[SPORK] Weird definition of "draining the swamp"
Owen Byrne
owen at permafrost.net
Wed Apr 30 16:47:30 PDT 2003
Russell Turpin wrote:
> Jeff Bone:
>
>> However, I'm not sure it's true --- I think we could tally up
>> invasions, excursions, interventions, police actions, illegal arrests
>> on foreign soil (i.e. international kidnappings), assassinations,
>> other breaches of international law, and enemy com- and non-com
>> deaths in various conflicts of us vs. the previous USSR... and it'd
>> probably be a pretty close call, if we didn't lose it outright.
>
>
> Not even close. The USSR would 'win' hands down. At
> least, if we get to count the numbers of their own
> citizens who were killed. It's remarkable and
> ghastly that that exceeds the number of people they
> killed in foreign wars.
While you're probably right, I would like to see the final tally.
This site says 4,000,000 civilian casualties in Vietnam - admittedly
including the French period - but Americans are so much more efficient
at killing civilians.
http://www.rjsmith.com/kia_tbl.html
This site says 2,000,000 more in the Korean war, and shows that the US
PR machine was suppressing civilian casualties even back then:
http://www.cptours.com/the_korean_war.htm
>
> *The three-year war was a bloody, unsatisfying affair for all
> sides, and the magnitude of the devastation in Korea is still
> not well understood, either in the U.S. or in Korea.
> Casualties among the Korean civilian population were
> horrifying - likely more than 2 million dead, with the
> majority of the population uprooted from their homes and
> villages, many of which had been completely destroyed (by
> comparison, the Vietnam War - from the beginning of the
> conflict to the end in 1975 - claimed something in the
> neighborhood of 1 million civilian casualties over two
> decades). *
>
>
> * In addition to the large number of atrocity killings by both
> North and South Korean military forces, police and guerillas,
> it is unfortunate that some American air and ground forces
> inflicted substantial damage on Korean civilians. These
> incidents included strafing and the use of napalm on civilians
> in the unrestrained bombing campaign against cities and towns,
> bridges and dams throughout North Korea (the intensity of this
> air campaign is not well understood outside of wartime Air
> Force circles - the bombing was severe, and is a major source
> of North Korean antipathy to the US which lingers to this day). *
>
>
> *Also, during the panicky early days of the North Korean
> advance, some American ground units, retreating under pressure
> and reacting to North Korea's practice of concealing soldiers
> and guerillas in refugee columns, sometimes did opened fire on
> large groups of Korean civilians, killing hundreds in at least
> one case.*
>
>
> * *
>
> *It is worth examining the facts of the situation, both because it is
> distasteful for Americans to consider the killing of civilians by
> American military forces - we are, after all, supposed to be the "good
> guys" - and because of the recent surfacing of news reports concerning
> Korean War civilian killings, such as those at the village of No Gun
> Ri. In this incident, which appears to be well-substantiated, a group
> of several hundred refugees was first strafed by American planes,
> killing about 100 people, after which the survivors were taken under
> machine gun fire by American soldiers, killing perhaps several hundred
> more. Fifty years after the fact, with little understood of the
> actual conflict, it is easy to take these reports out of context,
> particularly for anyone with an "axe to grind". Understanding this
> complicated and unfortunate situation takes more than "sound bite"
> journalism allows.*
>
> * *
>
I do find the reports of firing into crowds interesting given recent
events and reflects nicely on the debate here on whether the US would
use CS/pepper spray on civilians. Why bother? - they aren't Americans -
we'll just use bullets.
Owen
More information about the FoRK
mailing list