Read this article.
What do you think?
Really? you would use wikipedia as a source? It is extremely un-reliable. The Korean War was in fact a Civil War very similar to the US Civil War, the only difference is the reaction time of other nations. During the US Civil war, lots of negotiations were being made with other nations for both the Union and the Confederacy. The problem was how long the negotiations lasted. There were no phones where you could call a guy up and ask for help. With the Korean war, they were able to get allies quite rapidly due to the increased ability of communication. You might think that because other nations got involved it becomes an international war, your wrong. it was still fought over one country. there was no one trying to conquer another country, it was just people standing up for what they thought was right. So by saying it was merely a civil war is a bit of an understatement because it still today is having effects on the world, but it never really became an international war since the real fighting stayed contained in Korea, for the most part, and it was fought for ideals of freedom
I don't know why you think Wikipedia is unreliable. Several studies have proved its reliability.
Because even the teachers say its unrealiable.
Anyone can edit and put anything on there.
Jman ... are you reading and thinking? Or are you just repeating what others have told you? If the latter, how do you know they're right?
Because if we use wikipedia as a source we will be in trouble. My teachers tell me not to use it.
That's fine. When I was a student, the teachers told us we couldn't cite any encyclopedia in research papers. They wanted us to dig deeper into our subjects than encyclopedias.
Actually, Jman, you cite a very good argument for being Homeschooled: Many teachers are unreliable.