Customer Reviews

The Korean War

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(24)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

The interpretations of the Korean War are varied and numberalmost as many as the pages that have been devoted to the conflict'shistory. The Korean War is an attempt by the British author MaxHastings to paint a portrait of the war, focusing upon some human and military aspects less familiar to readers on both sides of the Atlantic. From the outset, Hastings does not purport to give a comprehensive account of the war and cites the works of David Rees (Korea: The Limited War, New York, 1964) and Bruce Cumings (Origins of the Korean War, New Jersey, 1981) as the best in these categories. The author also professes his belief in the rightness of the American commitment to Korea in 1950. One of the more interesting passages in the Korean War is the author's coverage of the Inchon operation. Hastings defends the decision of General MacArthur to maintain X Corps as a separate tactical unit from Eighth Army: ... there was an entirely legitimate case for placing the conduct of the Inchon landing in hands other than those of General Walton Walker. MacArthur well knew the low morale that existed in Eighth Army headquarters.... [Although] Walker had conducted a stubborn defense of Pusan.... there was grave reason to doubt his ability now to lead the sort of imaginative and dynamic operation MacArthur planned. MacArthur considered, and rejected, the possibility of relieving him [Walker] of his command.... MacArthur's compromise was to entrust the amphibious operation to Almond. The author's argument is plausible, but he fails to cite his references. One of the strong points of the Korean War is the author's analysis ofthe Chinese and their intervention in the war. Hastings visited Peking while researching this book and incorporates the oral histories gained from interviewing veterans of the People's Liberation Army. He succeeds in using this material (although his journalistic, vice scholarly use of oral history gives the book a spurious creditability) in supporting his main thrust regarding the Chinese; that patriotism, not Communism, drove their intervention. The Chinese viewed the naval blockade of Formosa as a threat to their sovereignty; the Chinese sought the liberation of Taiwan and now equated the attainment of this goal with the defeat of the United States. Additionally, the Chinese refused to remain idle with the approach of foreign troops towards their border: Throughout the Korean War, Washington persistently sought the communist ideological logic behind Chinese actions. It might have been more profitable to consider instead historic Chinese nationalistic logic. Korea had provided the springboard for the Japanese invasion of Manchuria only a generation before. As the Americans drove north after smashing Kim Il Sung's armies in September 1950, Peking was appalled by the imminent prospect of an American imperialist army on the Yalu. (p. 134) Hastings also refutes the belief by the United States that the Chinese were acting in concert with the Soviet Union. The Russians regretted the North Korean's invasion and wished to distance themselves from Korea; thus, the Chinese acted unilaterally Hastings, to his credit, also gives ample analysis of the misjudgments of the Communists. The Chinese, after their initial success in late 1950, were led into the same trap as the United States after Inchon: they allowed their military success to change their original political goals. However limited the war aims of the Chinese in November 1950, there is no doubt that their early triumphs opened up, in the eyes of Peking, illusory visions of absolute military victory in Korea, of an all-embracing Communist success. Hastings argues correctly that the Chinese would have greatly boosted their own prestige had they sought a negotiated end to the struggle after the winter of 1950. Nevertheless, his argument that China lost a prime opportunity to gain a seat in the United Nations by not negotiating a truce after 1950 is a weak one. Although the United States wished to downplay their support of Chiang and Nationalist China, they were far from formally recognizing the Communists. Another area receiving little attention elsewhere is the intelligence-gathering operations in Korea. Hastings boldly asserts that "the Korean War put the CIA on the map". The United States already possessed a growing hunger for information on their chief enemies; the Communists. They were prepared to seize upon any means in which to gain more knowledge and Korea provided an ideal opportunity. The author chronicles the buildup of the Central Intelligence Agency, beginning with the appointment of Bedell Smith as its first director. The CIA launched numerous operations in attempt to learn more of the Communists and their intentions in Korea. Hastings concludes, "it is difficult to judge that its [the CIA's] operations remotely justified the scale of resources it eventually deployed or the lives that were squandered in its name." Hastings does add that the initial errors made by the CIA in Korea resulted in a better intelligence gathering effort in Vietnam. The author makes sparing use of maps, but does provide a sufficient number to keep the reader oriented. Hastings also includes a helpful chronology of the war and a listing of the military assistance provided by each member of the United Nations in the appendix. Although Hastings may draw criticism for devoting an inordinate amount of attention to Britain's involvement in Korea, his argument that a "British officer's or private soldier's recollection of the experience of fighting the Chinese in Korea is no less valid ... than that of an American" is legitimate. To his credit, Hastings gives fair treatment to all parties by incorporating interviews with Americans, Chinese, South Koreans, and soldiers from other participating UN armies. Overall Hastings presents some valid arguments and his writing style is good. As the editor of the Daily Telegraph in London, Hastings writes with a more journalistic than scholarly style and sometimes lacks the in-depth analysis to carry some of his arguments to completion. Nevertheless, his work still has value among the sociopolitical literature on the war. I would recommend this book as supplemental reading to those already possessing a solid understanding of the war.

British Historian Max Hasting's gives the "forgotten war" the kind of good overall one volume treatment that it deserves. For some reason, Korea has just never registered with Americans the way World War Two or Vietnam has. But the stakes were high as America rushed its untrained Pacific army from Japan to the Korean peninsula in a desperate attempt to forestall a communist takeover of the South in 1950. The heroism of those first soldiers cannot be understated. Hastings captures the whole saga of the war as a horrible tragedy and as the first test of the West's determination to literally fight the spread of communism. Ultimately, as Hastings points out, the sacrifice of the allied troops was not in vain. That democracy exists today in South Korea is a testement to those who fought and died to preserve the country's freedom.

It has always been a bit surprising to me that of the war's America has been involved in over the last century, it seems that the Korean War has always gotten so little attention. After all, two superpowers met in battle, it was the communists against us in a very hot war. Nuclear war was a very real possibility and the violence of the conflict was far higher then any other conflict except World War Two. We were responding to an invasion of a free and democratic country. Yet it gets little to no mention in our history books and public discourse.

There are a lot of very interesting and one would say dramatic military events that took place in this war. The brutal winter losses at Chosin, the Inchon landing, the drive to Yalu, all of which are recounted in the book in a very engaging way. Not only does the author give you the facts and overview of the battles, but he also does a good job at retelling the stories of the common soldier. He seemed to have talked to people on all sides of the conflict in order to gain a unique view into what it was like for them as well as us. Overall I enjoyed the book. It gave me a very easy to read overview of the war. He covered big picture items well and really got into the battle details to make the book exciting at times.

First, let me clear a reader's confusions. The Chinese Army fights with not only American Army but also UN Troops. If you can include the casualty of ROK, British, Turkish and some other country's armies, I am quite sure you can draw a different conclusion. Second, the Chinese Army didn't get too many US weapons formerly owned by Chiang Kai-shek. Most of them used .31-caliber rifle, which was used by Japanese in 1930's and totally out of date. You can find this information from a lot of photographs on both sides.

Korean War is a forgotten war in USA and some kind of forgotten by younger generation in China. There are a lot of books and photographs introducing this war on both sides. So far, this book is the best book I have seen about Korean War from the West. The writer is objective, unbiased to describe the cause of the war, the battle in the war and the prisoner on both sides. He incorporates American soldiers, Chinese soldiers and British Soldiers into his book, which gives readers a vivid image of War. His clear writing, objective and informative narrative of the war make his work the best book of Korean War for almost twenty years. This is a classic book deserve to read and keep, if you are big fan of Korean War. If you just want to browse the history, I strongly recommend a website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_war, which can give you objective, unbiased information.

This is a top rate book. The interviews with actual participants in the Korean War make the conflict personal and real. Most interesting are the conversations with the Chinese. Max Hasting's coverage of the 3rd People's Liberation Army involvement in the war is very well done. Between the depth of the coverage of the 1950-51 winter campaign and the intensity of the personal interviews, it's possible to really connect with the people who were there. The book is very well researched. It is presented fairly and the issues all sides bring to the conflict are brough to light. This is not easy reading though and the reality of some of the subject matter (executions of civilians, etc.) is troublesome.

Max Hastings has achieved one of the most difficult feats in writing a good survey history about a particular event. That is, Hastings was able to cover the Korean War well from the political, diplomatic, social, and military aspects.

In addition to this, Hastings was able to bring in a very personal feel to the drama by including touching accounts of the war from a wide range of people including American, British, Korean, and Chinese soldiers; and the people of Korea who suffered very dearly.

I found especially gripping and well constructed, the epic U.S. retreat to the Pusan Perimeter and the stunning counterstroke at Inchon. As an American, I found the heroic British battle with the Chinese at Imjin welcome to my limited knowledge of English military contributions.

Hastings also illustrates quite well how the U.S. and China were both and at varying times close to total victory, and how the failure to achieve total victory put themselves in a worse postion diplomatically. (i.e. the U.N. push to the Yalu that failed in the fall of 1950, and the Chinese advance to the 38th Parallel in the winter of 1950-51.)

Hastings also shows just how different General MacArthur's strategic thinking on the war was from both Washington and London. Also interesting is the author's exploration into the typical poor moral within the U.N. ranks resulting from the frustration of having to fight a limited war in a cold-inhospitable place.

Anyone looking for a good one volume compact history of the Korean War should buy this book.

I read this book when it was first published in hardback and I found it to be well written and easy to read. It offers a complete overview of the war including the contributions of all nations involved. An enjoyable book from this British historian which covers all aspects of this forgotten war. Well worth reading.

British Author Max Hastings, author of Armageddon and the Falklands War, has written another solid historical treatise on the oft forgotten Korean War. His past work as a newspaper writer allows him to reach the reader in a clear, comprehensive manner that is easy to read. Hastings does not bog you down in excrutiating detail as some historians are wont to do.

Hastings has done a knock up job incorporating the experience of not only the Americans, but the UN soldiers from Great Britain and Canada and the Chinese Communist soldiers as well. This is a side of the war that is rarely told, and brings new insight into the battle strategy and tenacious fighting that accompanied the Chinese entry over the Yalu.

Also covered are the naval and air campaigns and a solid analysis of the overall strategy of both sides. This is a great book for those looking to learn more about the Korean War, or to history buffs who wish to learn more about the war from a perspective other than the American one.

This is an excellent starting point for a study of the Korean War (but certainly not a "sole source.") I grew up during the Viet Nam era and remember questioning how our government and military could have been so incompetent -- how so many lives could have been wasted for no apparent gain.

I purchased Max Hastings' book after realizing that I knew very little about the Korean Was (except what I had read in William Manchester's "American Caesar" or in the biograpies of Harry S Truman by David McCullough and Alonzo Hamby). After reading this work, I now find it difficult to understand how the US government could NOT have looked back on this first attempt at a "limited war" and their total misunderstanding of Asian cultures and avoided Viet Nam altogether.

Why did I find this book heartbreaking? The descriptions of the humiliating collapse and retreats of the US Army -- only five years after victory in WWII.

Why disturbing? Why has this war been "forgotten"? How could the lessons learned here not be applied to Viet Nam? Why has it taken so long for veterans of this conflict to receive (belated) recognition? And just how close did the US come to using nuclear weapons?

The Korean War took the world by surprise when, in the morning of June 25 1950, thousands of North Korean troops came crashing across the 38th parallel separating the two Koreas. The ensuing war would come to pit the American -led United Nations against North Korea and communist China . In this well researched work, Max Hastings looks not only at the conflict itself but also its origins and its often forgotten lessons. Hastings writes of a United States that was thoroughly unprepared for a war of this type, with near disasterous results. In the end, the consequences of the mistakes on both sides would prolong the conflict , cost millions of lives and left the Korean peninsula devastated. However the conclusion drawn from the book is one that the American effort in Korea, though flawed, was indeed very necessary and ultimately not in vain.