INTRIGUE IN IRAN: U.S./Israel Murder Iranian Nuclear Scientist...

[toomuchtime_]

It is undisputed the North Korean forces crossed the 38th parallel on June 25, 1950 (two years after the Soviet withdrawl) and within three days took control of Seoul, meeting little resistance and finding much support from their southern brothers and sisters.

The US military industrial complex was not prepared to see a reunification of Korea on any terms except their own. Using the typical fig leaf of UN authorization (the Soviet ambassador was absent when the Security Council voted and an American puppet held China's seat) the US counterattacked, driving nearly as far as the Yalu River.

The war ended in stalemate, after the death of about 4 million people, three years later.

"The huge destruction wrought by both sides" would likely have never occurred if the US had withdrawn its troops at the same time the Soviets did, and a united Korea today would be at least as prosperous and free as you imagine South Korea to be.

Clearly you take great pride in apologizing for the crimes of the greatest purveyor of violence on the face of the earth.

Your irrational hatred of the US and Israel leads you to make one absurd statement after another. It is bizarre to claim that the Stalinist slave state the Soviets installed in in North Korea that cannot feed its own people would have been able to create a free and prosperous society in South Korea if it had conquered it.

It was Stalin who, in 1947, rejected the UN call for a united Korea to hold free and fair elections monitored by the UN by boycotting the vote on the proposal and then declaring he would not abide by it. The UN passed the proposal and proceeded with the elections but Stalin refused to allow the Koreans under his control to vote. In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North, just as he had in all the countries he had conquered in eastern Europe and central Asia.

Had Stalin allowed the North Korean to vote in UN monitored elections then there would have been a united Korea with a government chosen by the Korean people and there would have been no war.

 

[Unkotare]

In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North.

Painfully and permanently dividing thousands and thousands of family members who would suffer (and still do) for decades thereafter.

 

[georgephillip]

It is undisputed the North Korean forces crossed the 38th parallel on June 25, 1950 (two years after the Soviet withdrawl) and within three days took control of Seoul, meeting little resistance and finding much support from their southern brothers and sisters.

The US military industrial complex was not prepared to see a reunification of Korea on any terms except their own. Using the typical fig leaf of UN authorization (the Soviet ambassador was absent when the Security Council voted and an American puppet held China's seat) the US counterattacked, driving nearly as far as the Yalu River.

The war ended in stalemate, after the death of about 4 million people, three years later.

"The huge destruction wrought by both sides" would likely have never occurred if the US had withdrawn its troops at the same time the Soviets did, and a united Korea today would be at least as prosperous and free as you imagine South Korea to be.

Clearly you take great pride in apologizing for the crimes of the greatest purveyor of violence on the face of the earth.

Your irrational hatred of the US and Israel leads you to make one absurd statement after another. It is bizarre to claim that the Stalinist slave state the Soviets installed in in North Korea that cannot feed its own people would have been able to create a free and prosperous society in South Korea if it had conquered it.

It was Stalin who, in 1947, rejected the UN call for a united Korea to hold free and fair elections monitored by the UN by boycotting the vote on the proposal and then declaring he would not abide by it. The UN passed the proposal and proceeded with the elections but Stalin refused to allow the Koreans under his control to vote. In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North, just as he had in all the countries he had conquered in eastern Europe and central Asia.

Had Stalin allowed the North Korean to vote in UN monitored elections then there would have been a united Korea with a government chosen by the Korean people and there would have been no war.

At the Yalta Conference in February of 1945 Stalin advocated independence for the Koreans as soon as possible. FDR countered with a suggestion of a US/Korean "trusteeship" of 20-30 years, modeled on our successful occupation of the Philippines, where we perfected the water torture known today as waterboarding.

The US commitment to Korean independence began with the Taft-Katusra agreement with Japan in 1904-05 at the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War. In exchange for Japanese recognition of US colonial rule over the Philippines, the US recognized Japan's "right" to annex Korea in 1910.

Shit clumps, as they say.

 

[georgephillip]

In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North.

Painfully and permanently dividing thousands and thousands of family members who would suffer (and still do) for decades thereafter.

At the conclusion of the war in Europe, Soviet forces invaded Korea, advancing to the 38th parallel by August 10, 1945. They could easily have conquered the entire peninsula. What did the do? They consulted with the US who requested they halt their advance so the US could occupy the rest of Korea in the coming month.

In that same month, defeated Japanese troops formally turned over authority in Korea to the broad-based Committee for the Preparation of Korean Independence, led by Lyuh Woon-hyung, which in September proclaimed the Korean People's Republic.

When US General Hodge arrived in Inchon to accept the Japanese surrender he ordered all Japanese occupiers to remain at their posts, refused to recognize Lyuh as national leader, and soon banned all public reference to the KPR.

Soviet troops left Korea in 1948.
Ours are still there.
That should tell you everything you need to know about the US commitment to Korean independence.

 

[Unkotare]

In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North.

Painfully and permanently dividing thousands and thousands of family members who would suffer (and still do) for decades thereafter.

At the conclusion of the war in Europe, Soviet forces invaded Korea, advancing to the 38th parallel by August 10, 1945. They could easily have conquered the entire peninsula. What did the do? They consulted with the US who requested they halt their advance so the US could occupy the rest of Korea in the coming month.

In that same month, defeated Japanese troops formally turned over authority in Korea to the broad-based Committee for the Preparation of Korean Independence, led by Lyuh Woon-hyung, which in September proclaimed the Korean People's Republic.

When US General Hodge arrived in Inchon to accept the Japanese surrender he ordered all Japanese occupiers to remain at their posts, refused to recognize Lyuh as national leader, and soon banned all public reference to the KPR.

Soviet troops left Korea in 1948.
Ours are still there.
That should tell you everything you need to know about the US commitment to Korean independence.

Does it ever even occur to you that you read all history as if you were a mortal enemy of the US yourself personally?

The Soviets were so thoughtful out of a deep respect for us? Or, might it have been something else? Hmmm...what had happened oh, say four days or so before they exhibited such thoughtful restraint? Hmmm...something...something...what was it...?

While you are working on that great mystery, consider this: Look at North and South Korea today. Which condition would you like to have seen for the entire penninsula (and don't pretend it wasn't one or the other unless you are hopelessly naive or hopelessly ignorant of the history).

South Korea is a free, democratic, prosperous nation as opposed to the nightmarish, starving, oppressive, dangerous basketcase just to its north. "That should tell you everything you need to know about the US commitment to Korean independence."

 

[Unkotare]

The US commitment to Korean independence began with the Taft-Katusra agreement with Japan in 1904-05 at the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War. In exchange for Japanese recognition of US colonial rule over the Philippines, the US recognized Japan's "right" to annex Korea in 1910.

Shit clumps, as they say.

It's really all Admiral Perry's fault, right?

 

[georgephillip]

The US commitment to Korean independence began with the Taft-Katusra agreement with Japan in 1904-05 at the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War. In exchange for Japanese recognition of US colonial rule over the Philippines, the US recognized Japan's "right" to annex Korea in 1910.

Shit clumps, as they say.

It's really all Admiral Perry's fault, right?

I think it's more likely the fault of whoever authorized the US merchant ship General Sherman to defy the laws of Korea in 1866 by sailing up the Taedong River to demand trade. (sort of like Perry's arrogance in Japan.

Things didn't work out as well for the imperialists in Korea as the General Sherman was burned and sunk with the loss of her entire crew.

 

[toomuchtime_]

It is undisputed the North Korean forces crossed the 38th parallel on June 25, 1950 (two years after the Soviet withdrawl) and within three days took control of Seoul, meeting little resistance and finding much support from their southern brothers and sisters.

The US military industrial complex was not prepared to see a reunification of Korea on any terms except their own. Using the typical fig leaf of UN authorization (the Soviet ambassador was absent when the Security Council voted and an American puppet held China's seat) the US counterattacked, driving nearly as far as the Yalu River.

The war ended in stalemate, after the death of about 4 million people, three years later.

"The huge destruction wrought by both sides" would likely have never occurred if the US had withdrawn its troops at the same time the Soviets did, and a united Korea today would be at least as prosperous and free as you imagine South Korea to be.

Clearly you take great pride in apologizing for the crimes of the greatest purveyor of violence on the face of the earth.

Your irrational hatred of the US and Israel leads you to make one absurd statement after another. It is bizarre to claim that the Stalinist slave state the Soviets installed in in North Korea that cannot feed its own people would have been able to create a free and prosperous society in South Korea if it had conquered it.

It was Stalin who, in 1947, rejected the UN call for a united Korea to hold free and fair elections monitored by the UN by boycotting the vote on the proposal and then declaring he would not abide by it. The UN passed the proposal and proceeded with the elections but Stalin refused to allow the Koreans under his control to vote. In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North, just as he had in all the countries he had conquered in eastern Europe and central Asia.

Had Stalin allowed the North Korean to vote in UN monitored elections then there would have been a united Korea with a government chosen by the Korean people and there would have been no war.

At the Yalta Conference in February of 1945 Stalin advocated independence for the Koreans as soon as possible. FDR countered with a suggestion of a US/Korean "trusteeship" of 20-30 years, modeled on our successful occupation of the Philippines, where we perfected the water torture known today as waterboarding.

The US commitment to Korean independence began with the Taft-Katusra agreement with Japan in 1904-05 at the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War. In exchange for Japanese recognition of US colonial rule over the Philippines, the US recognized Japan's "right" to annex Korea in 1910.

Shit clumps, as they say.

Whatever you may imagine FDR said at Yalta, in 1947 the US clearly had no designs on Korea. The US proposed free and fair elections monitored by the UN in all of Korea to choose a government, but the Soviets refused to allow the Koreans to decide their own destiny, boycotted the vote and refused to abide by it. When the South Koreans elected their own government in the summer of 1948, the US military government immediately turned all power and authority over to them and began withdrawing US troops. By the time North Korea invaded the South in the summer of 1950, only 500 US troops assigned as advisers to the South Korean army remained.

Before the North Korean invasion, the US had not considered Korea part of its defensive perimeter against Soviet expansion in Asia. Both Syngman Rhee, the president of South Korea, and Kim Il Sung, the North Korean dictator, were ardent nationalists who wanted to unite Korea, each under his own government, and this led to threats and border incidents caused by both sides. The US did not want to encourage Rhee to invade the North, so it refused to provide the South with tanks, aircraft or heavy artillery which it would need for an invasion. Stalin, on the other hand, provided North Korea with its most advanced weaponry, fighters, bombers, tanks and heavy artillery. It was for these reasons, the lack of US troops and the fact that the South Korean army lacked heavy weapons, that the invasion had some initial success.

US troops were returned to Korea to counter the invasion because the Truman administration reasoned the not responding forcefully to Soviet aggression in Korea would encourage the Soviet expansion elsewhere, even in Europe.

 

[toomuchtime_]

In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North.

Painfully and permanently dividing thousands and thousands of family members who would suffer (and still do) for decades thereafter.

At the conclusion of the war in Europe, Soviet forces invaded Korea, advancing to the 38th parallel by August 10, 1945. They could easily have conquered the entire peninsula. What did the do? They consulted with the US who requested they halt their advance so the US could occupy the rest of Korea in the coming month.

In that same month, defeated Japanese troops formally turned over authority in Korea to the broad-based Committee for the Preparation of Korean Independence, led by Lyuh Woon-hyung, which in September proclaimed the Korean People's Republic.

When US General Hodge arrived in Inchon to accept the Japanese surrender he ordered all Japanese occupiers to remain at their posts, refused to recognize Lyuh as national leader, and soon banned all public reference to the KPR.

Soviet troops left Korea in 1948.
Ours are still there.
That should tell you everything you need to know about the US commitment to Korean independence.

Japanese troops surrendered to the Soviets in the North and to the US in the South. The Japanese colonial authority hoping to gain protection for themselves and to hold on to their property supported the Soviet dominated Preparation of Korean Independence.

US troops began withdrawing from South Korea after the Korean government was elected in the summer of 1948. By the time of the North Korean invasion in the summer of 1950, only 500 US troops assigned as advisers remained.

 

[georgephillip]

Your irrational hatred of the US and Israel leads you to make one absurd statement after another. It is bizarre to claim that the Stalinist slave state the Soviets installed in in North Korea that cannot feed its own people would have been able to create a free and prosperous society in South Korea if it had conquered it.

It was Stalin who, in 1947, rejected the UN call for a united Korea to hold free and fair elections monitored by the UN by boycotting the vote on the proposal and then declaring he would not abide by it. The UN passed the proposal and proceeded with the elections but Stalin refused to allow the Koreans under his control to vote. In response to the UN monitored elections, Stalin sealed the border to prevent Koreans from fleeing south and installed a puppet government in the North, just as he had in all the countries he had conquered in eastern Europe and central Asia.

Had Stalin allowed the North Korean to vote in UN monitored elections then there would have been a united Korea with a government chosen by the Korean people and there would have been no war.

At the Yalta Conference in February of 1945 Stalin advocated independence for the Koreans as soon as possible. FDR countered with a suggestion of a US/Korean "trusteeship" of 20-30 years, modeled on our successful occupation of the Philippines, where we perfected the water torture known today as waterboarding.

The US commitment to Korean independence began with the Taft-Katusra agreement with Japan in 1904-05 at the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War. In exchange for Japanese recognition of US colonial rule over the Philippines, the US recognized Japan's "right" to annex Korea in 1910.

Shit clumps, as they say.

Whatever you may imagine FDR said at Yalta, in 1947 the US clearly had no designs on Korea. The US proposed free and fair elections monitored by the UN in all of Korea to choose a government, but the Soviets refused to allow the Koreans to decide their own destiny, boycotted the vote and refused to abide by it. When the South Koreans elected their own government in the summer of 1948, the US military government immediately turned all power and authority over to them and began withdrawing US troops. By the time North Korea invaded the South in the summer of 1950, only 500 US troops assigned as advisers to the South Korean army remained.

Before the North Korean invasion, the US had not considered Korea part of its defensive perimeter against Soviet expansion in Asia. Both Syngman Rhee, the president of South Korea, and Kim Il Sung, the North Korean dictator, were ardent nationalists who wanted to unite Korea, each under his own government, and this led to threats and border incidents caused by both sides. The US did not want to encourage Rhee to invade the North, so it refused to provide the South with tanks, aircraft or heavy artillery which it would need for an invasion. Stalin, on the other hand, provided North Korea with its most advanced weaponry, fighters, bombers, tanks and heavy artillery. It was for these reasons, the lack of US troops and the fact that the South Korean army lacked heavy weapons, that the invasion had some initial success.

US troops were returned to Korea to counter the invasion because the Truman administration reasoned the not responding forcefully to Soviet aggression in Korea would encourage the Soviet expansion elsewhere, even in Europe.

If the US had no designs on Korea and didn't consider Korea part of its "defensive perimeter", why did US General Hodge order all Japanese officials to remain at their posts? Why did Hodge refuse to meet with Lyuh Woon-hyung, leader of the Korean People's Republic? Why were Koreans who collaborated with the Japanese occupation murdered in the north and welcomed into the security services in the south?

That "free" election in 1948 was about as free as recent elections in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Syngman Rhee was a corrupt American puppet in the mold of Hamid Karzi.
Rhee presided over the murder of thousands of South Korean patriots with the biggest revolts against Rhee's US-backed rule taking place on Cheju Island, where North Korean influence was minimal.
Rhee was not an acceptable candidate for president in the minds of the majority of all Koreans; therefore, many boycotted the sham elections in 1948.

For all his faults, Rhee was preferable to another US puppet to rule in South Korea, Park Chung-hee, who served in the Japanese army during WWII. Park's reign was marked by economic growth, martial law, censorship, political repression, and the torture of political prisoners. His rule ended by assassination in 1979 at the hands of the KCIA.

Once free of their Japanese oppressors the Koreans needed no outside help to form a government.
That independence was unacceptable to Harry Truman.
Just as real independence in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan (and Honduras) is unacceptable to US elites today.

 

[Truthseeker420]

you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.

right?

pathetic.

Who is speaking for Arab countries? Even if you could show some Arab saying he doesn't want Iran to have "nukes" it is not his decision. It is Iran's decision to decide what is best for their security and I don't blame them with warmongering Israel threating to attack Iran.

Western Hypocrisy knows no bounds.

 

[toomuchtime_]

At the Yalta Conference in February of 1945 Stalin advocated independence for the Koreans as soon as possible. FDR countered with a suggestion of a US/Korean "trusteeship" of 20-30 years, modeled on our successful occupation of the Philippines, where we perfected the water torture known today as waterboarding.

The US commitment to Korean independence began with the Taft-Katusra agreement with Japan in 1904-05 at the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War. In exchange for Japanese recognition of US colonial rule over the Philippines, the US recognized Japan's "right" to annex Korea in 1910.

Shit clumps, as they say.

Whatever you may imagine FDR said at Yalta, in 1947 the US clearly had no designs on Korea. The US proposed free and fair elections monitored by the UN in all of Korea to choose a government, but the Soviets refused to allow the Koreans to decide their own destiny, boycotted the vote and refused to abide by it. When the South Koreans elected their own government in the summer of 1948, the US military government immediately turned all power and authority over to them and began withdrawing US troops. By the time North Korea invaded the South in the summer of 1950, only 500 US troops assigned as advisers to the South Korean army remained.

Before the North Korean invasion, the US had not considered Korea part of its defensive perimeter against Soviet expansion in Asia. Both Syngman Rhee, the president of South Korea, and Kim Il Sung, the North Korean dictator, were ardent nationalists who wanted to unite Korea, each under his own government, and this led to threats and border incidents caused by both sides. The US did not want to encourage Rhee to invade the North, so it refused to provide the South with tanks, aircraft or heavy artillery which it would need for an invasion. Stalin, on the other hand, provided North Korea with its most advanced weaponry, fighters, bombers, tanks and heavy artillery. It was for these reasons, the lack of US troops and the fact that the South Korean army lacked heavy weapons, that the invasion had some initial success.

US troops were returned to Korea to counter the invasion because the Truman administration reasoned the not responding forcefully to Soviet aggression in Korea would encourage the Soviet expansion elsewhere, even in Europe.

If the US had no designs on Korea and didn't consider Korea part of its "defensive perimeter", why did US General Hodge order all Japanese officials to remain at their posts? Why did Hodge refuse to meet with Lyuh Woon-hyung, leader of the Korean People's Republic? Why were Koreans who collaborated with the Japanese occupation murdered in the north and welcomed into the security services in the south?

That "free" election in 1948 was about as free as recent elections in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Syngman Rhee was a corrupt American puppet in the mold of Hamid Karzi.
Rhee presided over the murder of thousands of South Korean patriots with the biggest revolts against Rhee's US-backed rule taking place on Cheju Island, where North Korean influence was minimal.
Rhee was not an acceptable candidate for president in the minds of the majority of all Koreans; therefore, many boycotted the sham elections in 1948.

For all his faults, Rhee was preferable to another US puppet to rule in South Korea, Park Chung-hee, who served in the Japanese army during WWII. Park's reign was marked by economic growth, martial law, censorship, political repression, and the torture of political prisoners. His rule ended by assassination in 1979 at the hands of the KCIA.

Once free of their Japanese oppressors the Koreans needed no outside help to form a government.
That independence was unacceptable to Harry Truman.
Just as real independence in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan (and Honduras) is unacceptable to US elites today.

Clearly, the US had no designs on Korea. In 1947, the US turned the matter of elections over to the UN and in 1948 abided by the choice the Koreans had made by turning over all power and authority to the new government and beginning to withdraw its troops. It is also clear that the US did not consider South Korea to be part of its strategic Asian defensive perimeter since it withdrew its troops from South Korea and refused to supply the South Korean army with anything but light weapons. The Soviet and Chinese backed North Korean invasion was seen by the Truman administration as a threat to Japan and a test of US resolve to oppose Soviet expansion elsewhere and this caused them to revise their strategic thinking and to redraw the perimeter at the 38th parallel.

The US and UN provided a venue in which all the groups, both those that favored communism and those who opposed it, that wanted to form a government could compete, and the South Korean people elected Syngman Rhee. In the North, the Soviets installed what government they wanted without consulting the Korean people and installed a leader, Kim Il-Sung, who barely spoke the Korean language, having been educated in Chinese and having spent nearly his entire life to that point among the Chinese or Russians.

Although South Korea faced a steep learning curve to becoming a sustainable democracy, as you have pointed out, since 1987 it has been a free, prosperous democracy, while the Soviet installed Stalinist slave state in North Korea remains as it was, a relic from another age, frozen in time, espousing policies and values no other nation, not even its former Chinese and Russian mentors, believe in, its people starving, suffering outrageous oppressions, prisoners within its borders.

The division of Korea into two states and the suffering the Korean War caused these people is entirely the fault of the Soviet Union. Had Stalin allowed the North Korean people to vote in the UN monitored elections, there would have been one Korea, probably non aligned in the Cold War, and the people of the North might have had the opportunity to enjoy the freedoms and prosperity that the South Koreans now have. Failing that, had the Soviets not supported Kim IL-Sung's ill advised invasion of the South, none of the horrors of the Korean War would have occurred.

 

[georgephillip]

US imperial designs on Korea were apparent in September of 1945 when a US general refused to meet with a delegation from the "Korean Peoples"s Republic which had broad-based political and geographic support from one end of the peninsula to the other. The US colonial designs immediately inflamed the passions of Korean patriots in the north and south.

Thousands, some say hundreds of thousands, south Korean patriots died attempting to dislodge Syngman Rhee during his two years of US-backed rule before the 1948 elections.

Clearly, if all Koreans had been allowed to vote in 1945 the long line of US sponsored dictators in the south would've never begun, and a united Korea could well be prosperous and free today.

But it would also be an independent Korea, and that is something US elites have never tolerated.

 

[jillian]

you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.

right?

pathetic.

Who is speaking for Arab countries? Even if you could show some Arab saying he doesn't want Iran to have "nukes" it is not his decision. It is Iran's decision to decide what is best for their security and I don't blame them with warmongering Israel threating to attack Iran.

Western Hypocrisy knows no bounds.

i'm not "speaking" for anyone. i'm relating fact. iran is shi'a. the rest of the arab countries are sunni. they hate each other. why do you think the saudis gave israel the right to use its air space.

but then again, you'd actually have to know something about the middle east other than your own anti-semitism to understand that.

 

[High_Gravity]

you do understand, nutbar, that there isn't a single arab country that wants iran to have nukes.

right?

pathetic.

Who is speaking for Arab countries? Even if you could show some Arab saying he doesn't want Iran to have "nukes" it is not his decision. It is Iran's decision to decide what is best for their security and I don't blame them with warmongering Israel threating to attack Iran.

Western Hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Why don't you move to Tehran ass wipe?

 

[Hugidwyn]

America is preparing a provocation, "the scale of Pearl Harbor"

In the expert community is increasingly gaining momentum conclusions about possible provocations by the U.S. against Iran, which resulted in Iran will make the aggressor and his support for Russia and China, even in the UN Security Council can be significantly reduced under the pressure of public opinion.

In the Persian Gulf sent an American aircraft carrier battle group led by the nuclear aircraft carrier "Enterprise". This aircraft carrier U.S. plans to completely write off the fleet in 2013. Given the growth of the economic crisis as many content becomes unsupportable burden AUG for the United States. But at the same time, to write off this carrier, dropping it into the recycling is also very expensive, because unlike other carriers, it has on board eight nuclear reactors (the other is not more than two).

At the same time, the United States sent in the same area mother ship U.S. Navy - the ship Ponce, which is the amazing coincidence, is also going to write off any time soon, after 40 years of operation.

Recall that part of the historians called the method of provocation attack ships of old, classic version of the war the United States. For example, some claim that Japan before the attack on "Pearl Harbor" Americans are specially brought out all the newest ships in the same time, contrary to the harbor having got old. But if the story of the "Pearl Harbor" actively questioned the official story, but the events related to the battleship "Maine" no one disputes do not cause.

"In 1898, to the shores of Cuba, then the colony of Spain, approached an American battleship" Maine. " All this occurred against the backdrop of worsening of Spain and the United States. The Spaniards, wanting not to aggravate the crisis allowed the ship in its territorial waters. February 15, 1898 the battleship exploded and sank. Exploding, "Maine" left behind a lot of mysteries and oddities, "taking with them life 266 U.S. sailors, among which by strange coincidence, 260 were black and the skin was not a single officer."

In Havana, the U.S. investigators arrived to determine the circumstances. The nature of damage pointed to an internal explosion, but the commission has ignored this fact and left for home, where in full swing started to prepare for war with Spain. The Americans have done everything for that would make people antiispansky attitude. April 19 Congress passed a resolution requiring that Spain left Cuba, leaving her in the care of the United States. After that call began deploying volunteers and Navy. From April 21 U.S. Navy ships began to seize the Spanish transports to Cuba. "

 

[georgephillip]

Stranger things have happened in US History:

"The USS Liberty incident was an attack on a United States Navy technical research ship, USS Liberty, by Israeli Air Force jet fighter aircraft and Israeli Navy torpedo boats, on June 8, 1967, during the Six-Day War.[2]

"The combined air and sea attack killed 34 crew members (naval officers, seamen, two Marines, and one civilian), wounded 170 crew members, and severely damaged the ship.[3]

"At the time, the ship was in international waters north of the Sinai Peninsula, about 25.5 nmi (29.3 mi; 47.2 km) northwest from the Egyptian city of Arish.[1][4]"

USS Liberty incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[toomuchtime_]

US imperial designs on Korea were apparent in September of 1945 when a US general refused to meet with a delegation from the "Korean Peoples"s Republic which had broad-based political and geographic support from one end of the peninsula to the other. The US colonial designs immediately inflamed the passions of Korean patriots in the north and south.

Thousands, some say hundreds of thousands, south Korean patriots died attempting to dislodge Syngman Rhee during his two years of US-backed rule before the 1948 elections.

Clearly, if all Koreans had been allowed to vote in 1945 the long line of US sponsored dictators in the south would've never begun, and a united Korea could well be prosperous and free today.

But it would also be an independent Korea, and that is something US elites have never tolerated.

Again, your irrational hatred of the US and Israel leads you to make one absurd statement after another. The "Korean People's Republic" was he precursor of the North Korean communist party which has never allowed the Korean people any say in their government.

It was Stalin who divided Korea at exactly the same place that the Tsar had proposed to the Japanese before the Russo Japanese War, both seeing North Korea as no more than a buffer between Russia and a potential enemy, first Japan and later the US. It was the US that consistently lobbied for a united democratic Korea and the Soviets that consistently opposed it.

One need only compare the conditions in the two Koreas today to see which occupation and alliance was most beneficial to the Korean people.

 

[georgephillip]

"The People's Republic of Korea (PRK) was a short-lived provisional government organized to take over control of Korea after the Surrender of Japan at the end of the Pacific War. It operated as the government in late August and early September 1945 until the United States Army Military Government in Korea was established by the United States. After that it operated unofficially, and in opposition to the United States Military Government, until it was forcibly dissolved in January 1946."

People's Republic of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your irrational obsequiousness toward the greatest purveyor of violence on the face of the planet today blinds you to historical reality.

 

[toomuchtime_]

"The People's Republic of Korea (PRK) was a short-lived provisional government organized to take over control of Korea after the Surrender of Japan at the end of the Pacific War. It operated as the government in late August and early September 1945 until the United States Army Military Government in Korea was established by the United States. After that it operated unofficially, and in opposition to the United States Military Government, until it was forcibly dissolved in January 1946."

People's Republic of Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your irrational obsequiousness toward the greatest purveyor of violence on the face of the planet today blinds you to historical reality.

It was organized by whom? Not by the majority of the Korean people because that could only happen through free and fair elections and the Soviets refused to allow that to happen in the North. In fact, these people had no legitimate claim to organize a government for Korea and when they did run for office in the 1948 UN monitored elections the Korean people rejected them.