Citation

CHAPTER ONE THE COURSE OF THE WAR

On the very day that President Barack Obama fielded a student’s question in Moscow about whether a new Korean War was in the offing (July 7, 2009), the papers were filled with commentary on the death of Robert Strange McNamara. The editors of The New York Times and one of its best columnists, Bob Herbert, condemned McNamara for knowing the Vietnam War was un-winnable yet sending tens of thousands of young Americans to their deaths

 

 

anyway: “How in God’s name did he ever look at himself in the mirror?” Herbert wrote. They all assumed that the war itself was a colossal error. But if McNamara had been able to stabilize South Vietnam and divide the country permanently (say with his “electronic fence”), thousands of our troops would still be there along a DMZ and evil would still reside in Hanoi. McNamara also had a minor planning role in the firebombing of Japanese cities in World War II: “What makes it immoral if you lose and not immoral if you win?” he asked; people like himself and Curtis LeMay, the commander of the air attacks, “were behaving as war criminals.” McNamara derived these lessons from losing the Vietnam War: we did not know the enemy, we lacked “empathy” (we should have “put ourselves inside their skin and look[ed] at us through their eyes,” but we did not); we were blind prisoners of our own assumptions. 1 In Korea we still are. Korea is an ancient nation, and one of the very few places in the world where territorial boundaries, ethnicity, and language have been consistent for well over a millennium. It sits next to China and was deeply influenced by the Middle Kingdom, but it has always had an independent civilization. Few understand this, but the most observant journalist in the war, Reginald Thompson, put the point exactly: “the thought and law of China is woven into the very texture of Korea … as the law of Rome is woven into Britain.” The distinction is between the stereotypical judgment that Korea is just “Little China,” or nothing more than a transmission belt for Buddhist and Confucian culture flowing into Japan, and a nation and culture as different from Japan or China as Italy or France is from Germany. Korea also had a social structure that persisted for centuries: during the five hundred years of the last dynasty the vast majority of Koreans were peasants, most of them tenants working land held by one of the world’s most tenacious aristocracies. Many were also slaves, a hereditary status from generation to generation. The state squelched merchant activity, so that commerce, and anything resembling the green shoots of a middle class, barely developed. This fundamental condition—a privileged landed class, a mass of peasants, and little leavening in between—lasted through twentieth-century colonialism, too, because after their rule began in 1910 the Japanese found it useful to operate through local landed power. So, amid the crisis of national division, upheaval,

 

 

and war, Koreans also sought to rectify these ancient inequities. But this aristocracy, known as yangban, did not last so long and survive one crisis after another by being purely exploitative; it fostered a scholar-official elite, a civil service, venerable statecraft, splendid works of art, and a national pastime of educating the young. In the relative openness of the 1920s, young scions proliferated in one profession after another—commerce, industry, publishing, academia, films, literary pursuits, urban consumption—a budding elite that could readily have led an independent Korea. 2 But global depression, war, and ever-increasing Japanese repression in the 1930s destroyed much of this progress, turned many elite Koreans into collaborators, and left few options for patriots besides armed resistance. Korea was at its modern nadir during the war, yet this is where most of the millions of Americans who served in Korea got their impressions—ones that often depended on where the eye chose to fall. Foreigners and GIs saw dirt and mud and squalor, but Thompson saw villages “of pure enchantment, the tiles of the roofs up-curled at eaves and corners … the women [in] bright colours, crimson and the pale pink of watermelon flesh, and vivid emerald green, their bodies wrapped tightly to give them a tubular appearance.” Reginald Thompson had been all over the world; most GIs had never been out of their country, or perhaps their hometowns. What his vantage point in 1950 told him, in effect, was this: here was the Vietnam War we came to know before Vietnam—gooks, napalm, rapes, whores, an unreliable ally, a cunning enemy, fundamentally untrained GIs fighting a war their top generals barely understood, fragging of officers, 3 contempt for the know-nothing civilians back home, devilish battles indescribable even to loved ones, press handouts from Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s headquarters apparently scripted by comedians or lunatics, an ostensible vision of bringing freedom and liberty to a sordid dictatorship run by servants of Japanese imperialism. “What a Quixotic business,” Thompson wrote, trying to impose democracy—to try to achieve “an evolutionary result without evolution.” The only outcome of fending off the North, he thought, would be a long occupation if not “conquest and colonization.”

 

 

THE CONVENTIONAL WAR BEGINS The war Americans know began on the remote, inaccessible Ongjin Peninsula, northwest of Seoul, on the night of June 24–25, 1950, Korean time; this was also the point at which border fighting began in May 1949, and the absence of independent observers has meant that both Korean sides have claimed ever since that they were attacked first. During the long, hot summer of 1949, one pregnant with impending conflict, the ROK had expanded its army to about 100,000 troops, a strength the North did not match until early 1950. American order-of-battle data showed the two armies at about equal strength by June 1950. Early that month, MacArthur’s intelligence apparatus identified a total of 74,370 Korean People’s Army (KPA) soldiers, with another 20,000 or so in the Border Constabulary. The Republic of Korea Army (ROKA) order of battle showed a total of 87,500 soldiers, with 32,500 soldiers at the border, 35,000 within thirty-five miles, or a day’s march, of the 38th parallel. This data did not account for the superior battle experience of the northern army, however, especially among the large contingents that had returned from the Chinese civil war. The North also had about 150 Soviet T-34 tanks and a small but useful air force of 70 fighters and 62 light bombers—either left behind when Soviet troops evacuated in December 1948, or purchased from Moscow and Beijing in 1949–50 (when war bond drives ensued for months in the North). Only about 20,000 South Korean troops remained in the more distant interior. This was the result of a significant redeployment northward toward the parallel in the early months of 1950, after the southern guerrillas appeared to have been crushed. The northern army had also redeployed southward in May and June 1950, but many KPA units—at least one third—were not aware of the impending invasion and thus were not mobilized to fight on June 25. Furthermore, thousands of Korean troops were still fighting in China at this time. Just one week before the invasion John Foster Dulles visited Seoul and the 38th parallel. By then he was a roving ambassador and, as the odds-on Republican choice for secretary of state, a symbol of Harry Truman’s attempt at bipartisanship after Republicans opened up on him with the “who lost China?”

 

 

campaign. In meetings with Syngman Rhee the latter not only pushed for a direct American defense of the ROK, but advocated an attack on the North. One of Dulles’s favorite reporters, William Mathews, was there and wrote just after Dulles’s meeting that Rhee was “militantly for the unification of Korea. Openly says it must be brought about soon … Rhee pleads justice of going into North country. Thinks it could succeed in a few days … if he can do it with our help, he will do it.” Mathews noted that Rhee said he would attack even if “it brought on a general war.” All this is yet more proof of Rhee’s provocative behavior, but it is no different from his threats to march north made many times before. The Dulles visit was merely vintage Rhee: there is no evidence that Dulles was in collusion with him.4 But what might the North Koreans have thought?

John Foster Dulles peering across the 38th parallel, June 19, 1950. To his left, in the pith helmet, is Defense Minister Shin Sung-mo; behind him, in the porkpie hat, is Foreign Minister Ben Limb. U.S. National Archives

 

 

That is the question a historian put to Dean Acheson, Truman’s secretary of state, in a seminar after the Korean War: “Are you sure his presence didn’t provoke the attack, Dean? There has been comment about that—I don’t think it did. You have no views on the subject?” Acheson’s deadpan response: “No, I have no views on the subject.” George Kennan then interjected, “There is a comical aspect to this, because the visits of these people over there, and their peering over outposts with binoculars at the Soviet people, I think must have led the Soviets to think that we were on to their plan and caused them considerable perturbation.” “Yes,” Acheson said. “Foster up in a bunker with a homburg on—it was a very amusing picture.”5 Pyongyang has never tired of waving that photo around. At the same time, the veteran industrialist Pak Hung-sik showed up in Tokyo and gave an interview to The Oriental Economist, published on June 24, 1950—the day before the war started. Described as an adviser to the Korean Economic Mission (that is, the Marshall Plan), he was also said to have “a circle of friends and acquaintances among the Japanese” (a bit of an understatement; Pak was widely thought in South and North to have been the most notorious collaborator with Japanese imperialism). In the years after liberation in 1945 a lot of anti-Japanese feeling had welled up in Korea, Pak said, owing to the return of “numerous revolutionists and nationalists.” By 1950, however, there was “hardly any trace of it.” Instead, the ROK was “acting as a bulwark of peace” at the 38th parallel, and “the central figures in charge of national defense are mostly graduates of the former Military College of Japan.” Korea and Japan were “destined to go hand in hand, to live and let live,” and thus bad feelings should be “cast overboard.” The current problem, Pak said, was the unfortunate one that “an economic unity is lacking whereas in prewar days Japan, Manchuria, Korea, and Formosa economically combined to make an organic whole.” Pak Hung-sik was the embodiment of the Japanese colonial idea—having been born a Korean his only unfortunate, but not insurmountable, fate. For Pak and Kim Il Sung, the 1930s were the beginning: hugely expanded business opportunities for Pak (the founder of Seoul’s Hwashin department store, its first on the American model), a decade

 

 

of unimaginably harsh struggle for Kim. After this beginning, a civil war between the young leaders of Korea who chose to collaborate with or to resist Japan in the 1930s was entirely conceivable, and probably inevitable. War came on the last weekend in June 1950, a weekend about which much still remains to be learned. It is now clear from Soviet documents that Pyongyang had made a decision to escalate the civil conflict to the level of conventional warfare many months before June 1950, having tired of the inconclusive guerrilla struggle in the south, and perhaps hoping to seize on a southern provocation like many that occurred in 1949, thus to settle the hash of the Rhee regime. Maturing clandestine American plans to launch a coup d’état against Chiang Kai-shek on Taiwan complicated this same weekend; Dean Rusk met with several Chinese at the Plaza hotel in New York on the evening of June 23, 1950, hoping that they would form a government to replace Chiang’s regime, which was threatened by an impending invasion from the Chinese Communists. He and Acheson wanted a reliable leader in Taipei, so that their secret desire to keep the island separate from mainland control would field a government that Truman could justify supporting. 6 The fighting on Ongjin began around 3 or 4 A.M. on June 25; initial intelligence reports were inconclusive as to who started it. Later on, attacking elements were said to be from the 3rd Brigade of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) Border Constabulary, joined at 5:30 A.M. by the formidable 6th Division. At about the same time, according to the American official history, KPA forces at the parallel south of Chorwon assaulted the 1st Regiment of the ROKA 7th Division, dealing it heavy casualties; it gave way and the 3rd and 4th KPA divisions, with an armored brigade, crashed through and began a daunting march toward Seoul. South Korean sources asserted, however, that elements of the 17th Regiment had counterattacked on the Ongjin Peninsula and were in possession of Haeju city, the only important point north of the 38th parallel claimed to have been taken by ROK forces. Roy Appleman, America’s official historian of the war, relied on James Hausman’s heavily sanitized account of the war’s start on the Ongjin Peninsula. Hausman later told a Thames Television documentary crew that his good friend Paek In-yop (brother to Paek Son-yop) was the commander on Ongjin, “and

 

 

when the war broke out as you know he was there not only defending his line but counterattacking” (that is, across the parallel). As for “those who think that the South may have started this war,” Hausman went on, “I think … I think they’re wrong.” Another Thames interviewee, Col. James Peach, an Australian who was with the UN observer group, reported that the Ongjin commander, Paek, was “a get-going sort of chap” who led the “twin-tiger” 17th Regimental Combat Team: “I, I never quite knew what went on. There’s a bit of a mystery still about Haeju, I think it might have been Paek and his merry men, the 17th Regiment, attacking it … We didn’t hear anything about it until the war had been going for a while, and I never quite knew what went on. It’s been said that they attacked there and that the North Koreans responded.” Peach went on to say that he didn’t think this version held much water. (Note also that if the South Koreans attack, it is “Paek and his merry men”; when the North Koreans do the same, it is heinous aggression.) 7 Whether 17th Regiment soldiers may have occupied Haeju on June 25, or even initiated the fighting on Ongjin, is still inconclusive, with the existing evidence pointing both ways. There is no evidence, however, to back up the North’s claim that the South launched a general invasion; at worst there may have been a small assault across the parallel, as happened many times in 1949. Whatever transpired, the North met it with a full invasion. South of the attacking KPA units was the ROK 7th Division, headquartered at the critical invasion-route town of Uijongbu; it had not committed its forces to battle even by the morning of June 26, probably because it was waiting to be reinforced by the 2nd Division, which had entrained northward from Taejon. When the 2nd Division arrived later that day, it collapsed and the troops panicked. It was through this gaping hole in the Uijongbu corridor that North Korean troops poured on the afternoon and evening of June 26, thus jeopardizing the capital. An American official on the scene later wrote that “the failure of the 2nd Division to fight” was the main reason for the quick loss of Seoul. South Korean units mutinied or fled before the oncoming Northern troops for many reasons, including their relative lack of firepower, their poor training, their officers who had served Japan, and ultimately the unpopularity of the Rhee government—which had nearly been voted out by a moderate coalition in

 

 

reasonably free elections held on May 30, 1950. President Rhee tried to leave the city with his top officials as early as Sunday evening, and on June 27 the entire ROK Army headquarters relocated south of Seoul, without telling their American allies. That left troops engaging the enemy north of Seoul without communications, and panicked both the troops and the civilian population. The next day most ROK divisions followed suit, withdrawing to the south of the capital, and Gen. “Fatty” Chae famously and egregiously blew the major Han River bridge without warning, killing hundreds who were crossing it. Later that day President Rhee took off southward in his special train. During the battle for Taejon he vowed to stay there and fight to the death, but soon he was back on his train, headed for the southwestern port of Mokpo, thence by naval launch to Pusan, where he would remain inside the defensive perimeter.8 Military morale evaporated and civilians panicked. Seoul fell to a Northern invasion force of about 37,000 troops. By month’s end fully half of the ROKA soldiers were dead, captured, or missing. Only two divisions had their equipment and weapons, all the rest (about 70 percent of the total) having been left in place or lost on the battlefield. The quick and virtually complete collapse of resistance in the South energized the United States to enter the war in force. Secretary of State Dean Acheson dominated the decision making, which soon committed American air and ground forces to the fight. On the night of June 24 (Washington time), Acheson decided to take the Korean question to the UN, before he had notified President Truman of the fighting; he then told Truman there was no need to have him back in Washington until the next day. At emergency White House meetings on the evening of June 25, Acheson argued for increased military aid to the ROK, U.S. Air Force cover for the evacuation of Americans, and the interposition of the Seventh Fleet between Taiwan and the China mainland—thus obviating a Communist invasion of the island, dividing China and leaving Taiwan governed by the Republic of China even today. On the afternoon of June 26 Acheson labored alone on the fundamental decisions committing American air and naval power to the Korean War, which were approved by the White House that evening. Thus the decision to intervene in force was Acheson’s decision, supported

 

 

by the president but taken before United Nations, Pentagon, or congressional approval. His reasoning had little to do with Korea’s strategic value, and everything to do with American prestige and political economy: “prestige is the shadow cast by power,” he once said, and the North Koreans had challenged it; American credibility was therefore at stake. South Korea was also essential to Japan’s industrial revival, Acheson thought, as part of his “great crescent” strategy linking northeast Asia with the Middle East (and which we discuss later on). George Kennan, who supported the June decisions, recalled from notes taken at the time that Acheson broke off collegial discussions on the afternoon of June 26: He wanted time to be alone and to dictate. We were called in [three hours later] and he read to us a paper he had produced, which was the first draft of the statement finally issued by the President, and which was not significantly changed by the time it finally appeared, the following day … the course actually taken by this Government was not something pressed upon [Acheson] by the military leaders, but rather something arrived at by himself, in solitary deliberation. Acheson later concurred with Kennan, saying, “that’s as I recall it.” Kennan noted that the decisions of June 26 were the key ones; Acheson agreed that they were taken before congressional or UN consultations (“it wasn’t until 3:00 in the afternoon [on June 27] that the U.N. asked us to do what we said we were going to … in the morning”). 9 On this same summer Saturday evening the Soviet ambassador to the UN, Adam Malik, was taking his ease on Long Island rather than wielding his much used and abused veto on the Security Council, a boycott conducted ostensibly because the UN had refused to admit China. He was planning to return to Moscow for consultations on July 6.10 The longtime Soviet foreign minister, Andrei Gromyko, later told Dean Rusk that on Saturday night Malik instantly wired Moscow for instructions, and for the first time ever in its experience got

 

 

back a message direct from Generalissimo Stalin: nyet, do not attend. 11 Stalin’s reasons are not known, but he may have hoped to facilitate the entry of U.S. forces into a peripheral area, thus to waste blood and treasure, or perhaps he hoped that American dominance of the UN would destroy the perceived universality of the international body. Acheson’s June 25–26 decisions prefigured the commitment of American ground forces, which came in the early hours of June 30. The Joint Chiefs of Staff remained “extremely reluctant” to commit infantry troops to the fighting right up to June 30, and were not consulted when Truman made his decision. They were reticent both because Korea was a strategic cul-de-sac and perhaps a trap in the global struggle with Moscow, and because the total armed strength of the U.S. Army was 593,167, with an additional 75,370 in the Marines. North Korea alone was capable of mobilizing upward of 200,000 combat soldiers in the summer of 1950, quite apart from the immense manpower reserve of China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA). The immediate precipitating factor for the decision to dispatch U.S. ground forces was MacArthur’s conclusion, after visiting the front lines, that the ROK Army had mostly ceased to fight. From the start of the war and throughout the summer and fall of 1950, Korean units ceased to exist, lacked equipment to fight the North Koreans, or proved unable to hold the lines in their sectors. Most veterans of the first two years of the war thought South Koreans “did no fighting worthy of the name,” they just broke and ran. (By the summer of 1951 the ROKA had lost enough matériel to outfit ten divisions, according to Gen. Matthew B. Ridgway, and still needed “thorough training and equipment and instruction on all levels.”) An American colonel told the British journalist Philip Knightly, “South Koreans and North Koreans are identical. Why then do North Koreans fight like tigers and South Koreans run like sheep?” The Morse code “HA” was used all over the front to signal that South Korean forces were “hauling ass.” ROKA officers exploited their own men, and beat them mercilessly for infractions. One GI observed an officer execute a man for going AWOL, shooting him in the back of the head and kicking him into a grave. The man had a wife and three children. But racism also infected GI views of their Korean enemy and ally. Most Americans, a veteran remembered, “had an

 

 

ingrained prejudice against Koreans” that made any kind of empathy or understanding difficult. “They hated Koreans by reflex action.” It was only after truce talks began in 1951 that the ROKA had the time to develop, however slowly, its fighting temper. 12 But the Americans also had no idea that they would be fighting against truly effective troops, a disastrous misjudgment of the Korean enemy that began right at the top, on the day the war began. “I can handle it with one arm tied behind my back,” MacArthur said; the next day he remarked to John Foster Dulles that if he could only put the 1st Cavalry Division into Korea, “why, heavens, you’d see these fellows scuttle up to the Manchurian border so quick, you would see no more of them.” At first MacArthur wanted an American regimental combat team, then two divisions. Within a week, however, he cabled Washington that only a quarter of the ROKA troops could even be located, and that the KPA was “operating under excellent top level guidance and had demonstrated superior command of strategic and tactical principles.” By the beginning of July he wanted a minimum of 30,000 American combat soldiers, meaning more than four infantry divisions, three tank battalions, and assorted artillery; a week later he asked for eight divisions. 13 Misjudgments also grew out of the ubiquitous racism of whites coming from a segregated American society, where Koreans were “people of color” subjected to apartheid-like restrictions (they drank from “colored” fountains in Virginia, could not marry Caucasians in other southern states, and could not own property in many western states). Consider the judgment of the respected military editor of The New York Times, Hanson Baldwin, three weeks after the war began: We are facing an army of barbarians in Korea, but they are barbarians as trained, as relentless, as reckless of life, and as skilled in the tactics of the kind of war they fight as the hordes of Genghis Khan.… They have taken a leaf from the Nazi book of blitzkrieg and are employing all the weapons of fear and terror. Chinese Communists were reported to have joined the fighting, he erred in saying, and not far behind might be “Mongolians, Soviet Asiatics and a variety of

 

 

races”—some of “the most primitive of peoples.” Elsewhere Baldwin likened the Koreans to invading locusts; he ended by recommending that Americans be given “more realistic training to meet the barbarian discipline of the armored horde.”14 A few days later Baldwin remarked that to the Korean, life is cheap: “behind him stand the hordes of Asia. Ahead of him lies the hope of loot.” What else “brings him shrieking on,” what else explains his “fanatical determination”?15 Mongolians, Asiatics, Nazis, locusts, primitives, hordes, thieves—one would think Baldwin had exhausted his bag of bigotry to capture a people invading their homeland and defending it against the world’s most powerful army. But he came up with another way to deal with “the problem of the convinced fanatic”: In their extensive war against Russian partisans, the Germans found that the only answer to guerrillas … was “to win friends and influence people” among the civilian population. The actual pacification of the country means just that. (A pacification, perhaps, like that in the Ukraine.) Somewhat uncomfortable with North Korean indignation about “women and children slain by American bombs,” Baldwin went on to say that Koreans must understand that “we do not come merely to bring devastation.” Americans must convince “these simple, primitive, and barbaric peoples … that we—not the Communists—are their friends.”16 Now hear the chief counsel for war crimes at the Nuremberg Trials, Telford Taylor: The traditions and practices of warfare in the Orient are not identical with those that have developed in the Occident … individual lives are not valued so highly in Eastern mores. And it is totally unrealistic of us to expect the individual Korean soldier … to follow our most elevated precepts of warfare.17 In the summer months of 1950 the Korean People’s Army pushed

 

 

southward with dramatic success, with one humiliating defeat after another for American forces. An army that had bested Germany and Japan found its back pressed to the wall by what it thought was a hastily assembled peasant military, ill-equipped and, worse, said to be doing the bidding of a foreign imperial power. By the end of July, American and ROK forces outnumbered the KPA along the front, 92,000 to 70,000 (47,000 were Americans), but in spite of this, the retreat continued. In early August, however, the 1st Marine Brigade went into action and finally halted the KPA advance. The front did not change much from then until the end of August. The fighting stabilized at what came to be called the Pusan Perimeter, an eighty-by-fifty-mile right-angled front. Kim Il Sung later said that the plan was to win the war for the South in one month, and by the end of July he had nearly done so. This perimeter had its northern anchor on the coast around Pohang, its southeastern anchor in the coastal Chinju-Masan region, and its center just above the major city of Taegu. The latter became a symbol of the American determination to stanch the KPA’s advance; but it was Pohang in the northeast that was probably the key to stopping the KPA from occupying Pusan and unifying the peninsula. Roy Appleman wrote that the “major tactical mistake” of the North Koreans was not to press their advantage on the northeast coastal road. The KPA 5th Division worried too much about covering its flanks, instead of moving quickly on Pohang and thence combining with the 6th Division marching from the southeast to menace Pusan. Northern forces had paused south of the capital for nearly a week before restarting a dual-pincer, tank-led blitzkrieg to the southwest and southeast. This pause has caused some historians to wonder if the initial thrust was aimed mainly at Seoul, the nerve center of the South, hoping to hold it and watch the Rhee regime collapse; in any case the pause gave vital time to MacArthur to organize a defensive line in the southeast. This perimeter became the place where American power finally stiffened. North Korea had brought its forces along the perimeter to 98,000, and thousands of guerrillas, including many women, were active in the fighting. In August Gen. John H. Church, commander of the 24th Infantry Division and a veteran of the Anzio campaign, concluded that Korea was not like the European battles of World War II: “It’s an entirely different kind of warfare,

 

 

this is really guerrilla warfare.” It was “essentially a guerrilla war over rugged territory,” according to British sources; American troops were “constantly exposed to the threat of infiltration by guerrillas sweeping down from the hills into and behind its positions.” 18 Virtually any village suspected of harboring or supporting guerrillas was burned to the ground, usually from the air. Furthermore, cities and towns thought to be leftist in inclination were simply emptied of their population through forced evacuations. All but 10 percent of civilians were moved out of Sunchon, Masan was emptied of tens of thousands of citizens, “all civilians” were moved out of Yechon. Amid a threat that “the leftists and Fifth column, living in Taegu, are conspiring to create a big disturbance,” and with the perimeter under great strain, vast numbers of Taegu citizens were evacuated for fear of “an uprising.” By mid-August, many of these removed citizens were concentrated on islands near Pusan, forbidden to leave.19 Still, by this time the North Koreans were badly outnumbered. MacArthur had succeeded in committing most of the battle-ready divisions in the entire American armed forces to the Korean fighting; by September 8 all available combat-trained army units had been dispatched to Korea except for the 82nd Airborne Division. Although many of these units were with the impending Inchon amphibious operation, some 83,000 American soldiers and another 57,000 South Korean and British faced the North Koreans along the front. By this time the Americans had five times as many tanks as the KPA, their artillery was vastly superior, and they had complete control of the air since the early days of the war. At the end of August North Korean forces launched their last major offensive along the perimeter, making “startling gains” over the next two weeks, which severely strained the UN lines. On August 28, Gen. Pang Ho-san ordered his troops to take Masan and Pusan in the next few days; three KPA battalions succeeded in crossing the Naktong River in the central sector, Pohang and Chinju were lost, and the perimeter was “near the breaking point” with KPA forces pressing on Kyongju, Masan, and Taegu. U.S. commanders relocated Eighth Army headquarters from Taegu to Pusan, and prominent South Koreans began leaving Pusan for Tsushima. On September 9, Kim Il Sung said the war had

 

 

reached an “extremely harsh, decisive stage,” with the enemy being pressed on three fronts; two days later U.S. commanders reported that the frontline situation was the most dangerous since the perimeter had been established. “After two weeks of the heaviest fighting of the war,” Appleman wrote, UN forces “had just barely turned back the great North Korean offensive.” American casualties were the highest of the war to date, totaling 20,000, with 4,280 dead, by September 15. In mid-September 1950, General MacArthur masterminded his last hurrah, a tactically brilliant amphibious landing at Inchon that brought American armed forces back to Seoul five years after they first set foot on Korean soil. Inchon Harbor has treacherous tides that can easily ground a flotilla of ships if they choose the wrong time, but the American passage through the shifting bays and flats was flawless. Adm. Arthur Dewey Struble, the navy’s crack amphibious expert who led the World War II landing operations at Leyte in the Philippines and who directed the naval operations off Omaha Beach during the Normandy invasion, commanded an enormous fleet of 270 ships in the Inchon operations, depositing eighty thousand marines with hardly a loss. The marines landed mostly unopposed, but then slogged through a deadly gauntlet before Seoul finally fell at the end of September. Against this the North Koreans could do nothing; Kim Il Sung placed about two thousand poorly trained troops to defend the harbor, and for unknown reasons, failed to mine the port. They were not surprised by the invasion, as the American mythology has it, but could not resist it and so began what their historians call euphemistically “the great strategic retreat.” Regular North Korean forces continued pulling back in the face of the American decision to launch attacks across the parallel in early October, luring the enemy in deep, influencing MacArthur to split his forces into two huge columns against much contrary advice, and imploring their Chinese allies to come to their aid. Captured documents show that the North made a critical decision to fight the Americans at key points to cover a general withdrawal of their forces; a captured notebook quoted Pak Ki-song, chief of political intelligence in the KPA 8th Division: The main force of the enemy still remained intact, not having been fully

 

 

damaged. When they were not fully aware of the power of our forces, they pushed their infantry far forward … to the Yalu River. This indicated that they underestimated us. All these conditions were favorable to lure them near. Another KPA officer captured at the time of the joint Sino-Korean offensive said that until late November, the KPA had been “continuously withdrawing”: One may think that going down all the way to the Pusan perimeter and then withdrawing all the way to the Yalu River was a complete defeat. But that is not so. That was a planned withdrawal. We withdrew because we knew that UN troops would follow us up here, and that they would spread their troops thinly all over the vast area. Now, the time has come for us to envelop these troops and annihilate them. He said that combined KPA and Chinese forces striking from the front would be aided by “eight strong corps which will harass and attack the enemy from the rear.”20 Although large numbers of foot-soldiers were captured in MacArthur’s trap, most officers escaped and led large units back through the mountains and into the North. Many guerrillas also escaped into mountainous areas of the South, and became a major problem for American forces in the winter of 1950–51. (In early 1951 KPA forces had moved back as far south as Andong and Sangju in North Kyongsang province to envelop UN troops.) Shortly after the Inchon landing, a document was retrieved giving Kim Il Sung’s epitaph on the southern fighting: “The original plan was to end the war in a month,” he said, but “we could not stamp out four American divisions.” The units that had captured Seoul disobeyed orders by not marching southward promptly, thereby giving “a breathing spell” to the Americans. From the beginning, “our primary enemy was the American soldiers,” but he acknowledged that “we were taken by surprise when United Nations troops and the American Air Force and Navy moved in.” This suggests that Kim anticipated

 

 

the involvement of American ground forces (probably drawn from U.S. troops stationed in Japan), but not in such size, and not with air and naval units—a curious oversight, unless the Koreans thought that Soviet air and naval power would either deter or confront their American counterparts. It would have been hard for anyone, including the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to imagine that the vast majority of American battle-ready infantry would be transferred around the globe to this small peninsula, of seeming marginal import to U.S. global strategy. The war for the South left 111,000 South Koreans killed, 106,000 wounded, and 57,000 missing; 314,000 homes had been destroyed, 244,000 damaged. American casualties totaled 6,954 dead, 13,659 wounded, and 3,877 missing in action. North Korean military casualties are not known with any certainty, but probably totaled at least 50,000. “A GLUTOF CHINAMEN”: THE MARCH NORTH The American-led forces might have reestablished the 38th parallel and called the war a success for the containment doctrine. It would have been a surgically precise intervention, short but arduous, a sweet and telling defeat for the Communists and clear evidence of American credibility. No one could ever have taken this victory away from Harry Truman. But as the war proceeded during the summer, nearly all of Truman’s high advisers decided that the chance had come not only to contain Communist aggression, but to roll it back. Truman approved a march north toward the end of August; the evidence is clear that the decision to invade the North was made in Washington, not in Tokyo. The historian D. Clayton James remarked that this decision “must rank in quixotism with the Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961,” but he thinks it resulted from “groupthink” in Washington. Not so: it was the logical follow-on to the debate over containment and rollback bubbling along in the Truman administration for more than a year. But James is right that civilian centrality—Acheson’s centrality—in the key decisions, first to defend the South and then to invade the North, separated Korea dramatically from the shared and collegial civil-military decision making of World War II. 21

 

 

The decision was embodied in NSC document number 81, written mostly by Dean Rusk, which authorized MacArthur to move into North Korea if there were no Soviet or Chinese threats to intervene. It explicitly called for “a roll-back” of the North Korean regime; war dispatches routinely referred to the “liberated areas” in the North. At first he was told to use only Korean units in operations near the Chinese border, but soon the JCS told MacArthur to feel unhindered. MacArthur was correct in telling senators in 1951 that the crossing of the parallel “had the most complete and absolute approval of every section of the American government,” if we grant him the license of mild exaggeration owed to a person who had been badly blindsided by Truman-aligned reconstructions of history. Kim Il Sung crossed the five-year-old 38th parallel, not an international boundary like that between Iraq and Kuwait, or Germany and Poland; instead it bisected a nation that had a rare and well-recognized unitary existence going back to antiquity. The counter-logic implied by saying “Koreans invade Korea” disrupts the received wisdom or renders a logical reconstruction of the official American position impossible. In the most influential American book on justice in war, Michael Walzer defends the Truman administration’s initial intervention with the following argument: the U.S. response to North Korean aggression was correct because Truman took the problem to the United Nations, which was the legitimate organ of world decision and opinion, and thus global justice (“it was the crime of the aggressor to challenge individual and communal rights”). In justifying the American invasion of North Korea, however, the U.S. ambassador to the UN called the 38th parallel “an imaginary line.” Walzer then comments, “I will leave aside the odd notion that the 38th parallel was an imaginary line (how then did we recognize the initial aggression?).” Walzer bypasses this mouthful without further thought, because it is the essence of his argument that Truman was right to defend the 38th parallel as an international boundary—that was “the initial aggression.” 22 Why is it aggression when Koreans cross the 38th parallel, but imaginary when Americans do the same thing?

 

 

CHINA IS NEAR In September and October the general conclusion of all American intelligence agencies was that China would not come into the war. On September 20 the CIA envisioned the possibility that Chinese “volunteers” might enter the fighting, and a month later it noted “a number of reports” that Manchurian units might be sent to Korea. However, “the odds are that Communist China, like the USSR, will not openly intervene in North Korea.” On November 1, Gen. Walter Bedell Smith, director of the CIA, accurately wrote that the Chinese “probably genuinely fear an invasion of Manchuria,” and that they would seek to establish a cordon sanitaire for border security “regardless of the increased risk of general war.” But on November 24 as MacArthur lunged toward the Yalu River border, the CIA still found insufficient evidence to suggest a Chinese plan for “major offensive operations.” Intelligence agencies did not lack information; instead the problem resided at the level of assumptions and presuppositions: Moscow wouldn’t intervene because it would fear global war; Beijing wouldn’t either, because Moscow dictated to its leaders. The Russians and the Chinese had a division of labor before the war started: Russian military advisers were in North Korea and Chinese military advisers were in North Vietnam in 1950. Both worked with the respective armies on strategic planning, logistics, army organization, and political controls. While the Koreans prepared their invasion, the Vietnamese “were planning a full-scale assault on the French forces along the Sino-Vietnamese border.”23 This was less a conscious or planned division of labor than a result of Soviet occupation of North Korea and Chinese occupation of northern Vietnam after World War II, and connections between Mao and Ho Chi Minh during the Yanan period. A Chinese military intelligence group arrived in Pyongyang within three weeks of the war’s start, and as early as August 4 Mao considered intervening in Korea: if the Americans were to invade the North “we must therefore come to [North] Korea’s aid and intervene in the name of a volunteer army.” Around the time of the Inchon landing a high North Korean officer, Pak Il-yu, requested Chinese military assistance, and then on October 1 Kim Il Sung held an

 

 

emergency meeting with the Chinese ambassador to plead that the PLA 13th Army Corps quickly cross the Yalu River. By then Chinese intervention was certain, the only question was the timing: on September 30 Mao told Stalin “we have decided” to send as many as twelve infantry divisions. The Kremlin, however, fretted that a big Chinese offensive against the Americans might precipitate a world war, and backed off from a previous commitment to provide airpower to protect China’s coasts. China went ahead regardless, which apparently surprised Stalin.24 North Korean and Chinese documents make clear that China did not enter the war purely as a defensive measure to protect its border, as has long been known, but also because Mao determined early in the war that should the North Koreans falter, China had an obligation to come to their aid because of the sacrifice of so many Koreans in the Chinese revolution, the anti-Japanese resistance, and the Chinese civil war. The PRC’s Foreign Affairs Ministry referred to China’s obligations to “the Korean people who have stood on our side during the past decades.” The October 1 crossing of the 38th parallel caused Mao a sleepless night, but he made the lone decision to intervene, and informed Stalin of his decision the next day. As if some telepathy were at work, MacArthur told the Department of the Army on the same day that “the field of our military operations is limited only by military exigencies and the international boundaries of Korea. The so-called 38th Parallel, accordingly, is not a factor.” 25 In other words, NSC 81, the rollback strategy itself, caused the Chinese intervention, and not the subsequent arrival of American troops at the Yalu River. Chinese forces attacked in late October, bloodied many American troops, and then disappeared. It is likely that the Chinese hoped this would suffice to stop the American march to the Yalu, perhaps at the narrow neck of the peninsula above Pyongyang. But this also would leave the DPRK as a small, rump regime. Around this time Kim Il Sung arrived in Beijing on an armored train, moving under cover of darkness and blanketed security. He was accompanied by three other uniformed Koreans, and China’s northeast leader, Kao Kang. High PRC leaders, including Chou En-lai and Nieh Jung-chen (the two besides Mao most closely linked to the Korean decision), were not seen in Beijing in the same period, reappearing for the funeral of Jen Pi-shih on October 27.26 But the

 

 

Americans resumed their advance, as did the North Korean–Chinese strategy of luring them deep into the interior of North Korea, thus to stretch their supply lines, wait for winter, and gain time for a dramatic reversal on the battlefield. MacArthur and his G-2 chief, Charles Willoughby, trusted only themselves, and had an intuitive approach to intelligence that mingled the hard facts of enemy capability with hunches about the enemy’s presumed ethnic and racial qualities (“Chinamen can’t fight”). This combined with MacArthur’s “personal infallibility theory of intelligence,” in which he “created his own intelligence organization, interpreted its results and acted upon his own analysis.” 27 When the CIA was formed it threatened MacArthur’s exclusive intelligence theater in the Pacific and J. Edgar Hoover’s in Latin America. MacArthur and Willoughby thus continued the “interdiction” that they practiced against the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in the Pacific War. Although the CIA did function in Japan and Korea before June 1950, operatives had to either get permission from Willoughby or hide themselves from MacArthur’s G-2 (as well as the enemy target). Effective liaison in the handling of information barely existed. At the late date of March 1950 some minimal cooperation ensued when Gen. J. Lawton Collins of the JCS asked that MacArthur share with them Willoughby’s reports on China and areas near to it. On Thanksgiving Day (November 23) the troops in the field had turkey dinners with all the trimmings—shrimp cocktail, mashed potatoes, dressing, cranberry sauce, pumpkin pie. They did not know that thousands of Chinese soldiers surrounded them, carrying “a bag of millet meal” and wearing tennis shoes at 30°F below zero. (The North Koreans and Chinese had “one man back to support one man forward,” Thompson wrote; the Americans had nine back and one forward—and “scores of tins, of candy, Coca-cola, and toilet supplies.”) 28 The next day MacArthur launched his euphemistically titled “reconnaissance in force,” a general offensive all along the battle line. He described it as a “massive compression and envelopment,” a “pincer” movement to trap remaining KPA forces. Once again American and South Korean forces were able to run north unimpeded. The offensive rolled forward for three days against little or no resistance, with ROK units succeeding in entering the northeastern industrial city of Chongjin. MacArthur launched the marines toward the Changjin Reservoir

 

 

(known by its Japanese name, Chosin, in the American literature) and sent the 7th Division north of the Unggi River, in spite of temperatures as low as 22 degrees below zero. Within a week the 7th Division had secured Kim Il Sung’s heartland of Kapsan, and reached Hyesan on the Yalu River against no resistance.

Gen. Douglas MacArthur surveys Korea from The Bataan on the eve of the “reconnaissance in force.” U.S. National Archives Finally CIA daily reports caught the pattern of enemy rearward displacement, arguing that such withdrawals had in the past preceded offensive action, and noting warily that there were “large, coordinated and well-organized guerrilla forces in the rear area” behind the Allied forces, along with guerrilla

 

 

occupation of “substantial areas in southwest Korea.” But as late as November 20 the estimates were still mixed, with some arguing that the Communists were simply withdrawing to better defensive points, and others that the pattern of “giving ground invariably in face of UN units moving northward” merely meant “a delaying action,” not preparation for all-out assault. Lost amid the hoopla of victory by Christmas were reports from reconnaissance pilots that long columns of enemy troops were “swarming all over the countryside”—not to mention the retrieval of Chinese POWs from six different armies.

American soldiers enjoy Thanksgiving dinner on the banks of the Yalu, November 23, 1950. U.S. National Archives Strong enemy attacks began on November 27, through a “deep envelopment” that chopped allied troops to pieces. The 1st Marine Division was pinned down at the Changjin Reservoir, the ROK II Corps collapsed again, and within two days a general withdrawal ensued. On December 4 the JCS cabled MacArthur that “the preservation of your forces is now the primary consideration”—that is, the utterly overexposed core of the entire American

 

 

expeditionary force, now battered and surrounded. Two days later Communist forces occupied Pyongyang, and the day after that the allied front was only twenty miles north of the parallel at its northernmost point. The combined Sino-Korean offensive cleared North Korea of enemy troops in little more than two weeks from its inception. Gen. Edward Almond wrote that “we are having a glut of Chinamen”; he hoped he would have the chance later “to give these yellow bastards what is coming to them.” By the end of December, Seoul was about to fall once again, to a Sino-Korean offensive launched on New Year’s Eve. 29 MacArthur had described the first Sino-Korean feint as “one of the most offensive acts of international lawlessness of historic record”; the KPA, he told Washington, was completely defeated, having suffered 335,000 casualties with no forces left. Thus, “a new and fresh [Chinese] army now faces us.” (In fact, KPA forces far outnumbered Chinese at this point.) Then, when large Chinese units entered the fighting at the end of November, he radioed back that he faced “the entire Chinese nation in an undeclared war.” All the Chinese? Did he mean those famous “Chinese hordes”? There weren’t any, Reginald Thompson rightly said; in late 1950 the total of enemy forces in the North never outnumbered those of the UN, even though MacArthur’s headquarters counted eighteen Chinese divisions (somehow a few hundred POWs had fortuitously managed to come from each and every one of them).30 The Chinese just exploited night maneuvers, deft feints, unnerving bugles and whistles, to make UN soldiers think they were surrounded. As soon as Chinese troops intervened in force, MacArthur ordered that a wasteland be created between the war front and the Yalu River border, destroying from the air every “installation, factory, city, and village” over thousands of square miles of North Korean territory. As a British air attaché at MacArthur’s headquarters put it, except for the city of Najin near the Soviet border and the Yalu River dams, MacArthur’s orders were “to destroy every means of communication and every installation and factories and cities and villages. This destruction is to start at the Manchurian border and to progress south.”31 This terrible swath of destruction, targeting every village in its path, followed Chinese forces right into South Korea. Soon George Barrett of The New

 

 

York Times found “a macabre tribute to the totality of modern war” in a village north of Anyang: The inhabitants throughout the village and in the fields were caught and killed and kept the exact postures they held when the napalm struck—a man about to get on his bicycle, fifty boys and girls playing in an orphanage, a housewife strangely unmarked, holding in her hand a page torn from a Sears-Roebuck catalogue crayoned at Mail Order No. 3,811,294 for a $2.98 “bewitching bed jacket—coral.” Secretary of State Dean Acheson wanted censorship authorities notified about this kind of “sensationalized reporting,” so it could be stopped.32 On November 30 Truman also rattled the atomic bomb at a news conference, saying the United States might use any weapon in its arsenal to hold back the Chinese; this got even Stalin worried. According to a high official in the KGB at the time, Stalin expected global war as a result of the American defeat in northern Korea; fearing the consequences, he favored allowing the United States to occupy all of Korea: “So what?” Stalin said. “Let the United States of America be our neighbors in the Far East.… We are not ready to fight.” Unlike Stalin the Chinese were ready—but only to fight back down to the middle of the peninsula, rather than to start World War III. Gen. Matthew Ridgway’s astute battlefield generalship eventually stiffened the allied lines below Seoul, and by the end of January he led gallant fights back northward to the Han River, opposite the capital. After more weeks of hard fighting, UN forces recaptured Seoul, and in early April, American forces crossed the 38th parallel again. Later that month the last major Chinese offensive was turned back, and by the late spring of 1951 the fighting stabilized along lines similar to those that today mark the Korean demilitarized zone, with UN forces in occupation north of the parallel on the eastern side, and Sino–North Korean forces occupying swatches of land south of the parallel on the western side. That was about where the war ended after tortuous peace negotiations and another two years of bloody fighting (most of it positional, trench warfare reminiscent of World War I).

 

 

THE SUSPENSION OF THE WAR On June 23, 1951, the Soviet UN representative, Adam Malik, proposed that discussions get started between the belligerents to arrange for a cease-fire. Truman agreed, suggesting that representatives find a suitable place to meet, which turned out to be the ancient Korean capital at Kaesong, bisected by the 38th parallel. Truce talks began on July 10, led initially by Vice Adm. C. Turner Joy for the UN side, and Lt. Gen. Nam Il of North Korea. The talks dragged on interminably, with several suspensions and a removal of the truce site to the village of Panmunjom (where it remains today). Proper and fair demarcation of each side’s military lines caused endless haggling, but the key issue that drew out the negotiations was the disposition of huge numbers of prisoners of war on all sides. The critical issue was freedom of choice in regard to repatriation, introduced by the United States in January 1952; about one third of North Korean POWs and a much larger percentage of Chinese POWs did not want to return to Communist control. Meanwhile South Korea refused to sign any armistice that would keep Korea divided, and in mid-June 1953, Syngman Rhee abruptly released some 25,000 POWs—leading the United States to develop plans (“Operation Everready”) to remove Rhee in a coup d’état, should he try to disrupt the armistice agreement again. As usual, though, Rhee got his way: the Eisenhower administration bribed him with promises of a postwar defense treaty and enormous amounts of “aid”—and even then he refused to sign the armistice.

 

 

The UN negotiating team. Paek Son-yop is in the front row. U.S. National Archives The North Koreans had abused many American and allied POWs, harshly depriving them of food and especially sleep, and subjecting many to political thought reform that was decried as “brainwashing” in the United States. Meanwhile, in spite of endless American statements of their allegiance to individual rights, human dignity, and the Geneva convention, a virtual war ensued in the South’s camps, as pro-North, pro-South, pro-China, and pro-Taiwan POW groups fought with one another, and for the allegiance of other POWs. Against American presuppositions, the Communists were more discriminating in the violence they dealt out to POWs, whereas the South routinely murdered captives before they could become POWs and tortured and mentally tormented the ones they let live. Right-wing youth groups—the familiar ones from the turmoil of the 1940s—tried to organize anti-Communist prisoners but generally dealt in haphazard mayhem. Both sides sought to “convert” POWs politically, but the Communists had a positive message and genuinely seemed to

 

 

believe in what they said, whereas youth group leaders simply demanded automatic obedience (one of the best sources for all this remains General Dean’s Story). Even after years in the camps, the ROK put liberated POWs through six more months of “reeducation” before dismissing them to their families. Sixty individuals remained detained because they had not yet shed their Communist “brainwashing.” 33

North Korean head negotiator Nam Il at Panmunjom. U.S. National Archives The POW issue was finally settled on June 8, 1953, when the Communist side agreed to place POWs who refused repatriation under the control of the Neutral Nations’ Supervisory Commission for three months; at the end of this period those who still refused repatriation would be set free. Two final and costly Communist offensives in June and July sought to gain more ground but failed, and the U.S. Air Force hit huge irrigation dams that provided water for 75 percent of the North’s food production. On June 20, 1953, The New York Times announced the execution of the accused Soviet spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg at Sing Sing prison; in the fine print of daily war coverage the U.S. Air Force stated that its planes bombed dams at Kusong and Toksan in North Korea, and in

 

 

even finer print the North Korean radio acknowledged “great damage” to these large reservoirs. Two days later the Times reported that the State Department had banned several hundred American books from overseas libraries of the U.S. Information Service—including Dashiell Hammett’s The Maltese Falcon. The fighting could have come to an end much earlier, but both Moscow and Washington had interests in keeping it going since Korea no longer threatened to erupt into general war. Some historians think that Stalin’s death in March 1953 and the Eisenhower administration’s escalation of the air war in May and June finally brought the hot war to a conclusion, while others argue that it easily could have ended in 1951. But as the war dragged on, the United States also brandished the biggest weapons in its arsenal. On May 26, 1953, The New York Times featured a story on the first atomic shell shot from a cannon, which exploded at French Flat, Nevada, with ten-kiloton force (half the Hiroshima yield). A few days later came the “mightiest atom blast” ever exploded at the Nevada test site; some speculated that it might have been a hydrogen bomb. Formerly secret materials illustrate that in May and June 1953 the Eisenhower administration sought to show that it would stop at nothing to bring the war to a close. In mid-May Ike told the National Security Council that using nukes in Korea would be cheaper than conventional weaponry, and a few days later the Joint Chiefs recommended launching nuclear attacks against China. The Nevada tests were integral to this atomic blackmail, a way of getting a message to the enemy that it had better sign the armistice. Nonetheless, there is little evidence that Ike’s nuclear threats made any difference in the Communist decision to end the war, which had come some months before (since 1953, however, it remains true that The Maltese Falcon has subverted many innocents). On July 27, 1953, three of the four primary parties to the war signed the armistice agreement (the ROK still refusing). It called for a 2.5-mile-wide buffer zone undulating across the middle of Korea, from which troops and weapons were supposed to be withdrawn. Today this heavily fortified “demilitarized zone” still holds the peace in Korea, as does the 1953 cease-fire agreement. No peace treaty has ever been signed, and so the peninsula remains in a technical state of war. Various encyclopedias state that the countries involved in the three-year

 

 

conflict suffered a total of more than 4 million casualties, of which at least 2 million were civilians—a higher percentage than in World War II or Vietnam. A total of 36,940 Americans lost their lives in the Korean theater; of these, 33,665 were killed in action, while 3,275 died there of nonhostile causes. Some 92,134 Americans were wounded in action, and decades later, 8,176 were still reported as missing. South Korea sustained 1,312,836 casualties, including 415,004 dead. Casualties among other UN allies totaled 16,532, including 3,094 dead. Estimated North Korean casualties numbered 2 million, including about 1 million civilians and about 520,000 soldiers. An estimated 900,000 Chinese soldiers lost their lives in combat.34 Washington, D.C., reporters wrote, met the war’s end with “a collective shrug of the shoulders.” In New York, TV camera crews showed up at Times Square to find desultory citizens who had to be coaxed into shouting approval of the peace; fewer people were on the streets because subway fares had just gone up to fifteen cents. The next day an Iowa court ruled that there had been no state of war in Korea, since Congress never declared one to exist. The point to remember is that this was a civil war35 and, as a British diplomat once said, “every country has a right to have its War of the Roses.” The true tragedy was not the war itself, for a civil conflict purely among Koreans might have resolved the extraordinary tensions generated by colonialism, national division, and foreign intervention. The tragedy was that the war solved nothing: only the status quo ante was restored, only a cease-fire held the peace.

 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? Order now!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

Week 6 Discussion

Discussion Board Forums 4

Topic: Privacy Policy

After reviewing the material in the Reading & Study folder for Module/Week 7, address the following, integrating biblical perspectives where appropriate: What other ways of writing privacy policies exist? For example, are there useful ways to combine BMA and Chinese Wall? Are there any ways, whether technical or economic, of aligning the data subject’s interest with those of the system operator and other stakeholders?

You are required to provide a thread in response to the provided topic for each forum. Each thread is to be 300 words and demonstrate course-related knowledge. In addition to the thread, you are required to reply to 2 other classmates’ threads. Each reply must be 150 words.

Your thread is due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Thursday, and your replies are due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday.

 

Discussion Board Forum 5

 

Topic: Hidden Content

 

Thread: Discuss methods on how to hide information on victim systems that will make forensic analysis more difficult. Also, share the value of being the light Jesus talks about in Matthew 5:14 by bringing hidden information into the light.

 

Replies: For your replies, respond to a minimum of 2 classmates, identifying at least one strength or weakness, or by adding a related thought to the conversation.

 

You are required to create a thread in response to the provided prompt. Each thread must be at least 300 words and include at least 1 scholarly source other than the course materials. You must also reply to a minimum of 2 other classmates’ threads. Each reply must be at least 100 words and include at least 1 scholarly source other than the course material. All sources must be cited in current APA format.

There must also be an appropriate incorporation of Judeo-Christian worldview/analysis and biblical principles in both the thread and the replies.

 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? Order now!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

PHED 1164 – Physical Education Research Paper, Due 5/5

Core Objective Obesity Research Paper Instructions

Your assignment is to prepare and submit a paper on OBESITY IN and possible solutions and AMERICA-statistics. Your paper should be a minimum of 250 words in length (1-2 pages double-spaced, risks not more than 500 words), in 12-point, Times New Roman type, and meet the following minimum objectives:

 

1) provide a review, reflection, and response to the topic, which should involve learning from your readings and personal research, self-assessments, class activities; and/or any other engagement with the web links and other materials in this class;

2) provide an assessment of how you think obesity may have affected you, someone you know, or society in general, and how you can apply your present knowledge of the health risks associated with obesity; and,

3) provide some advice relating to this general topic of obesity that you might give yourself or others regarding the benefits of a proactive approach to a healthy lifestyle

4) cite a minimum of two written sources outside of the class material. Here’s a good link to help in citing your sources https://www.wikihow.com/Cite-a-Research-Paper#Citation_Help_sub

Submit a WORD document with the above title on the top) ……..This assignment is worth 15 points. Points will be deducted for grammatical errors, spelling and word count minimum or maximum not being fulfilled.

 

Grading Rubric for Obesity Research Paper

Your 250-500 word research paper on “Obesity in America” will be graded using the following Grading Rubric.

Score and Criteria

Score: 9 – 10 points Criteria: Research paper demonstrates complete understanding and execution of the assigned objectives. Thesis statement/argument is clearly stated, complex and original, and the writing does not spend excessive time on any one point of development at the expense of developing other points in the body of the paper. Writing is also error-free, without ambiguity, and reads smoothly, creatively, and with a purpose.

Score: 7- 8 points Criteria: Research paper demonstrates considerable understanding and execution of the assigned objectives. Thesis statement/argument is stated, verges on the complex and original, and the writing shows accuracy and balance in developing body points, but may exhibit occasional weaknesses and lapses in correctness. Writing also has some errors and ambiguities, yet does read clearly and coherently.

 

Score: 4 – 6 points Criteria: Research paper demonstrates some understanding and execution of the assigned objectives. Thesis statement/argument is faintly stated and/or expected and not confident, and the writing is inconsistent in terms of balance in developing body points, and exhibits weaknesses and lapses in correctness. Writing also has many errors and ambiguities, and may read confusingly and incoherently.

Score: 1 – 3 points Criteria: Research paper demonstrates limited understanding and execution of the assigned objectives. Thesis statement/argument is simplistic, unoriginal, and/or not present at all, and the writing is unbalanced in developing body points, weak, and incomplete. Writing also has numerous errors and ambiguities, and reads confusingly and incoherently.

 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? Order now!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

Assignment: Supporting Grief And Loss

For the Assignment, you will create a support group for one of the following populations: breast cancer survivor, loss of infant, new widow, child who lost a sibling, or another population as approved by your instructor. You will create a PowerPoint (PPT) presentation in which you will explain the type of group (family, multi-group, etc.) you will be designing. The presentation must include at least 5-7 academic references to support the planning and 3-5 good resources you would pass on to group members.  Record your presentation using the Personal Capture function of Kaltura.

By Day 7

Submit a 5-7 minute recorded PPT presentation which includes the following:

· Explanation of important principles related to grief and loss and how these were taken into account when designing the group

· Description of the structure and function of the group you planned

· Explanation of how diversity and culture was taken into account when developing this group

· Explanation of how you would engage the group members

· Explanation of how you would assess functioning and dynamics

· Explanation of intervention that would be provided in the group, including reasons for sharing the 3-5 recommended resources for the group.

· Explanation of how you would evaluate group outcomes

· References

 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? Order now!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

Intercultural Communication

Intercultural Communication!

READINGS: Igor E. Klyukanov. Principles of Intercultural Communication, 2nd Edition, Routledge.

· Read chapter 5: Commensurability Principle

· Lecture and PowerPoint Slides Chapter 5 (attached)

· Read chapter 6: Continuum Principle

· Lecture and PowerPoint Slides Chapter 6 (attached)

 

ASSIGNMENT: TAP ( Takeaways points ) #3

 

Answer for Questions 1 (attached)

using only Commensurability Principle (ch.5)

We are all Americans. The American model of life.

· Identify five (5) distinctly American concepts

· How they are represented with verbal or nonverbal signs in other cultures? (example would be the concept of fast food and its representation by the sign “McDonald’s” (verbal) or the golden arches (nonverbal))

· How does the Commensurability Principle, only this one principal, work here in this particular question?

 

Answer for Questions 2 (p.154) (attached)

using only Continuum Principle (ch.6) by reading the case study

Use this TEMPLATE (attached)

 

 

Intercultural Communication

“Takeaways points Assignment Rubric”

· Use the proper format (name, course #, TAP #…Identify each Question you’re answering…have your TAP double- spaced, after answering both questions, you should total 500 word- count

· Have thoughtful answers

· Include the 2 Current Principles (Commensurability in question 1 and

Continuum in question 2 )

 

(make them easy to identify)!!!

 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? Order now!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

Irony And Theme In “The Lottery”

LESSON 7: THE SCAPEGOAT ARCHETYPE

“The Lottery” by Shirley Jackson

LEARNING GOALS:

R1. read and demonstrate an understanding of a variety of literary, informational, and graphic texts, using a range of strategies to

construct meaning;

R2. recognize a variety of text forms, text features, and stylistic elements and demonstrate understanding of how they help

communicate meaning;

R3. use knowledge of words and cueing systems to read fluently

W1. generate, gather, and organize ideas and information to write for an intended purpose and audience;

W2. draft and revise their writing, using a variety of literary, informational, and graphic forms and stylistic elements appropriate

for the purpose and audience;

W3. use editing, proofreading, and publishing skills and strategies, and knowledge of language conventions, to correct errors,

refine expression, and present their work effectively;

M1. demonstrate an understanding of a variety of media texts;

M2. identify some media forms and explain how the conventions and techniques associated with them are used to create

meaning;

M4. Reflecting on Skills and Strategies: reflect on and identify their strengths as media interpreters and creators, areas for

improvement, and the strategies they found most helpful in understanding and creating media texts

SUCCESS CRITERIA:

Successfully complete the questions

 

Reflecting on Literary Concepts: The Scapegoat

 

BEFORE CONTINUING, BE SURE THAT YOU HAVE VIEWED THE POWER POINT

PRESENTATION OF THE SCAPEGOAT ARCHETYPE

 

TASK

 

This story is the product of writer Shirley Jackson’s imagination and it was written during the

mid 1940s during her residence in North Bennington, Vermont. Jackson got the idea for this

story while wheeling her young children up the hill in their stroller coming home from a trip to

the little village one day. When she got home, she managed to get the story down In writing

while it was fresh in her mind. At the time it was published, she received a tremendous volume

of mail inquiring into the origin and factual basis of the story. Therefore, we have the author’s

word that it is a fictional account of the scapegoat scenario.

 

Read “The Lottery” and note your impression.

1. What is the irony of the text’s title? How do the fundamentals of “a lottery” (i.e. the various

state run “Jackpot” lotteries) differ and relate to the one portrayed in this story?

 

2. Articulate responses to the following:

 

• Evaluate the complex ritual of the lottery. Why does this town feel obligated to continue the tradition that causes such an end to one of their own?

 

 

• How might you analyse Mrs. Hutchinson’s characterization as she joins the assembly? At this point, what is the attitude between Mrs. Delacroix’s toward her? How does this

compare to the end of the story? What does complex relationship suggest in terms of

their relationship and the ritual?

• Consider the overall description and actions of Mr. Summers. What is his role in the proceedings? How does his characterization aid in developing the complex and

suggestive meaning of the ritual?

 

• What is the implication behind Old Man Warner’s remark, “it’s not the way it used to be. People ain’t the way they used to be,” as the Hutchinson’s make the final draw? What is

Mrs. Hutchinson’s demeanor at the end of the story? What is your reaction to this

outcome?

3. Decide what the author is trying to uncover about human nature and social order. What is the

theme for this text?

 

 

The Lottery

By Shirley Jackson

 

 

The morning of June 27th was clear and sunny, with the fresh warmth of a full-summer

day; the flowers were blossoming profusely and the grass was richly green. The people of the

village began to gather in the square, between the post office and the bank, around ten o’clock;

in some towns there were so many people that the lottery took two days and had to be started

on June 2th. but in this village, where there were only about three hundred people, the whole

lottery took less than two hours, so it could begin at ten o’clock in the morning and still be

through in time to allow the villagers to get home for noon dinner.

The children assembled first, of course. School was recently over for the summer, and the

feeling of liberty sat uneasily on most of them; they tended to gather together quietly for a while

before they broke into boisterous play. and their talk was still of the classroom and the teacher,

of books and reprimands. Bobby Martin had already stuffed his pockets full of stones, and the

other boys soon followed his example, selecting the smoothest and roundest stones; Bobby and

Harry Jones and Dickie Delacroix– the villagers pronounced this name “Dellacroy”–eventually

made a great pile of stones in one corner of the square and guarded it against the raids of the

other boys. The girls stood aside, talking among themselves, looking over their shoulders at

rolled in the dust or clung to the hands of their older brothers or sisters.

Soon the men began to gather. surveying their own children, speaking of planting and rain,

tractors and taxes. They stood together, away from the pile of stones in the corner, and their

jokes were quiet and they smiled rather than laughed. The women, wearing faded house dresses

and sweaters, came shortly after their menfolk. They greeted one another and exchanged bits

of gossip as they went to join their husbands. Soon the women, standing by their husbands,

began to call to their children, and the children came reluctantly, having to be called four or

five times. Bobby Martin ducked under his mother’s grasping hand and ran, laughing, back to

the pile of stones. His father spoke up sharply, and Bobby came quickly and took his place

between his father and his oldest brother.

The lottery was conducted–as were the square dances, the teen club, the Halloween

program–by Mr. Summers. who had time and energy to devote to civic activities. He was a

round-faced, jovial man and he ran the coal business, and people were sorry for him. because

he had no children and his wife was a scold. When he arrived in the square, carrying the black

wooden box, there was a murmur of conversation among the villagers, and he waved and called.

“Little late today, folks.” The postmaster, Mr. Graves, followed him, carrying a three- legged

stool, and the stool was put in the center of the square and Mr. Summers set the black box down

on it. The villagers kept their distance, leaving a space between themselves and the stool. and

when Mr. Summers said, “Some of you fellows want to give me a hand?” there was a hesitation

before two men. Mr. Martin and his oldest son, Baxter. came forward to hold the box steady on

the stool while Mr. Summers stirred up the papers inside it.

The original paraphernalia for the lottery had been lost long ago, and the black box now

resting on the stool had been put into use even before Old Man Warner, the oldest man in town,

was born. Mr. Summers spoke frequently to the villagers about making a new box, but no one

liked to upset even as much tradition as was represented by the black box. There was a story

that the present box had been made with some pieces of the box that had preceded it, the one

that had been constructed when the first people settled down to make a village here. Every year,

 

 

after the lottery, Mr. Summers began talking again about a new box, but every year the subject

was allowed to fade off without anything’s being done. The black box grew shabbier each year:

by now it was no longer completely black but splintered badly along one side to show the

original wood color, and in some places faded or stained.

Mr. Martin and his oldest son, Baxter, held the black box securely on the stool until Mr.

Summers had stirred the papers thoroughly with his hand. Because so much of the ritual had

been forgotten or discarded, Mr. Summers had been successful in having slips of paper

substituted for the chips of wood that had been used for generations. Chips of wood, Mr.

Summers had argued. had been all very well when the village was tiny, but now that the

population was more than three hundred and likely to keep on growing, it was necessary to use

something that would fit more easily into he black box. The night before the lottery, Mr.

Summers and Mr. Graves made up the slips of paper and put them in the box, and it was then

taken to the safe of Mr. Summers’ coal company and locked up until Mr. Summers was ready

to take it to the square next morning. The rest of the year, the box was put way, sometimes one

place, sometimes another; it had spent one year in Mr. Graves’s barn and another year underfoot

in the post office. and sometimes it was set on a shelf in the Martin grocery and left there.

There was a great deal of fussing to be done before Mr. Summers declared the lottery open.

There were the lists to make up–of heads of families. heads of households in each family.

members of each household in each family. There was the proper swearing-in of Mr. Summers

by the postmaster, as the official of the lottery; at one time, some people remembered, there had

been a recital of some sort, performed by the official of the lottery, a perfunctory. tuneless chant

that had been rattled off duly each year; some people believed that the official of the lottery

used to stand just so when he said or sang it, others believed that he was supposed to walk

among the people, but years and years ago this p3rt of the ritual had been allowed to lapse.

There had been, also, a ritual salute, which the official of the lottery had had to use in addressing

each person who came up to draw from the box, but this also had changed with time, until now

it was felt necessary only for the official to speak to each person approaching. Mr. Summers

was very good at all this; in his clean white shirt and blue jeans. with one hand resting carelessly

on the black box. he seemed very proper and important as he talked interminably to Mr. Graves

and the Martins.

Just as Mr. Summers finally left off talking and turned to the assembled villagers, Mrs.

Hutchinson came hurriedly along the path to the square, her sweater thrown over her shoulders,

and slid into place in the back of the crowd. “Clean forgot what day it was,” she said to Mrs.

Delacroix, who stood next to her, and they both laughed softly. “Thought my old man was out

back stacking wood,” Mrs. Hutchinson went on. “and then I looked out the window and the kids

was gone, and then I remembered it was the twenty-seventh and came a-running.” She dried

her hands on her apron, and Mrs. Delacroix said, “You’re in time, though. They’re still talking

away up there.”

Mrs. Hutchinson craned her neck to see through the crowd and found her husband and

children standing near the front. She tapped Mrs. Delacroix on the arm as a farewell and began

to make her way through the crowd. The people separated good-humoredly to let her through:

two or three people said. in voices just loud enough to be heard across the crowd, “Here comes

your, Missus, Hutchinson,” and “Bill, she made it after all.” Mrs. Hutchinson reached her

husband, and Mr. Summers, who had been waiting, said cheerfully. “Thought we were going

to have to get on without you, Tessie.” Mrs. Hutchinson said. grinning, “Wouldn’t have me

leave m’dishes in the sink, now, would you. Joe?,” and soft laughter ran through the crowd as

 

 

the people stirred back into position after Mrs. Hutchinson’s arrival.

“Well, now.” Mr. Summers said soberly, “guess we better get started, get this over with,

so’s we can go back to work. Anybody ain’t here?”

“Dunbar.” several people said. “Dunbar. Dunbar.”

Mr. Summers consulted his list. “Clyde Dunbar.” he said. “That’s right. He’s broke his leg,

hasn’t he? Who’s drawing for him?”

“Me. I guess,” a woman said. and Mr. Summers turned to look at her. “Wife draws for her

husband.” Mr. Summers said. “Don’t you have a grown boy to do it for you, Janey?” Although

Mr. Summers and everyone else in the village knew the answer perfectly well, it was the

business of the official of the lottery to ask such questions formally. Mr. Summers waited with

an expression of polite interest while Mrs. Dunbar answered.

“Horace’s not but sixteen vet.” Mrs. Dunbar said regretfully. “Guess I gotta fill in for the

old man this year.”

“Right.” Sr. Summers said. He made a note on the list he was holding. Then he asked,

“Watson boy drawing this year?”

A tall boy in the crowd raised his hand. “Here,” he said. “I m drawing for my mother and

me.” He blinked his eyes nervously and ducked his head as several voices in the crowd said

thin#s like “Good fellow, lack.” and “Glad to see your mother’s got a man to do it.”

“Well,” Mr. Summers said, “guess that’s everyone. Old Man Warner make it?”

“Here,” a voice said. and Mr. Summers nodded.

A sudden hush fell on the crowd as Mr. Summers cleared his throat and looked at the list.

“All ready?” he called. “Now, I’ll read the names–heads of families first–and the men come up

and take a paper out of the box. Keep the paper folded in your hand without looking at it until

everyone has had a turn. Everything clear?”

The people had done it so many times that they only half listened to the directions: most of

them were quiet. wetting their lips. not looking around. Then Mr. Summers raised one hand

high and said, “Adams.” A man disengaged himself from the crowd and came forward. “Hi.

Steve.” Mr. Summers said. and Mr. Adams said. “Hi. Joe.” They grinned at one another

humorlessly and nervously. Then Mr. Adams reached into the black box and took out a folded

paper. He held it firmly by one corner as he turned and went hastily back to his place in the

crowd. where he stood a little apart from his family. not looking down at his hand.

“Allen.” Mr. Summers said. “Anderson…. Bentham.”

“Seems like there’s no time at all between lotteries any more.” Mrs. Delacroix said to Mrs.

Graves in the back row.

“Seems like we got through with the last one only last week.”

“Time sure goes fast.– Mrs. Graves said.

“Clark…. Delacroix”

“There goes my old man.” Mrs. Delacroix said. She held her breath while her husband went

forward.

“Dunbar,” Mr. Summers said, and Mrs. Dunbar went steadily to the box while one of the

women said. “Go on. Janey,” and another said, “There she goes.”

“We’re next.” Mrs. Graves said. She watched while Mr. Graves came around from the side

of the box, greeted Mr. Summers gravely and selected a slip of paper from the box. By now, all

through the crowd there were men holding the small folded papers in their large hand. turning

them over and over nervously Mrs. Dunbar and her two sons stood together, Mrs. Dunbar

holding the slip of paper.

 

 

“Harburt…. Hutchinson.”

“Get up there, Bill,” Mrs. Hutchinson said. and the people near her laughed.

“Jones.”

“They do say,” Mr. Adams said to Old Man Warner, who stood next to him, “that over in

the north village they’re talking of giving up the lottery.”

Old Man Warner snorted. “Pack of crazy fools,” he said. “Listening to the young folks,

nothing’s good enough for them. Next thing you know, they’ll be wanting to go back to living

in caves, nobody work any more, live hat way for a while. Used to be a saying about ‘Lottery

in June, corn be heavy soon.’ First thing you know, we’d all be eating stewed chickweed and

acorns. There’s always been a lottery,” he added petulantly. “Bad enough to see young Joe

Summers up there joking with everybody.”

“Some places have already quit lotteries.” Mrs. Adams said.

“Nothing but trouble in that,” Old Man Warner said stoutly. “Pack of young fools.”

“Martin.” And Bobby Martin watched his father go forward. “Overdyke…. Percy.”

“I wish they’d hurry,” Mrs. Dunbar said to her older son. “I wish they’d hurry.”

“They’re almost through,” her son said.

“You get ready to run tell Dad,” Mrs. Dunbar said.

Mr. Summers called his own name and then stepped forward precisely and selected a slip

from the box. Then he called, “Warner.”

“Seventy-seventh year I been in the lottery,” Old Man Warner said as he went through the

crowd. “Seventy-seventh time.”

“Watson” The tall boy came awkwardly through the crowd. Someone said, “Don’t be

nervous, Jack,” and Mr. Summers said, “Take your time, son.”

“Zanini.”

After that, there was a long pause, a breathless pause, until Mr. Summers. holding his slip

of paper in the air, said, “All right, fellows.” For a minute, no one moved, and then all the slips

of paper were opened. Suddenly, all the women began to speak at once, saving. “Who is it?,”

“Who’s got it?,” “Is it the Dunbars?,” “Is it the Watsons?” Then the voices began to say, “It’s

Hutchinson. It’s Bill,” “Bill Hutchinson’s got it.”

“Go tell your father,” Mrs. Dunbar said to her older son.

People began to look around to see the Hutchinsons. Bill Hutchinson was standing quiet,

staring down at the paper in his hand. Suddenly. Tessie Hutchinson shouted to Mr. Summers.

“You didn’t give him time enough to take any paper he wanted. I saw you. It wasn’t fair!”

“Be a good sport, Tessie.” Mrs. Delacroix called, and Mrs. Graves said, “All of us took the

same chance.”

“Shut up, Tessie,” Bill Hutchinson said.

“Well, everyone,” Mr. Summers said, “that was done pretty fast, and now we’ve got to be

hurrying a little more to get done in time.” He consulted his next list. “Bill,” he said, “you draw

for the Hutchinson family. You got any other households in the Hutchinsons?”

“There’s Don and Eva,” Mrs. Hutchinson yelled. “Make them take their chance!”

“Daughters draw with their husbands’ families, Tessie,” Mr. Summers said gently. “You

know that as well as anyone else.”

“It wasn’t fair,” Tessie said.

“I guess not, Joe.” Bill Hutchinson said regretfully. “My daughter draws with her husband’s

family; that’s only fair. And I’ve got no other family except the kids.”

“Then, as far as drawing for families is concerned, it’s you,” Mr. Summers said in

 

 

explanation, “and as far as drawing for households is concerned, that’s you, too. Right?”

“Right,” Bill Hutchinson said.

“How many kids, Bill?” Mr. Summers asked formally.

“Three,” Bill Hutchinson said.

“There’s Bill, Jr., and Nancy, and little Dave. And Tessie and me.”

“All right, then,” Mr. Summers said. “Harry, you got their tickets back?”

Mr. Graves nodded and held up the slips of paper. “Put them in the box, then,” Mr.

Summers directed. “Take Bill’s and put it in.”

“I think we ought to start over,” Mrs. Hutchinson said, as quietly as she could. “I tell you

it wasn’t fair. You didn’t give him time enough to choose. Everybody saw that.”

Mr. Graves had selected the five slips and put them in the box. and he dropped all the

papers but those onto the ground. where the breeze caught them and lifted them off.

“Listen, everybody,” Mrs. Hutchinson was saying to the people around her.

“Ready, Bill?” Mr. Summers asked. and Bill Hutchinson, with one quick glance around at

his wife and children. nodded.

“Remember,” Mr. Summers said. “take the slips and keep them folded until each person

has taken one. Harry, you help little Dave.” Mr. Graves took the hand of the little boy, who

came willingly with him up to the box. “Take a paper out of the box, Davy.” Mr. Summers said.

Davy put his hand into the box and laughed. “Take just one paper.” Mr. Summers said. “Harry,

you hold it for him.” Mr. Graves took the child’s hand and removed the folded paper from the

tight fist and held it while little Dave stood next to him and looked up at him wonderingly.

“Nancy next,” Mr. Summers said. Nancy was twelve, and her school friends breathed

heavily as she went forward switching her skirt, and took a slip daintily from the box “Bill, Jr.,”

Mr. Summers said, and Billy, his face red and his feet overlarge, near knocked the box over as

he got a paper out. “Tessie,” Mr. Summers said. She hesitated for a minute, looking around

defiantly. and then set her lips and went up to the box. She snatched a paper out and held it

behind her.

“Bill,” Mr. Summers said, and Bill Hutchinson reached into the box and felt around,

bringing his hand out at last with the slip of paper in it.

The crowd was quiet. A girl whispered, “I hope it’s not Nancy,” and the sound of the

whisper reached the edges of the crowd.

“It’s not the way it used to be.” Old Man Warner said clearly. “People ain’t the way they

used to be.”

“All right,” Mr. Summers said. “Open the papers. Harry, you open little Dave’s.”

Mr. Graves opened the slip of paper and there was a general sigh through the crowd as he

held it up and everyone could see that it was blank. Nancy and Bill. Jr.. opened theirs at the

same time. and both beamed and laughed. turning around to the crowd and holding their slips

of paper above their heads.

“Tessie,” Mr. Summers said. There was a pause, and then Mr. Summers looked at Bill

Hutchinson, and Bill unfolded his paper and showed it. It was blank.

“It’s Tessie,” Mr. Summers said, and his voice was hushed. “Show us her paper. Bill.”

Bill Hutchinson went over to his wife and forced the slip of paper out of her hand. It had a

black spot on it, the black spot Mr. Summers had made the night before with the heavy pencil

in the coal company office. Bill Hutchinson held it up, and there was a stir in the crowd.

“All right, folks.” Mr. Summers said. “Let’s finish quickly.”

Although the villagers had forgotten the ritual and lost the original black box, they still

 

 

remembered to use stones. The pile of stones the boys had made earlier was ready; there were

stones on the ground with the blowing scraps of paper that had come out of the box Delacroix

selected a stone so large she had to pick it up with both hands and turned to Mrs. Dunbar. “Come

on,” she said. “Hurry up.”

Mr. Dunbar had small stones in both hands, and she said. gasping for breath. “I can’t run at

all. You’ll have to go ahead and I’ll catch up with you.”

The children had stones already. And someone gave little Davy Hutchinson few pebbles.

Tessie Hutchinson was in the center of a cleared space by now, and she held her hands out

desperately as the villagers moved in on her. “It isn’t fair,” she said. A stone hit her on the side

of the head. Old Man Warner was saying, “Come on, come on, everyone.” Steve Adams was in

the front of the crowd of villagers, with Mrs. Graves beside him.

“It isn’t fair, it isn’t right,” Mrs. Hutchinson screamed, and then they were upon her.

After reading “The Lottery” and noting your impression and completing the multiple choice quiz, submit answers to the following:

1.  What is the irony of the text’s title? How do the fundamentals of “a lottery” (i.e. the various state run “Jackpot” lotteries) differ and relate to the one portrayed in this story?

2. What is the implication behind Old Man Warner’s remark, “it’s not the way it used to be. People ain’t the way they used to be,” as the Hutchinson’s make the final draw? What is Mrs. Hutchinson’s demeanor at the end of the story? What is your reaction to this outcome?

3. What is the theme for this text?  Decide what the author is trying to uncover about human nature and social order. Connect this to the theme for this text.

 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? Order now!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

SOCW 6311 WK 7 Responses

SOCW 6311 WK 7 responses 

Respond to at least two colleagues each one has to be answered separately name first then response and references after each

Respond to at least two colleagues by doing all of the following:

  • Offer critiques      of their logic model as if you were a member of their work groups.
    • Identify       strengths of the logic models.
    • Identify       potential weaknesses in the assumptions or areas that may require       additional information or clarification.
  • Offer      substantial information to assist your colleagues’ efforts such as:
    • Information to       support their understanding of the problems and needs in this population
    • Suggestions       related to intervention activities, and potential outcomes

Instructor wants laid out like this:

Offer critiques of their logic model as if you were a member of their work groups.

Your response

Identify strengths of the logic models.

Your response

Identify potential weaknesses in the assumptions or areas that may require additional information or clarification.

Your response

Offer substantial information to assist your colleagues’ efforts such as:

Information to support their understanding of the problems and needs in this population

Your response

Suggestions related to intervention activities, and potential outcomes

Your response

References

Your response

PEER 1

Cedric Brown 

RE: Discussion – Week 7

Top of Form

Post a logic model and theory of change for a practitioner-level intervention.

Children/Students with substance abuse issues

Input steps

  • Identify substance abuse with teen that caused the child to      get kicked out of school.
  • Provide family and caregivers appropriate materials that is      needed for dealing with someone who has substance abuse issues.

Program activities

  • Provides substance abuse classes for the child as well as      classes for the parents to know how to cope with them.

Output steps

  • Have all parties involved attend all of the required meetings      that are provided by the program.

Initial outcomes

  • Both the parents and the client will be knowledgeable about      the dangers and how to deal with the individual who suffers from substance      abuse.

Intermediate outcomes

  • Parents are knowledgeable about behaviors and tendencies of      the client.
  • The client who suffers from substance abuse will know the      effects of drug use.
  • The client will abstain from drug use.

Long-term outcomes

  • Client will not participate in any illegal drug use.
  • Client will have a healthy and high quality of life      (Randolph, 2010).

Describe the types of problems, the client needs, and the underlying causes of problems and unmet needs.

The problem that the teen faces is that they have been kicked out of school for drug use. The client’s needs are that they feel like they are not important and found a crowd that they felt like they belonged to and started to use drugs. Some of the unmet needs that they have are not feeling accepted, loved, or that they belong.

Identify the short- and long-term outcomes that you think would represent an improved condition.

Short-term outcomes that would represent an improved condition are the client acknowledging that they have a problem and are willing to seek help. Also, the willingness to accept the services being provided to them. A long-term outcome that would represent an improved condition is no more use of any illegal substance going forward.

Then describe interventions that would lead to a change in the presenting conditions.

An intervention that would fit this client and their family is Family Behavior Therapy (FBT). FBT is an evidence-based treatment option where family members are taught to use behavioral strategies to learn new skills to improve their home environment (Family-Based Approaches, n.d.). During the treatment, all parties involved set goals for behavior for preventing substance use and reducing risky behaviors. Goals are rewarded at each session as an incentive to continue on the right path (Family-Based Approaches, n.d.).

Cedric

Reference

Family-Based Approaches (n.d.). https://www.drugabuse.gov

Randolph, K.A. (2010). Logic Models. In B. Thyer (Ed.), The handbook of social work research

methods (2nd ed., pp. 547-562). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (PDF)

Bottom of Form

Peer 2

McKenna Bull 

RE: Discussion – Week 7

Top of Form

Randolph (2010) suggests that logic models are diagrams of the relationship between a need that a program is designed to address and the actions or interventions taken to address the need and achieve program outcomes (p. 547). This type of model can help practitioners to better understand how various components of a program are intertwined, and connected, and how these components may potentially aid in achieving program goals/outcomes.

Describe the types of problems, the client needs, and the underlying causes of problems and unmet needs.

The primary population for this particular logic model will be adolescent females within a residential treatment center. The presenting problem for this particular population presents as poor emotion regulation, and lack of impulse control. This problem presents in a number of different ways depending on the client and various particulars with their history. Some of the ways in which this lack of emotion regulation and lack of impulse control presents may include: verbal aggression, physical aggression, self-harm, isolation, homicidal ideation, suicidal ideation, etc. Though the presentation varies from individual to individual, it seems that there is often one variable that is common amongst each of the girls. This factor is trauma, and having experienced trauma.

It could be that a need of this population is to be in a stable, safe environment. Many of these adolescents hail from less than savvy home environments, and often times these home environments exposed them to high levels of traumatic events, or could be the source of the emotion dysregulation. Another need could be to learn coping skills and techniques to help them manage their emotions and impulses more appropriately. It seems that many of these adolescents have not had the chance to learn a number of pro-social behaviors, and coping skills that many other children/adolescents have learned in their youth. Finally, it seems that a need of the client population may be receiving a therapeutically sounds, evidence-based treatment to help them overcome their trauma.

It appears that a primary underlying cause of the problem could be trauma itself. Much of the dysregulation and impulsivity seems to be a result of trauma experienced at a younger age.

Identify the short- and long-term outcomes that you think would represent an improved condition.

Short-term outcomes are those client changes or benefits that are most immediately associated with the program’s outputs (Randolph, 2020, p. 550). In this case, some of the short-term outcomes that may represent an improved condition amongst this population could be things such as: (1) improved emotion regulation and impulse control as evidenced by less incidents of self-harm, verbal aggression, physical aggression, decreased thoughts of homicide or suicide, etc., (2) increased levels of engagement in school, therapy, peer interactions, and (3) ability to communicate emotions and feelings in an appropriate, pro-social manner.

Long-term outcomes are also referred to as program impacts or program goals (Randolph, 2010, p. 550). Long-term outcomes for this population may be reflected as follows: (1) maintained ability to regulate emotions and manage impulses (similar evidence as before), and (2) the ability to function and engage in society, maintain employment, be self-sufficient, and engage in appropriate relationships with partners, friends, and family.

Then describe interventions that would lead to a change in the presenting conditions.

The intervention identified for this population could be a combination of dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) and prolonged exposure (PE). Lang et al. (2018) suggests that DBT’s skills, modalities and commitment strategies make it effective for stabilizing high-risk behaviors and possibly even unstable home environments, addressing generalized difficulties with interpersonal functioning and emotion regulation, but it does not necessarily address trauma. For trauma, this same study suggests utilizing PE as a treatment modality in congruence with DBT. Both DBT and PE have been proven effective in treating adolescents. It has been suggested that the integration of DBT and PE to treat adolescents who have experienced trauma, are presenting with high-risk behaviors, and emotion dysregulation could be of great benefit to this ever growing population (Lang et al., 2018, p. 416). Based on the identified problem(s), needs of the population, underlying factors, and desired outcomes, it seems that this DBT-PE approach could prove useful in providing adequate care to these young girls.

References (Be sure to search for and cite resources that inform your views).

Lang, C. M., Edwards, A. J., Mittler, M. A., & Bonavitacola, L. (2018). Dialectical behavior therapy with prolonged exposure for adolescents: Rationale and review of the research. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 25(3), 416–426. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1016/j.cbpra.2017.12.005

Randolph, K. A. (2010). Logic models. In B. Thyer (Ed.), The handbook of social work research methods (2nd ed., pp. 547-562). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? Order now!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

Strategic Management Essay Questions- Week 5 Assignment 1

Go to Illustration Capsule 9.1 Many of Apple’s Suppliers Flunk the Ethics Test in your textbook. Do Apple’s actions indicate that their position on business ethics is aligned with the principle of ethical universalism?

Here is a link that talks about Apple’s ethics. http://danielsethics.mgt.unm.edu/pdf/Apple%20Case.pdf

2. Go to Illustration Capsule 9.2, Investment Fraud at Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities and Stanford Financial Group in your textbook. What drivers for unethical behavior are evident in reviewing the actions of Bernard Madoff and the managers of the Stanford Financial Group?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/18/business/18stanford.html?_r=0

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/bernard_l_madoff/index.html

3. Go to Illustration Capsule 9.3, How General Electric’s Top Management Built a Culture That Fuses High Performance with High Integrity in your textbook. In what way do the ethics policies at General Electric recognize and address the possible challenges of maintaining a high standard of ethical behavior?

http://files.gecompany.com/gecom/citizenship/pdfs/TheSpirit&TheLetter.pdf

http://www.geindustrial.cn/PDF/Privacy28sep10.pdf

4. Go to Illustration Capsule 9.4 John Deere’s Approach to Corporate Social Responsibility in your textbook. What socially beneficial activities does John Deere elect to support, and how does this shape its CSR (corporate social responsibility)strategy?

http://www.deere.com/wps/dcom/en_US/corporate/our_company/citizenship/reporting/gri_index.page

http://www.deere.com/en_ASIA/docs/brochure/our_company/news_and_media/pdf/2011_annual_report.pdf

The required minimum number of words for initial postings to each discussion question listed above is 250 words, but the key is to effectively and fully answer each question.

 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? Order now!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

Sports

1. You are required to research, investigate, and analyze the various college student-athlete social media policies. Some schools have policies some do not.

2. Write a 3-4 page position paper answering the following question:

If you were a college athletics director what social media policy would you implement for your student-atheltes?

a. You are to select and discuss 3 universities’ student-athlete social media policy.

b. You must present 3 reasons to support your stance. Make sure you do a thorough job discussing each of your reasons.

c. This paper must have a minimum of 3 resources, needs to be cited in the paper and listed at the end of the paper.

d. MLA format must be followed; times new roman font size 12 and double space

 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? Order now!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

Grant Proposal To Study The Benefits Homeschooling With Emphasis On Parental Involvement

Develop the goals and objectives for the program you are going to implement.

 

Develop the specific eligibility and enrollment requirements for the program.  Also, include the schedule of services and the staffing requirements to implement the program.

 

Develop an initial budget plan for the program giving consideration to staffing, services that will be provided, and an estimation of annual cost to fund the program.

 

Develop a basic plan for funding the program that utilizes several public and private funding sources.  Provide a brief description of the sources of funding you are proposing and what the funds will be used for.

 

Develop a brochure that brings all of the various components of the program proposal together.  The brochure should include an overview of the program, the goals and objectives of the program, eligibility for the program, the types of services providing, and give an overview of how the program is funded.

 

 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? Order now!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!