Kissinger's killing fields

https://theintercept.com/series/henry-kissinger-killing-fields/

by l3mure • 3 years ago

182 149 3 years ago

l3mure2• 3 years ago

An exclusive archive of formerly classified U.S. military documents — assembled from the files of a secret Pentagon task force that investigated war crimes during the 1970s, inspector generals’ inquiries buried amid thousands of pages of unrelated documents, and other materials discovered during hundreds of hours of research at the U.S. National Archives — offers previously unpublished, unreported, and underappreciated evidence of civilian deaths that were kept secret during the war and remain almost entirely unknown to the American people.

lisasays7• 3 years ago

  E.O. 11652 N/A
  TAGS: PFOR, XC, US
  SUBJECT: AUGUST 8 EA PRESS SUMMARY

  INDOCHINA

  1. CASUALTY FIGURES FOR WORST BOMBING ACCIDENT OF INDOCHINA WAR AT NEAK LUONG GIVEN BY AMEMBASSY PP AS 137 (INCLUDING 56 FANK) KILLED AND 268 (INCLUDING 137 FANK) WOUNDED, BUT KHMER OFFICIALS SAY 189 KILLED AND 315 WOUNDED. SOURCE OF BOMBING ERROR NOT YET PINPOINTED, BUT DOD BELIEVES DUE MECHANICAL OR HUMAN TECHNICAL ERROR (AP CHITRIB, NYDN, WP; BINDER, NYT; SEIDEN, SUN; CSM; MARKS, UPI, PHINQ). KIRK (CHITRIB) FINDS REACTION AT PP ONE OF RESIGNATION. CHARGE ENDERS APOLOGIZES TO GKR AND EXPRESSES PROFOUND CONDOLENCES FOR NEAK LUONG ERROR (MARKS). SUN (AP) BELIEVES DANGER OF MISTAKEN BOMBING OF FRIENDLY AREAS DUE TO US PILOTS' DEPENDENCE ON CAMBODIAN OBSERVERS FOR TARGET INFORMATION AND DANGER IS HEIGHTENING AS INSURGENTS TIGHTEN NOOSE. PHOTOGRAPHER WHO VISITED NEAK LUONG (AP WP, NYT) SAYS HALF OF TOWN DESTROYED OR HEAVILY DAMAGED AND MAIN STREET LINED WITH RUBBLE; CONTRADICTS US AIR ATTACHE WHO STATED DAMAGE NOT EXTENSIVE

dredmorbius• 3 years ago

Is there one of the four articles you'd recommend reading first / consider most significant?

l3mure2• 3 years ago

'Blood on his hands,' the other 3 flesh out specific claims.

startupsfail• 3 years ago

Friendly fire.

ypeterholmes• 3 years ago

He's the Wembanyama of the afterlife draft- devil is salivating.

b2158263• 3 years ago

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer." -- H. Kissinger.

It's sad this deplorable human being was given the Nobel Peace Prize.

DirectorKrennic• 3 years ago

The quote is apocryphal. There is no evidence he said that. And if he did, it was in jest.

giraffe_lady• 3 years ago

Plenty of evidence he did it, however.

runarberg• 3 years ago

Kissinger him self claims to have said it.

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/P860114-1573_MC_b.html#ef...

avgcorrection2• 3 years ago

… and if it wasn’t in jest: “sticks and stones”.

hotpotamus• 3 years ago

I think you're supposed to wait until after someone proves that they said it to claim that it was a joke. I'd add that Kissinger had a decent sense of humor that he did not mind using glibly.

RIMR• 3 years ago

I don't think "He didn't say that, but if he did he didn't mean it" is a great argument, especially since there is proof that he did say it in the documents linked to these articles...

It's also clear that that he did tons of illegal/unconstitutional things in his career, so it's pretty clear that he did say it and meant it, because it was an accurate portrayal of his behavior.

moffkalast• 3 years ago

Once more the Sith will rule the galaxy, and we shall have... peace.

hayst4ck4• 3 years ago

Words are indirect references to ideas. For some, particularly oppressors, peace references the idea of lack of physical violence. To other peace references the presence of justice.

If someone thinks peace is lack of violence, how do you even communicate with them when you think peace is the presence of justice. To the former war violates peace, to the latter war is required for peace.

1letterunixname2• 3 years ago

It's still not too late to bring the blood-money profiteering war criminals Kissinger and Cheney before The Hague. While the US isn't a signatory to the ICC, a cargo van and a private jet would solve that.

They should die in custody and disgrace while Snowden and Assange should be free.

dragonwriter9• 3 years ago

It's still not too late to bring the blood-money profiteering war criminals Kissinger and Cheney before The Hague. While the US isn't a signatory to the ICC, a cargo van and a private jet would solve that.

There's also the substantial problem that the war crimes (and crimes of aggression) that each is most clearly responsible for are not within ICC jurisdiction for geographical and/or temporal reasons. (Becauae the UK is and was at the time a Rome Statute party, the ICC did have investigate British potential violations in Iraq.)

science4sail• 3 years ago

While the US isn't a signatory to the ICC, a cargo van and a private jet would solve that.

Wouldn't that just result in the US invading the Netherlands to rescue them? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pr...

This authorization led to the act being colloquially nicknamed "The Hague Invasion Act", as the act allows the President to order U.S. military action, such as an invasion of The Hague, where the ICC is located, to protect American officials and military personnel from prosecution or rescue them from custody

pstuart• 3 years ago

I'm still bent about Assange's complicity in the 2016 election interference. It's believed that both the DNC and RNC servers were hacked, but conveniently one side was omitted.

Yes, I do believe in transparency and have no love for the DNC, but that asymmetry had significant consequences. It's widely believed that the other dump was used for blackmail purposes.

emodendroket4• 3 years ago

To be honest I'm not sure the megalomaniacs who pushed him aside are any better... in a way, better to deal with someone amoral who can be reasoned with than a true believer who thinks he's going to remake the Middle East in the image of America or whatever.

avgcorrection2• 3 years ago

better to deal with someone amoral who can be reasoned with

By whom/who?

eynsham3• 3 years ago

Kissinger wasn't exactly unimpeachably rational; see e.g. G.J. Bass's The Blood Telegram.

zeteo• 3 years ago

When you find Kissinger deplorable you basically deplore his honesty. There are plenty of people with that level of power who have done as bad, or worse, but covered it up with silence or PR spin. Don't shoot the messenger.

yabones• 3 years ago

Kissinger's turning 100 this Saturday. The final horcrux of 20th century imperialism.

koolba• 3 years ago

Watching what’s become of Ukraine and China must be keeping him going. Probably doesn’t even need a Viagra prescription anymore.

hummer_embark2• 3 years ago

The Ukraine war is a negative for him. He wanted to use Russia against China. Like how he previously used China against the Soviet Union. He was the one advising Trump towards detente with Russia during the 2016 campaign. Unfortunately for him, others within the deep state made that policy impossible.

therein• 3 years ago

There is a saying in Turkish that roughly translates: "Nothing bad happens to bad people, God has to protect the good people".

Here is Kissinger being asked directly: https://youtu.be/p9vj2IkpBEw?t=7

celtoid4• 3 years ago

Kissinger's friendship with Putin must be a thorn in the side of his many defenders in DC.

"Putin and Kissinger, indeed, met regularly – at least fifteen times. Once Putin was even invited for dinner at Kissinger’s home in New York. A “close and trusting collaboration” seemed in particular be established between the Kremlin and Kissinger Associates, Kissinger’s consulting firm." [0]

[0] "The Strange Putin-Kissinger Friendship", Marcel H. Van Herpen, 2016:

https://www.cicerofoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/Marcel_H...

mrguyorama• 3 years ago

Trump himself openly talks about admiring Putin and preferring the way Putin leads to anything here in America, and high ranking members of the American Republican party spent at least one recent July 4th in Moscow meeting with Putin.

Connections with the Russian Oligarchy haven't harmed them at all, especially since all their followers are convinced it was a hoax.

speed_spread• 3 years ago

You mean he'll let himself be killed to finally take down his mortal enemy but will be resurrected moments later by his loyal friends? That metaphor holds further than one would like.

JKCalhoun• 3 years ago

Wow, I must have been the 23rd person to show up at this party — he and I share the same birthday.

dctoedt• 3 years ago

So you're turning 100 too? Wow, congratulations! </smile>

(I drill my law students in spotting and correcting phrasing that can be interpreted in two different ways, i.e., ambiguities.)

celtoid4• 3 years ago

Not just Cambodia. What Kissinger and Nixon did in Chile in 1973 was a crime that brought untold suffering to the people of Chile.

"...[What are we to make of] President Nixon and Secretary of State Kissinger who, having been emboldened by various multinational corporations such as IT&T and PEPSICO, pursued another attempt to bring down Allende, an attempt which was operated through the White House and even kept secret from the 40 Committee? According to Kissinger, this plan involved a group that was unknown to others ‘and charged with the responsibility of working with the Chilean military in bringing about a coup against Allende.”? They suc- ceeded."[0]

[0] "Democracy Versus The National Security State", Marcus Raskin, 1976:

https://archive.org/details/democracy-versus-the-national-se...

mjhay• 3 years ago

We're still doing the same antics. The OAS and State Dept supported the failed (literal) fascist coup in Bolivia, and also the recent one in Peru that has lead to quite a few deaths so far due to police/military brutality. Both were claimed to somehow be about upholding democracy despite strong popular opposition.

celtoid4• 3 years ago

Like the old joke goes-

Q: Why will there never be a coup d’état in Washington?

A: Because there’s no American embassy there.

missedthecue3• 3 years ago

The coup attempt in Perú was by a leftist politician, it wasn't some right-wing power grab. Castillo was overwhelmingly voted to be removed from power by democratic means. He flailed and tried to get the military on his side and it didn't work. The current president of Perú is not some installed puppet, it's Castillo's vice president.

Saying it was US anti-leftist meddling is baseless conspiracy theory.

(I'm Peruvian and live in Perú.)

sillywalk2• 3 years ago

Also the invasion of East Timor, the Bangladesh War (see Blood Telegram)..

pessimizer• 3 years ago

Neither major US party has significantly different policy than Kissinger, and currently both are significantly more aggressive. They also both believe that Domino Theory is true. The major difference is that Kissinger and Nixon opened up China, while the US sees the comfort and wealth of Chinese people as the biggest threat facing the world today.

Kissinger is a scapegoat that lets everyone else off. He's another Judith Miller for the liberal soul.

Here's the LA Times calling Kissinger a wimp last year: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2022-02-21/richard-nix...

Here's NYT pretending they weren't calling him an idiot and a coward by writing a story quoting only people calling him an idiot and a coward: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/25/world/europe/henry-kissin...

edit: also, I hate to add this because it's so 2023, but it's a trope that we blame on the one Jewish guy everything a bunch of WASPs did on his advice.

NoMoreNicksLeft• 3 years ago

while the US sees the comfort and wealth of Chinese people as the biggest threat facing the world today.

I mostly see the CCP's concentration camps and sociopathic indifference to fundamental rights as the biggest threat to the world today.

Of course, I can see your point of view too, that the "less evil" regimes are so arrogant in always boasting about how they're "less evil". As if that matters. Everyone knows that if they stopped doing that, the world would improve.

AbrahamParangi3• 3 years ago

"the US sees the comfort and wealth of Chinese people as the biggest threat facing the world today"

This is a pretty crazy thing to say. I am aware that you can find this opinion in Chinese propaganda but what leads you to believe that this is actually true and the US/China tension is not a function of the fact that the US is an ally to most democracies and opposed to most authoritarian states?

I mean, if we just look at a list of who the US calls "adversaries":

Iran

North Korea

Russia

China

ISIS

Are there any trends we can pick out here? Any commonalities?

missedthecue3• 3 years ago

Is it really such a crazy thing to say when US officials like the commerce secretary are publicly saying that the US needs to get Europe on board so they can more effectively slow the Chinese innovation rate?

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/28/us-needs-to-work-with-europe...

sabayapitman• 3 years ago

  but it's a trope that we blame on the one Jewish guy everything a bunch of WASPs did on his advice.

see

  White Man's Burden, Ari Shavit, Apr 3, 2003

  The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history. Two of them, journalists William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer, say it's possible. But another journalist, Thomas Friedman (not part of the group), is skeptical

https://web.archive.org/web/20220528031529/https://www.haare...

kornhole10• 3 years ago

Imperial wars and the people who waged them in the past are horrible, but the current wars are just and worthy of our support.

This type of reporting perpetuates war by putting us in a loop of kill, repent and repeat. This is generally the type of reporting I find from this and other billionaire owned outlets. If you disagree, please reference an article where they are not in support of the current war in Ukraine.

comrh• 3 years ago

Many articles are not in support of the current war in Ukraine. A lot of ink has been spilled on what Russia is doing is wrong and should immediately end their war.

kornhole10• 3 years ago

People of the US must support their leader to make war. Similarly people of Russia must support their leader for war. An American journal like the Intercept has near zero influence on people in Russia just as Komsomolskaya Pravda has near zero influence on us. If an outlet is promoting hate against another country rather than paths of diplomacy, it is promoting war.

pasquinelli• 3 years ago

war is a racket after all.

https://archive.org/details/WarIsARacket

MSFT_Edging• 3 years ago

On the day Russia invaded, Defense contractor stocks rose significantly.

Until we can break the profit motive away from war production, you won't see these kinds of wars stopping.

Not to say there aren't other motivations for war, but policy makers, defense companies, and governmental orgs are fairly entwined.

One fun thing I used to find, if you followed an article about Xiajiang, and followed the citations far enough, the source citation was almost always a thinktank funded by these groups in abstract ways. It'd take a while to find again, but one example was a study by some pacific named thinktank, who's funding was from an Australian defense policy group. That group was in turn partially funded by the American DoD.

The corruption is circular. Soft power manipulates studies, which manipulates reporting, which manipulates public opinion, which then sways policy, which then supports the original orgs. It was so easy to turn "predicted cultural genocide(by including a group in a policy they were previously exempt from)" into "active genocide" when you're 8 citations deep.

tome• 3 years ago

This is generally the type of reporting I find from this and other billionaire owned outlet

Is The Intercept billionare-owned?

b2158263• 3 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Look_Media

b2158263• 3 years ago

support of the current war in Ukraine

The Intercept has mostly echoed current left-liberal talking points ever since Greenwald left, so you won't find many articles critical of the current war there. Anyway, since the OP is about Kissinger, it's interesting to note what he had to say about the current war [1]

"After saying that Western countries should remember Russia’s importance to Europe and not get swept up “in the mood of the moment,” Kissinger also pushed for the West to force Ukraine into accepting negotiations with a “status quo ante,” which means the previous state of affairs.
“Negotiations need to begin in the next two months before it creates upheavals and tensions that will not be easily overcome. Ideally, the dividing line should be a return to the status quo ante,” said Kissinger, 98, according to the Daily Telegraph. “Pursuing the war beyond that point would not be about the freedom of Ukraine, but a new war against Russia itself.”

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/05/24/henry-kissin...

int_19h8• 3 years ago

The war in Ukraine is an imperial war, instigated by another empire. So if you consider imperial wars to be horrible, supporting their victims is a good way to make amends, no?

mythrwy5• 3 years ago

It's an imperial war instigated by multiple parties. Not one party. And the Ukrainian people are paying for it in blood.

kornhole10• 3 years ago

Your understanding supports this claim. If you go outside the mainstream media and this outlet, you might hear that the US is the only real empire with ~800 military bases around the world and their NATO that has expanded right up to Russia's borders. The best way to support the victims of Ukraine is to help them not die and suffer further by supporting peace talks, cease fires, and détente instead of sending them weapons that Russia will destroy along with them. It may be too late for Ukraine now. MSM has done its job already. We can only hope this does not go nuclear.

throwaway6734• 3 years ago

Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a war of colonialism and imperialism.

soledades3• 3 years ago

Every major outlet is against the war in Ukraine, which is why they want to help the Ukrainians drive the aggressors out.

ultrasaurus• 3 years ago

It's mind-boggling how often there are military disasters because of someone skipping a single obvious step like "fail[ing] to flip an offset switch" or "mak[ing] no attempt to warn any of the other Allied ships" after being hit by a torpedo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Savo_Island#Action_s...

msla3• 3 years ago

So many people were wrong about Cambodia:

https://globalist.yale.edu/in-the-magazine/glimpses/ghosts-o...

At the time, American scholars Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman argued that media claims of the Cambodian genocide were propaganda, designed to make the US look favorable in the ongoing Vietnam War. Swedish diplomat Gunnar Bergstrom dined with Pol Pot in Phnom Penh while the dictator’s cadres continued their genocide. Global powers like the United States and China promoted pro-Khmer-Rouge resolutions in the United Nations after their removal from Cambodia. Ironically, academics, politicians, and foreigners were key Khmer Rouge targets for extermination.

PDF:

https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1...

Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman’s 1977 article, “Distortions at Fourth Hand,” published in the left-leaning publication The Nation, exemplifies the perspective of the left in regards to Cambodia during the 1970s. Although Chomsky and Herman acknowledge that Cambodia was facing a time of extreme suffering, they criticize less ideologically driven publications like The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Time for reporting Khmer Rouge crimes for which “there is no independent confirmatory evidence.”12 Citing other liberal publications like The Economist, Chomsky and Herman declare that the evidence suggests, “Executions have numbered at most in the thousands.” They even go so far as to claim, “The ‘slaughter’ by the Khmer Rouge is a...New York Times creation.”

camillomiller3• 3 years ago

So, let me understand: the mistake of a non-military intellectual who was not in a position of power at the time, and was proven wrong about his ideologically loaded perspective, is presented as an equivalent to the position of a high ranking official that physically commanded actions that killed thousands of innocent civilians?

msla3• 3 years ago

No, of course not. I'm just providing context.

mimd2• 3 years ago

You don't think Chomsky has power? Using your influence to cause others to disregard or advocate for actions can lead to as much death as direct influence. He was activity dismissing reports as "misinformation" for ideological reasons at the time and people took his advice. If it caused people to not act, then yes, he's partially responsible.

No, I don't think he's equivalent, but let's not give him a pass here. His ideology lead to excusing and lauding a group of people who wanted to slaughter anyone with education and reduce anyone else to starving farmers. And he didn't do himself any favors afterwards either, sulking and attacking people who pointed out that moral failing, even circa 2000's.

We tend to trash people for that sorta thing, like we do for Kissinger, but since it's Marxism/Communism it's given a pass by media/left groups. Their are still a lot of puff articles for Chomsky/and his similars every year. The imbalance in how we talk about that era in certain circles is a bit nauseating.

Anyway, the Intercept is trying to obscure their favored ideologies excesses, and reassign blame to their ideological opponents. That's why the intercept is specifically titling it "killing fields" to usurp the other known quantity of the Khmer Rouge's massacres, and focusing exclusively on Kissinger. I've heard way too many people blame solely Kissinger as responsible, as if pol pot did not exist, to give the intercept the benefit of the doubt.

sillywalk2• 3 years ago

Although I despise Kissinger, I'm not sure it's fair to put it all responsibility on him. There is more blame to go around.

Author is Nick Turse. I can recommend his 'Kill Anything That Moves' as a good book on the Vietnam War.

g8oz• 3 years ago

This article is an excellent riposte to the nauseatingly worshipful interview with Kissinger that the Economist published this week.

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2023/05/17/henry-kissinge...

camillomiller3• 3 years ago

As a journalist, I am disgusted by what the Economist has become. Or maybe was it always this low level boot-licking rag?

agentdrtran• 3 years ago

It was literally founded as a boot-licking rag! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist#History

Kissinger's killing fields

Related Stories