Talk:1st Battle of the Western Sea

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.

[edit] A few questions

What is this confrontation called in Korean? I wouldn't be surprised if the North and South call it different things, but in any case, that should be included in the article. It is also relevant because a better name for this article needs to be found I believe. "1st Western Sea" may be a common shorthand, just as the words "Vietnam" and "Korea" are sometimes used to refer to the Vietnam War and Korean War respectively; just as, for example, the words Hastings and Waterloo are used to refer to the Battle of Hastings and the Battle of Waterloo. But these are just shorthand, not the real terms. So, should this confrontation be called the 1st Battle of Western Sea or the 1st Western Sea Engagement or what?

Secondly, while I recognize that the Korean War never formally ended, that is, that a treaty was never signed, I feel that to consider this 1999 event a part of the 1950-53 war is a bit strange. It's playing off a semantic and legal technicality rather than an on-the-ground factual situation. The war never formally ended on paper, sure, but fighting ended over fifty years ago. Thoughts or suggestions would be most appreciated. LordAmeth (talk) 22:40, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't quite sure what to name this articale and the related ones myself. I cant read korean, and many of the translated ones said battle in the western sea or skirmish, ect. Perhaps just calling it Action of ..... would be better. As for the korean war itself, there have been many skirmishes and combat deaths other than these two battles since 1953, so i do think it is appropriate to list them under the korean war. XavierGreen

Well, I certainly default to the judgment of those who know Korean history/affairs better than I. Still, it seems bizarre to me. The Arab-Israeli conflict has been going on for nearly 60 years now, but the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, Six-Day War, and Yom Kippur War are still distinct conflicts with beginnings and endings. Just because there was no formal treaty ending the war doesn't mean that we as historians have to (or should) consider this to still be an active war. The major fighting ended over 50 years ago, and no matter how many scattered confrontations and skirmishes there may have been since then, it's far from being an all-out war like it was in the 50s. Or is the Chinese Civil War also still ongoing, since the PRC continues to regard Taiwan as a rebel province or whatever? LordAmeth (talk) 22:40, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I see your point that major combat is over for the korean war, but perhaps listing the two in a seperate section as the later island campaigns are in the Chinese Civil War Campaign Box. As for the names perhaps Battle of the Western Sea would be more descriptive. XavierGreen —Preceding unsigned comment added by XavierGreen (talk • contribs) 22:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC)