Re: "The Inchon Landing: An Example of Brilliant Generalship"

["Love Shack" <Home@DanSources.com>]

WELL this is not true..
We were in a major build up to hammer Korea.
My experience is that of a few customers that were
being trained as USAF F86D fighters.

The very day the Armethist was signed they next day they were deactivated.
Dan

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "swan" <swan@haysco.net>
To: <KOREAN-WAR-L@listproc.cc.ku.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: "The Inchon Landing: An Example of Brilliant Generalship"


> We did not launch another invasion in Korea for two reasons. First we
> couldn't pull enough troops out of the line for such an invasion. But even
> more importly, the war had become completely politicized. Eisenhower,
> finally used the war as a gambit to get elected. Just as George Bush will
> try to use Gulf War II to be reelected.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ed Evanhoe" <evanhoe1@korean-war.com>
> To: <KOREAN-WAR-L@listproc.cc.ku.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 8:55 AM
> Subject: Re: "The Inchon Landing: An Example of Brilliant Generalship"
>
>
> > Dan,
> >
> >  >>At 09:40 AM 8/13/2003 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> > >(snip)
> > >Just POI MacArthur did not trust some of these same agencies either?<<
> >
> > I don't think MacArthur trusted anyone, or any agency, in
> > Washington.  (Just my opinion. <LOL>)
> >
> > Ed
> >
>