NationStates Jolt Archive


Is the U.S. capable of and has it employed brutal policy's

Pensia
30-05-2006, 00:12
If we cant come clean on our past human right's folleys we cannot expect the world to take us seriously on such issues. We most certainly can't start pointing the finger at other nations while trying to justify past, at the very least gross negligence and the lack of real civil oversight.

We have to come completely clean on these things instead of just hoping the truth wont one day come out.

Taken from CNN.com on this date - I cant believe another one - I hope its not true.
________________________________________________________________

U.S. apology sought in Korean refugee killings
Follows report that shoot-to-kill policy known to U.S. officials

Monday, May 29, 2006; Posted: 6:40 p.m. EDT (22:40 GMT)

Refugees leave Yongdong on July 26, 1950, the day of mass killing of refugees.
Image: http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/05/29/skorea.us.ap/story.nogunri.refugees.ap.jpg

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- A victims' group on Monday called on the U.S. government to offer an apology to South Korea and punish those responsible for the alleged manipulation of an investigation into the U.S. Army's mass killing of South Korean refugees during the 1950-53 Korean War.

The group also urged the formation of a U.N. committee to look into the deaths, claiming it cannot trust the U.S. government, which it accused of distorting key facts in an inquiry into the killings at No Gun Ri in 1950.

"We strongly hope that France and Germany, which succeeded in coming to terms with past history, participate in the committee and an objective and transparent probe can proceed," the victims' committee said in a statement.

The demand came after a report from The Associated Press citing a letter that a shoot-to-kill policy against refugees was known to senior U.S. government officials. (Text of letter)

In the letter dated the day of the mass killing, U.S. Ambassador to South Korea John J. Muccio informed Assistant Secretary of State Dean Rusk that American soldiers would shoot refugees approaching their lines because of fears of North Korean infiltration.

The letter is the strongest indication yet that such a policy existed for all U.S. forces in Korea, and the first evidence that that policy was known to upper ranks of the U.S. government.

The letter reported on decisions made at a high-level meeting in South Korea on July 25, 1950, the night before the 7th U.S. Cavalry Regiment shot the refugees at No Gun Ri.

Estimates vary on the number of dead at No Gun Ri. American soldiers' estimates ranged from under 100 to "hundreds" dead; Korean survivors say about 400, mostly women and children, were killed at the village 100 miles (160 kilometers) southeast of Seoul, the South Korean capital. Hundreds more refugees were killed in later, similar episodes, survivors say.

The Pentagon concluded that the No Gun Ri shootings were "an unfortunate tragedy" -- "not a deliberate killing." It suggested panicky soldiers, acting without orders, opened fire because they feared that an approaching line of families, baggage and farm animals concealed North Korean troops.

But Muccio's letter indicates the actions of the 7th Cavalry were consistent with policy, adopted because of concern that North Koreans would infiltrate via refugee columns. And in subsequent months, U.S. commanders repeatedly ordered refugees shot, documents show.

"This report by the AP after obtaining the document ... is a decisive report that overturns the key conclusion of the U.S. Defense Department's finding and ... the No Gun Ri incident is a massacre of innocent people and constitutes a clear war crime," the victims' committee said.

The group also urged the U.S. government to accept its responsibility for victims and compensate them, while asking the U.S. Congress to hold a hearing on the issue and pass a special law to resolve it. The group also said it would file a lawsuit against the U.S. Defense Department's research panel over its alleged manipulations and submit the issue at the U.N. Human Rights Committee.

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Kulikovo
30-05-2006, 00:14
Yes. The U.S. is capable of employing brutal tactics and has used them and does still use them to this day.
Thegrandbus
30-05-2006, 00:43
I thought the whole the US is an evil military machine, was common knowledge.

Personally I think we need A few World wars on this continent to set us straight
United Uniformity
30-05-2006, 00:44
War isn't nice, no matter what anyone says and, after all, in it the main aim is to win with as few casualtys to your side as possible. Unfortunatly in war, the rule book tends to get thrown out of the window, expesally when your enemy uses you rown sencablitys against you it comes to the civilians (e.g. your example, and also the war in Iraq, there the terrorists all dress as civilians to blend in with the general public and then complain when the civlians get shot as a mistake).
Kulikovo
30-05-2006, 00:46
I thought the whole the US is an evil military machine, was common knowledge.

Personally I think we need A few World wars on this continent to set us straight

I don't think the U.S. military is some evil machine. There are intelligence groups inside the military that does these things. And the occasional soldier who kills a civilian. I think it's more or less federal security agencies like the CIA which do the torture, and some elements of the military.
Free Farmers
30-05-2006, 02:15
Where's the just plain "Yes" option? If you say "yes" you also have to say you agree with it according to this poll... Apparently when you dislike something you have to go into denial...
Bobo Hope
30-05-2006, 02:17
The US must defend its freedom at all cost. End of story.
Fass
30-05-2006, 02:20
The US must defend its freedom at all cost. End of story.

Gosh darnit, even if it means the loss of said freedom and turning into that from what they're supposed to have fled Europe and founded the country in the first place! Yeehaw!
Neu Leonstein
30-05-2006, 02:24
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/27/Shootingkoreancivilians.jpg
Psychotic Mongooses
30-05-2006, 02:28
snip
Ah, the old National Security Archives. My research friend. :fluffle:
Pride and Prejudice
30-05-2006, 02:40
Brutal policies? Well, yeah. Within this past century in particular. We were a little less brutal in the 18th century...

We also have a tendency towards not letting in refugees, either. *cough* Halocaust *cough*
Corneliu
30-05-2006, 02:49
The answer is yes and no.

In the past yea but then, we didn't have precision guided bombs. Do not get me started on Hiroshima and Nagasaki for I would destroy that line of reasoning in a heartbeat as would many other posters on this board.
The Taker
30-05-2006, 02:50
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/27/Shootingkoreancivilians.jpg

Photoshop And not a very good one either. Please note the crappy corners that do not match in color, or texture. The part that says National Archives and is obviously pasted on.
Pride and Prejudice
30-05-2006, 02:51
The answer is yes and no.

In the past yea but then, we didn't have precision guided bombs. Do not get me started on Hiroshima and Nagasaki for I would destroy that line of reasoning in a heartbeat as would many other posters on this board.

And then your line of reasoning would be destroyed, and then that one would, and then...

Trust me, that's been debated by American History majors for quite a while. Neither line of reasoning for Hiroshima and Nagasaki has been close to universally accepted by historians yet.
Neu Leonstein
30-05-2006, 02:53
Photoshop And not a very good one either. Please note the crappy corners that do not match in color, or texture. The part that says National Archives and is obviously pasted on.
:rolleyes:
It says something bad about the US, so it must be a conspiracy, hey?

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jan2001/smu20010111.html
Corneliu
30-05-2006, 02:56
And then your line of reasoning would be destroyed, and then that one would, and then...

Trust me, that's been debated by American History majors for quite a while. Neither line of reasoning for Hiroshima and Nagasaki has been close to universally accepted by historians yet.

As a History Major and a student of MILITARY History....yes it is for all the evidence for the bombings is well...indisputable.
Pride and Prejudice
30-05-2006, 03:00
As a History Major and a student of MILITARY History....yes it is for all the evidence for the bombings is well...indisputable.

er... since when? Lot's of documents are contradicting each other... :confused:
Fass
30-05-2006, 03:02
As a History Major and a student of MILITARY History....yes it is for all the evidence for the bombings is well...indisputable.

No offence, but you're a history major from the US. That sort of says it all...
Fass
30-05-2006, 03:03
:rolleyes:
It says something bad about the US, so it must be a conspiracy, hey?

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jan2001/smu20010111.html

The US is good. Don't you know that?
Psychotic Mongooses
30-05-2006, 03:04
No offence, but you're a history major from the US. That sort of says it all...
Snap.
The Taker
30-05-2006, 03:08
:rolleyes:
It says something bad about the US, so it must be a conspiracy, hey?

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jan2001/smu20010111.html

Nope, but if you are going to post a photo, make sure its legit from a legit site that does not allow uploads from any Joe Schmo.
Corneliu
30-05-2006, 03:12
No offence, but you're a history major from the US. That sort of says it all...

You have a problem Fass for I don't look at just US Sources.
Pensia
30-05-2006, 03:19
Just to add an angle to the arguements about weather it was nessisary or not to nuke those 2 cities - it didnt determine the outcome of the war - we fire bombed several Japanese cities before dropping those 2 bombs and they werent nudging for it.

Something else told them to surrender - it was a convienient excuse when the americans came for signatures though.
Corneliu
30-05-2006, 03:21
Just to add an angle to the arguements about weather it was nessisary or not to nuke those 2 cities - it didnt determine the outcome of the war - we fire bombed several Japanese cities before dropping those 2 bombs and they werent nudging for it.

Something else told them to surrender - it was a convienient excuse when the americans came for signatures though.

And yet they were preparing to fight in all out defense of the home island despite the 2 bombs.
DesignatedMarksman
30-05-2006, 03:21
Of course. War is brutal, so yes.

ETA: It needs to stay that way too in order for it to remain such a nasty option.
Psychotic Mongooses
30-05-2006, 03:23
And yet they were preparing to fight in all out defense of the home island despite the 2 bombs.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

Stop it stop it stop it stop it stop it stop it stop it stop it, both of you!

Lets not go through this VERY long repetitive argument again, shall we?!:(
Neu Leonstein
30-05-2006, 03:25
Nope, but if you are going to post a photo, make sure its legit from a legit site that does not allow uploads from any Joe Schmo.
It's easy to access, and the story is not exactly unknown. Rather than try and go through a billion documents in the real national archives, I'll just stick to that one.

As for the edges, that is probably because it was scanned, the "National Archive" bits are watermarks.
Pensia
30-05-2006, 03:25
War is a result of a failure to reason and to see the perspective of your fellow man - an inability to compromise - nationalism is stupidity, an inhuman invention in my opinion.

Just so you know where I stand, and where my comments are coming from.
But I am not an activist on anything - Ill let the world work out its own problems less I become part of the problem - I just have some opinions I feel could be universally correct in a perfect world.

I exsist in an idealogical bubble in other words. :D
Fass
30-05-2006, 03:27
You have a problem Fass for I don't look at just US Sources.

If you did, then you would know that what you claimed "indisputable" is quite disputed, indeed. Non-US historians are not as forgiving of the US as the US would like.
Corneliu
30-05-2006, 03:32
If you did, then you would know that what you claimed "indisputable" is quite disputed, indeed. Non-US historians are not as forgiving of the US as the US would like.

That's because they do not know the culture of Japan as well as they think they do. Ironiclly that's the biggest failing of history.
Fass
30-05-2006, 03:36
That's because they do not know the culture of Japan as well as they think they do. Ironiclly that's the biggest failing of history.

As I said, you're a history major from the US...
Corneliu
30-05-2006, 03:40
As I said, you're a history major from the US...

At least I know the culture of Japan.
Not bad
30-05-2006, 03:43
Why can poll options almost never be allowed to match thread title questions?
Is it a conspiracy or just a close study of media tactics?
Pensia
30-05-2006, 03:44
At least I know the culture of Japan.

Talk to us about Japanese Culture. Do you work in Japan? Have you studied it long - how many books from how many different authors have you read?

I would just like to qualify your statement because you havent offered any enlightening details with respect to the subject.
Pensia
30-05-2006, 03:46
Why can poll options almost never be allowed to match thread title questions?
Is it a conspiracy or just a close study of media tactics?

No conspiracy let me assure you - just some inexperience - I personally dont like yes or no answers because there arent any in the real world.

Its only my second poll I think
Corneliu
30-05-2006, 03:47
Talk to us about Japanese Culture. Do you work in Japan? Have you studied it long - how many books from how many different authors have you read?

I would just like to qualify your statement because you havent offered any enlightening details with respect to the subject.

Ever hear of the Bushido Code?
Fass
30-05-2006, 03:47
At least I know the culture of Japan.

Sure you do, oh, thou grand authoritaaah, which we should no doubt respect.
Neu Leonstein
30-05-2006, 03:48
Let's just say that Nervun and Daistallia are probably the two people on this forum most likely to understand Japanese culture. Nervun in particular has also worked tirelessly in the past to clear up the Hiroshima discussions.

So let's leave at that, okay?
Corneliu
30-05-2006, 03:49
Sure you do, oh, thou grand authoritaaah, which we should no doubt respect.

In the realm of the Pacific War..yea I do for in order to study the war, you have to study the culture at the time.
Pride and Prejudice
30-05-2006, 03:53
In the realm of the Pacific War..yea I do for in order to study the war, you have to study the culture at the time.

What I'd like to know is since when historians from other countries don't know the culture as well as you do?
Corneliu
30-05-2006, 03:53
Let's just say that Nervun and Daistallia are probably the two people on this forum most likely to understand Japanese culture. Nervun in particular has also worked tirelessly in the past to clear up the Hiroshima discussions.

So let's leave at that, okay?

I second.
Pride and Prejudice
30-05-2006, 03:54
I second.

Or that works too...
Not bad
30-05-2006, 03:54
No conspiracy let me assure you - just some inexperience - I personally dont like yes or no answers because there arent any in the real world.

Its only my second poll I think

I dont have any issues with the possible answers to the poll question. I dont have issues with the poll question. I dont have issues with the question in the thread title. I have issues with the question in the thread title being quite seperate and different from the question in the poll.

It is probably just me though so dont worry about it.