Friday, July 28, 2017

When was America great?


By Kim Petersen

July 27, 2017 "Information Clearing House" - 


Racism, Poverty, Violence…

“Make America Great Again” was Donald Trump’s campaign slogan. It appeals to the people whose hearts beat with patriotic fervor. But what does such a slogan explicitly point out?

Syntactically, Trump is telling Americans that the United States of America is not great. A country can only become something again when it is currently not that something it seeks to recapture – in this case, that something is greatness. So currently the US is not great according to the mantra of Trump.

Two questions are raised by this?

1. When was America great?
2. How will Trump make America great again?

When was America great?

Obviously, to be become great again, America must have at one time been great. When was that?

Was America great at its inception? In an era when it was killing Indigenous peoples, violating treaties, and stealing their land? Can you be great when the early colonists, many professedly Christians, broke sacred commandments like “Thou shalt not kill” and “Thou shalt not steal”?

Was going to war with Mexico from 1846 to 1848 to aggrandize the US landmass great?

Was it great when the US allowed slave labor for the profit of slave owners? The Emancipation Proclamation was not issued until 1863, so unless a person believes that a country in which slavery can be practiced is great, then greatness must not have been possible until the later half of the 19th century. There are, however, some niggling complications to be discussed below.

In 1893, US corporate interests engineered an overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy and annexed the islands. Was this great? Yes, the US Congress apologized, but how great of an apology is that? If someone steals your car and says sorry, but that person does not return your car and instead continues driving it around town, would you be content with the apology? Can such an apology even be construed as sincere?

Near the close of the 19th century, the US went to war with Spain. While docked in Havana Harbor, an onboard explosion occurred sinking the USS Maine with huge loss of life. The cause of the sinking remains mysterious; some point to a spontaneous combustion fire. Nevertheless, despite unclear etiology, the US government, urged on by the yellow journalism of newspaper magnates, blamed Spain and went to war.

Spanish colonies fought with the US against Spain. At the war’s end, the US subsumed administration of the former Spanish colonies. Aspirations for self-determination by Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines were crushed. After bloody wars against the US, the Philippines finally gained independence in 1946. Cuba liberated itself in 1959 (although Guantanamo Bay remains occupied by the US). Guam and Puerto Rico remain de facto colonies of the US.

The 20th century also does not look great on the moral front for the US. The US entered WWI and WWII in the later stages of each war, and it helped to defeat imperialist warmongers in Europe and East Asia. It came up with the Marshall Plan to help Europe back on its feet again and provide markets for US capitalism.(1) Then in 1969, the US accomplished a spectacular feat by placing the first men on the moon. 

However, at the same time back on planet Earth, the US was waging war against an already war-ravaged Viet Nam that wound up killing millions of Vietnamese, and this came on the heels of waging war against North Korea also killing millions of Koreans. Neither of these countries posed a military threat to the US, and both wars imposed military defeats on the US. As soon as China entered the war in Korea, it pushed the US back from the Yalu River all the way to the 38th parallel. The US war on Viet Nam was a resounding defeat for the US, one that witnessed US troops scampering, at war’s end, from a Saigon rooftop to be transported to safety by helicopters.

Elsewhere, in the middle of the Indian Ocean, lies the Chagos archipelago, the site of more questionable American greatness. There the British government conspired with the US to remove all Chagossians from the British colony (which Britain had severed from Mauritius) to serve as an unfettered American military installation. It remains an ethnically cleansed strategic platform for American imperialism and militarism, as well as a site for extraordinary renditions.

Slavery was long ago outlawed, but racism and discrimination were still rife in 20th century America. It wasn’t until the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968 that the legal sanctions of racist Jim Crow laws were repealed.

Aside from the violence against Blacks on the homefront, the US was involved in several violent incidents in the 20th century such as the dissolution of Yugoslavia, the invasion of Grenada, Panama, Chile, etc. Is greatness conferred by waging violence? Especially violence against smaller, less militarily armed countries?

Has America ever been a noble beacon on the hill? Has it been an exemplar for democracy, freedom, human rights, and equal opportunity – values that would indicate greatness?


Has the 21st century seen a move toward American greatness? In 2003, the Persian Gulf Slaughter, led by the US, saw a genocide committed against Iraq based on a contrived casus belli.

In 2004, the US, abetted by Canada and France, orchestrated a military coup against the elected president of Haiti that forced Jean-Bertrand Aristide into exile overseas.

Then there is the ongoing war against Afghanistan; the war against Libya; the warring against Syria; a US-backed coup in Honduras; US-backed coup plots against the government in Venezuela; and unabated, continued support for the occupation and oppression of Indigenous Palestinians by the Jewish state. The litany of moral depredations that America wreaks upon peoples or that it is fully complicit with demand legal redress.

Given the above, this writer regards with extreme skepticism the notion of America ever having been great in any meaningful sense. Granted, great deeds have been accomplished in America, including developing a leading university system; technological breakthroughs in astronomy, aviation, transportation, communication, armaments; entertainment; sports; etc. However, the deeds do not add up to a great nation.

How will Trump make America great again?

Or, more correctly posed: how will Trump make America great?

Because it seems that America was never truly great. As per the foregoing arguments, I will dismiss the “again” part of Trump’s slogan. Sans the “again,” the slogan is not quite appealing. After all, a reformulated slogan like “Let’s finally make America great” probably wouldn’t be great for attracting votes. Better to appeal to the capricious American dream. 

But Trump’s slogan alone will not reify American greatness. So how is Trump going to make America great?

By building a wall to keep Mexicans out?

Trump is also pushing for a ban on travel from, originally seven now, six predominantly Muslim countries. Is this selective isolationism — identifying certain, purportedly undesirable nationalities and keeping them out — a nascent sign of greatness?

Is eliminating health insurance for millions of people while cutting taxes for the wealthy a great idea?

Is Trump chumming with Saud clan fat cats — the kleptocratic, misogynistic moneybags for ISIS — a great choice of allies?

Is shooting down a Syrian plane in Syrian airspace, unilaterally setting up US military bases in sovereign Syria, and bombing the country legal, ethical, or a sign of greatness?

Was the lethal US raid on Yemen and its ongoing involvement is a siege creating a cholera epidemic that is killing thousands of children a sign of America becoming great?

Is it great that Donald Trump is repeating the folly of the inarticulate former US president George W Bush who back-tracked on a deal to keep North Korea nuclear free? The result is that North Korea became a nuclear-armed nation. Despite having certified that Iran is compliant with the terms of a 2015 nuclear deal, Trump is determined to undermine the deal by violating the terms. Did Trump learn nothing from the US breaking its deal with North Korea? (2)

Is championing fossil fuels, disregarding the precautionary principle, and jettisoning participation in the Paris climate accord a sign of greatness?

One wonders, just how is it that Trump will make America great, regardless of whether it is again or for the first time?

The Chinese way to Greatness

Greatness is not conferred by having the most billionaires and neither by having the biggest corporations. When at the same time there are millions of working poor and unemployed what is indicated? When there are millions who are homeless and nourished by dumpster diving what does this tell one about the greatness of a country? Clearly, there is a wide chasm between the haves and have-nots. This is not greatness. The number of skyscrapers, the number of overseas military bases, the number of nuclear weapons, Silicon Valley, and the glitz of Hollywood do not mask the stench of a having a huge underclass that refutes any claim to greatness.

Greatness is a transcendent quality that sets itself above all else. Greatness is anathema to moral turpitude. The destruction of Indigenous peoples, the subjugation of others to slavery, the constant resort to lethal violence to impose one’s will, and the deteriorating quality of life for millions of people on the domestic front point toward a quality that rebuts any claim to greatness.

Instead of his bellicose rhetoric against China, Trump would be better advised to consider how the Chinese are pursuing a peaceful path to greatness. Unlike the US, China has pledged no first use of nukes. Although China has strengthened itself militarily (and who can blame it given that China is ringed by US military bases, and given the way an unfriendly US conducts itself in the South China Sea and elsewhere in the world), Chinese Communist Party chairman Xi Jinping affirms that peace is the way to settle disputes. 

China has an extraordinary goal: it is on target to eliminate poverty by the year 2020. Imagine that! No manned moon landing can compare since the elimiation of poverty is not based on a vicarious pride; rather, it is a social development that affects every citizen directly. Moreover, the rising dragon is also poised to place humans on lunar soil. Instead of imposing the scourge of war on small countries, China is a country that aspires to greatness through peaceful dialogue and by ridding itself of the scourges of hunger, homelessness, and other attributes of poverty. 

China partners with other nations to develop their economies; as such it funds and engages in multilateral economic development with a host of nations. Africa is not just a source for resource exploitation; China invests heavily in African infrastructure development. Across Asia and into Europe China invests in the mega Belt and Road Initiative that is spurring economic activity across Eurasia.

Is China great? In terms of the nation state, some kind of agreed upon definition is required. Assuredly, any meaningful definition of greatness would preclude wreaking violence on others. And how great are you if you can not properly care for and provide the basic necessities for your own citizens? I am not ready to pronounce China to be great,(3) but the policy directives and the steps China has embarked on appear promising.

Conclusion

In the case of America, to become genuinely great a first step is demanded. Since America exists as a nation state through its denationalization of Indigenous nations, it must first address and atone for this longstanding injustice. 

Second, America must sincerely address the historical wrongs committed against African-Americans. And should that day arrive — and hopefully soon — when America has ridden itself of racism, poverty as well as resolutely disavowing violence, then it may be considered to have genuinely attained greatness.


  1. In Understanding Power (New York: The New Press, 2002) anarchist professor Noam Chomsky says, “… the Marshall Plan was designed largely as an export-promotion operation for American business, not as the noblest effort in history …” p 39. 
  2. It must be noted that the US National Intelligence Estimate of 2007, endorsed by senior officials in 2011, concluded that Iran did not have a nuclear weapons program.
  3. At this stage of development, which chairman Xi notes is in the primary stage of socialism, China is still plagued by serious income inequality, albeit this inequality is tapering.

Kim Petersen is a former co-editor of the Dissident Voice newsletter. He can be reached at: kimohp@gmail.com. Twitter: @kimpetersen. Read other articles by Kim.


Wednesday, June 28, 2017


The terrorists attacking Syria may well be planning yet another chemical weapon attack to falsely blame on President Assad and the Syrian government. They have done this before, several times, and each time it is later proved to be a deliberate lie. If this fake story hits the news again, don't believe it!

Believe NOTHING Western politicians and 'news' media say about Syria. Everything they say should be assumed to be deliberate lies to cover their war crimes against Syria (unless and until proven otherwise - highly unlikely!).
Beware of more "false flags" to blame Syria for the evil deeds of the "U.S.-led coalition" of terrorists.



White House Says It Will Fake "Chemical Weapon Attack" In Syria
By Moon Of Alabama
Their aim is to prevent the victory of Syria and its allies. The U.S. wants to split up the country. Continue




Watch: Trump Ignored Intel Before Bombing Syria 
By Real News
Trump bombed Syria despite no evidence that the Assad regime used a chemical weapon. Continue




Hersh’s New Syria Revelations Buried From View
By Jonathan Cook
What Hersh’s critics must concede if they are to argue that Assad used sarin gas.  Continue



Trump Threatens Escalated Aggression on Syria
By Stephen Lendman
I guess it didn’t matter whether we elected Clinton or Trump.
 

Saturday, May 20, 2017


   














Syrian Prison Executions – Anatomy of a Smear Campaign 
Ted Faison, May 20, 2017

“…The public has become accustomed to media and government stories peddled without evidence, playing on shear emotion…the headlines stick in our minds. It’s not what’s true, it’s what people believe, and headlines are great indoctrination tools. Who cares about proof anymore?...

Syria is in the throes of a CIA-backed insurgency. Islamist extremists of every extraction, not to mention ISIS, with the common goal of replacing al-Assad with an extreme form of Sunni Islam. Everyone armed with American weapons supplied directly by the US or indirectly through Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and others…

Syria has since been the target of a massive, relentless disinformation campaign…the US government needed total, uncompromising public support. What better way to get that support than to depict your enemy as a sadistic, barbaric dictator?...

The smear campaign against Syria in general – and Bashar al-Assad personally – has been ongoing for years. We’ve seen nothing but horror stories come out of Syria. Allegations of chemical weapons, barrel bombing of civilians, terrible crimes against humanity. We’re seldom presented with evidence, yet the headlines stick in our minds. It’s not what’s true, it’s what people believe, and headlines are great indoctrination tools. Who cares about proof anymore?...

The smear machine is again in high gear, with reports of mass executions in a Syria prison accompanied by ghastly headlines…The mass media stories on Syrian prison exterminations conjure up images of people tortured to death in dark, dingy rooms.

They turn our stomachs.
They cry out for justice.
If only they were true.

If my mother taught me anything, it was "don’t believe everything you read"…so let’s look at the stories more carefully to see if they merit our belief... In a court of law, one would immediately demand proof. Where is the evidence?... 

As it turns out, they’re all based on a single report published by Amnesty International. On the surface, the report is formatted to look like a scholarly paper, with footnotes, dates, methodologies, procedures. All very impressive to the layman…

But Amnesty’s purpose wasn’t to present facts but rather to sway opinion, and at the highest levels: The US Congress, the US courts, the US presidency, the United Nations, not to mention the western public in general…

…And what to say about recent reports of a crematorium inside the Saydnaya prison grounds?... With a little digging, we discover that all the stories are tied (again) to a single source: a newly declassified satellite image of Saydnaya prison… No other proof. Not even a single witness, alleged or otherwise…

…The public has become accustomed to media and government stories peddled without evidence, playing on shear emotion. The pseudo-journalists of today are heavy on accusations and light on facts, especially when dealing with perceived foes of the United States.

We’re all still waiting for the evidence about Russia’s tampering with the US elections, Russia’s hacking of the Democratic National Convention servers, Russia’s secret ties with Trump. Given what’s at stake, if evidence existed it would have been presented long ago, and the massive US smear machine would have had a field day.”

- - -

Edmund "Ted" Faison is a software architect living in Southern California. With an electrical engineering degree from California State University, Fullerton, he has published several books on computer and software technology. He also…developed a keen interest in international affairs, with special emphasis on American foreign policy.

- - -

Read the complete article: 

- - -

A statement from the article with which I would disagree:
“Syria is an enemy of the Saudis, who are America’s best friend. No foreign country has more control of the US government than Saudi Arabia.”  I believe that role is shared with, if not exceeded by, Israel.


- - -

This may come as a great shock to many people, but multiple evidence shows Amnesty International is no longer the ethical champion of human rights that it may once have been.



Monday, May 01, 2017

To understand the real reasons for war, follow the money. . .



 America’s Financial War Strategy

By Alasdair Macleod
April 20, 2017

EXTRACTS:

“America’s renewed desire to escalate military tensions is a front for America’s continual financial war, this time directed at North Korea, Syria and possibly Iran. 

This is likely to be the opinion of China’s strategic advisors. We analyse the geopolitics and economics behind America’s war strategy from China’s perspective, concluding that it is entering its final phase. 

China’s exit plan appears to be to tie the pricing of energy and then other major commodities to gold, returning to the pre-1971 status quo, when the dollar was just a settlement link between commodity prices and gold. Except this time, the dollar itself will be side-lined, so far as China is concerned, which will use the yuan instead for its empire, which will be far larger than that of the US in time…

It is because of American-led operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria that Europe is flooded with refugees, bringing undercover terrorists with them. 

There can be little doubt that a dispassionate analyst would recommend America abandons military action, so there must be other reasons behind America’s war-mongering…

The relationship between Russia and China is strong, and they are likely to coordinate their strategic responses to American aggression in both Korea and Syria. 

The question is, if America continues to escalate its bellicose actions against North Korea, Syria, and possibly Iran, what will their response be? For clues, we should look at this from China’s point of view. 

The People’s Liberation Army’s most influential strategist, Major-General Qiao Liang laid out his overall strategic philosophy at a book-study forum of the Communist Party’s Central Committee in Autumn 2015…

Qiao’s principal thesis is that America uses the dollar to manage external trade and finance for its domestic benefit. 

Many of us are familiar with the proposition that by exporting dollars and dollar-denominated bank credit, America creates wealth for both the US government and the major American banks, and that the dollar’s reserve status is accordingly vital to the US economy. 

But Qiao takes this much further, claiming that since the dollar’s peg to the gold price was abandoned, America has initiated a cycle of economic boom and bust among foreign users of the dollar for its own benefit…

[Qiao] claims that Saddam Hussein was overthrown because he instituted a policy of selling oil for euros, not dollars. That was true, and there is little doubt that the threat to dollar hegemony was discouraged. He claims the break-up of Yugoslavia was to undermine the status of the new euro…

Qiao then turns his attention to the contemporary cycle (in 2015) of dollar management, claiming it was now aimed at China… 

However, China has protected herself from America’s financial attacks through its national ownership of the banks and by capital controls. Consequently, only foreigners can sell yuan to buy dollars, or withdraw dollars from their own operations to invest in Treasuries. Therefore, the damage was always going to be limited…

China also bends with the wind. While America increases her Naval domination of the Pacific region, instead of fighting it she merely increases her influence towards the West. This is the basis of the One Belt One Road project, which is already running goods trains as far as Madrid and London.

China prefers her trade partners to take yuan in payment, and will lend them yuan if called upon. In time, yuan payments will have convertibility into gold using the Shanghai Gold Futures Market when it gains greater depth, making it superior to the dollar as a settlement currency…

Embedded in Qiao’s analysis is an understanding that the Chinese empire will not only become far larger than the US in terms of trade, but by understanding the weaknesses of American financial imperialism, it will be more enduring… 

Let us assume for a moment that his thesis is valid, then Trump’s threats to escalate a regional war over North Korea and/or Syria/Iran takes on a wholly different light…

By threatening North Korea, dollar investment is likely to flow out of trade and investment in South Korea and Japan, back to US Treasuries… this could solve two pressing problems: the first is to persuade Congress to sanction an increase in the deficit limit, it always being easier to persuade Congress to finance a government at war, and the second is to attract the necessary dollar-denominated capital to buy Treasury debt, without having to increase interest rates…

…China will avoid being undermined by these negative capital flows. Unknown to the public, America has already failed in its financial war against China, and needs new victims, which is why the attention has switched to the Korean peninsula as well as the Middle East. 

Trump now realises the only way his presidency can prosper is to encourage capital flight into America from abroad, and have the debt limit raised to accommodate it…

Japan and South Korea will most probably have studied Qiao’s paper, becoming wise to America’s true motives, and are therefore more likely to distance themselves from trading in dollars thereafter. Their private sectors will be slow to understand these financial dynamics, so will remain victims. 

But for governments and large corporations, the American gaff has been blown. This is likely to lead us into a new world, where the dollar’s decline as a reserve and trade currency accelerates, as America runs out of its pump-and-dump victims. And when that happens, the dollar is almost certain to rapidly lose its purchasing power, leading to a global currency reset and a far higher dollar price for gold…

China places a great emphasis on hoarding gold, both for itself and its citizens… But China has gone even further, seeking to control the global market by making the Shanghai Gold Exchange the largest physical exchange by far. 

She has now introduced yuan gold futures contracts, which will be followed by yuan oil futures contracts in time. This ensures that foreign traders in commodities and wholesale goods can sell forward the yuan they receive in return for gold, increasing the attractiveness of trade finance and settled in yuan compared with dollars. And when the yuan oil contract is introduced, oil importers will use the yuan contracts to sell oil for gold.

In one simple action, China is ready to change the pricing of oil to gold instead of dollars… 

This should come as no surprise to the American state, close to being declared check-mate by China on the geopolitical chess board. The dollar price of gold is likely to rise sharply, reflecting the loss of purchasing power for the dollar, and it will end the American dollar’s exorbitant privilege, enjoyed since the end of the gold standard in 1971. 

It is potentially the coup-de grace for both the paper dollar and American imperialism.

Conclusion

China is thinking ahead, and has its own unique understanding of how America manages its financial empire for the benefit of its domestic economy, at the expense of everyone else. 

China has protected herself, and attempts by America to undermine China’s economy have already failed. Attention is now focused elsewhere. 

The latest war-mongering against North Korea, Syria and possibly Iran has much to do with persuading Congress to raise the debt ceiling, and to encourage capital flight back into a new wave of US Treasuries without interest rates being raised. This neatly explains Trump’s change of heart over foreign adventures…

China’s publication of Qiao’s analysis has alerted government strategists everywhere to the use of this tactic, reducing its efficacy. America is running out of fools to fleece.

The end game for the dollar and America’s harvesting of foreign countries is therefore in sight, and it will likely end with a final dollar crisis. China could bring this about at a time of its own choosing, simply by introducing the planned oil futures yuan contract alongside the gold futures yuan contract… 

This explains the dynamics being played out at the highest levels, and America has the most to lose. But because China still owns large quantities of US Treasuries and dollar reserves, for the moment she might prefer more time before executing the coup de grace.

But execute it, she will. 

Her fundamental objective is to remove America’s ability to profit from having everything priced in dollars. 

Logically, that means getting oil and other key commodities referenced in gold, as they were before the Nixon shock in 1971, with fiat currencies merely being the settlement media. 

America must be careful not to bring forth the date of her own demise by attacking North Korea, Syria, or Iran.” 


Read the complete article:

Also read the complete article, and read/post public comments:





Watch:
The West lives in debt – Putin
(YouTube, 5:05)

“They say that if you want to understand the values of a particular society - take a look at its architecture and buildings. Which ones stand out as the most glamorous in today's world? Why of course - the international banks and financial institutions. 

All countries live in debt, albeit to much larger proportions in the West - but to whom? A handful of fat cat CEOs. 

In this quick outtake, Putin talks about the state of the international economy. The key point to take away is that the US prints fiat money, backed by nothing more than thin air, while the national debt level only gets larger (19 trillion!) 

The only way this situation can change is through the imposition of a parallel financial system that steers away from the US dollar as the reserve currency. 

Gaddafi attempted to do this in his time, through the use of the gold backed dinar. Russia and China are the only ones left that allude to the possibility of a world in which the dollar is no longer the reserve currency. 

In theory, such a system would dismantle the 500 year old Rothschild Empire. The empire that continually sponsors both sides of wars...”





Sunday, April 23, 2017

Why Does North Korea Want Nukes?
 
“Why has this tiny nation of 24 million people invested so much of its limited resources in acquiring nuclear weapons?... 

North Korea’s stance cannot be separated out from its turbulent history during the 20th Century, especially its four decade long occupation by Japan, the forced division of the Korean peninsula after World War II, and, of course, the subsequent utterly devastating war with the United States from 1950-1953 that ended in an armistice in which a technical state of war still exists…

…Japan surrendered on 15 August when Soviet troops had occupied much of the northern peninsula. It should be noted that American forces played no role in the liberation of Korea from Japanese rule. However, because the Soviets, as allies of the U.S., wished to remain on friendly terms they agreed to the division of Korea between Soviet and American forces…

The Soviets could easily have occupied the entirety of Korea but chose not to do so, instead opting for a negotiated settlement with the U.S. over the future of Korea. Theoretically the peninsula would be reunited after some agreement between the two victors at some future date.

However, the U.S. immediately began to favor those Koreans who had collaborated with the Japanese in the exploitation of their own country and its people, largely the landed elites, and Washington began to arm the provisional government it set up to root out the peoples’ committees. 

For their part the Soviets supported the communist nationalist leader, Kim Il-Sung who had led the guerrilla army against Japan at great cost in lives.

In 1947 the United Nations authorized elections in Korea, but the election monitors were all American allies so the Soviets and communist Koreans refused to participate. By then the Cold War was in full swing, the critical alliance between Washington and Moscow that had defeated Nazi Germany had already been sundered. 

As would later also occur in Vietnam in 1956, the U.S. oversaw elections only in the south of Korea and only those candidates approved by Washington. Syngman Rhee became South Korea’s first president protected by the new American armed and trained Army of the Republic of Korea. This ROK was commanded by officers who had served the Japanese occupation…

On both sides of the new artificial border pressures mounted for a forcible reunification. The fact remained that much of rural southern Korea was still loyal to the peoples committees. This did not necessarily mean that they were committed communists but they were virulent nationalists who recognized the role that Kim’s forces had played against the Japanese. Rhee’s forces then began to systematically root out Kim’s supporters…

In 1948 guerrilla war broke out against the Rhee regime on the southern island of Cheju, the population of which ultimately rose in wholesale revolt. The suppression of the rebellion was guided by many American agents soon to become part of the Central Intelligence Agency and by military advisers…between 20,000 and 30,000 villagers died. 

Simultaneously elements of the ROK army refused to participate in this war against their own people and this mutiny was brutally suppressed by those ROK soldiers who would obey such orders. Over one thousand of the mutineers escaped to join Kim’s guerrillas in the mountains…

In 1950 Washington issued its famous National Security Paper-68 (NSC-68) which outlined the agenda for a global anti-communist campaign, requiring the tripling of the American defense budget…

The Korean War seemed to vindicate everything written and said about the” international communist conspiracy. In popular myth on June 25, 1950 the North Korean Army suddenly attacked without warning… In fact the entire 38th Parallel had been progressively militarized and there had been numerous cross border incursions by both sides going back to 1949…

The Korean civil war was all but inevitable. Given postwar American plans for access globally to resources, markets and cheaper labor power any form of national liberation, communist or liberal democratic, was to be opposed… 

Truman decided to request authorization for American intervention from the United Nations and bypassed Congress thereby leading to widespread opposition and, later, a return to Republican rule under Dwight Eisenhower…

The war went badly at first for the U.S. despite numerical advantages in forces. Rout after rout followed with the ROK in full retreat. Meanwhile tens of thousands of southern guerrillas who had originated in peoples’ committees fought the Americans and the ROK. 

At one point the North Koreans were in control of Seoul and seemed about to drive American forces into the sea. At that point the commander- in-chief of all UN forces, General Douglas MacArthur, announced that he saw unique opportunities for the deployment of atomic weapons…

Truman was loathe to introduce nukes and instead authorized MacArthur to conduct the famous landings at Inchon in September 1950…This threw North Korean troops into disarray and MacArthur began pushing them back across the 38th Parallel, the mandate imposed by the UN resolution. But the State Department claimed that the border was not recognized under international law and therefore the UN mandate had no real legal bearing. 

It was this that MacArthur claimed gave him the right to take the war into the north. Though the North Koreans had suffered a resounding defeat in the south, they withdrew into northern mountain redoubts forcing the American forces that followed them into bloody and costly combat, led Americans into a trap.

The Chinese had said from the beginning that any approach of foreign troops toward their border would result in “dire consequences.” 

Fearing an invasion of Manchuria to crush the nascent communist revolution the Chinese foreign minister, Zhou En-Lai declared that China “will not supinely tolerate seeing their neighbors invaded by the imperialists.” 

MacArthur sneered at this warning. “… They have no airforce…if the Chinese tried to get down to Pyongyang there would be a great slaughter…we are the best.” He then ordered airstrikes to lay waste thousands of square miles of northern Korea bordering China and ordered infantry divisions ever closer to its border.

It was the terrible devastation of this bombing campaign, worse than anything seen during World War II short of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that to this day dominates North Korea’s relations with the United States and drives its determination never to submit to any American diktat.

General Curtis Lemay directed this onslaught. It was he who had firebombed Tokyo in March 1945 saying it was “about time we stopped swatting at flies and gone after the manure pile.” It was he who later said that the US “ought to bomb North Vietnam back into the stone age.” Remarking about his desire to lay waste to North Korea he said “We burned down every town in North Korea and South Korea too.” Lemay was by no means exaggerating.

On November 27, 1950 hundreds of thousands of Chinese troops suddenly crossed the border into North Korea completely overwhelming US forces…

Panic took hold in Washington. Truman now said use of A-bombs was under “active consideration.” MacArthur demanded the bombs… As he put it in his memoirs:

I would have dropped between thirty and fifty atomic bombs…strung across the neck of Manchuria…and spread behind us – from the Sea of Japan to the Yellow Sea- a belt of radioactive cobalt. It has an active life of between 60 and 120 years.

Cobalt it should be noted is at least 100 times more radioactive than uranium.

He also expressed a desire for chemicals and gas…

By June 1951, one year after the beginning of the war, the communists had pushed UN forces back across the 38th parallel… the war became one of attrition…casualties continued to be high on both sides for the duration of the war which lasted until 1953 when an armistice without reunification was signed.

Of course the victims suffering worst were the civilians. In 1951 the U.S. initiated “Operation Strangle” which officials estimated killed at least 3 million people on both sides of the 38th parallel, but the figure is probably closer to 4 million…

The North accused the U.S. of dropping bombs laden with cholera, anthrax, plague, and encephalitis and hemorrhagic fever, all of which turned up among soldiers and civilians in the north. 

Some American prisoners of war confessed to such war crimes but these were dismissed as evidence of torture by North Korea on Americans. However, none of the U.S. POWs who did confess and were later repatriated were allowed to meet the press. 

A number of investigations were carried out by scientists from friendly western countries. One of the most prominent concluded the charges were true. At this time the US was engaged in top secret germ-warfare research with captured Nazi and Japanese germ warfare experts, and also experimenting with Sarin, despite its ban by the Geneva Convention. Washington accused the communists of introducing germ warfare.

Napalm was used extensively, completely and utterly destroying the northern capital of Pyongyang. By 1953 American pilots were returning to carriers and bases claiming there were no longer any significant targets in all of North Korea to bomb. In fact a very large percentage of the northern population was by then living in tunnels dug by hand underground…

In the Spring of 1953 US warplanes hit five of the largest dams along the Yalu river completely inundating and killing Pyongyang’s harvest of rice. 

Air Force documents reveal calculated premeditation saying that “Attacks in May will be most effective psychologically because it was the end of the rice-transplanting season before the roots could become completely embedded.” Flash floods scooped out hundreds of square miles of vital food producing valleys and killed untold numbers of farmers.

At Nuremberg after WWII, Nazi officers who carried out similar attacks on the dikes of Holland, creating a mass famine in 1944, were tried as criminals and some were executed for their crimes…

I submit that it is the collective memory of all of what I’ve described that animates North Korea’s policies toward the US today which has nuclear weapons on constant alert and stations almost 30,000 forces at the ready. Remember, a state of war still exists and has since 1953…

While South Korea received heavy American investment in the industries fleeing the United States in search of cheaper labor and new markets it was nevertheless ruled until quite recently by military dictatorships scarcely different than those of the north. 

For its part the north constructed its economy along five-year plans and collectivized its agriculture. While it never enjoyed the sort of consumer society that now characterizes some of South Korea, its GDP grew substantially until the collapse of communism globally brought about the withdrawal of all foreign aid to north Korea.

During the late 1980s and early 1990s, as some American policymakers took note of the north’s growing weakness, Secretary of Defense Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz talked openly of using force finally to settle the question of Korean reunification and the claimed threat to international peace posed by North Korea.

In 1993 the Clinton Administration discovered that North Korea was constructing a nuclear processing plant and also developing medium range missiles. The Pentagon desired to destroy these facilities but that would mean wholesale war so the administration fostered an agreement whereby North Korea would stand down in return for the provision of oil and other economic aid.

Then in 2001, after the events of 9-11, the Bush II neo-conservatives militarized policy and declared North Korea to be an element of the “axis of evil.” All bets were now off. 

In that context, North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, reasoning that nuclear weapons were the only way possible to prevent a full scale attack by the US in the future. Given a stark choice between another war with the US and all that would entail this decision seems hardly surprising.

Under no circumstances could any westerner reasonably expect, after all the history I’ve described, that the North Korean regime would simply submit to any ultimatums by the US, by far the worst enemy Korea ever had measured by the damage inflicted on the entirety of the Korean peninsula.”

- - -
Read the complete article:

Also read the complete article, and read/post public comments: