World News

Yeah, just recently I rewatched Apocalypse Now. And I've never been to the U.S. or Vietnam. I agree, this is pretty much alive in cultural memory, not forgotten.

Not trying to be confrontational or pedantic (there's enough bickering in here) but it's important to state that the Korean War is quite literally called "The Forgotten War". In fact, it's more important to point out that it wasn't even a War, but considered a "police action" that claimed the lives of up to 3 million civilians (link).

Council on Foreign Affairs

Truman acted without seeking congressional authorization either in advance or in retrospect. He instead justified his decision on his authority as commander in chief. The move dramatically expanded presidential power at the expense of Congress, which eagerly cooperated in the sacrifice of its constitutional prerogatives.

Robert A. Taft of Ohio, one of the leading Republicans on Capitol Hill at the time, took to the Senate floor on June 28 to argue that “there is no legal authority for what he [Truman] has done.” Nor could Truman argue that the Korean conflict didn’t constitute war in a constitutional sense, even if he did downplay the significance of his decision. (At a press conference on June 29, Truman denied the country was at war, prompting a journalist to ask, “would it be correct…to call this a police action?” Truman answered simply, “Yes.”

Truman in the end acted because he believed, contrary to what the framers envisioned and the historical record showed, that as commander-in-chief he had the authority to order U.S. troops into combat.... Truman was able to establish the precedent that presidents can take the country to war, though, because members of Congress were unwilling, Taft’s complaints notwithstanding, to defend their constitutional power from executive encroachment.

You can't look at those statements and not make parallels to what's going on in America today with the executive branch trying to sequester even more power. Ironically just recently saw a pretty decent video on the war by Mr. Beat

The War Americans Forgot About

edit: forgot an S

Is it better to be drowned out than forgotten?

recognizing the Taliban

The US gave the fucking country to the talibans omg

If I had a nickle for everyone who either stopped watching Full Metal Jacket after Lee Emery gets shot or watched the husks of men, who just got massacred by a child defending her home, marching through the burning town while singing children's songs, and thanked the next veteran they met for fighting for freedom.

It is not my intention to give other countries a pass. Indonesia is guilty of genocide in the case of East Timor; the US is guilty as well.

The genocide in East Timor is analogous to the ongoing genocide in Palestine.

Both genocides are not conducted by US personnel, but the majority of arms are supplied by the US. The US gives international legitimacy to the genocidal party, while running defense for it's atrocities. The genocide in East Timor was ended by a phone call from the US president, and I am of the firm belief that the genocide in Gaza could be ended by a similar call. Previous Israeli atrocities were ended by calls from Reagan and Bush Sr.

I agree that declassification is a great thing, but it is not so black and white. Not all info becomes declassified eventually, so much is covered up and destroyed.

For example, much is known about the My Lai massacre in the Vietnam War. Most of this information is known due to declassified documents. But these declassified documents also mention that there were over 100 My Lai-level massacres that occured, most of which we know nothing about. Army Chief of Staff Westmoreland was quoted saying we do a "My Lai each month".

One of the largest, codenamed Speedy Express, reportedly killed 11,000 people, and was covered up at the highest levels.

Some commentators have defended the usage of whataboutism and tu quoque in certain contexts. Whataboutism can provide necessary context into whether or not a particular line of critique is relevant or fair, and behavior that may be imperfect by international standards may be appropriate in a given geopolitical neighborhood. Accusing an interlocutor of whataboutism can also in itself be manipulative and serve the motive of discrediting, as critical talking points can be used selectively and purposefully even as the starting point of the conversation (cf. agenda setting, framing, framing effect, priming, cherry picking). The deviation from them can then be branded as whataboutism

Wow. Fascinating. Thanks for the link.

This makes perfect sense, it's one thing for Taiwanese and Chinese people to remember it but its absolute hypocrisy for the west to comment. Especially as they fund the genocide in Gaza and Western Liberals make excuses for it.

"Whataboutism" can occasionally be an honest critique of a spurious argument.

When it's just a link on it's own, it's almost always cover for hypocrisy.

Yep that's exactly my point, the US is doing Whataboutism when it issues these PR stunts to condemn Chinese atrocities.

Your comment ignores the context that the US is doing anti-Chinese propaganda here, and there is no parity.

Imagine if the shoe was on the other foot, and China was releasing PR statements on every anniversary of every US atrocity. They would still be issuing multiple statements every day.

All the fucking time? Really? When was the last time the Coup d'état against Aristide was discussed around here?

Really? Could that be because china isn't carpet bombing civilians?