the events of the Korean War. The theoretical model of Realism has long been one of dominant theories of international relations, although as a formal school of thought it has only existed since the Second World War. The primary assumptions of this theoretical model is that the global political system is fundamentally anarchic in that nation-states are effectively sovereign with no check on their actions other than from other nation-states. The relations between these states is predicated on their differential power levels - state power being understood in military and economic terms - with each state pursuing its own national security and other interests."
| |
|
The Korean War, 2007.
This paper examines the long-lasting repercussions of the Korean War of the 1950s.
1,494 words (approx. 6.0 pages), 5 sources, MLA, £ 34.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper relates that for the United States, the Korean War was the first limited war of the twentieth century that required painful learning and difficult adjustment. The paper describes how Korea became a bloody stalemate; the thirty-seven months of fighting had resulted in over 550,000 casualties. The paper explains how the Korean War was a key history-shaping event of the twentieth century, for it was a war that resonated worldwide and recast the international structure of Northeast Asia. It also led to significant changes in the U.S. national security system and was the proving ground for many of the doctrinal concepts. The paper concludes that the Korean War provided many lessons that are directly relevant to the conduct of joint and coalition warfare today.
From the Paper
"Although the Truman administration and the United States military, as well as the Central Intelligence Agency, were somewhat concerned about the possibility of further armed conflict between the Democratic People's Republic of (North) Korea and the Republic of (South) Korea, the majority of U.S. military planners had concluded that the R.O.K. was indefensible (Sandler 1999). Moreover, the United Sates was focused on Western Europe, since the North Atlantic Treaty Organization had been founded the previous year in 1949, a year which also had witnessed the termination of the Berlin Airlift and the Soviet's first explosion of a nuclear weapon (Sandler 1999)."
| |
|
The Korean War, 2004.
This paper discusses the history and causation of the Korean War.
2,940 words (approx. 11.8 pages), 9 sources, MLA, £ 59.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that Korean War, one of the most destructive conflicts of the 20th century, is called the "forgotten war" because it took place less than five years after the end of World War II. The author points out that the basis of the Korean War not only was the distrust between the U.S.S.R. and the U.S., but also was fostered by underlying political contentions between North and South Korea. The paper relates that, from a general historical point of view, Russia, through its political strategies and anti-American rhetoric, was more influential than China in starting the Korean War; it was the fear of global communist dominance that was the most obvious cause of the war.
Table of Contents
Introduction: the Background
The Causes
China and Russia
From the Paper
"Efforts were made to normalize the growing tension in the region; and, in 1948, an attempt was made to hold elections throughout the country. However, this failed mainly due to the fact that North Korea refused to allow voting observers while demanding full observer access to the voting in the South. The result was that both North and South Korea declared that they had been victorious in the election. Each declared their government as the true representative of the entire Korean people. Against this background, there was a growing buildup of military power in the north and south. Each government was aided by their respective supporters ? the Russians and the Chinese in the north and the Americans in the South."
| |
|
The Korean War, 2002.
Examines the causes, course and effects of the Korean War (1950-53).
3,072 words (approx. 12.3 pages), 8 sources, MLA, £ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This position paper addresses some of the critical events which occurred, key decisions taken and personalities involved in the Korean War (1950-1953). The paper covers the United States' decision to intervene in the conflict between North and South Korea, the main 'characters' in the conflict and the outcome.
Paper Headings:
Background and Causes of the Conflict
Causes of the War
Decision to Intervene
Scoundrels and Heroes
Kim Il Sung
Louis Johnson
Senator Joseph McCarthy
Macarthur
Truman and Acheson
Brutality
Good or Bad - Final Results
From the Paper
"The United States did not use nuclear weapons in the Korean War; however, Eisenhower warned the Chinese and North Koreans in the spring of 1953 that they might be used in order to induce them to conclude the armistice talks which finally resulted in a truce on July 27, 1953. Truman misspoke at a press conference on November 30, 1950 when he indicated that consideration had been given to the employment of nuclear weapons and "the military commander in the field will take charge of [their use], as he always has" (Goulden 396). The United States did make large-scale conventional air raids on populated areas in North Korea in 1951-1953 to accelerate the armistice talks and to disrupt enemy communications and transport."
| |
|
The Korean War, 1993.
Discusses the Korean War, the first major test of the post-war, soon to be called Cold War, period, examining the background to the war, the war itself and the American role.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 3 sources, £ 21.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The Korean War
Introduction
Although World War II ended in 1945, the aftermath of the war included continuing skirmishes with the Soviet Union, primarily through its surrogates, in both Europe and Asia. The Korean War was one of the more visible of those fights, and it led to a stalemate that continues to this day.
Background to the Struggle
Although the war did not actually begin until June of 1950, the circumstances that led to it began long before. By the mid.1940s, Goncharov et al. (1993) reported that Kim Il Sung was already determined that Korea would be unified, and that it had to be unified by force. At that time, Kim was training in the ..."
| |
|
Origins of the Korean War, 2001.
This essay puts forth the argument that the USSR encouraged the Korean War to benefit itself politically.
1,055 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 4 sources, £ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the theory that the Korean conflict was purposely started by Joseph Stalin in order to drive the United States and China apart and to bring Mao Zedong and Communist China under Soviet influence. The author also discusses how the war?s origins were primarily domestic, yet global superpowers provided quicker means to escalation.
From the paper:
"On December 16, 1949, Mao Zedong arrived in Moscow to begin discussions with Joseph Stalin. Mao hoped to acquire from the Soviets ships and aircraft to use in his planned invasion of Taiwan. Mao also wanted to renegotiate the treaty previously agreed to by Stalin and the Kuomintang government. Stalin, however, stonewalled Mao, refusing to relinquish the access to Manchuria that the treaty granted him. On December 19, realizing that Stalin was reading his messages, Mao cabled Zhou Enlai in Beijing, informing him that the Chinese Communists should soon attempt to open relations with the United States."
| |
|
The Korean War, 2005.
This paper discusses "Heartbreak Ridge" and other areas of wasteful conflict in the Korean War.
3,030 words (approx. 12.1 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper relates that the battle of control of "Heartbreak Ridge", like most battles glorified by the media of the time, is filled with nothing but half truths and downright lies; in reality, it was nothing more than a pawn for the negotiators at the peace tables. The author uses the newly released, under the Freedom of Information Act, "After-action Reports" (DF-214s) by the Department of Defense to graphic report about this "Police Action", which began in 1950, with the cease fire agreement signed and implemented in July, 1953, although a a state of war still exists on the peninsula of Korea. The casualties were heavy and soon the war on the home-front became quite unpopular and a political football; the main thrust of the 1952 election campaign between Truman and Eisenhower was this single issue.
From the Paper
"This created a salient in the lines which the Chinese quickly capitalized on. They drove Southeastward and cut off the 1st Marine Division and a contingent of other United Nations forces totaling nearly 40,000 from the remainder of the troops. Their only route of escape would be a forced march to the Sea to the port of Tanchon where they could be picked up by Naval forces and be returned to Pusan. This too is where the 2nd Division received its now infamous nickname. Previously and proudly the members of this proud Division proclaimed they were "Second to None." GI's being what they were at this time once they realized what had happened quickly tacked onto the proud motto the words "And First to Run" a motto that has forever stuck with this Division however unfairly attached it is."
| |
|
The Korean War, 2004.
This paper discusses the Korean War and the way it illustrates the principles of defensive realism.
1,970 words (approx. 7.9 pages), 8 sources, MLA, £ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that defensive realism is an umbrella term for several theories of international politics and foreign policy, which suggests that security is the primary interest of most states. Yet, when one state takes action to increase its perceived security, this action generally serves to decrease the perceived security of other competing states. The author points out that the reason the United States decided to intervene in what would have otherwise been a localized civil war was precisely because of the supposed involvement of Russia in North Korea?s movements. The paper states that, if America had not appeared to be the aggressor, but had stuck strictly to a moderate course that communicated restraint, then it might never have had to face the massive forces of China. However, throughout the war, America seemed to act in an unrestrained fashion.
From the Paper
"Once America got involved, it quickly restored the status quo and pushed the North Korean army back to the 38th parallel. However, General MacAuthor decided to ?finish? the war by pushing farther into North Korea to assure the destruction of the North Korean military force. As America pushed its armies into what had originally been North Korean territory, it lost some of its ability to pass as a police action against an aggressive state and began to look like a direct assault on the communist bloc. This was certainly how it appeared to China as the American troops began marching on her borders. Chinese security interests demanded that North Korea serve as some kind of buffer between American forces in South Korea and the Chinese border, and also that American forces not be allowed on Chinese soil. So, as defensive realism would expect, China began to send forces to meet and engage American troops."
| |
|
The Korean War, 2000.
An analysis of the Korean War as a military success.
850 words (approx. 3.4 pages), 8 sources, MLA, £ 20.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is in Document Based Question format, analyzing different primary sources and evaluating the success of the war in relation to its stated goals. It analyzes many military tactics and how they were seen at the time, as well as in retrospect. It proves the war was successful despite popular belief.
From the Paper
"Over the years the Korean War has come to be known as the ?Forgotten War.? Coming between the World War II and Vietnam, the comparatively short Korean War has come to be coupled together in the minds of people with Vietnam. Being that they were both fighting communism, they have been fused and confused with people?s negative views of the Vietnam War. Being that it came before Vietnam and the Vietnam War still occurred, it is often viewed as a failure in its attempt to stop communism. By the end of the three-year war, the border of North and South Korea were exactly the same, along the 38th Parallel, is it had been before the invasion. Because of this, many felt the Korean War was a defeat; the UN army once advanced all the way to the Yalu River, had been pushed back and not gained any territory for the Republic of South Korea. These views though, are clearly wrong."
| |
|
The Korean War, 2008.
Examines the reasons why the U.S. entered the Korean War.
750 words (approx. 3.0 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 18.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, after WWII and the division of Korea, the U.S. was struck with the fear of the fast spreading cancer of communism. The author points out that the Truman administration pursued a policy of containment to deal with alleged Soviet aggression. Nothing but brute force would stop the Soviets from gaining power. The paper concludes that Truman believed that, if Korea became a domino in the game of communism, the next domino would probably be Japan, which was very important for American trade.
From the Paper
"The outcome of World War II left many countries destroyed physically and economically. Countries were looking for ways to rebuild despite the shambles they saw before them. Countries came together and formed an alliance to promote peace called the United Nations. This was America's chance to prove to its people that it truly promoted peace; therefore, our nation became part of the U.N. America moved quickly to help Japan set up a democratic form of government, which allowed the country to govern itself. Germany was now divided between the Soviets and the United Nations."
|
|
|
