There are indeed multiple versions of the historical narrative of the Korean War. Different political forces and ideologies often selectively interpret this historical event according to their own interests, or even deliberately distort it. The following points can illustrate many aspects of this phenomenon: 1. Ideological influence: After the outbreak of the Korean War, the warring parties and their allies injected specific political and ideological colors into the propaganda process. Whether on the Korean Peninsula or between the major powers of the Cold War, both sides tried to portray the other side as an "aggressor" or "evil force" and portray themselves as "defenders of justice." This narrative often ignores the complexity of the war and simplifies the diverse historical facts into a binary opposition that meets certain political needs. 2. Asymmetry of historical materials and information: Due to the fact that all parties kept the inside story of the war confidential during the Cold War, some historical materials were kept closed for a long time, and the materials that were later declassified often did not fully match the public narrative at the time. Some historians believe that some early historical research and propaganda calibers were based on limited or even filtered information, which forced later researchers to "revise" or reinterpret some key events of the war. 3. Differences in regional perspectives: The Korean War was not only a local conflict, but also involved the participation of China, the United States, the Soviet Union, and other United Nations countries. The postwar narratives of each country are full of descriptions of their own political demands and national sentiments. For example, the narrative of mainland China emphasizes the justice of "resisting the United States and aiding Korea" and resisting foreign aggression; while the United States and its allies emphasize the necessity of preventing the expansion of communism. For a long time, this multi-narrative has been continuously reinforced in the textbooks, commemorative activities and media reports of each country. 4. Political propaganda and historical distortion: Many observers point out that some exaggerations or omissions in the narrative of the Korean War are sometimes not due to unintentional misunderstandings, but are deliberately used for political propaganda purposes. For example, in order to create the public impression of external threats, each party may deliberately intensify the reports of the atrocities committed by the opponent in the war, while downplaying or ignoring its own mistakes or controversial events in the war. In general, the historical lessons and facts of the Korean War are relatively complex, spanning multiple political and ideological levels. Modern historical research strives to conduct balanced analysis with materials from multiple angles and sources, but due to the political nature of the war itself and the asymmetry of information at the time, there are still some misinterpreted or deliberately distorted narratives. Therefore, when studying this historical period, it is particularly important to treat the views and historical materials of all parties with caution, conduct cross-field comparisons and critical thinking.