The Korean war

Re: Please help answer this question regarding the Korean War for me!

My research are mainly on Chinese intervention (excluding stalemate), so this is what I can recall from top of my head.

Organization: US Eighth Army
->US I Corps
->US IX Corps
->US X Corps
->ROK I Corps
->ROK II Corps (destroyed by Chinese during the Second Phase Campaign)
->ROK III Corps

US Units: US 1st Calvary Division, US 2nd Infantry Division, US 3rd Infantry Division, US 7th Infantry Division, US 24th Infantry Division, US 25th Infantry Division, US 1st Marine Division, US 187th RCT.

South Korean Units: ROK Capital Division, ROK 1st Division, ROK 2nd Division, ROK 3rd Division, ROK 5th Division, ROK 6th Division, ROK 7th Division, ROK 8th Division, ROK 9th Division, ROK 11th Division

Other major UN units: Anglo-Australian 27th Infantry Brigade, British 29th Infantry Brigade, Turkish Brigade.

The rest are battalion combat teams.

Total UN strength:

First and Second Phase Campaign: 412.313 (US: 178,464)
Third and Fourth Phase Campaign: 473,663 (US: 229,866)
Fifth Phase Campaign: ~418,000 (US: 245,000)

Source:
Appleman, Roy (1989), Disaster in Korea: The Chinese Confront MacArthur, College Station, TX: Texas A and M University Military History Series, 11, ISBN 9781603441285
Appleman, Roy (1990), Escaping the Trap: The US Army X Corps in Northeast Korea, 1950, College Station, TX: Texas A and M University Military History Series, 14, ISBN 0-89096-395-9
Appleman, Roy (1990), Ridgway Duels for Korea, College Station, TX: Texas A and M University Military History Series, 18, ISBN 0890964327
Mossman, Billy C. (1990), Ebb and Flow: November 1950-July 1951, United States Army in the Korean War, Washington, D.C.: Center of Military History, United States Army, , retrieved 2009-12-25

Re: Please help answer this question regarding the Korean War for me!

pla101prc said:

wikipedia prolly has the answer

Click to expand...

There are in total only three guys on Wikipedia that tried to provide quality info on Korean War...:coffee:

Re: Please help answer this question regarding the Korean War for me!

thank you for the information. Wikipedia is definitely not reliable.... the page about the battle of triangle hill(forgot the name) in which the Chinese successfuly stood against very fierce UN attakcs, in the conclusion wikipedia says " After six weeks of heavy fighting, the Eighth Army had failed to gain the two hill masses that were its original goal, The high UN casualties forced Clark to suspend any upcoming offensive operations involving more than one battalion, effectively preventing any major UN offensives for the rest of the war" While this battle was known as one of the most brutal battle where tremendous amount of menpower was employed by both side over a 6 weeks of intense fighting, wikipedia list the US Death as 365 and the Chinese as 7000..... The Chinese was the defensive side and won the battle and yet lose almost 20x more men? This really shows how unreliable wikipedia can be......

Re: Please help answer this question regarding the Korean War for me!

sidewinder01 said:

thank you for the information. Wikipedia is definitely not reliable.... the page about the battle of triangle hill(forgot the name) in which the Chinese successfuly stood against very fierce UN attakcs, in the conclusion wikipedia says " After six weeks of heavy fighting, the Eighth Army had failed to gain the two hill masses that were its original goal, The high UN casualties forced Clark to suspend any upcoming offensive operations involving more than one battalion, effectively preventing any major UN offensives for the rest of the war" While this battle was known as one of the most brutal battle where tremendous amount of menpower was employed by both side over a 6 weeks of intense fighting, wikipedia list the US Death as 365 and the Chinese as 7000..... The Chinese was the defensive side and won the battle and yet lose almost 20x more men? This really shows how unreliable wikipedia can be......

Click to expand...

A bit off topic here, but that is not exactly unreliable, the most important factor you have to realize is that first of all, it is a battle of attrition, thus casualty number does not matter, only the willingness to take casualty matter. China won because it is willing to lose more man in battle. Second of all, given that even during the Second Phase Campaign Western Sector, one of US Army's worst defeat in history, the US Army still only suffered 600 KIA, the Battle of Triangle Hill then in perspective can still be considered to be one of the deadliest in the Korean War. Third of all, this is a major battle between South Korea and China, with US playing a secondary role, thus the real kill ratio was around 1,400 vs 7,000, similar to all other engagement in the Korean War (Second Phase Campaign for example, 11,000 UN casualties vs 45,000 Chinese casualties). If you need more analysis on the background and effects of this battle, see Malkasian, Carter (2002). A History of Modern Wars of Attrition. Greenwood Publishing Group.

There are also other factors such as logistics and propaganda, in which Chinese always suffer more KIA in Korean War battles, while US forces are more likely to suffer WIA in Korean War battles. Anyway, the point in dealing with Wikipedia is that when in doubt, check their footnotes.

Re: Please help answer this question regarding the Korean War for me!

raider1001 said:

A bit off topic here, but that is not exactly unreliable, the most important factor you have to realize is that first of all, it is a battle of attrition, thus casualty number does not matter, only the willingness to take casualty matter. China won because it is willing to lose more man in battle. Second of all, given that even during the Second Phase Campaign Western Sector, one of US Army's worst defeat in history, the US Army still only suffered 600 KIA, the Battle of Triangle Hill then in perspective can still be considered to be one of the deadliest in the Korean War. Third of all, this is a major battle between South Korea and China, with US playing a secondary role, thus the real kill ratio was around 1,400 vs 7,000, similar to all other engagement in the Korean War (Second Phase Campaign for example, 11,000 UN casualties vs 45,000 Chinese casualties). If you need more analysis on the background and effects of this battle, see Malkasian, Carter (2002). A History of Modern Wars of Attrition. Greenwood Publishing Group.

There are also other factors such as logistics and propaganda, in which Chinese always suffer more KIA in Korean War battles, while US forces are more likely to suffer WIA in Korean War battles. Anyway, the point in dealing with Wikipedia is that when in doubt, check their footnotes.

Click to expand...

Definitely Chiinese suffered a total of 390000 death while US suffered around 50000, however Im sure the death ratio for the particular battle was much closer than 1400 vs 7000, and US played a major role in every battle regardless because US provided all the Air support, modern weaponery and tactics... Without the US, the southern korean can even stand against the North

Re: Please help answer this question regarding the Korean War for me!

sidewinder01 said:

Definitely Chiinese suffered a total of 390000 death while US suffered around 50000, however Im sure the death ratio for the particular battle was much closer than 1400 vs 7000, and US played a major role in every battle regardless because US provided all the Air support, modern weaponery and tactics... Without the US, the southern korean can even stand against the North

Click to expand...

Depend on which stage of battle. Before mid 1951, South Korean forces were a rabble. After mid 1951, they can hold out on their own. In fact during the stalemate, most of the fighting were carried out by South Koreans in order to limit US casualties. US provided air support, but ground forces were all Korean.

One of the biggest fallacy in analyzing Korean War history is that people always ignore South Korean strength and casualties. South Koreans always formed half to two-third of all UN strength in Korea. You also have to remember that it is very rare for Chinese forces to engage US forces alone, and the Chinese strategy is always focused on destroying the South Koreans while encircling the US forces. Thus during any battle between Chinese and UN forces, it is always the South Koreans that suffered most of the losses while US forces retreat with low losses.

Re: Please help answer this question regarding the Korean War for me!

raider1001 said:

Depend on which stage of battle. Before mid 1951, South Korean forces were a rabble. After mid 1951, they can hold out on their own. In fact during the stalemate, most of the fighting were carried out by South Koreans in order to limit US casualties. US provided air support, but ground forces were all Korean.

One of the biggest fallacy in analyzing Korean War history is that people always ignore South Korean strength and casualties. South Koreans always formed half to two-third of all UN strength in Korea. You also have to remember that it is very rare for Chinese forces to engage US forces alone, and the Chinese strategy is always focused on destroying the South Koreans while encircling the US forces. Thus during any battle between Chinese and UN forces, it is always the South Koreans that suffered most of the losses while US forces retreat with low losses.

Click to expand...

Totally just learned some information I didnt know before from you haha What about the roles of the North Korean in the war? The iinformation about Korean war out there are mostly focused on the chinese and the US... Thats what most people think it was the US fighting the Chinese? Btw another question, say if the US provided most of the ground forces instead of the south Koreans would the US have a higher death toll then?

Re: Please help answer this question regarding the Korean War for me!

NK government never did declassify documents like China and Russia, so there really isn't much information about them.

One of the reason why US had suffered less casualty was because US has trucks, Chinese and South Koreans don't. Every time Chinese destroyed a South Korean formation and trying to swing in the American rear, their force marching can't catch the American escaping on trucks. American forces would usually retreat to a new phase line and wait for the Chinese to ran out of supplies. After that, the Americans counter attack the exhausted Chinese forces incapable of fighting back, and that is the biggest cause of Chinese losses in the Korean War. As professor Shu Guang Zhang point out in his seminal work Mao's Military Romanticism: China and the Korean War, Chinese Phase Campaigns, which is always aimed for Cannae style battle with the American, never achieved full success because American mobility always enabled them to escape fights they can't win.

Thus the reason why US and Chinese history on Korean War are always don't agree - they always focus on different stages of the same battle. Chines history are always talk about how they won because the American were in full retreat, American history always talk about how they won by counterattacking the Chinese after retreating. But being the sacrificial lamb handicapped with language barriers, nobody pays attention on the South Koreans Army that got slaughtered in the process. As professor Millett lamenting in the introduction to The Korean War: Volume One, "when the army of the Republic of Korea enters the story, it is almost always as a South Korean division fleeing to the rear in panic."

Edit: people may argue that American firepower would be the biggest killer, but we have to remember that Chinese did develop very effective night fighting tactics and special operation forces to greatly negate those advantage. So IMO they are not that decisive China and US match up. If the Chinese is able to carry their attack plan correctly by surprise and encircling US forces, the casualty ratio is much closer to 1:2.

Re: Please help answer this question regarding the Korean War for me!

raider1001 said:

NK government never did declassify documents like China and Russia, so there really isn't much information about them.

One of the reason why US had suffered less casualty was because US has trucks, Chinese and South Koreans don't. Every time Chinese destroyed a South Korean formation and trying to swing in the American rear, their force marching can't catch the American escaping on trucks. American forces would usually retreat to a new phase line and counter attack the exhausted Chinese forces incapable of fighting back, and that is the biggest cause of Chinese losses in the Korean War. As professor Shu Guang Zhang point out in his seminal work Mao's Military Romanticism: China and the Korean War, none of Chinese Phase Campaigns, which is always aimed for Cannae style battle with the American, achieved full success because American mobility always enabled them to escape fights they can't win.

Thus the reason why US and Chinese history on Korean War are always don't agree - they always focus on different stages of the same battle. Chines history are always talk about how they won because the American were in full retreat, American history always talk about how they won by counterattacking the Chinese after retreating. But being the sacrificial lamb handicapped with language barriers, nobody pays attention on the South Koreans Army that got slaughtered in the process. As professor Millett lamenting in the introduction to The Korean War: Volume One, "when the army of the Republic of Korea enters the story, it is almost always as a South Korean division fleeing to the rear in panic."

Click to expand...

You really sound like you really understand the Korean War from both sides! I have one major question that I have about the Korean war, that is being technologically behiind and poorly equipped like they were, how did the PVA manage stop the UN from uniting Korea Instead of being slaughted like Macarthur said in the beginning of the Korean war? What are the determining factors that made the PVA successful in achieving their goal(for tremendous cost of course) The south Koreans after all, were equipped by the UN while the Chinese had a mixture of weapons from Japan, US and USSR, many which were very outdated, how did the Chinese so easily in many cases completely overran South Korean Formations even with when they had UN air support.

Re: Please help answer this question regarding the Korean War for me!

Wow, one question at a time...

how did the PVA manage stop the UN from uniting Korea Instead of being slaughted like Macarthur said in the beginning of the Korean war?

Click to expand...

Chinese entry in the Korean War was a complete surprise to MacArthur. He didn't really believe China could enter the war because he believed that China, Russia and North Korea were under one government, thus he reasoned that if China wants to intervening, it should do so already at the start of the war. He also believed that the UN air force would detect something if the Chinese did cross the Yalu. The Chinese discipline, on the other hand, was so strict that 180,000 Chinese moved across the Yalu with no detection. The surprise was so complete that even after the South Korean II Corps and the US 8th Cavalry got wiped out during the First Phase Campaign, he still did not believe China had entered the war. It wasn't until the Eighth Army got kick out of North Korea did he start to believe that Chinese was actually in North Korea. Historian Patrick Roe wrote an excellent book called The Dragon Strikes on the Chinese deception plans, maybe you should check it out.

To show how out of touch the UN Command was, General Walton Walker, commander of the US Eighth Army, after hearing reports that Chinese prisoners were brought in for interrogation, remarked "Well, there are a lot of Mexicans in Texas, aren't there?"

What are the determining factors that made the PVA successful in achieving their goal?

Click to expand...

China is the master of asymmetrical warfare at the time, while US is the master of conventional warfare at the time. Chinese always avoid US advantage by using semi-guerrilla tactics such as infiltration, night attacks or commando raids. It is one thing to say PVA will lose in a conventional fight against US because they are poorly equipped, but Chinese never fought in a conventional way against US.

The south Koreans after all, were equipped by the UN...

Click to expand...

South Korean were not that better equipped. There were little training for each soldier, there were no professional NCOs to lead its men, they have no tanks, there were few artillery/crew served weapons available, and communication between American commands/air support and South Korean units were very unreliable due to the language barrier. Chinese on the other hand, were composed of veterans with 20 plus years of combat experience, enjoyed large number of professional NCOs to lead its men, and perfected methods to avoid better firepower. It wasn't until General Van Fleet arrived in mid-1951 did South Korean problems starting to go away. In fact, the modern South Korean Armed Force's birthday is set in 1951 to celebrate its "rebirth".