Were Julius and Ethel Rosenberg responsible for the Korean War?

[PLATO]

Judge Irving Kaufman thought so...

His words at their sentencing:

I consider your crime worse than murder...I believe your conduct in putting into the hands of the Russians the A-Bomb years before our best scientists predicted Russia would perfect the bomb has already caused, in my opinion, the Communist aggression in Korea, with the resultant casualties exceeding 50,000 and who knows but that millions more of innocent people may pay the price of your treason. Indeed, by your betrayal you undoubtedly have altered the course of history to the disadvantage of our country. No one can say that we do not live in a constant state of tension. We have evidence of your treachery all around us every day for the civilian defense activities throughout the nation are aimed at preparing us for an atom bomb attack

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenbergs

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Nope. I really don't have much time for that reasoning. Communist uprisings (with Soviet backing) were happening before the Russkis had the bomb, as well as after.

Anyway, the Rosenbergs were far from being the sole atomic spies.

[PLATO]

Yeah...I agree with that. It is interesting to see what the thought process was during that time though. With the McCarthy hearings coming on the heals of the trial, it seems that this line of thinking may have been prominent in Washington. I do take a little exception with insinuating that the Korean war was an "uprisng", but I guess you could look at it that way.

I guess the real question is: Did the level of and success of Soviet Espionage bolster the Soviets in encouraging client states to be more confrontational?

[chequita guevara]

The USSR didn't have to push the DPRK to invade. In fact, there's evidence to suggest that the war was deliberately provoked by the West.

In any event, since South Korea was imposed on Korea by the US while the DPRK had set itself up across the entire peninsula following the fall of Japan, the DPRK had reason enough to want to get rid of it.

[Kuciwalker]

Che, I'm starting to get the same feeling reading your posts that I do reading Ned's

[PLATO]

The "cheverse"?

Can you you share some of the"evidence" with us che? I would love to see some of the histrical background on the commie side.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
Nope. I really don't have much time for that reasoning. Communist uprisings (with Soviet backing) were happening before the Russkis had the bomb, as well as after.

Anyway, the Rosenbergs were far from being the sole atomic spies.

a large scale conventional invasion is hardly the same thing as an uprising. Would the DPRK really have invaded if the US had had a nuclear monopoly? (that is assuming the USSR wouldnt have been able to build a bomb using the info from Fuchs, rather than the Rosenbergs)

[GePap]

In 1950 the Russians had few nukes and almost no delivery systems that could reach the continental US. Kim il Jong was more than willing and able to invade SK whether the Soviets had nukes or not. Heck, American nuclear hegemony didn't deter the Russians from consolidating their control of Eastern Europe, it did nothing to stop Mao from driving out Chiang Kai Shek, why then would it have stopped the Korean War?

Hell the only reason the UN was able to send a force anyways was cause the Soviets were boycotting the Un at the time.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
In fact, there's evidence to suggest that the war was deliberately provoked by the West.

I've seen transcripts of the conversations between the Dear Leader and his backers which suggest otherwise.


Of course these were printed in the capitalist running dog lackey kennels of the West, in an essay in 'History Today', so obviously cannot be trusted.

I must say, it seems rather a high risk strategy for 'the West'- allow North Korea to build up a highly motivated well armed force which almost completely annihilates South Korean forces and occupies virtually the whole of the peninsula before South Korea is rescued by the U.N. .

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
In 1950 the Russians had few nukes and almost no delivery systems that could reach the continental US. Kim il Jong was more than willing and able to invade SK whether the Soviets had nukes or not. Heck, American nuclear hegemony didn't deter the Russians from consolidating their control of Eastern Europe, it did nothing to stop Mao from driving out Chiang Kai Shek, why then would it have stopped the Korean War?

I wasnt asserting, I was really asking this time. Launching a conventional invasion (even with the ambiguity of invading the other half of one country) is still rather more than consolidating control over a country you already occupy, or continuing an ongoing civil war.

The examples speak to the difference. In neither of the other cases did the US intervene militarily. In Korea, the US already troops present. The US would have been involved, UNSC resolution or not.

I would think that Kim would have had to consider the possibility of a nuclear response from the US. That he did not historically, could mean either that A. He wouldnt have worried even if the US had a nuclear monopoly or B. that the few nuclear weapons the USSR had, with their limited delivery options, were STILL a sufficient deterrent, and were the reason he went ahead anyway.

Certainly from the POV of Judge Kaufman, his claim was not that far fetched.

[molly bloom]

Dear Leader, the peaceable Kim Il Sung:

We believe that the situation makes it necessary and possible to liberate the whole country through military means.

The reactionary forces of the South will never agree on a peaceful reunification and will perpetuate the division of the country until they feel themselves strong enough to attack the North.

Now is the best opportunity for us to take the initiative into our own hands.

Our armed forces are stronger, and in addition we have the support of a powerful guerilla movement in the South.

The population of the South, which despises the pro-American regime, will certainly help as well.

Kim Il Sung in conversation with Stalin, March 7th 1949.

Source: declassified documents relating to the origins of the Korean War from Russian archives, released by Boris Yeltsin to the South Korean government.


The voice said, Cry. And he said, What shall I cry? All flesh is grass, but especially in North Korea....

[Blaupanzer]

Suspect the extent Fuchs' treachery may have been unknown at the time of the tril's conclusion. The casualty figure given by the judge is very America-centric. Korean casualties may have approached or exceeded one million. Kim may have believed the Americans would not use nukes in support of a foreign client. In this, he was right. Also the Communists were very contemptuous of the UN as a military power.

I've not read anything (even in Communist sources) that indicates the U.S. or the West provoked or even desired the invasion by the North. Where does that come from?

[Darius871]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The USSR didn't have to push the DPRK to invade. In fact, there's evidence to suggest that the war was deliberately provoked by the West.

Originally posted by PLATO
Can you you share some of the"evidence" with us che? I would love to see some of the histrical background on the commie side.

Originally posted by Blaupanzer
I've not read anything (even in Communist sources) that indicates the U.S. or the West provoked or even desired the invasion by the North. Where does that come from?

I'm anxiously waiting to hear the sources on that too...