CIA, MKUltra, and the cover-up of U.S. germ warfare in the Korean war (2022)

jeff-kaye.medium.com

171–172 of 172 posts

Re: CIA, MKUltra, and the cover-up of U.S. germ warfare in the Korean war (2022)

#171

Post by discardedrefuse » Mon, Jun 05, 2023, 3:58 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #167

hutzlibu wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about exploding the bomb in the sky, visible from the emperors palace and the whole city? Or using it against an actual military target. The message would have been clear, we can annihilate you if we want and you don't surrender. But they choose to go against the civilian population simply, because they wanted the data, of what a bomb does to a city. And that by that time bombing civilians was already pretty norm…

I mean, the Allies literally bombed a major city with the first atomic weapon and Japan was like "yeah, not going to surrender". Then after the 2nd bomb, it still took days and a Soviet invasion to get them to surrender. I'm not sure a demonstration would mean much if destroying a entire city didn't convince them.

The article I posted covers this (the section called Scale). When put into context, the destruction of Hiroshima just wasn't that impressive. We had already leveled 66 Japanese cities with conventional bombs. Hiroshima may have been a technical / scientific feat, but the end result paled in comparison to what we had already done before.

Re: CIA, MKUltra, and the cover-up of U.S. germ warfare in the Korean war (2022)

#172

Post by shadowgovt » Mon, Jun 05, 2023, 5:29 PM UTC

phpisthebest wrote: post #145

anigbrowl wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some level of secrecy for purely operational matters is natural. You don't want to give out the keys to your secure communications system or publish your military dispositions in real time. On the other hand, the existence of programs like this cannot and should not be granted a veil of secrecy. It's a sad irony that the US presents itself as the champion of a rules-based international order, human rights etc., while…

I can understand that limited position, however then we get into the proper role, size, and make up of government. The foundation of the US was there was not to be a standing army, in fact they made it unconditional. Only allowing for a defensive navy. Of course likely most things in the constitution it was quickly ignored and/or "interpreted" to mean something else allowing for massive expanding on both power and si…

The idealized United States required compromises from day 1. Among the things the Continental Army did, instead of standing down, was suppress a tax revolt in western Pennsylvania.

(... and that's before we get into much messier issues with the government-as-constructed such as what led to the Civil War. The United States is arguably currently on version 4 of its federal government, depending on how you slice "major releases").

Post reply on HN