Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus
Yes, but assuming that the USSR and WTO either withdraw from or are booted out of the UN, its pretty much a rump organization.
|
The USSR was boycotting the UN from January 1950 (months before Korea flared) over the refusal of each of it's component states to be granted a separate seat. Therefore, the lack of the USSR in the UN during T2K is a bit of a moot point due to the above precedent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus
Might the UN sanction W. Germany and the U.S. for their invasion of E. Germany and Poland?
|
The issue may well have been raised, but both the US and Britain possess the power of Veto. There's no way such a resolution could have been passed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus
The UN could say it's running the show in Korea, but how much financial, organizational, and military resources and control would it have at its disposal?
|
Same as always really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus
...wasn't there some other SOUTHPAC-typle alliance in place between Western-aligned Asia-Pacific nations?
|
Not as far as I'm aware. There's a handful of economic organisations, but next to nothing as far as military alliances able to take charge in Korea. A South Pacific organisation wouldn't have much cause to intervene in the northern hemisphere anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rainbow Six
...legally the UN says it is running the show, but in practice it's the US calling the shots (literally as well as metaphorically).
|
That's no different to 1950. The initial Resolution was a massive political win for the US, General MacArthur was placed in command (until he was sacked by Truman) and the bulk of troops involved were from the US.
However a total of 14 nations contributed forces with some countries (such as Australia) contributing a much greater
percentage of their military strength than the US.
As mentioned, the Korean War of the 50's hasn't actually ended. The initial UN Resolutions still hold.
Can anyone who served in Korea shed some light on the reasons why they were stationed there? Paul? I'm guessing it had something to do with UN responsibilities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Webstral
It's interesting to conjecture what kind of contribution New Zealand might have made to Korea once the fighting kicked off.
|
My guess is they would be looking at the UN and acting under it's authority. As you mentioned, the lack of a military alliance between them and the US, or with South Korea will effectively preclude their involvement otherwise.