VIDEO: U.S. Crimes of Genocide against Korea

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, via Global Research

Video: Michel Chossudovsky’s Presentation to the Japanese Foreign Correspondent’s Club on US Aggression against the People of Korea, Tokyo, August 1, 2013

The crimes committed by the US against the people of Korea in the course of the Korean War but also in its aftermath are unprecedented in modern history.

We Killed Off – What – Twenty Percent of the Population. We Burned Down every Town in North Korea…”

The above quotation is from General Curtis Lemay, who coordinated the bombing campaign (1950-53)
Who is a Threat to Global Security? The US or the DPRK?
The public perception of the entire population of North Korea is that the US is a threat to their national security.
During the Korean War, the DPRK lost more than 25% of its population.
The population of North Korea was of the order of 8-9 million in 1950 prior the Korean War. US sources acknowledge 1.55 million civilian deaths in North Korea, 215,000 combat deaths. MIA/POW 120,000, 300,000 combat troops wounded. What we are dealing with are crimes of genocide under international law. (Article 2 of the “Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide”(1948))
In contrast, during the Second World War, the United Kingdom lost 0.94% of its population, France lost 1.35%, China lost 1.89% and the US lost 0.32%.
Casually ignored by the Western media and the international community, the US has actively deployed nuclear weapons targeted at North Korea for more than half a century in violation of article 13b) of the 1953 Armistice agreement.
This is what Pyongyang looked like in 1953: the result of US carpet bombing of all major cities without exception.

This is how it looks today.

And this is what Donald Trump wants to destroy. This urban infrastructure is largely residential ( Compare Pyongyang’s towers to the Trump Towers).

Kit Knightly is co-editor of OffGuardian. The Guardian banned him from commenting. Twice. He used to write for fun, but now he's forced to out of a near-permanent sense of outrage.

Filed under: empire watch, latest, North Korea


Kit Knightly is co-editor of OffGuardian. The Guardian banned him from commenting. Twice. He used to write for fun, but now he's forced to out of a near-permanent sense of outrage.

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Reblogged this on wgrovedotnet.


Really informative video: if anyone ever doubted the imperial agenda of the USA and the fact that S.Korea remains a colony of the USA, here is the proof.
If North Korea (DPRK) didn’t exist, the West would have to invent it, since they adore holding up their cartoon image of an “insane” regime. The DPRK has had to cope with extreme isolation and never-ending real threats from a truly psychopathic nation, whose military twice used atomic weapons on a nearby country. Suddenly North Korea’s atomic weapons program does not seem so insane at all.
There are other mostly unknown proofs, besides the facts stated in the video, that S.Korea does not have command over its own military.
The USA’s prized pupil, South Korea, also has the highest rate of suicide amongst the OECD countries.
It is rather obvious that the USA was and still is a curse on both Koreas, North and South, and it is long overdue that the Yanks should finally “go home”.


So genocide of 20% of Koreans was saving the planet but losing 3000 New Yorkers was threatening humanity?
I must enroll in Harvard’s distance learning programs so I can complete ‘Ethics in Government 101’…..,


As Professor Chussodovsky touched on; from 1950 both the Truman and Eisenhower regimes seriously considered ending the Korean War in a nuclear conflagration. I’m not sure that it was fear of a Soviet reprisal that stopped them – the Soviets only detonated their first bomb in 1949 – I’m not sure they had a stockpile worthy of deterrence. No, it was that the Armistice was reached by other conventional genocidal means – including 20,000 tons of newly invented napalm, and (allegedly?) biological weapons developed from the infamous Japanese Unit 731.
In his public persona, Eisenhower was all “Atoms for Peace”, behind closed doors – with others such as the psychotic duo of the Dulles brothers (John Foster and Allen) – he wanted to get rid of the false dichotomy between atomic and conventional weapons. He once publicly stated that small atomic bombs should be used as “a bullet or anything else.” As Professor Chussodovsky indicated, with the deployment of mini nukes, belatedly he got his way.
Now we have THAAD arriving on the Korean Peninsula, to be paid for by the South Koreans – says the Krazy Orange Dictator. This may well have an offensive, as well as a defensive capability. It is certainly offensive to me. Nevertheless, we are now on a tightrope to Armageddon – with a fifteen minute ‘Super-fuzed’ hair trigger – with megalomaniac crazies in the Pentagon hovering over, ready to ‘push the button.’ Apparently, they think a first strike attack is a winnable scenario – and they have rejected the Nuclear Winter studies, done by among others, Carl Sagan.
“Gee Honey, this ‘progress’ thing sure is awesome!”
Not that I wanted nuclear powered agriculture, but what happened to the “Atoms for Peace” – and the world where East and West could co-mingle without fear? I know, it was bullshit from the start.

Al (@Al60227260)

Wrong video?


I don’t agree with Chossudovsky about our ‘leaders’ believing their own propaganda. The fact that they can speak to each other, and us, in what is effect code – the language of the doctrinal system – isn’t proof that they believe their fantasies. Perhaps a few weak-minded individuals here and there do. That our ‘leaders’ have scary fantasies about nuking terrorists and rogue states, and are taking steps to act on those fantasies, reflects their character (macho, reckless like JFK was) and also stems from pressure from the deep state, whose military/intelligence/security-industrial complex (macho, reckless believers in inequality) to make war for profit.
There’s believing, fully and then there’s believing what you choose to believe in for certain reasons. You can believe actively (actions and public statements) and passively (internally) and therefore fully. And you can believe actively and conveniently only. And if you’re talented, observers won’t guess that you don’t believe what you profess to believe – unless it’s such an outrageous belief that it won’t convince the slowest person.
I also believe that when you embrace darkness for gain, which means choosing to walk a dark path that includes lying and manipulation and exploitation, then you do lose your mind. Does that count as truly believing? If you lie, which equals denying reality, and have no desire, or humility, to confess your lie and if you have every intention of lying again (and always if its ‘necessary’), then you get dimmer with time. You may have started off clever, like an Obama or Hillary Clinton, when you first started lying, but with time you simply become disconnected from reality and… dumb as a post.


Canada’s famous peacekeeper, Lester Pearson, was down with the destruction of Korea.