Blowback

Status
Not open for further replies.
I watched about 20 min of this episode and watched about 10 min of the intro to season 2 (cuba). It's all a big assumption to emphasize the evil actions of colonizers to impose status quo on the poor oppressed....a painfully ignorant and oversimplified take....
 
I watched about 20 min of this episode and watched about 10 min of the intro to season 2 (cuba). It's all a big assumption to emphasize the evil actions of colonizers to impose status quo on the poor oppressed....a painfully ignorant and oversimplified take....

Ironically Japan was the colonizer. They built up the infrastructure. Taiwan was the crown jewel in their empire but Korea and Manchuria were industrialized by them.
 
Well defending North Korea I think says more about your morals than I ever coukd. Pretty much one of the worst regimes on the planet.

Own goal condemned yourself.

Started watching part 1 but there's 10 of them and they're kind of long. It's not really realistic to expect people to watch a 4 or 5 hour youtuber.

If you're talking about lopping off heads but lack the self awareness why communists got suppressed in the cold war.
If you want to disassociate yourself from the material, then jsut go away. If you have a comment that adds something share, but don't come in here baiting and straw manning your way to hide your ignorance of a topic.

South Korea was literally worse than north Korea was during this war, I'm not making excuses for the Kim regime, the US should not have committed the mass atrocities it did in Korea.

I mean and there are 30 more episodes if you want to learn about Iraq, Cuba, and Afghanistan. All of them interesting, well-researched, and at least mildly entertaining while driving or walking a bike. I know it's a large buy in, I shared it for other inquisitive minds and to see what people thought in general about the war. Your opinion has been noted, it fits western propaganda hook line and sinker and your ignorance and clear reluctance to learn anything about the period also fits the general western PoV. Go back to watching the rugby match my friend its ok if this is not for you.

Capitalists have been mass murdering humans every day for 200 years, so your commuphobia can go fly a kite. It's just childish and delusional.
 
I watched about 20 min of this episode and watched about 10 min of the intro to season 2 (cuba). It's all a big assumption to emphasize the evil actions of colonizers to impose status quo on the poor oppressed....a painfully ignorant and oversimplified take....
Yea it's called blowback and the context is you already know the US propaganda version.
 
On this forum just by pointing out Korea was split up in a great power struggle to the severe disadvantage of the Korean people, you will find the angry pigs who can find it in their heart to justify anything, and really don’t actually believe in anything at all except a full trough and a fuller belly.

North Korea deserved to suffer because they were against the Japanese and the Americans. Hey, fair enough guys, but did the South Koreans deserve the No Gun-ri incident and the national defense corps incident? For that matter did they deserve to be ruled by an American-propped military government for decades? Do they deserve to be ruled by an extremely corrupt abeyance of corporate interests even now? It’s like one of the most unequal countries and just about the only thing you can say about it in favor to North Korea is that they’ve just found a way to make the citizenry a lot more profitable to the outside word. That also means they’re a lot more “plugged in,” so you know, you can visit and force people to work for you or give you stuff if you trade them your money (which is also worth way more than their money cuz of all the guns behind you), and get a massage or whatever, but then there’s like a million dudes under your feet holding their clothes above their head so the sewage flow doesn’t completely soak them. I mean what really makes South Korea so great other than a few pieties and the fact that is a comfortable place for wealthy internationalists?

And then of course there’s the fact the actual population of South Korea is a lot more sober about the whole affair and desires peaceful reunification for many reasons. Ah but the foreigners who dictate Korea’s destiny and wipe out its population and rain holy hell down on them think that the side they support should win at all costs, and keep offering those sweet real estate deals, natch.

Of course the pro democracy party is not going to be able to respond to this post with anything but a snarky attack on how bad they think North Korea is. Yeah that’s great. I mean if I became President and destroyed the state of Texas utterly, I would also tell everyone Texas is a stupid and evil place and the people there suffer because of their bad government.
 
On this forum just by pointing out Korea was split up in a great power struggle to the severe disadvantage of the Korean people, you will find the angry pigs who can find it in their heart to justify anything, and really don’t actually believe in anything at all except a full trough and a fuller belly.

North Korea deserved to suffer because they were against the Japanese and the Americans. Hey, fair enough guys, but did the South Koreans deserve the No Gun-ri incident and the national defense corps incident? For that matter did they deserve to be ruled by an American-propped military government for decades? Do they deserve to be ruled by an extremely corrupt abeyance of corporate interests even now? It’s like one of the most unequal countries and just about the only thing you can say about it in favor to North Korea is that they’ve just found a way to make the citizenry a lot more profitable to the outside word. That also means they’re a lot more “plugged in,” so you know, you can visit and force people to work for you or give you stuff if you trade them your money (which is also worth way more than their money cuz of all the guns behind you), and get a massage or whatever, but then there’s like a million dudes under your feet holding their clothes above their head so the sewage flow doesn’t completely soak them. I mean what really makes South Korea so great other than a few pieties and the fact that is a comfortable place for wealthy internationalists?

And then of course there’s the fact the actual population of South Korea is a lot more sober about the whole affair and desires peaceful reunification for many reasons. Ah but the foreigners who dictate Korea’s destiny and wipe out its population and rain holy hell down on them think that the side they support should win at all costs, and keep offering those sweet real estate deals, natch.

Of course the pro democracy party is not going to be able to respond to this post with anything but a snarky attack on how bad they think North Korea is. Yeah that’s great. I mean if I became President and destroyed the state of Texas utterly, I would also tell everyone Texas is a stupid and evil place and the people there suffer because of their bad government.

So you're fine with South Korea absorbing the North?
 
@Crezth After WW2, NK and SK each followed their own path to our present day. Neither path was was smooth, trouble free or without conflict. Do you prefer one outcome over the other?
 
And then of course there’s the fact the actual population of South Korea is a lot more sober about the whole affair and desires peaceful reunification for many reasons. Ah but the foreigners who dictate Korea’s destiny and wipe out its population and rain holy hell down on them think that the side they support should win at all costs, and keep offering those sweet real estate deals, natch.

Of course the pro democracy party is not going to be able to respond to this post with anything but a snarky attack on how bad they think North Korea is. Yeah that’s great. I mean if I became President and destroyed the state of Texas utterly, I would also tell everyone Texas is a stupid and evil place and the people there suffer because of their bad government.
This is something I wanted to get around to in this thread. South Korea does not see this in the same Americans see it at all. Which was news to me as well, I was taught that the South Koreans wanted freedom and democracy! Turns out the wanted a unified Korea more than anything (this was about all the southern coalitions could agree on actually). When we retreated both times first mainly South Korean army but then the UN army as well, we did scorched earth to protect our backsides as we retreated. north Korea never did this, and it is remembered to this day in South Korea.

none of these even touches on our political and economic repression we exercised during the time, the worst being the use of Japan as a managerial class for Korean production. Imagine being occupied by the Japanese with all the horrors they inflicted on their colonies only to have a bigger boot put on your throat and your former occupiers still getting to wear that boot.

I have real issues with American repression of trade unions, workers, and farmers as a whole, because that propaganda has had lingering effects that make organizing difficult in the US to this day. It's been almost fifty years since the working class in America has seen a real raise in wages and has actually been backsliding until very recently post covid (and looks to be back to sliding backwards again soon). So, yea I'm re-evaluating the miseducation of Estebonrober. Turns out most of my parents and their parents' generations were just patsies for weapons manufacturers, corporate exploitation, and reactionary politics... . At least they got fudging highways and schools out of it, my generation is being left homeless and poverty stricken. Add that the realization that my siblings might never have been so poverty stricken themselves minus my government's direct intervention and exploitation and this story really hit home.

The Cuba one slaps too, I can no longer understand how anyone would question the Kennedy assassination...
 
My teachers talked about it with more nuance, a demonstration of the bomb for its own sake.. I mean like many things it’s obviously a lot of things going into it. We discussed how it might not have been necessary for near term but that there’s a debate about that.. but primarily to do what it did which was end the war in such a quick and decisive way that would also cut the Soviets out of future Japan.

When we covered this era of history I had a teacher who just didn't gaf, was about to retire. He was cool as hell but that was a joke class.

When we covered US history from the Revolution to the Civil War my teacher was really good though, it was really more like a 300-level history course in college than like a high school class.

The way I read it, the big reason the US dropped the bomb was that we had built it at massive effort and expense, and we weren't just gonna mothball it. Imo, it's not a good enough reason to kill some 200,000 people.

Anyone making really definitive statements about whether the bomb caused Japan's surrender doesn't know what they're talking about, the documentary and testimonial evidence from Japan is not definitive.
 
So you're fine with South Korea absorbing the North?
I'm fine with New Zealand being absorbed by the North... :P

Seriously though, I'd like to see unification back on the table. It was not that long ago when it was seriously being discussed and athletes from both nations performed as one team at the Olympics. It's still possible and it is long overdue. Right now, it is the US that is blocking even the discussion. In 2023 that is abominable behavior as a supposed freedom loving nation.
 
So you're fine with South Korea absorbing the North?
Well, I-
Ironically Japan was the colonizer. They built up the infrastructure. Taiwan was the crown jewel in their empire but Korea and Manchuria were industrialized by them.
Oh yeah... forget it, then.
@Crezth After WW2, NK and SK each followed their own path to our present day. Neither path was was smooth, trouble free or without conflict. Do you prefer one outcome over the other?
There is only one outcome and that is the separation of Korea into two opposing clients of two opposing great power interests. The path they walk is shared. The same was true of east and west Germany as it was north and south USA as it is Rhodesia and Zimbabwe and Israel and Palestine. Even if you kill everyone in North Korea and force the ascendancy of the South, you will never change the fact that it is Korea's shared history that has been changed, and there is no less a sense of that history being shared just because foreign military bases have set up armed borders there. The two regions could have united peacefully and productively perhaps decades ago, on their own terms, without the eagle to slaughter its inhabitants to protect its interests and maintain a buffer in northeast Asia. But that was impossible because the United States would never let it happen.

And as Estebonrober has just alluded, and I've also brought up on these forums before, the situation in South Korea meant that the Japanese stayed there as an elite class, under the American aegis. This actually happened in post-war China too, but the KMT ended up losing the entire table and they were the ones running cover for it - at America's behest, of course. Exporting technical expertise is difficult and expensive. We took over the grift but kept Japan on the take. Who loses? Korea.
 

North and South Korea Drift Farther Apart Every Day​

July 26, 2023

By Haeryun Kang
Ms. Kang is a South Korean journalist and documentary filmmaker.
阅读简体中文版閱讀繁體中文版


When North Korean forces surged across the 38th parallel in June 1950, starting the three-year Korean War, my grandfather Kang Yeon-gu was a teenage student on summer break. He was lucky. His farming village on the southeastern tip of the Korean Peninsula was about as far from the outbreak of fighting as you could get. Millions of people were streaming south to the area seeking safety. One of his neighbors today in Busan had fled there with the family cow in tow. Gramps, who turned 90 this year, survived the war. After millions of deaths and thousands of divided families, an armistice was signed on July 27, 1953. But the Korean War has never technically ended. Neither has the division of the Korean nation.

Decades after Vietnam and Germany were reunified, ending their postwar divisions, Korean estrangement has only solidified. To the outside observer, the rupture between modern, democratic South Korea and the backward, repressive North — one of the last remaining symbols of the Cold War — can seem permanent. But a strange longing for unification persists across generations and borders, a jumble of personal and collective narratives about nation and identity that reveals the complexity of how Koreans perceive their division.

My parents’ generation in South Korea lived through the impoverished postwar decades of military dictatorship and the Red Scare, when North Korean terrorist attacks, military incursions and espionage felt visceral. My parents painted anti-Communist posters at school.
I grew up in the democratic and wealthy South Korea that emerged. At the height of the so-called sunshine era in the early 2000s — a period of North-South political détente in which reunification seemed possible, if still remote — my senior art project in high school was about reunited families and optimism about a unified Korea. I was 11 when the North and South Korean teams marched into the stadium together during the opening ceremony of the Sydney Olympics in 2000. I watched on television with tears of joy. For a brief time after that, my dream career was to lead South Korea’s Ministry of Unification, which deals with inter-Korean affairs.

The first time I met a North Korean was in 2010, in Vienna, of all places. A museum was hosting an exhibition of North Korean art, and I went three times. During my last visit, a man who identified himself as a bureaucrat from North Korea’s Culture Ministry approached me. We introduced ourselves, including where in each Korea we were from. We didn’t need an interpreter, and coincidentally, his surname was also Kang, from the same ancestral clan. The conversation was short, and we didn’t discuss any grand feelings of national unity. But the memory of briefly reaching across the divide remains powerful for me.

South Koreans are taught that North Koreans are still our people; they are part of our country. We’re taught to yearn for unification. During the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics in South Korea in 2018, when women’s ice hockey players from both Koreas played as one team, crowds of Koreans waved the flag of unification and chanted, “We are one!” Yet our dreams of unification have always collided with contradictory, polarizing messages about the North, internalized since childhood. North Korea’s government is the enemy and an existential threat. Appearing too sympathetic to the North can be viewed as a violation of South Korea’s National Security Act. The South Korean government blocks many North Korean websites.

North Korean missile launches and nuclear tests generate global headlines, but South Koreans — inured to these constant provocations — just shrug. (North Korea conducted a missile test? Just another Thursday in Seoul.) It’s just one sign of the real and widespread indifference with which many South Koreans have come to regard the North.

Since that moment of unity on the Olympic ice in Pyeongchang, the isolated North Korean regime in Pyongyang has resumed its nuclear and long-range missile testing. South Korea’s president, Yoon Suk Yeol, a conservative, has taken a harder line on the North. Inter-Korean relations have frozen again. The threat of a new war is always there. Every day, unification looks more like an illusion. How can we close such an immense gulf? According to one comparison, South Korea’s nominal G.D.P. may be 57 times as large as the North’s. The South is a robust and healthy democracy: The U.S.-based nongovernmental organization Freedom House gave South Korea a score of 83 out of 100 in political rights and civil liberties; North Korea, ruled with an iron fist by the Kim dynasty, scored a 3.

Despite everything that South Koreans have been taught to wish for, the desire for unification is waning, especially among younger citizens. According to a prominent annual survey, last year just 46 percent of respondents felt that unification was “very” or “somewhat” necessary, the second-lowest level since the survey began in 2007. Nearly 27 percent felt that it wasn’t necessary. My feelings of support for unification — Should we? Can we? — are still alive, but I’m increasingly skeptical.

There are still persuasive arguments for unification, like our shared history and language, the immeasurable value of securing freedom for North Koreans and, of course, peace. Together, we perhaps could shed our reliance on bigger powers like the United States and China and enjoy a peace dividend as a single economy that beats its swords into plowshares.

But there is also the challenge of reconciling vast differences in culture, ideology and political structures, the potentially high economic costs that the South could bear and the need to focus on bread-and-butter issues on our side of the border. Often missing from the debate is the perspective of North Koreans. A 2018 survey found that 90.8 percent of recently defected North Koreans said that before defecting, they felt unification was “very necessary” (probably owing at least in part to the North’s pro-unification propaganda).

I still dream that all Koreans can have the freedom to meet each other, for separated families to reunite, for North Korean defectors to safely return home if they want. But those things seem as distant as ever. During the most recent period of relative détente, a group of South Korean musicians visited Pyongyang in 2018. At the end of their peace concert, they sang a unification song. “Our wish is unification,” the South Korean performers sang, “unification that saves our people.” The audience of hundreds of North Koreans joined in, singing and waving their arms in unison.

Watching on television, the 11-year-old in me came back, and I cried. The passage of time is numbing the pain of separation and the inherited trauma passed down to each generation. But there was still something there, if only for a moment.
 

North and South Korea Drift Farther Apart Every Day​

July 26, 2023

By Haeryun Kang
Ms. Kang is a South Korean journalist and documentary filmmaker.
阅读简体中文版閱讀繁體中文版


When North Korean forces surged across the 38th parallel in June 1950, starting the three-year Korean War, my grandfather Kang Yeon-gu was a teenage student on summer break. He was lucky. His farming village on the southeastern tip of the Korean Peninsula was about as far from the outbreak of fighting as you could get. Millions of people were streaming south to the area seeking safety. One of his neighbors today in Busan had fled there with the family cow in tow. Gramps, who turned 90 this year, survived the war. After millions of deaths and thousands of divided families, an armistice was signed on July 27, 1953. But the Korean War has never technically ended. Neither has the division of the Korean nation.

Decades after Vietnam and Germany were reunified, ending their postwar divisions, Korean estrangement has only solidified. To the outside observer, the rupture between modern, democratic South Korea and the backward, repressive North — one of the last remaining symbols of the Cold War — can seem permanent. But a strange longing for unification persists across generations and borders, a jumble of personal and collective narratives about nation and identity that reveals the complexity of how Koreans perceive their division.

My parents’ generation in South Korea lived through the impoverished postwar decades of military dictatorship and the Red Scare, when North Korean terrorist attacks, military incursions and espionage felt visceral. My parents painted anti-Communist posters at school.
I grew up in the democratic and wealthy South Korea that emerged. At the height of the so-called sunshine era in the early 2000s — a period of North-South political détente in which reunification seemed possible, if still remote — my senior art project in high school was about reunited families and optimism about a unified Korea. I was 11 when the North and South Korean teams marched into the stadium together during the opening ceremony of the Sydney Olympics in 2000. I watched on television with tears of joy. For a brief time after that, my dream career was to lead South Korea’s Ministry of Unification, which deals with inter-Korean affairs.

The first time I met a North Korean was in 2010, in Vienna, of all places. A museum was hosting an exhibition of North Korean art, and I went three times. During my last visit, a man who identified himself as a bureaucrat from North Korea’s Culture Ministry approached me. We introduced ourselves, including where in each Korea we were from. We didn’t need an interpreter, and coincidentally, his surname was also Kang, from the same ancestral clan. The conversation was short, and we didn’t discuss any grand feelings of national unity. But the memory of briefly reaching across the divide remains powerful for me.

South Koreans are taught that North Koreans are still our people; they are part of our country. We’re taught to yearn for unification. During the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics in South Korea in 2018, when women’s ice hockey players from both Koreas played as one team, crowds of Koreans waved the flag of unification and chanted, “We are one!” Yet our dreams of unification have always collided with contradictory, polarizing messages about the North, internalized since childhood. North Korea’s government is the enemy and an existential threat. Appearing too sympathetic to the North can be viewed as a violation of South Korea’s National Security Act. The South Korean government blocks many North Korean websites.

North Korean missile launches and nuclear tests generate global headlines, but South Koreans — inured to these constant provocations — just shrug. (North Korea conducted a missile test? Just another Thursday in Seoul.) It’s just one sign of the real and widespread indifference with which many South Koreans have come to regard the North.

Since that moment of unity on the Olympic ice in Pyeongchang, the isolated North Korean regime in Pyongyang has resumed its nuclear and long-range missile testing. South Korea’s president, Yoon Suk Yeol, a conservative, has taken a harder line on the North. Inter-Korean relations have frozen again. The threat of a new war is always there. Every day, unification looks more like an illusion. How can we close such an immense gulf? According to one comparison, South Korea’s nominal G.D.P. may be 57 times as large as the North’s. The South is a robust and healthy democracy: The U.S.-based nongovernmental organization Freedom House gave South Korea a score of 83 out of 100 in political rights and civil liberties; North Korea, ruled with an iron fist by the Kim dynasty, scored a 3.

Despite everything that South Koreans have been taught to wish for, the desire for unification is waning, especially among younger citizens. According to a prominent annual survey, last year just 46 percent of respondents felt that unification was “very” or “somewhat” necessary, the second-lowest level since the survey began in 2007. Nearly 27 percent felt that it wasn’t necessary. My feelings of support for unification — Should we? Can we? — are still alive, but I’m increasingly skeptical.

There are still persuasive arguments for unification, like our shared history and language, the immeasurable value of securing freedom for North Koreans and, of course, peace. Together, we perhaps could shed our reliance on bigger powers like the United States and China and enjoy a peace dividend as a single economy that beats its swords into plowshares.

But there is also the challenge of reconciling vast differences in culture, ideology and political structures, the potentially high economic costs that the South could bear and the need to focus on bread-and-butter issues on our side of the border. Often missing from the debate is the perspective of North Koreans. A 2018 survey found that 90.8 percent of recently defected North Koreans said that before defecting, they felt unification was “very necessary” (probably owing at least in part to the North’s pro-unification propaganda).

I still dream that all Koreans can have the freedom to meet each other, for separated families to reunite, for North Korean defectors to safely return home if they want. But those things seem as distant as ever. During the most recent period of relative détente, a group of South Korean musicians visited Pyongyang in 2018. At the end of their peace concert, they sang a unification song. “Our wish is unification,” the South Korean performers sang, “unification that saves our people.” The audience of hundreds of North Koreans joined in, singing and waving their arms in unison.

Watching on television, the 11-year-old in me came back, and I cried. The passage of time is numbing the pain of separation and the inherited trauma passed down to each generation. But there was still something there, if only for a moment.
Nice article thanks for sharing. I note that the writer was 11 in 2000, so around my age and has only known when the South was in ascendancy and eclipsed the North...especially after the famine in the 90s, which as a hyper power I'm pretty embarrassed to our response at the time, but alas that was going to be a hard sell.

1697147269849.png


This chart kind of shows how this played out, but even here one can see that North Korea was keeping up even with the South being propped up at 12 billion plus per from the US from like 1960 onwards...I'm not here to defend North Korea post war behavior, I'm here to question the narrative taught in the US...which is just a bold-faced lie.
 
I'm fine with New Zealand being absorbed by the North... :P

Seriously though, I'd like to see unification back on the table. It was not that long ago when it was seriously being discussed and athletes from both nations performed as one team at the Olympics. It's still possible and it is long overdue. Right now, it is the US that is blocking even the discussion. In 2023 that is abominable behavior as a supposed freedom loving nation.

Problem is we don't really know what the North Koreans people want and their leaders will only agree to unification under their terms.

Ultimately it's up to the Korean people and reunification if it happens should be peaceful and respected by USA/China.

They may have to agree to a neutrality pact or be an Asian Switzerland might be reasonable.
 
Nice article thanks for sharing. I note that the writer was 11 in 2000, so around my age and has only known when the South was in ascendancy and eclipsed the North...especially after the famine in the 90s, which as a hyper power I'm pretty embarrassed to our response at the time, but alas that was going to be a hard sell.

View attachment 675015

This chart kind of shows how this played out, but even here one can see that North Korea was keeping up even with the South being propped up at 12 billion plus per from the US from like 1960 onwards...I'm not here to defend North Korea post war behavior, I'm here to question the narrative taught in the US...which is just a bold-faced lie.

It's not a big secret thr North was doing reasonably well until the 60s.

USSR peaked same time and alot of the communist world something similar. China being obvious exception.
 
Ultimately it's up to the Korean people and reunification if it happens should be peaceful and respected by USA/China.
China at one point did say that they were open to Korean Reunification under a Seoul government if it meant the departure of US forces from the peninsula.
 
China at one point did say that they were open to Korean Reunification under a Seoul government if it meant the departure of US forces from the peninsula.

That's not a bad position to take. Not gonna happen now though.

Idk if it would even work.
 
Part hysteria part truth. Soviet army essentially raped its way west, expelled ethnic Germans and lots of refugees fled west bringing those accounts with them.

We can see what NK does as well they're one of the worst regimes closest thing to Stalinism left.

North Korea invaded got flattened.

Every army raped their way in WW2. The soviets had a massively greater army in numbers, they raped more? There are plenty of testemonials of rapes by italians and even french to show that if you really want rapes you have to avoud wars with big armies on the move. Expelling ethnic germans was enthusiastically done by everyone all over central europe, with or without soviet help. The yugoslav partisans were quite thorough, and the czech made sure to resolve their Sudetenland problem. It was inevitable after what the germans had done. It was so bad in the post-war years that the conventions on refugees had to be created, they are a legacy from that era (which incidentally is why they are so unfit for the present situation).

The korean war was one of those accidental turning points of world history that gets little attention. No Korea war, perhaps no big red scare in the US turning it into a military empire with worldwide tentacles, and producing an imperial caste in washington that changed the US from traditionally isolationist to meddlers-in-chief taking over from the british.
Roosevelt, whom I have long considered the political-strategic genius of the 20th century, put a lot of effort into breaking the British Empire, it could be described imo as the top priority for the US diring the whole of WW2. But his view of american preeminece seems way more diplomatic than what came to pass in the Cold War. The USSR was in reactive mode, trying to rebuild after the devastation of having so much of WW2 fought on its territory. Without a perceived US threat things could have gone very differently.
I think the soviet archives showed that Stalin was loathe to release Kim Il Sung to attempt his reunification of Korea by force, but events in the south were forcing a reaction and holding the koreans back forever would damage the USSR's standing in China. Stalin's second greastest strategic mistake (the first being assuming Hitler was capable of rationally assessing the USSR and what war with it would mean). China drifted apart anyway and the korean war led to the creation of the gargantuan bureaucracy in Washington that used the US's resources and power post-ww2 as a a plaything ever since, wrecking its way with near impunity across the globe seeding the chaos it needs. The USSR got stuck in a war of mutual containment with it instead of developing itself.
 
Every army raped their way in WW2. The soviets had a massively greater army in numbers, they raped more? There are plenty of testemonials of rapes by italians and even french to show that if you really want rapes you have to avoud wars with big armies on the move. Expelling ethnic germans was enthusiastically done by everyone all over central europe, with or without soviet help. The yugoslav partisans were quite thorough, and the czech made sure to resolve their Sudetenland problem. It was inevitable after what the germans had done. It was so bad in the post-war years that the conventions on refugees had to be created, they are a legacy from that era (which incidentally is why they are so unfit for the present situation).

The korean war was one of those accidental turning points of world history that gets little attention. No Korea war, perhaps no big red scare in the US turning it into a military empire with worldwide tentacles, and producing an imperial caste in washington that changed the US from traditionally isolationist to meddlers-in-chief taking over from the british.
Roosevelt, whom I have long considered the political-strategic genius of the 20th century, put a lot of effort into breaking the British Empire, it could be described imo as the top priority for the US diring the whole of WW2. But his view of american preeminece seems way more diplomatic than what came to pass in the Cold War. The USSR was in reactive mode, trying to rebuild after the devastation of having so much of WW2 fought on its territory. Without a perceived US threat things could have gone very differently.
I think the soviet archives showed that Stalin was loathe to release Kim Il Sung to attempt his reunification of Korea by force, but events in the south were forcing a reaction and holding the koreans back forever would damage the USSR's standing in China. Stalin's second greastest strategic mistake (the first being assuming Hitler was capable of rationally assessing the USSR and what war with it would mean). China drifted apart anyway and the korean war led to the creation of the gargantuan bureaucracy in Washington that used the US's resources and power post-ww2 as a a plaything ever since, wrecking its way with near impunity across the globe seeding the chaos it needs. The USSR got stuck in a war of mutual containment with it instead of developing itself.

Careful you'll get accused of supporting Genocide.

Somewhat understandable with the circumstances I don't exactly blame the Soviets for that one.
 
As I pointed out, it wasn't "the soviets" so much as the central european countries. The soviets did "relocations" during WW2 but those were eventually reversed. They had their union/federal structure as a way to handle different nationalities within one country. It only broke down when the political system collapsed (NK was a manifestation of Gorbachev's incompetence).
A lot could be said about the subject of nationalities versus polities, and what could be learned from earlier eras or different forms of political organization. It would he off-tooir here though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom