The Construction of an American Political lie

[CrusaderFrank]

Until our leaders start fessing up to what has been done in the name of protecting America, we as the true overseers of this government need to start becoming a more informed citizenry.

Soleimani
Tue Jan 7th 2020 by abagond



Qasem Soleimani (1957-2020), also spelled “Suleimani”, was the Iranian general the US killed last week in Baghdad, on January 2nd 2020 at 22:00 UTC (it was one in the morning the next day in Iraq).

In the US almost no one knew who he was, but now the press is saying he was a Horrible Terrible Person, worse than Osama bin Laden (the head of Al Qaeda) or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (the head of ISIS), both of whom the US also assassinated.

As CNBC, a supposedly serious news outlet, tweeted, in its own voice:

“America just took out the world’s no. 1 bad guy”

And that was not even Fox News on the far-right!

If Soleimani was that terrible, why did the press say so little about him before he was killed? He has been a general in Iran since the 1980s – he was hardly hiding under a rock.

Before and after: Compare the Wikipedia before and after his death:

On December 27th, the second paragraph:

“Soleimani hailed from a humble background. He began his military career since the beginning of the Iran–Iraq War of the 1980s, during which he commanded the 41st Division. He was later involved in extraterritorial operations, providing military assistance to anti-Saddam Shia and Kurdish groups in Iraq, and later Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestinian territories. In 2012, Soleimani helped bolster the Syrian government, a key Iranian ally, during the Syrian Civil War. Soleimani also assisted in the command of combined Iraqi government and Shia militia forces that advanced against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in 2014–2015.[19]”

On January 7th, today:

“Soleimani began his military career at the start of the Iran–Iraq War during the 1980s, eventually commanding the 41st Division. He was later involved in extraterritorial operations, providing military assistance to Hezbollah in Lebanon. In 2012, Soleimani helped bolster the government of Bashar al-Assad, a key Iranian ally, during Iran’s operations in the Syrian Civil War and helped to plan the Russian military intervention in Syria.[20] Soleimani oversaw the Kurdish and Shia militia forces in Iraq, and assisted the Iraqi forces that advanced against ISIL in 2014–2015.[21][22] Soleimani was one of the first to support Kurdish forces, providing them with arms.[23][24] He maintained a low profile during most of his career.”

Compare: Both paragraphs might be perfectly true – they are not logically contradictory. But notice the change in emphasis: two good things about him have been taken out (humble origins, anti-Saddam) and two bad ones added (pro-Assad, helps Russia). Good and bad, that is, from a US point of view! Just over half the edits made to the English-language Wikipedia come from the US.

Demonization: Soleimani, as you might expect, fought both for and against US enemies. He was, be it noted, a general for Iran, not the US. And Iran, be it further noted, is not some rebel province of the US empire. But now that President Trump has killed him, Soleimani is being demonized, flattened into a Hollywood “bad guy”. Why?

Soleimani

Trump murders brave Persian poet warrior!

 

[georgephillip]

Neither of us were present in korea in 1945 so we cant possibly know how the koreans would have voted EVEN IF the vote was fair

Do you think they would have voted for another military occupation that relied on Japanese officials and collaborators to administer its policies?

Korean War - Wikipedia

"On 8 September 1945, US Lieutenant General John R. Hodge arrived in Incheon to accept the Japanese surrender south of the 38th Parallel.[79]

"Appointed as military governor, Hodge directly controlled South Korea as head of the United States Army Military Government in Korea (USAMGIK 1945–48).[82]

"He attempted to establish control by restoring Japanese colonial administrators to power, but in the face of Korean protests quickly reversed this decision.[83]

"Hodge did keep in governmental positions a large number of Koreans who had directly served and collaborated with the Japanese colonial government.

"This presence was particularly pronounced in the Korean National Police Force, who would later suppress widespread rebellions to the ROK.

"The USAMGIK refused to recognize the provisional government of the short-lived People's Republic of Korea (PRK) due to its suspected Communist sympathies."

 

[georgephillip]

and it certainly would not have been fair in the soviet half

It would not have been a less fair than US election in 1945 Alabama.

 

[georgephillip]

what would America have done if the soviets occupied all of korea?

I think we would have reacted the same way we did in 1950

it would have been war

With an ally which had just destroyed most of Hitler's military?

World War II - Wikipedia

"World War II was the deadliest conflict in human history, marked by 70 to 85 million fatalities, most of whom were civilians in the Soviet Union and China."

Thats up to the soviets since they choose to march on south korea

Thats up to the soviets since they choose to march on south korea

The Soviets invaded Korea because they agreed to enter the war against Japan after they defeated Hitler:

Division of Korea - Wikipedia

"At the Tehran and Yalta Conferences, Stalin promised to join his allies in the Pacific War in two to three months after victory in Europe.

"On 8 August 1945, two days after the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, but before the second bomb was dropped at Nagasaki, the USSR declared war on Japan..."

 

[Mac-7]

but by 1950 we had stood down most of the WWII war machine and even foolishly publicly implied that south korea was not a vital national interest

that was like a green light for the communists to invade

Does it matter to you a majority of Koreans never wanted the US military occupation of their country in the first place?

United States Army Military Government in Korea - Wikipedia

"The United States Army Military Government in Korea (USAMGIK) was the official ruling body of the southern half of the Korean Peninsula from September 8, 1945 to August 15, 1948...."

"Popular discontent stemmed from the U.S. Military Government's support of the Japanese colonial government; then once removed, keeping the former Japanese governors on as advisors; by ignoring, censoring and forcibly disbanding the functional and popular People's Republic of Korea (PRK); and finally by supporting United Nations elections that divided the country.[1]"

Its revisionist history to believe that most koreans wanted to be ruled by a communist dictatorship

Its revisionist history to believe that most koreans wanted to be ruled by a communist dictatorship

The PRK wasn't calling for a dictator.
That was what Americans provided.

Neither of these dictators would have come to power if the US had not prevented free elections in 1945.

Syngman Rhee - Wikipedia

Its idealistic to believe that the soviets would allow north korea to become neutral or even worse pro western

 

[Mac-7]

Neither of us were present in korea in 1945 so we cant possibly know how the koreans would have voted EVEN IF the vote was fair

Do you think they would have voted for another military occupation that relied on Japanese officials and collaborators to administer its policies?

Korean War - Wikipedia

"On 8 September 1945, US Lieutenant General John R. Hodge arrived in Incheon to accept the Japanese surrender south of the 38th Parallel.[79]

"Appointed as military governor, Hodge directly controlled South Korea as head of the United States Army Military Government in Korea (USAMGIK 1945–48).[82]

"He attempted to establish control by restoring Japanese colonial administrators to power, but in the face of Korean protests quickly reversed this decision.[83]

"Hodge did keep in governmental positions a large number of Koreans who had directly served and collaborated with the Japanese colonial government.

"This presence was particularly pronounced in the Korean National Police Force, who would later suppress widespread rebellions to the ROK.

"The USAMGIK refused to recognize the provisional government of the short-lived People's Republic of Korea (PRK) due to its suspected Communist sympathies."

Suspected communist sympathies is a pretty good reason not to recognize them

 

[Mac-7]

and it certainly would not have been fair in the soviet half

It would not have been a less fair than US election in 1945 Alabama.

You are an idealist

But the real world is not as neat and clean as you want it to be

both north and south korea began as dictatorships

but only south korea progressed to a representative democracy

 

[Mac-7]

what would America have done if the soviets occupied all of korea?

I think we would have reacted the same way we did in 1950

it would have been war

With an ally which had just destroyed most of Hitler's military?

World War II - Wikipedia

"World War II was the deadliest conflict in human history, marked by 70 to 85 million fatalities, most of whom were civilians in the Soviet Union and China."

Thats up to the soviets since they choose to march on south korea

Thats up to the soviets since they choose to march on south korea

The Soviets invaded Korea because they agreed to enter the war against Japan after they defeated Hitler:

Division of Korea - Wikipedia

"At the Tehran and Yalta Conferences, Stalin promised to join his allies in the Pacific War in two to three months after victory in Europe.

"On 8 August 1945, two days after the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, but before the second bomb was dropped at Nagasaki, the USSR declared war on Japan..."

You are repeating yourself now and just posting the same argument over and over again

 

[whitehall]

Where the hell were you when Bill Clinton authorized the bombing of a defenseless country and killed an estimated 10,000 people who wore no uniform? How about the time Barry Hussein authorized the execution of an American citizen who was deemed a "terrorist threat" and blew up his car and killed his son and a passenger? Selective outrage is old news. Find something else to whine about.

 

[georgephillip]

Who says a majority of koreans supported the communist front group?

The only reason we don't have a historical answer to that question is the US military's refusal to allow free elections in 1945 which an overwhelming majority of Koreans wanted.

United States Army Military Government in Korea - Wikipedia

"Popular discontent stemmed from the U.S. Military Government's support of the Japanese colonial government; then once removed, keeping the former Japanese governors on as advisors; by ignoring, censoring and forcibly disbanding the functional and popular People's Republic of Korea (PRK); and finally by supporting United Nations elections that divided the country.[1]"

"In addition, the U.S. military was largely unprepared for the challenge of administering the country, arriving with no knowledge of the language or political situation.[2]"

If not for the soviet occupation of north korea I think the US would have supported a free and fair election

but that was not possible with the soviets in control of the north

If not for the soviet occupation of north korea I think the US would have supported a free and fair election

Why do you think the US had any right to deny Koreans free and fair elections in 1945?

Americans certainly had no right to impose a military dictatorship on people who had risked their lives and the lives of their families in the fight against Imperial Japan:

United States Army Military Government in Korea - Wikipedia

"The USAMGIK tried to contain civil violence in the south by banning strikes on December 8 and outlawing the revolutionary government and the people's committees on December 12.

"Things spiraled quickly out of control however, with a massive strike on September 23, 1946 by 8,000 railway workers in Busan which quickly spread to other cities in the South.

"On October 1, police attempts to control rioters in Daegu caused the death of three student demonstrators and injuries to many others, sparking a mass counter-attack killing 38 policemen.

"In Yeongcheon, a police station came under attack by a 10,000-strong crowd on October 3, killing over 40 policemen and the county chief. Other attacks killed about 20 landlords and pro-Japanese officials.

"The U.S. administration responded by declaring martial law, firing into crowds of demonstrators and killing a publicly unknown number of people.[7]

 

[georgephillip]

what would America have done if the soviets occupied all of korea?

I think we would have reacted the same way we did in 1950

it would have been war

With an ally which had just destroyed most of Hitler's military?

World War II - Wikipedia

"World War II was the deadliest conflict in human history, marked by 70 to 85 million fatalities, most of whom were civilians in the Soviet Union and China."

Thats up to the soviets since they choose to march on south korea

Thats up to the soviets since they choose to march on south korea

The Soviets invaded Korea because they agreed to enter the war against Japan after they defeated Hitler:

Division of Korea - Wikipedia

"At the Tehran and Yalta Conferences, Stalin promised to join his allies in the Pacific War in two to three months after victory in Europe.

"On 8 August 1945, two days after the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, but before the second bomb was dropped at Nagasaki, the USSR declared war on Japan..."

You are repeating yourself now and just posting the same argument over and over again

ou are repeating yourself now and just posting the same argument over and over again

Because you ignore the explanations I provide to your arguments. Perhaps you find it hard to admit the US was not the "good guys" in Korea?

 

[georgephillip]

The US was no more willing to see the south go communist than the soviets were willing to allow a non communist government in the north

The last thing Stalin needed in 1945 was a Cold War with a continental superpower whose homeland's infrastructure was untouched by the destruction of WWII. When Truman made the choice in 1945 to impose a military dictatorship on South Korea he did so because the US had nuclear weapons and the Soviets did not. By the time the Korean War came five years later, that was no longer true. 70 years later the peninsula is still divided with little prospect of reunification. Koreans were perfectly capable of self-determination in 1945, and the US was the biggest reason they did not get a chance.

 

[Mac-7]

Who says a majority of koreans supported the communist front group?

The only reason we don't have a historical answer to that question is the US military's refusal to allow free elections in 1945 which an overwhelming majority of Koreans wanted.

United States Army Military Government in Korea - Wikipedia

"Popular discontent stemmed from the U.S. Military Government's support of the Japanese colonial government; then once removed, keeping the former Japanese governors on as advisors; by ignoring, censoring and forcibly disbanding the functional and popular People's Republic of Korea (PRK); and finally by supporting United Nations elections that divided the country.[1]"

"In addition, the U.S. military was largely unprepared for the challenge of administering the country, arriving with no knowledge of the language or political situation.[2]"

If not for the soviet occupation of north korea I think the US would have supported a free and fair election

but that was not possible with the soviets in control of the north

If not for the soviet occupation of north korea I think the US would have supported a free and fair election

Why do you think the US had any right to deny Koreans free and fair elections in 1945?

Americans certainly had no right to impose a military dictatorship on people who had risked their lives and the lives of their families in the fight against Imperial Japan:

United States Army Military Government in Korea - Wikipedia

"The USAMGIK tried to contain civil violence in the south by banning strikes on December 8 and outlawing the revolutionary government and the people's committees on December 12.

"Things spiraled quickly out of control however, with a massive strike on September 23, 1946 by 8,000 railway workers in Busan which quickly spread to other cities in the South.

"On October 1, police attempts to control rioters in Daegu caused the death of three student demonstrators and injuries to many others, sparking a mass counter-attack killing 38 policemen.

"In Yeongcheon, a police station came under attack by a 10,000-strong crowd on October 3, killing over 40 policemen and the county chief. Other attacks killed about 20 landlords and pro-Japanese officials.

"The U.S. administration responded by declaring martial law, firing into crowds of demonstrators and killing a publicly unknown number of people.[7]

America liberated korea and great cost in blood and treasure

There was a brief period of military occupation but we soon withdrew and left the south koreans to govern themselves until the north invaded in 1950

 

[Mac-7]

The US was no more willing to see the south go communist than the soviets were willing to allow a non communist government in the north

The last thing Stalin needed in 1945 was a Cold War with a continental superpower whose homeland's infrastructure was untouched by the destruction of WWII. When Truman made the choice in 1945 to impose a military dictatorship on South Korea he did so because the US had nuclear weapons and the Soviets did not. By the time the Korean War came five years later, that was no longer true. 70 years later the peninsula is still divided with little prospect of reunification. Koreans were perfectly capable of self-determination in 1945, and the US was the biggest reason they did not get a chance.

The US was no more willing to see the south go communist than the soviets were willing to allow a non communist government in the north

The last thing Stalin needed in 1945 was a Cold War with a continental superpower whose homeland's infrastructure was untouched by the destruction of WWII. When Truman made the choice in 1945 to impose a military dictatorship on South Korea he did so because the US had nuclear weapons and the Soviets did not. By the time the Korean War came five years later, that was no longer true. 70 years later the peninsula is still divided with little prospect of reunification. Koreans were perfectly capable of self-determination in 1945, and the US was the biggest reason they did not get a chance.

Are you arguing that the US forced the soviet union into a Cold War it didnt seek and didnt want?

Based on your posts so far that would be consistent with leftwing revisionist history that we have been hearing for the past 40 years

if so its complete nonsense

the soviets did not want a hot war in 1945 because we had the A bomb and they didnt

but they were more than willing to wage cold war such as attempting to drive the western allies out of West Berlin which led to the Berlin Air Lift

 

[georgephillip]

Are you arguing that the US forced the soviet union into a Cold War it didnt seek and didnt want?

That's exactly what I'm saying. Russia had just lost 20 million of her citizens. An economic struggle with the US would only impair recovery for decades, and there was nothing inevitable about a Cold War in the wake of WWII

Churchill and Stalin: Comrades-in-Arms during World War Two | History News Network

"It is commonly assumed the cold war was inevitable, that once Hitler was defeated the conflicting interests and ideologies of the Soviet Union and the western powers inexorably drove the two sides apart.

"Despite his reputation as an early cold warrior, that was not Churchill’s view: the main message of his iron curtain speech was the need for a good understanding with Russia.

"When he returned to power in Britain in 1951 it was as a peacemaker and an advocate of détente with the USSR.

"Jaw-jaw is always better then war-war, he said."

 

[georgephillip]

America liberated korea and great cost in blood and treasure

The blood was mostly Korean.

NK had a population of about 9 million in 1950 when the war began.

One in three Koreans (military and civilian) living north of the 38th parallel died in that conflict. Prominent US hawks of the time repeatedly called for using nuclear weapons to murder even more.

The US initiated the bloodshed in 1945 when it denied Koreans living under US military occupation the right to self-determination, a historical reality I've pointed out several times without you providing any contradictory evidence.

Monthly Review | Setting the Record Straight on the Korean War

"Although American troops were allegedly sent to oversee the surrender of Japanese forces, their mission was much bigger.

"Significantly, even before U.S. forces had landed in Korea, they were told by their commanding officer that the Korean people were to be considered enemies of the United States.

"The United States sought domination over as much of Korea as possible because of its strategic proximity to Japan, China, and the Soviet Union.

"Because the great majority of Koreans had their own vision of a democratic, independent, and socialist country, they stood in the way of U.S. plans."

 

[Mac-7]

Are you arguing that the US forced the soviet union into a Cold War it didnt seek and didnt want?

That's exactly what I'm saying. Russia had just lost 20 million of her citizens. An economic struggle with the US would only impair recovery for decades, and there was nothing inevitable about a Cold War in the wake of WWII

Churchill and Stalin: Comrades-in-Arms during World War Two | History News Network

"It is commonly assumed the cold war was inevitable, that once Hitler was defeated the conflicting interests and ideologies of the Soviet Union and the western powers inexorably drove the two sides apart.

"Despite his reputation as an early cold warrior, that was not Churchill’s view: the main message of his iron curtain speech was the need for a good understanding with Russia.

"When he returned to power in Britain in 1951 it was as a peacemaker and an advocate of détente with the USSR.

"Jaw-jaw is always better then war-war, he said."

You sir are a revisionist historian

you are repeating the big lie that the soviets spread for 70 years

 

[Mac-7]

America liberated korea and great cost in blood and treasure

The blood was mostly Korean.

NK had a population of about 9 million in 1950 when the war began.

One in three Koreans (military and civilian) living north of the 38th parallel died in that conflict. Prominent US hawks of the time repeatedly called for using nuclear weapons to murder even more.

The US initiated the bloodshed in 1945 when it denied Koreans living under US military occupation the right to self-determination, a historical reality I've pointed out several times without you providing any contradictory evidence.

Monthly Review | Setting the Record Straight on the Korean War

"Although American troops were allegedly sent to oversee the surrender of Japanese forces, their mission was much bigger.

"Significantly, even before U.S. forces had landed in Korea, they were told by their commanding officer that the Korean people were to be considered enemies of the United States.

"The United States sought domination over as much of Korea as possible because of its strategic proximity to Japan, China, and the Soviet Union.

"Because the great majority of Koreans had their own vision of a democratic, independent, and socialist country, they stood in the way of U.S. plans."

Your argument falls apart due to the fact the communists invaded sputh korea

we responded to their aggression

 

[georgephillip]

There was a brief period of military occupation but we soon withdrew and left the south koreans to govern themselves until the north invaded in 1950

How do you explain repeated military operations into North Korea by the US backed dictator in the south BEFORE the Korean War began in 1950?

http://www.newworker.org/ncptrory/nkorea.htm

"At a conference with his divisional commanders in Seoul during
October 1949 General Roberts, Chief of the American Military Mission in
Korea, said:

"'Certainly there have been many attacks on the territory north of
the 38th parallel on my orders, and there will be many others in the
days to come ... From now on, the invasion by the land forces of the
territory north of the 38th parallel is to be carried out only on the
basis of orders of the American military mission.'"

 

[georgephillip]

Are you arguing that the US forced the soviet union into a Cold War it didnt seek and didnt want?

That's exactly what I'm saying. Russia had just lost 20 million of her citizens. An economic struggle with the US would only impair recovery for decades, and there was nothing inevitable about a Cold War in the wake of WWII

Churchill and Stalin: Comrades-in-Arms during World War Two | History News Network

"It is commonly assumed the cold war was inevitable, that once Hitler was defeated the conflicting interests and ideologies of the Soviet Union and the western powers inexorably drove the two sides apart.

"Despite his reputation as an early cold warrior, that was not Churchill’s view: the main message of his iron curtain speech was the need for a good understanding with Russia.

"When he returned to power in Britain in 1951 it was as a peacemaker and an advocate of détente with the USSR.

"Jaw-jaw is always better then war-war, he said."

You sir are a revisionist historian

you are repeating the big lie that the soviets spread for 70 years

You sir are a revisionist historian

you are repeating the big lie that the soviets spread for 70 years

All governments lie, including the Soviets and the US. By 1949 the US was entering its first post-war economic recession. While it lasted only 11 month, many forecasters at the time expected it to be much worse than it was.

Most adults who were alive at that time lived through the Great Depression, and they knew how WWII solved that problem.

The Korean War was the beginning of a "permanent war-time economy" in the US, and its effects have continued through Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Most of the Big Lies coming from DC seek to conceal this reality.