I read your opinion interestingly.
But I have different point of view in some ways. First of all, there are some count evidence in your opinion. The DMZ is not a sight that merely historic battle once took place. Because The Repubric of Korea and North Korea are in the situation of armistice, it's hard to remind the past objectively. The shight of war can be decorated in biased view like Union soldiers and Confederate soldiers were treated differently after battle of Gettysburg. And the other problems with Gettysburg battlefiled tourism is shown in Korea battlefield tourism clearly. Concentration camp sight in Geoje island can be good example. Geoje island is famous sightseeing place. Families hoping to have nice vacations visit the island, and go to Concentration camp sight as a part of sightseeing. Rather than remind the meaning of the meaning of peace and freedom, they seek enjoyment there. The sacred to the memory of the soldiers is decorated with ribbons and night illumoinations. It cannot be said the history is educated correctly. And second, Korea battlefield tourism also got there own problem, too. There are also some battlefield which are forgotten, because the battle itself took place so long time ago. For example, Pungnabtosung is supposed to be a cattle for defense of Baekje, a dynasty established B.C. 18. It is really a kind of battlefield but even scholars don't know precisely what battle how broke.
It is important to keeping in mind the lessons and facts historical battlefields give us, but there have to be some ways to improve environments in studying at the very place historical battle happend.
referencehttp://news.nate.com/view/20100806n14531http://search.nate.com/search/all.html? ... 9%E9%C1%A6http://engdic.nate.com/