The proceedings of the Sep. 1996 hearing on the accounting for American combatants in the Korean and Vietnam Wars who remain missing in action. Principal witnesses: Garnett Bell, former Special Assistant for Negotiations, Joint Task Force-Full Accounting; Col. Philip Corso, U.S. Army (retired), former advisor to Pres. Eisenhower; Joseph Douglas, Jr., Defense analyst; Jan Sejna, former Czech General Officer; George Veith, POW/MIA researcher and analyst; Alan Liotta, Dep. Dir., Defense POW/MIA Office; and others.

A fresh look at the how US troops played a part in the resistance of US troops to the American war in Vietnam Even if you don't know much about the war in Vietnam, you've probably heard of "The Hanoi Hilton," or Hoa Lo Prison, where captured U.S. soldiers were held. What they did there and whether they were treated well or badly by the Vietnamese became lasting controversies. As military personnel returned from captivity in 1973, Americans became riveted by POW coming-home stories. What had gone on behind these prison walls? Along with legends of lionized heroes who endured torture rather than reveal sensitive military information, there were news leaks suggesting that others had denounced the war in return for favorable treatment. What wasn't acknowledged, however, is that U.S. troop opposition to the war was vast and reached well into Hoa Loa Prison. Half a century after the fact, Dissenting POWs emerges to recover this history, and to discover what drove the factionalism in Hoa Lo. Looking into the underlying factional divide between pro-war “hardliners” and anti-war “dissidents” among the POWs, authors Wilber and Lembcke delve into the postwar American culture that created the myths of the Hero-POW and the dissidents blamed for the loss of the war. What they found was surprising: It wasn’t simply that some POWs were for the war and others against it, nor was it an officers-versus-enlisted-men standoff. Rather, it was the class backgrounds of the captives and their pre-captive experience that drew the lines. After the war, the hardcore hero-holdouts—like John McCain—moved on to careers in politics and business, while the dissidents faded from view as the antiwar movement, that might otherwise have championed them, disbanded. Today, Dissenting POWs is a necessary myth-buster, disabusing us of the revisionism that has replaced actual GI resistance with images of suffering POWs—ennobled victims that serve to suppress the fundamental questions of America’s drift to endless war.

Excerpt from Accounting for Pow/Mia's From the Korean War and the Vietnam War: Hearing Before the Military Personnel Subcommittee of the Committee on National Security, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourth Congress, Second Session; Hearing Held September 17, 1996 Obviously, there is much media attention to today's hearing. I've lost track of how many hearings we've had in the last year and 10 months. But there should be media attention to this because, in the Korean aspect of it, there was precious little media attention or fol low-through on the hundreds of Americans that I'm convinced we left behind at the end of America's first stalemated, no-win war. During the past 20 months of the 104th Congress, I have con ducted a series of Military Personnel Subcommittee hearings in order to provide effective congressional oversight of the process of seeking the fullest possible accounting of American combatants who remain missing in action. It has been my intention throughout all of this to work in partnership with the Defense Department and the State Department, to bring an honest closure for hundreds of families who have not broken faith with their missing loved ones, the heroes of their lives. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.

This is a curated and comprehensive collection of the most important works covering matters related to national security, diplomacy, defense, war, strategy, and tactics. The collection spans centuries of thought and experience, and includes the latest analysis of international threats, both conventional and asymmetric. It also includes riveting first person accounts of historic battles and wars.Some of the books in this Series are reproductions of historical works preserved by some of the leading libraries in the world. As with any reproduction of a historical artifact, some of these books contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. We believe these books are essential to this collection and the study of war, and have therefore brought them back into print, despite these imperfections.We hope you enjoy the unmatched breadth and depth of this collection, from the historical to the just-published works.

Americans think of the Korean War as death and hardship in the bitter hills of Korea. It was certainly this, and for those who fought this is what they generally saw. Yet every foot of the struggles forward, every step of the retreats, the overwhelming victories, the withdrawals and last ditch stands had their seagoing support and overtones. The spectacular ones depended wholly on amphibious power -- the capability of the twentieth century scientific Navy to overwhelm land-bound forces at the point of contact. Yet the all pervading influence of the sea was present even when no major landing or retirement or reinforcement highlighted its effect. When navies clash in gigantic battle or hurl troops ashore under irresistible concentration of ship-borne guns and planes, nations understand that sea power is working. It is not so easy to understand that this tremendous force may effect its will silently, steadily, irresistibly even though no battles occur. No clearer example exists of this truth in wars dark record than in Korea. Communist-controlled North Korea had slight power at sea except for Soviet mines. So beyond this strong underwater phase the United States Navy and allies had little opposition on the water. It is, therefore, easy to fail to recognize the decisive role navies played in this war fought without large naval battles.

Napalm, incendiary gel that sticks to skin and burns to the bone, came into the world on Valentine’s Day 1942 at a secret Harvard war research laboratory. On March 9, 1945, it created an inferno that killed over 87,500 people in Tokyo—more than died in the atomic explosions at Hiroshima or Nagasaki. It went on to incinerate sixty-four of Japan’s largest cities. The Bomb got the press, but napalm did the work. After World War II, the incendiary held the line against communism in Greece and Korea—Napalm Day led the 1950 counter-attack from Inchon—and fought elsewhere under many flags. Americans generally applauded, until the Vietnam War. Today, napalm lives on as a pariah: a symbol of American cruelty and the misguided use of power, according to anti-war protesters in the 1960s and popular culture from Apocalypse Now to the punk band Napalm Death and British street artist Banksy. Its use by Serbia in 1994 and by the United States in Iraq in 2003 drew condemnation. United Nations delegates judged deployment against concentrations of civilians a war crime in 1980. After thirty-one years, America joined the global consensus, in 2011. Robert Neer has written the first history of napalm, from its inaugural test on the Harvard College soccer field, to a Marine Corps plan to attack Japan with millions of bats armed with tiny napalm time bombs, to the reflections of Phan Thi Kim Phuc, a girl who knew firsthand about its power and its morality.

African American leaders such as Frederick Douglass long advocated military service as an avenue to equal citizenship for black Americans. Yet segregation in the U.S. armed forces did not officially end until President Harry Truman issued an executive order in 1948. What followed, at home and in the field, is the subject of Brotherhood in Combat, the first full-length, interdisciplinary study of the integration of the American military during the Korean and Vietnam Wars. Using a wealth of oral histories from black and white soldiers and marines who served in one or both conflicts, Jeremy P. Maxwell explores racial tension—pervasive in rear units, but relatively rare on the front lines. His work reveals that in initially proving their worth to their white brethren on the battlefield, African Americans changed the prevailing attitudes of those ranking officials who could bring about changes in policy. Brotherhood in Combat also illustrates the schism over attitudes toward civil-military relations that developed between blacks who had entered the service prior to Vietnam and those who were drafted and thus brought revolutionary ideas from the continental United States to the war zone. More important, Maxwell demonstrates how even at the height of civil rights unrest at home, black and white soldiers found a sense of brotherhood in the jungles of Vietnam. Incorporating military, diplomatic, social, racial, and ethnic topics and perspectives, Brotherhood in Combat presents a remarkably thorough and finely textured account of integration as it was experienced and understood in mid-twentieth-century America.