How were Vietnam war different from Korean war?

Discounting technology (jets verses propeller driven aircraft, etc.), WW2 was a declared total war; any and all weapons were used to obtain an un-conditional surrender from the axis powers (Germany/Japan). Korea & Vietnam were limited wars; limited to the use of only conventional NON-ATOMIC WEAPONS. Korea & Vietnam were not total declared wars. There was no "un-conditional surrender"; instead there was negotiations...a settlement...truce (Armistice) in regards to Korea...and a communist victory in the case of Vietnam. The reason for this difference was the atomic bomb introduced in WW2. After the "A-bomb's" introduction in 1945, powerful nations could no longer fight declared total wars...without risking mutual destruction. Consequently, "limited wars." If there had been NO "A-Bomb", Korea would have erupted into WW3, fought as WW2 had been fought. The Korean War would have been a declared total war fought by free world nations verses the USSR, Red China, and North Korea.