Tag Archives: Korean War

Of course it was the 7th cavalry at Nogun Ri

Posted on by
Reply
Of course it was the 7th cavalry at Nogun Ri

Even the rightest wing-est extremist in Texas don’t hold a candle to Some Colorado Wingnuts, the ones who call Natives “prairie niggers” or “wagon burners”, especially when any negative reviews of the Seventh Cavalry massacres. Like Wounded knee, a vengeance quest for Custer and a bunch of his homicidal lunatic troopers got their own asses sent to Hell. And before that, at the Little Ouachita, murdering men, women and children at a mostly Cheyenne winter encampment. Must not criticize heroic asswipes like Custer. Oh, that song they adopted, Garryowen, that’s about a really rowdy  custom (performed by the lads of Garryowen, a town in Ireland) of getting drunk and beating up on cops. Anyhoo, I got this from Wiki because it’s easy. Sue me. It’s about another massacre and why the people of Korea aren’t as enthusiastic about the U.S. Big Brother as the South Korean Government. Hint: it’s because the corrupt U.S. Government pays the S. Korean Puppet Government to pretend to like us.

The No Gun Ri massacre (Hangul: ??? ??? ?? ??; Hanja: ?????????; RR: Nogeun-ri minganin haksal sageon) occurred on July 26–29, 1950, early in the Korean War, when an undetermined number of South Korean refugees were killed in a U.S. air attack and by small- and heavy-weapons fire of the 7th U.S. Cavalry at a railroad bridge near the village of Nogeun-ri (Korean: ???), 100 miles (160 km) southeast of Seoul. In 2005, a South Korean government inquest certified the names of 163 dead or missing and 55 wounded, and added that many other victims’ names were not reported. The South Korean government-funded No Gun Ri Peace Foundation estimated in 2011 that 250–300 were killed, mostly women and children.

The incident was little-known outside Korea until publication of an Associated Press (AP) story in 1999 in which 7th Cavalry veterans corroborated survivors’ accounts. The AP also uncovered declassified U.S. Army orders to fire on approaching civilians because of reports of North Korean infiltration of refugee groups. Some details were disputed, but the massacre account was found to be essentially correct. In 2001, the U.S. Army conducted an investigation and, after previously rejecting survivors’ claims, acknowledged the killings, but described the three-day event as “an unfortunate tragedy inherent to war and not a deliberate killing”. The army rejected survivors’ demands for an apology and compensation. United States President Bill Clinton issued a statement of regret, adding the next day that “things happened which were wrong”.

South Korean investigators disagreed with the U.S. report, saying that they believed that 7th Cavalry troops were ordered to fire on the refugees. The survivors’ group called the U.S. report a “whitewash”. The AP later discovered additional archival documents showing that U.S. commanders ordered troops to “shoot” and “fire on” civilians at the war front during this period; these declassified documents had been found but not disclosed by the Pentagon investigators. American historian Sahr Conway-Lanz reported that among the undisclosed documents was a letter from the U.S. ambassador in South Korea stating that the U.S. military had adopted a theater-wide policy of firing on approaching refugee groups. Despite demands, the U.S. investigation was not reopened.

Prompted by the exposure of No Gun Ri, survivors of similar alleged incidents from 1950–51 filed reports with the Seoul government. In 2008, an investigative commission said more than 200 cases of alleged large-scale killings by the U.S. military had been registered, mostly air attacks

If you’re a vet from that arena, and was above the rank of captain at the time, I won’t give two thirds of a sex act about your damn feelings.

US use of torture on POWs should stop

Posted on by
Reply

The U.S. has a long history of torturing its POWs. Torture of POWs is used by many other countries. However its use is denied by many U.S. authorities or government officials. The definition of torture put simply is to cause pain, emotionally, physically, or psychologically. Torture is used to terrify enemies, and hardly ever gains information.

Some examples of the U.S. A. military use of torture on P.O.W.s

Che Guevara
Che Guevara was murdered on October 9, 1967 in Bolivia. He was tortured and killed by Bolivian soldiers trained and equipped by CIA operatives. Che was told he was going to be killed by Felix Rodriguez. He was shot in the legs several times, and put into a dirty schoolhouse. His arms and feet were tied while he lay in the dirt. He lay by the bodies of his dead Guerrilla fighters. The USA tried to cover up his deliberate murder by shooting him in the legs to make it look like he died in battle. He was never given a trial. He was shot nine times.

Philippines war
The Philippine war was a war fought by Filipino revolutionaries and the USA. Waterboarding was one of the main techniques used by the CIA. It was used on Extra Judiciar prisoners.The department of Justice authorized this. Sleep Deprivation and de-sensorizing among other things was used. The use of solitary confinement and confusion is used frequently, prisoners are made to wear blindfolds to cause confusion and panic. Medical treatment is also refused. Bribery, and threats are used to force a confession.

Korean War
The Korean war was fought between South and North Korea. The US occupied the south, while the soviet troops occupied the North.

Vietnam War
Prisoners were put in Tiger cages. Lime was dumped on them, and water was dumped on them after.

Central America
In Nicaragua Somoza tortured people by putting them in cages with lions. Somoza was a dictator backed up by the US military. In Argentina children of communist parents were stolen, while their parents were tortured and killed.

School of The Americas
The CIA distributes an interrogation manual which shows torture techniques to use during interrogations. The manual was used by the CIA to train US-supported Latin American militaries at this school.

Abu Ghraib Prison
Torture has been recently used in Abu Ghraib prison, located in Iraq. Some of the main forms of torture used here are rape, sodomy, water boarding among many others. Military Intelligence has been present during these procedures, and highly encourages it. A prison guard said prisoners receive snake bites for minimum mis-behavior. In the AD. seg units prisoners are dumped into poop and pee.

Afghanistan war
The US invaded, tortured and suffocated thousands of POWs to death.

Officials claim that Torture must be used to gain information. During the presidency of George W. Bush some U.S government officials said that they believed water boarding was not a form of torture. In 2002 the Office of Legal Counsel stated that water boarding wasn’t a form of torture. The OLC said that the reason water boarding was not thought of as a torture was that “In order for pain or suffering to rise to the level of torture, that statute requires it to be severe & water boarding did not cause severe pain or suffering either physically or mentally.” Even though water boarding causes the victim to believe he/she is being drowned.

Torture hardly ever gains information but instead is used to terrorize people so they don’t resist, or to force a confession. Torture is used in interrogations by cops, being put in handcuffs that are to tight is also a less painful form of torture. During the st. Patrick Parade a couple of years ago the police stopped the parade and threw older people on the ground, an old lady was dragged across the pavement and put into handcuffs. She died a couple of months later.

People say that the US doesn’t torture people, because supposedly it is better than that.The fact of the matter is that the USA is the biggest user of torture in the world. It has and will continue to torture its POWs while everyone here says the USA government and military does not torture and has never tortures POWs.

The reasons for Military Service, Training and Recruitment Programs…

Posted on by
Reply

Such as the Youth Programs which the Right WingNuts are so upset because we compare them (correctly) to the HitlerJugend.
I am fully aware that everything I write here will be denied and called false, simply because the Pentagon says differently.

But the reasons many have put forth about the mission of the Military and Paramilitary Youth groups as to what their Training Programs are set to accumplish are purest bullshit.

Joining the Military to get health benefits, education, build a career or to get your life together, for instance.

The military doesn’t care about your health beyond what is necessary for you to complete your mission.

And that mission is to Kill when you are ordered to do so.

The Military likewise doesn’t care if you remain uneducated, in fact, Education is contrary to the training mission.

People who are educated, who think independently, are a liability to the mission of the Military, which is to Kill when you are ordered to do so.

Thinking for yourself would make you question your orders.

The Military does not exist as a Career Opportunity, if you can make a career of the Military they won’t object, but the primary mission is for you to Kill when you are ordered to do so.

If it’s done by Career people or people who are in only for one enlistment it doesn’t matter.

The Military does not exist as your own publicly funded private counseling service.

They don’t care if you “become a man” or “straighten out your life” by or through their training.

The training is to make you accept, without ever questioning orders, their mission, which, once again, is to Kill People when you are told to do so.

After you complete your “duty” to Kill People when told to do so, and you are out of the Military either through being killed, wounded so badly that you are no longer of any use to the Military and their mission, if your enlistment is finished or you retire, the Military no longer has any reason to care about your Education, your health care, your career goals or your lifestyle.

The “goals” you set as a reason for Military service are your own affair.

The so-called Benefits are a Recruitment Pitch, and remember, the Recruiter gets paid more for every kid he gets to join the service.

Paid more directly in bonuses and paid more in promotion in rank, rank being your Pay Grade.

The Recruiter is literally selling you to the Army/Navy/Air Force/Marines.

The training regimen is designed to make you obey without thinking and without question.

Whether in the Marine Corps, other branches of the Military such as the Air Force, or the Kiddie Korps like Devil Dogs, the fundamental part of the training is a technoque politely called Pavlovian Conditioning.

Other groups who use this Conditioning Technique are Cults, Dictatorships, Torturers, and Prisons.

When Cults do the same technique, it’s called Brainwashing.

When the Red Chinese did the same thing in order to SUCCESSFULLY control the prisoner of war camps in the Korean War, it was called Brainwashing.

Did you know, there was not ONE prison insurrection nor even ONE escape from the Chinese prison camps?

The level of severity of the training regimen doesn’t make any difference.

The end result is the same if you’re in the Marines or in the Air Force or The People’s Temple or in Devilpups.

Devilpups would have the least Intensive training of them because they’re working with children, and that does NOT mean that they’re “going soft on the kids”.

It simply means that kids are easier to train to follow orders.

They’re more prone to accept “groupthink”.

It’s the same reason Reverend David Wilkerson said in his book “The Cross and the Switchblade” that they YOUNGEST gang members were the most dangerous.

And in truth, they ARE.

It’s the same reason the United States Army Office of Special Services, the precursor to today’s C.I.A., wrote in training manuals for Resistance Groups in Axis-occupied countries that children as young as 12 make the most effective recruits in these organizations.

It’s the reason the U.S. Government Claims to oppose “terror” groups like Hizbollah and the Resistance in Gaza and Iraq and Afghanistan.

They feel so bad for these poor kids that they imprison them, torture and kill them the same as though they were adults.

In other words, crocodile tears.

It’s the reason Military Recruiters are allowed to ply their Sick Trade among Elementary School kids.

Barack Obama resembles Gerald Ford more than he does Lincoln

Posted on by
Reply

Gerald FordToday’s Denver Post print edition headline reads U.S. closes door on Guantanamo, torture. Of interest is how their internet version of this headline has changed the verb tense from ‘closes’ to ‘closing’. Yes, well it amounts to about the same thing, kind of? Well but is it a closed book, or not? That question has to be asked because Gerald Ford supposedly closed the book on Watergate, which was where a President acted in a criminal manner but was left entirely free from facing any criminal charges! The President will be stopped (after his criminal acts become just too obvious and exposed) but is simply above the law, was how the message was left later to be read by the likes of Dubya Bush and Dick Cheney.

Yes, Barack Obama wants to clean America’s image up and closing Guantanamo’s detention unit down is key to that. But he also wants to sweep the dirt under the rug and get on with it, so to speak. There is no evidence that he plans to prosecute anybody for the crimes they committed by running this Federal torture camp, and this is what makes us look on these seemingly positive moves with a huge amount of scepticism.

Eisenhower, too, eventually stopped the McCarthyite witch hunt from going further forward, but then continued to wage the Korean War that resulted in millions going to their deaths. He kept the Cold War going full tilt, and much of the world worried that the ‘cold’ would become a hot war with nuclear weapons begin launched. In fact, Eisenhower’s military command thought long and hard about nuking China. So looking at the edicts coming out from Barack Obama on his first day about supposedly moving to end the torture regime of the Bush Administration should not be looked at with rose tinged glasses on.

Suspected U.S. missile attacks kill 18 in Pakistan At the same time as Barack is supposedly ending US government torture of POWs, his Administration is continuing the bombing of targets that hit civilians in Pakistan as often as not. Further, the bombing raids are a violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty, same as the continued now Barack Occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan are, too.

While nobody can expect Barack Obama to reverse all that Bush’s Klan instituted with DP loyal assistance in just one or two days, let alone one or two weeks, there still is really no reason to assume that Barack has any plan to do so… EVER. In this sense, Barack Obama resembles Gerald Ford much more than he resembles Abraham Lincoln. Eventually this will become rather obvious but for now the liberal euphoria continues. They are being led around on their leashes by the corporate media and Barack, but what we are actually seeing so far is Barack Obama pardoning Bush and his gang for crimes committed.

One big pimp for the Pentagon

Posted on by
Reply

Korean prostitute“Our government was one big pimp for the U.S. military,” one of the women, Kim Ae-ran, 58, said in a recent interview reports the NYT. Ex-Prostitutes Say South Korea and U.S. Enabled Sex Trade Near Bases.

This woman is talking about South Korea but just as well could have been talking about the South Vietnamese government, the Thai government, or the Philippine government. When one strips away all the rhetoric about fighting communism, fighting terrorism, and fighting to bring democracy to whoever? …what remains is the naked reality of ‘our boys’ screwing over other peoples on behalf of the US corporate elites’ profit making and power.

All those lies about why the US supposedly went and occupied South Korea to spread democracy we have heard through all these long years, are now crumbling away into the real facts becoming more known about mass atrocities, mass prostitution of Korean women, and the simple mass brainwashing of the American people back then that is coming out. Korea was no good war, but was rather merely the Japanese occupation of that country being turned into the US occupation of a portion of that Peninsula.

Many in the US military High Command wanted to drop nuclear weapons on China at that time as they used Korea as a base for their US government Asian aggression! That’s the moral caliber of the US Political and Military establishment and the forced sex trade was the same thing just passed downward as spoils to the grunts. Part of the ‘character building’ the US military is noted for. Join the Army and get a license to kill. Get a license to fuck an under aged prostitute with little to no risk from the law.

US slaughtered over 100,000 prisoners during US invasion of Korea

Posted on by
1

Suspected partisans taken for execution by South Korean Army In the US, it is always called the ‘Korean War’ simply to cover up the fact that it was really the US invasion of Korea, followed by our long occupation of the southern part of the Korean Peninsula. Millions died, and over 100,000 of them were innocent Korean civilians picked up by US directed forces off the streets and then simply slaughtered. AP: U.S. Okayed Korean War Massacres The history was then swept under the rug.

The War in Iraq

Posted on by
Reply

the war no more
In my opinion, noted chronicler Ken Burns, whom I otherwise respect, does Americans a great disservice to title his multimedia WWII homage THE WAR.

I do resent the President and his enablers admonishing Americans for what may or may not be appropriate behavior “in a time of war.” We were not “at war” during the Cold War or the War on Drugs. And the War on Terror is equally an [existential, so-called] abstraction. Fighting terrorists, including the invasion of Afghanistan, is a police action. If we are talking about apprehension. Missile strikes are extra-judicial assassination. Undeclared military aggression.

But since our soldiers are being sent to war, and there is profound anti-war revulsion, and congress is being asked to collude by providing war funding, and we are detaining combatants which at a minimum should be awarded Prisoner of War status, we cannot escape discussing Iraq as a war, and most notably as an illegal war.

So when Ken Burns calls his WWII tome THE WAR, isn’t it more than slightly dismissive of veterans of all combat since? The Vietnam War lasted three times as long as WWII, to Baby Boomers it was the war. The Korean War, termed a “conflict” to avoid having Congress refuse a declaration of war, is now called the Korean War, even tragically the Forgotten War. World War One before it was The First World War, was known as The Great War, even the War to End All Wars. De facto it WAS THE WAR, but imagine anyone thinking to call it that in the midst of WWII.

Does Burns mean to deny [The] Iraq [War] its significance, even as he might suggest it lacks the legitimacy of WWII, the Just War? As Iraq casualties and atrocities slip from the headlines, it’s hard to see the diversion of WWII nostalgia as helpful.

Iraq may turn out to be simply the opening salvo of THE WAR declared by the corporate west on all of humanity. It deserves its due.

Sand Creek No Gun Ri

Posted on by
2

This morning will be the dedication of the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site. The headline of today’s Gazette? “One man’s battle” about whether the 1864 slaughter was a massacre or a battle, and reporting the re-release of a 1925 first hand account written by Irving Howbert who, 61 years after the fact, did not recall the atrocities ascribed to his unit. Whatever kind of near sesquicentenial slap in the face is this? Do you think the prominent placement of this insult could have something to do with blurring America’s vision about current military massacres?

Normally respected Old Colorado City historian Dave Hughes is republishing the book, and wants to repaint the Sand Creek Massacre as, well, not a massacre at all. A quick recap: One early morning in 1864, 700 cavalry volunteers swooped into a village of 500 Arapaho and Cheyenne refugees, killing nearly 200 (the Gazette says 150) committing unmentionable atrocities, following the command “Kill or scalp all, big and little; nits become lice!”

I first heard Dave Hughes talk about the glories of war at, of all places, the traveling Vietnam War Memorial. It reflected a myopic immoral tide change I would never have been cynical enough to foresee, and it presaged our national sanction of the US war of aggression against Iraq and acceptable collateral damage. In the shadow of the traveling wall, remembering the 58,000 American dead, where not often enough did someone mention the millions of Vietnamese dead, Dave spoke of his immense pride of commanding his men, suffering the terrible casualties they did in Korea. The heavier the toll, the deeper his pride, the blustery commander was volunteering, if it weren’t for old-age, to do it again. I kid you not. Though he lost half his men to the battle, he would bravely venture more.

Downplaying massacres seems to be Hughes’ game. If you Google No Gun Ri, the now admitted deliberate massacre of hundreds of Korean refugees in 1950, here’s what do you’ll get: Dave Hughes on record standing up for the actions of American machine gunners. Here too, he wasn’t there, and relies on the recollection of soldiers who might have reasons to be blanking out on those parts. For shame. I know and like Dave Hughes, but he’s got a moral screw loose. And as we’ve seen in this town, that’s catching.

Elsewhere in the news, a play opens in London which retells the tragedy of Fallujah, in the actual words of participants on both sides. Authorities note 70 breaches of international conventions by the US forces. Soldiers like Dave Hughes can explain to themselves the necessity of sniping, gassing and obliterating hundreds of civilians in the regular conduct of war. Luckily wiser soldiers and statesmen before them have already addressed man’s bloodlust and agreed there are crimes that must never be rationalized.

North Korea-US peace accord

Posted on by
Reply

As the whole world waits for the coming US attack on Iran to begin, there appeared to be little interest in the announcement of a North Korea-US peace accord. That is kind of stunning, since the US has waged war against the Korean people for over half a century with disastrous loss of life as a consequence. Over 2 1/2 million people died in 3 years of conflict back in the early ’50s, and subsequently the US economic warfare waged against North Korea has killed millions more.

Wikipedia reports that between 600,000 to 3.5 million North Koreans lost their lives due to famine after the Soviet Union was bankrupted by the US imposed Cold War. This cut off the principal outside trade that was the lifeline of North Korea’s economic sustainability, as otherwise the US blocked out almost all foreign trade.

It helps to understand the context of all this loss of life. The US took over from the Japanese as being the principal imperialist occupiers of the Korean Peninsula at the end of WW2, and blocked the establishment of one country governed by Koreans themselves. Instead, the US installed a puppet regime in the south, very similar to the one later established in the South of Vietnam when the French got the boot from that country. When the end of the hot conflict ended in the US-Korean War, the US did not leave like they had to eventually in Vietnam. The US occupation had destroyed over 80% of the civilian infrastructure in Korea by mid 1953, and coming after the Japanese occupation of Korea during WW2, left the country divided and in total shambles. Plus, the end of hostilities left the US firmly in control and with military bases in the South of the Peninsula.

Is the new treaty real, or just a US ploy? Basically, it calls for North Korea to incrementally receive fuel oil supplies in exchange for incrementally dismantling its nuclear power program. As such, it runs directly counter to the US economic warfare against North Korea that has been the mainstay of US government foreign policy for decades. Condoleezza Rice hailed the accord as being a break through, while John Bolton panned it as being an ‘appeasement’. Actually, it appears that his main disagrement might probably be to having an accord which the US will deliberately not abide by in the months ahead. That will then make the US look rather bad, even if it allows Bush to now bide his time with North Korea as he wages war against Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran in another part of Asia. In short, this appears to be a ‘peace’ that is not even paper thin in substance.

Not only is the US not prepared to help the North Korean economy economically, it is not prepared to do its part in removing nuclear weapons off the Korean Peninsula. The treaty appears to be more game playing than anything much else. It bides both North Korea time to further strengthen its weapons program in self defense, and time for the US government ot wage war in regions more important to its imperial plans regarding seizing energy supplies. Hopefully some day peace will finally come to the Koreans, but this is not the day.

US Out of Korea! Bring the Troops Home Now!

Pablo Picasso’s (US) Massacre in Korea

Scorched journalist policy

Posted on by
1

Shall we speculate as to who is killing journalists in Iraq and Afghanistan? (141 to date in Iraq.) Well, the who is documented, much of it labeled “friendly fire.” Shall we speculate about the why? Forgive me if it feels like I am connecting the dots with a crayon.
 
A recent documentary interviewed some Iraqi journalists about their inconsistent use of flack jackets. The journalists said they choose not to wear protection around fellow Iraqis because they don’t want to be mistaken for working for the occupiers. But walking beside American soldiers the journalists do wear flack jackets because they are fearful of being shot …by the Americans.

Witness to a crime
We’ve all seen it in the movies: the protagonist is accidental witness to a crime and becomes targeted by the perpetrator lest he live to testify. Or the victim begging for life, vowing in exchange not to go to the police. Both victim and criminal know it’s an offer the villain cannot risk.

Massacres usually intend to leave no survivors because the dead tell no tales. Countless war movies have depicted the war correspondent happening upon a war crime in progress, recognizing immediately that a “stray bullet” will be eminent.

Kill Boxes
We’ve learned over the course of two Gulf Wars that our military employs such tactics as “Kill Boxes” and “Free Fire Zones.” Both describe a similar US M.O.. The first is Air Force lingo for an area bounded by given coordinates inside of which everything is considered a target. The airmen are tasked with killing everybody in that box. They have the discretion not to shoot something, but they will be held responsible for whatever they leave, authorized as they were to annihilate all.

Photo shown across the world except in the USA renowned Kill Box in 1990 was the Highway of Death, where thousands of Iraqi soldiers fleeing from Kuwait were incinerated in their vehicles. (American viewers were spared the graphic images.)

The Hague Conventions forbid firing upon soldiers who are no longer attacking you. Even cowboys know you don’t shoot somebody in the back. Both the Hague and Geneva Conventions outlaw the indiscriminate killing of civilians and other non-combatants.

Free Fire Zones
Kill Boxes violate all international conventions. They are as illegal as the US Army’s Free Fire Zone in which soldiers are ordered to fire freely at “anything that moves.” Civilians are expected to know beforehand to get out of the way. They figure it out when our snipers begin popping their family members’ heads off in their gardens. IED detonations now trigger automatic Free Fire Zones around the radius of the blast. An American reputation for ruthless overkill now precedes us. As a result, when IEDs explode, Iraqis have learned to run for their lives. Our soldiers lie to themselves that the escaping figures must be responsible for the IED, and are thus combatants. American Humvees carry extra shovels to plant on the bodies of the slain civilians to paint them as bomb laying insurgents.

The US has deliberately shot civilians since the Korean War, though this has only recently been revealed. In No Gun Ri, entire masses of refuges were machine-gunned to prevent fighters from passing amongst them. This policy continued in Vietnam, the My Lai massacre being unique only for having been uncovered. In war, Collateral Damage has always been a tragic unintended consequence, but by no stretch of a JAG’s imagination can it be a sanctioned consequence.

Secret and Confidential
Let’s speculate here… If military manuals exist with instructions for Kill Boxes and Free Fire Zones which explicitly require the killing of civilians and non-combatants, how do you suppose the instructions read for dealing with uninvited members of the press? The US military seems quite preoccupied with how its actions appear in news broadcasts. How might US soldiers be instructed to deal with journalists who stumble upon the bodies and capture the unbecoming bloodshed with their cameras? We’ll find out someday when a witness survives.