Iraq isn't supposed to be a war, but it is. It's the kind of war that the American army isn't trained to fight, which is why its not referred to as a war. You can't lose if you're not in a war - much better for propoganda purposes.
Koran war =
Korean war? Anyone who describes that as a minor conflict is simply being unrealistic - there were some seriously nasty battles over there with some very high casualty figures, around 2 million soldiers lost their lives if memory serves.
History has a funny way of forgetting huge and terrible conflicts - everyone knows about the 1st Gulf War but how many know of the Iran-Iraq war just a few years before - that was a truly horrible and bloody conflict which dwarfed any other in that period.
If you're looking for some kind of intellectual justification for calling the Korean war a war, then it was the first place that the US put its doctrine of global containment into practice following the recommendations made in
NSC-68.
Edit: Aaah, I see your confusion, it wasn't called a war in America apparently but 'police action'.
Quote:
|
In the United States, the conflict was termed a police action (as the Korean Conflict) under the aegis of the United Nations rather than a war, largely in order to remove the necessity of a Congressional declaration of war.
|
[ 03-11-2005, 03:32 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]