russian jet pilots in korean war?

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...
Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj wrote:
George Z. Bush wrote:

If you knew your history, or were around at the time, you'd know
without
being told that the only reason the US was in that "police action" at
all
was that the Soviet Union, during those relatively early UN Security
Council
days, took a walk during one of their political snits when the subject
came
up for discussion. The SC, in their absence, approved UN intervention
in
behalf of South Korea; had the Soviet ambassador been present during
that SC
discussion, they could easily (and undoubtedly would have) vetoed it,
since
they had the right to do that as all original members of the Security
Council could.

Common knowledge.


So, to answer your question, they fought in behalf of North Korea
because
North Korea was one of their client states to whom they furnished all
kinds
of military equipment and supplies, as well as the training in their
use.
They fought for the NKs because they did not want the world to think
their
MIG aircraft, in the hands of relatively green NK pilots, couldn't be
competitive with US military equipment. If they could have turned back
the
clock, there wouldn't even have been a war, because they'd have
prevented it
from happening. That's it, in a nutshell.

George Z.

So you explain, interpret, this as an expression of
simple commercial interests ? ;-)

Only in part. I thought it obvious that everybody would assume that they
would
stand up for their ideological bedfellows, and so I didn't think that part
of it
was worth mentioning.

(^-^))))

George Z.



Stalin and the Soviets planned, trained, and equipped the North Koreans to
prepare for the invasion as an instrument of Soviet foreign policy.

In article ,
Han Kim wrote:

The Soviets (not the Russians to be precise) walked out of the Security
Council thinking that the US would not be able to push through a vote.

As I understand it (and without going back and rereading the UN
charter), there was a difference of opinion about the role of
permanent members of the Security Council. The Soviets at that
time interpreted it as meaning that action required the positive
votes of all five permanent members, and therefore that by walking
out they were disabling the SC. The US maintained that action
required no negative votes of the permanent members, and whatever
the charter actually says this interpretation was accepted.
(Corrections by people who know more than I do about this willingly
accepted.)

While many historians had thought that the Soviets were reluctant
supporters duped by a unruly client, the declassified archives show
otherwise. The Soviets were doing their share of instigating and
were quite active in supporting the North Korean plans
to start a conventional attack on the South. The Korean War was
certainly not started behind Stalin's back.

I believe that the poster meant that the UN intervention was
started behind Stalin's back, and one implication is that Stalin
did not feel bound by it. (Not that Stalin would have necessarily
followed a UN resolution if he didn't agree with it.)

There is the possibility that the US could have intervened on
behalf of South Korea, without direct UN auspices. Again without
looking it up, I believe the UN charter allows the use of military
force in defense, and not only defense of one's own country.


--
David H. Thornley | If you want my opinion, ask.
| If you don't, flee.
http://www.thornley.net/~thornley/david/ | O-

On Sat, 06 Mar 2004 12:33:54 GMT, "Stinky Pete"
wrote:

id est..the design for the engine was stolen from the Brits. The design for

Not stolen, GIVEN.

--
More blood for oil... in my name!

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 17:06:14 -0500, "George Z. Bush"
wrote:

So, to answer your question, they fought in behalf of North Korea because North
Korea was one of their client states to whom they furnished all kinds of
military equipment and supplies, as well as the training in their use. They

They also "furnished" the president of North Korea, Kim Il Sung, who
had been an artillery officer in the Soviet Red Army during WWII.

--
More blood for oil... in my name!

"D. Patterson" wrote in message
...

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...
Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj wrote:
George Z. Bush wrote:

If you knew your history, or were around at the time, you'd know
without
being told that the only reason the US was in that "police action" at
all
was that the Soviet Union, during those relatively early UN Security
Council
days, took a walk during one of their political snits when the
subject
came
up for discussion. The SC, in their absence, approved UN
intervention
in
behalf of South Korea; had the Soviet ambassador been present during
that SC
discussion, they could easily (and undoubtedly would have) vetoed it,
since
they had the right to do that as all original members of the Security
Council could.

Common knowledge.


So, to answer your question, they fought in behalf of North Korea
because
North Korea was one of their client states to whom they furnished all
kinds
of military equipment and supplies, as well as the training in their
use.
They fought for the NKs because they did not want the world to think
their
MIG aircraft, in the hands of relatively green NK pilots, couldn't be
competitive with US military equipment. If they could have turned
back
the
clock, there wouldn't even have been a war, because they'd have
prevented it
from happening. That's it, in a nutshell.

George Z.

So you explain, interpret, this as an expression of
simple commercial interests ? ;-)

Only in part. I thought it obvious that everybody would assume that
they
would
stand up for their ideological bedfellows, and so I didn't think that
part
of it
was worth mentioning.

(^-^))))

George Z.



Stalin and the Soviets planned, trained, and equipped the North Koreans to
prepare for the invasion as an instrument of Soviet foreign policy.



Yes! Let's make it perfectly clear! The Soviets trained and equipped a five
piece brass band as an instrument of Soviet foreign policy!

If you post your credit card number, I'll be happy to fill up at the pump in
your name!


"Christopher Morton" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 06 Mar 2004 12:33:54 GMT, "Stinky Pete"
wrote:

id est..the design for the engine was stolen from the Brits. The design
for

Not stolen, GIVEN.

--
More blood for oil... in my name!

D. Patterson wrote:

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj wrote:

George Z. Bush wrote:

If you knew your history, or were around at the time, you'd
know without being told that the only reason the US was in that
"police action" at all was that the Soviet Union, during those
relatively early UN Security Council days, took a walk during
one of their political snits when the subject came up for
discussion. The SC, in their absence, approved UN intervention
in behalf of South Korea; had the Soviet ambassador been
present during that SC discussion, they could easily (and
undoubtedly would have) vetoed it, since they had the right to
do that as all original members of the Security Council could.

Common knowledge.


So, to answer your question, they fought in behalf of North
Korea because North Korea was one of their client states to
whom they furnished all kinds of military equipment and
supplies, as well as the training in their use. They fought for
the NKs because they did not want the world to think their MIG
aircraft, in the hands of relatively green NK pilots, couldn't
be competitive with US military equipment.

If they could have turned back the clock, there wouldn't even
have been a war, because they'd have prevented it from
happening. That's it, in a nutshell.

George Z.

So you explain, interpret, this as an expression of
simple commercial interests ? ;-)

Only in part.
I thought it obvious that everybody would assume that they would
stand up for their ideological bedfellows, and so I didn't think
that part of it was worth mentioning.

(^-^))))

George Z.

Stalin and the Soviets planned, trained, and equipped the North Koreans
to prepare for the invasion as an instrument of Soviet foreign policy.

Yes. That's the much more important point to keep in mind, and explore,
for soc.culture.russian readers. Rather than to have major wrangles
over trivia such as which now obsolete airplane was superior, or which
ace had how many kills.
What is important is the mind set and culture of the Russian leadership
caste, including the administrative apparatchik bureaucracy

id est..the design for the engine was stolen from the Brits. The design for

Not stolen, GIVEN.

Neither stolen nor given, but bought.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

No. Stolen. They bought a very small number from the Brits. They then copied
the design illegally, i.e. stolen.



"Cub Driver" wrote in message
news

id est..the design for the engine was stolen from the Brits. The design
for

Not stolen, GIVEN.

Neither stolen nor given, but bought.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

"Stinky Pete" wrote in message
t...
No. Stolen. They bought a very small number from the Brits. They then
copied
the design illegally, i.e. stolen.

I thought they were given them rather than any purchase.

The Whittle design was done while he was a serving officer and so any
rights, patents, etc. rest with the Crown.

The UK government of the day didn't make an issue of it, and the person
responsible, the then President of the Board of Trade, is now dead, so we
can't ask him.

I should add that as he went on to become Prime Minister it obviously didn't
do his political career any harm either...

--
William Black
------------------
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords
is no basis for a system of government