STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT- Don’t be blind world and open your eyes and see american crime,too much american crime in this world,Now you are busy talking about war russia with ukraine and blame and punish Russia.
You don’t see the history of American crimes, the invasion of Vietnam and other countries,If you have a healthy soul and perfect humanity, you will be able to judge America’s crimes.
First we describe American crimes in Vietnam:
In 1968 US soldiers murdered several hundred Vietnamese civilians in the single most infamous incident of the Vietnam War. The My Lai massacre is often held to have been an aberration but investigative journalist Nick Turse has uncovered evidence that war crimes were committed by the US military on a far bigger scale.
In a war in which lip service was often paid to winning “hearts and minds”, the US military had an almost singular focus on one defining measure of success in Vietnam: the body count – the number of enemy killed in action.
Vietnamese forces, outgunned by their adversaries, relied heavily on mines and other booby traps as well as sniper fire and ambushes. Their methods were to strike and immediately withdraw.
Unable to deal with an enemy that dictated the time and place of combat, US forces took to destroying whatever they could manage. If the Americans could kill more enemies – known as Viet Cong or VC – than the Vietnamese could replace, the thinking went, they would naturally give up the fight.
To motivate troops to aim for a high body count, competitions were held between units to see who could kill the most. Rewards for the highest tally, displayed on “kill boards” included days off or an extra case of beer. Their commanders meanwhile stood to win rapid promotion.
Very quickly the phrase – “If it’s dead and Vietnamese, it’s VC” – became a defining dictum of the war and civilian corpses were regularly tallied as slain enemies or Viet Cong.
Civilians, including women and children, were killed for running from soldiers or helicopter gunships that had fired warning shots, or being in a village suspected of sheltering Viet Cong.
At the time, much of this activity went unreported – but not unnoticed.
Researching post-traumatic stress disorder among Vietnam veterans, in 2001 I stumbled across a collection of war crimes investigations carried out by the military at the US National Archives.
Box after box of criminal investigation reports and day-to-day paperwork had been long buried away and almost totally forgotten. Some detailed the most nightmarish descriptions. Others hinted at terrible events that had not been followed up.
At that time the US military had at its disposal more killing power, destructive force, and advanced technology than any military in the history of the world.
The amount of ammunition fired per soldier was 26 times greater in Vietnam than during World War II. By the end of the conflict, America had unleashed the equivalent of 640 Hiroshima-sized atomic bombs on Vietnam.
Vast areas dotted with villages were blasted with artillery, bombed from the air and strafed by helicopter gunships before ground troops went in on search-and-destroy missions.
The phrase “kill anything that moves” became an order on the lips of some American commanders whose troops carried out massacres across their area of operations.
While the US suffered more than 58,000 dead in the war, an estimated two million Vietnamese civilians were killed, another 5.3 million injured and about 11 million, by US government figures, became refugees in their own country.
Today, if people remember anything about American atrocities in Vietnam, they recall the March 1968 My Lai massacre in which more than 500 civilians were killed over the course of four hours, during which US troops even took time out to eat lunch.
Far bloodier operations, like one codenamed Speedy Express, should be remembered as well, but thanks to cover-ups at the highest levels of the US military, few are.
In late 1968, the 9th Infantry Division, under the command of Gen Julian Ewell, kicked off a large-scale operation in the Mekong Delta, the densely populated deep south of Vietnam.
In an already body count-obsessed environment, Ewell, who became known as the Butcher of the Delta, was especially notorious. He sacked subordinates who killed insufficient numbers and unleashed heavy firepower on a countryside packed with civilians.
A whistle-blower in the division wrote to the US Army Chief of Staff William Westmoreland, pleading for an investigation. Artillery called in on villages, he reported, had killed women and children. Helicopter gunships had frightened farmers into running and then cut them down. Troops on the ground had done the same thing.
The result was industrial-scale slaughter, the equivalent, he said, to a “My Lai each month”.
Just look at the ratio of Viet Cong reportedly killed to weapons captured, he told Westmoreland.
Indeed, by the end of the operation Ewell’s division claimed an enemy body count of close to 11,000, but turned in fewer than 750 captured weapons.
Westmoreland ignored the whistle-blower, scuttled a nascent inquiry, and buried the files, but not before an internal Pentagon report endorsed some of the whistle-blower’s most damning allegations.
The secret investigation into Speedy Express remained classified for decades before I found it in buried in the National Archives.
The military estimated that as many as 7,000 civilians were killed during the operation. More damning still, the analysis admitted that the “US command, in its extensive experience with large-scale combat operations in South East Asia, appreciated the inevitability of significant civilian casualties in the conduct of large operations in densely populated areas such as the Delta.”
Indeed, what the military admitted in this long secret report confirmed exactly what I also discovered in hundreds of talks and formal interviews with American veterans, in tens of thousands of pages of formerly classified military documents, and, most of all, in the heavily populated areas of Vietnam where Americans expended massive firepower.
Survivors of a massacre by US Marines in Quang Tri Province told me what it was like to huddle together in an underground bomb shelter as shots rang out and grenades exploded above.
Fearing that one of those grenades would soon roll into their bunker, a mother grabbed her young children, took a chance and bolted.
“Racing from our bunker, we saw the shelter opposite ours being shot up,” Nguyen Van Phuoc, one of those youngsters, told me. One of the Americans then wheeled around and fired at his mother, killing her.
Many more were killed on that October day in 1967. Two of the soldiers involved were later court martialled but cleared of murder.
Last year, the Pentagon kicked off a 13-year programme to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the war. An entry on the official Vietnam War Commemoration website for My Lai describes it as an “incident” and the number killed is listed as “200” not 500.
Speedy Express is referred to as “an operation that would eventually yield an enemy body count of 11,000”.
There is almost no mention of Vietnamese civilians.
In a presidential proclamation on the website, Barack Obama distils the conflict down to troops slogging “through jungles and rice paddies… fighting heroically to protect the ideals we hold dear as Americans… through more than a decade of combat”.
Despite what the president might believe, combat was just a fraction of that war.
The real war in Vietnam was typified by millions of men, women, and children driven into slums and refugee camps; by homes, hamlets, and whole villages burnt to the ground; by millions killed or wounded when war showed up on their doorstep.
President Obama called the Vietnam War “a chapter in our nation’s history that must never be forgotten”. But thanks to cover-ups like that of Speedy Express, few know the truth to begin with.
About the author: Nick Turse has been researching US military atrocities in the Vietnam War for more than a decade and has detailed his findings in a book Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam.
A Pentagon spokesman, when asked for a statement about the evidence presented, said he doubted that more than 50 years after the US went to war in Vietnam, it would be possible for the military to provide an official statement in “a timely manner.”
The description of the crimes of America and Britain attacking a sovereign country Iraq.
The US/UK-led invasion of Iraq in spring 2003 is a crime. Hundreds of thousands of people died in the armed conflict that spanned more than thirteen years. All parties, including the USA and the UK, committed war crimes including massacres and torture on a massive scale. We can’t expect any kind of remorse about this from former Prime Minister Tony Blair. The report of the Iraq Inquiry published on Wednesday by former diplomat Sir John Chilcot won’t change that. But Chilcot’s findings couldn’t be clearer. The UK’s decision to join the invasion was premature, made before exhausting all other options. Blair’s government proceeded on the basis of false information. Not only was the intelligence information wrong, the war also lacked a legal basis.
As we look back to the decision to go to war in 2003, we shouldn’t forget that Saddam Hussein and his Syrian neighbor Bashar al-Assad committed grave human rights crimes. In Saddam’s case it was crimes against humanity directed against the Kurdish and Shiite population in his country. The Iraqi dictator’s regime also used the infamous Abu Ghraib prison for systematic torture, decades before the US did. With this in mind it would be wrong to place all of the blame for the destabilization of the region on western military powers. Nevertheless: the war and the occupation by the UK and the US contributed massively to the fragility of Iraq and the emergence of the “Islamic State”.
It is right and important that the UK – unlike many other states – is addressing its political missteps and the breaches of law, including of the UN Charter, from this period. On these questions the report, stretching to thousands of pages, will require a careful assessment. One would hope that illegal acts with such fatal consequences would result in legal sanctions against the political and military figures responsible. The Chilcot report itself provides no legally binding judgment. This would require – as Chilcot points out – a properly constituted and internationally recognized Court.
This might of course bring to mind the International Criminal Court in The Hague – its great predecessor, the Nuremberg Military Tribunal set up to try major Nazi criminals, condemned Germany’s war of aggression as the “mother of all crimes”. But it is not currently possible to conduct investigations or bring charges concerning the crime of aggression in The Hague. The relevant provision first takes effect in 2017, and even then it will apply only prospectively and only to states that opt in.
In the UK, lawyers and politicians are already thinking about using an old law to trigger impeachment proceedings against Blair the bellicist. But it’s worth noting there is a lack of criminal law provisions that would clearly allow the prosecution of the former Prime Minister for wrongdoing.
Work done on this issue by my organization, the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), focused on cases of torture and abuse of Iraqi detainees by British military personnel and intelligence agents. In 2014 prosecutors at the International Criminal Court opened a preliminary investigation into this issue. Blair’s Defence Secretary Geoffrey Hoon will hopefully face scrutiny as part of this process.
Further proceedings may establish Blair’s criminal liability for these crimes of torture. Investigations in The Hague, and ideally, in London, should be pushed forward. Impunity for this war of aggression is a deeply unsatisfying outcome. The Chilcot report offers plenty of political lessons to help avert future wars; these should also include the need to make the relevant criminal law reforms.
White House spokesperson Jen Psaki said on Monday that celebrating Russia’s Victory Day would be unethical because Russia committed war crimes in Ukraine. Psaki said the war between Russia and Ukraine has caused a lot of suffering and destruction, especially on the Ukrainian side. Psaki also said Putin had distorted history by justifying war.
European Commission President Ursula Von Der Leyen on Monday announced new sanctions to stop imports of crude oil supplies from Russia for six months. Europe’s decision is a form of response to a large-scale Russian attack on cities in Ukraine some time ago. However, this decision will also be a complicated task for the EU, because the countries in the region are highly dependent on several energy sources in Russia.
PT Freeport Indonesia President Director Tony Wenas on Tuesday said the copper prices had climbed even before the Russian invasion of Ukraine. He said the Russia-Ukraine crisis would possibly make the price higher as Russia is one of the copper producers.
Tony said that Russia’s copper production is comparable to Indonesia’s, which is between 700 and 800 thousand tons. Although it is not as big as Chile’s, the United States’, or China’s production, Toni believes the consequences of the Russia-Ukraine war will continue to affect copper prices in the international market, especially due to the increasing copper demand for electrification.
U.S. President Joe Biden was clear from the moment he entered office — China is the main international competitor and should be the top concern for U.S. foreign policy. Then Russia invaded Ukraine. After months devoted to supporting Ukraine and punishing Russian President Vladimir Putin, Biden is shifting focus, at least temporarily, back to Asia, a sign that the ongoing war will not drown out the administration’s other international goals.
Biden from Thursday meets leaders of ASEAN for a two-day summit, a sign of personal U.S. engagement in a region full of disputes with a rising China. At the ASEAN summit, “certainly the war in Ukraine will be a topic of discussion, but it’s also an opportunity to discuss security in the region,” White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said.
President Vladimir Putin on Monday insisted Russia was defending the “motherland” by its war in Ukraine, as Moscow staged a show of force at a military parade marking the 1945 victory over Nazi Germany. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy sought, however, to undercut his Russian rival’s display of might, saying Kyiv would not allow Moscow to appropriate the Soviet Union’s triumph in World War II.
Putin blamed the West and Ukraine for today’s conflict, telling thousands of troops in Moscow’s Red Square that Russia faced an “absolutely unacceptable threat” and warning against the “horror of a global war.” But as huge intercontinental ballistic missiles rumbled through the square, Putin made no major announcements, despite reports in the West that he could unveil an escalation of the Ukraine invasion.
In a virtual press briefing on Monday, Ukrainian Ambassador to Indonesia Vasyl Hamianin said Russia continues to carry out full-scale armed aggression against Ukraine, adding that the Russian occupation has not stopped carrying out offensive operations in the Eastern Operational Zone to establish full control over the Donetsk and Luhansk regions and maintain a land corridor between these regions and occupied Crimea.
Ambassador Hamianin said missiles and air strikes from Belarusian territory could be launched against Ukrainian sites. He said Russia has continued to launch airstrikes on Ukraine in order to determine the whereabouts of Ukrainian soldiers. He also claimed that Moscow has received a supply of weapons to invade Ukraine. Ambassador Hamianin said Russia’s invasion is similar to World War II, and that Russia’s unilateral claim is also used to garner international support for its invasion of Ukraine.
Russia has been the largest exporter of arms to Southeast Asia over the past two decades but the value of its defence sales to the region has fallen sharply since its annexation of Crimea in 2014. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will only exacerbate this downward trend.
Since President Vladimir Putin took office in 2000, Russia’s defence-industrial sector (DIS) has played a key role in the country’s military modernisation programme, enabling the Kremlin to pursue a more assertive foreign policy in the post-Soviet space, Europe and the Middle East. In addition, Russia’s DIS provides employment for over a million workers and generates foreign currency revenues through the sale of military hardware to overseas customers.
Today, Russia is the world’s second largest arms exporter after the US. In Southeast Asia, however, it ranks number one. Between 2000 and 2021, the value of Russia’s arms exports to the region was US$10.87 billion, followed by the US (US$8.4 billion), France (US$4.3 billion), Germany (US$2.94 billion) and China (US$2.9 billion).
U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres at the U.N. Security Council meeting convened by the United States on Thursday urged Russia to halt the war in Ukraine immediately after carrying out a two-month military invasion. As he briefed the UN Security Council on his shuttle diplomacy last week in Russia and Ukraine, Guterres said that he “did not mince words” when he spoke with the presidents of Russia and Ukraine about ending the conflict. The conflict must “end for the sake of the people of Ukraine, Russia, and the entire world…the cycle of death, destruction, dislocation and disruption must stop,” the secretary-general said at a Security Council meeting on the situation in Ukraine.
House Commission I Member Bobby Adhityo Rizaldi on Sunday assessed Indonesia’s attitude toward the Russia-Ukraine conflict was legitimate in light of the constitution and the U.N. peace charter. He said Indonesia did not intervene in the conflict and did not take side on any country. President Jokowi prefers to call for the end of the war and support humanitarian aid. Bobby said that the differences in the G20 members’ perspectives on the situation between Russia and Ukraine were reasonable, but he emphasized that these differences should not undermine the G20 forum’s substance.
Defense and military observer Connie Rahakundini Bakrie on Sunday warned the government to be wary of tweets by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky about the outcome of talks with President Jokowi, which appeared to imply that Indonesia was starting to interfere with Ukraine’s sovereignty and integrity. On the other hand, she lauds President Jokowi’s approach of offering aids without taking sides.
PDIP politician Said Abdullah on Saturday addressed the challenges that Indonesia will face if it becomes a mediator between Russia and Ukraine. First, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin’s peace proposal is not readily accepted by Ukraine, as Putin wants Ukraine demilitarized and neutralized. Second, NATO’s support for Ukraine, including aid in war equipment and mercenaries to Ukraine, as well as other provocations of military exercises in Poland, according to Said, were counterproductive to Russia and Ukraine’s peace efforts.
Third, Said mentioned that the United States’ and its allies’ egoism in gradually lifting various restrictions and sanctions on Russia still become a challenge. He suggested that Indonesia may use the momentum of the G20 summit to urge for gradual lift of the economic sanctions. The fourth challenge is the UN’s forthright role in seeking diverse dispute settlements in several sectors.
Malaysia’s government is following in the footsteps of Indonesia by refusing to implement sanctions on Russia unless the decision comes from the United Nations (UN). Malaysian Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Abdullah on Saturday said Malaysia does not recognize any unilateral sanctions on any country, unless the resolution for the sanctions was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). On the Russia-Ukraine conflict, he said Malaysia has always maintained its non-aligned stance but at the same time has never condoned any aggression by any country that threatened the sovereignty of another country.
The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield during an interview on Friday with government-sponsored broadcaster PBS has admitted that she sees no way of barring Russia from its status as a permanent member of the UN Security Council (UNSC) over the Ukraine conflict. Describing Russia’s actions in Ukraine as “particularly galling” given its status as a UNSC permanent member, she insisted that such status cannot easily be revoked despite demands from Ukraine’s Western-sponsored President Volodymyr Zelensky.(RED)