World won’t forget Tiananmen Square, US and Taiwan say on 36th anniversary of massacre

Not trying to be confrontational or pedantic (there's enough bickering in here) but it's important to state that the Korean War is quite literally called "The Forgotten War". In fact, it's more important to point out that it wasn't even a War, but considered a "police action" that claimed the lives of up to 3 million civilians (link).

Council on Foreign Affairs

Truman acted without seeking congressional authorization either in advance or in retrospect. He instead justified his decision on his authority as commander in chief. The move dramatically expanded presidential power at the expense of Congress, which eagerly cooperated in the sacrifice of its constitutional prerogatives.

Robert A. Taft of Ohio, one of the leading Republicans on Capitol Hill at the time, took to the Senate floor on June 28 to argue that “there is no legal authority for what he [Truman] has done.” Nor could Truman argue that the Korean conflict didn’t constitute war in a constitutional sense, even if he did downplay the significance of his decision. (At a press conference on June 29, Truman denied the country was at war, prompting a journalist to ask, “would it be correct…to call this a police action?” Truman answered simply, “Yes.”

Truman in the end acted because he believed, contrary to what the framers envisioned and the historical record showed, that as commander-in-chief he had the authority to order U.S. troops into combat.... Truman was able to establish the precedent that presidents can take the country to war, though, because members of Congress were unwilling, Taft’s complaints notwithstanding, to defend their constitutional power from executive encroachment.

You can't look at those statements and not make parallels to what's going on in America today with the executive branch trying to sequester even more power. Ironically just recently saw a pretty decent video on the war by Mr. Beat

The War Americans Forgot About

edit: forgot an S

Is it better to be drowned out than forgotten?

The "pressure on the cultural zeitgeist" you speak of is just "shoot, then cry". The victims are forgotten.

If I had a nickle for everyone who either stopped watching Full Metal Jacket after Lee Emery gets shot or watched the husks of men, who just got massacred by a child defending her home, marching through the burning town while singing children's songs, and thanked the next veteran they met for fighting for freedom.

It is not my intention to give other countries a pass. Indonesia is guilty of genocide in the case of East Timor; the US is guilty as well.

The genocide in East Timor is analogous to the ongoing genocide in Palestine.

Both genocides are not conducted by US personnel, but the majority of arms are supplied by the US. The US gives international legitimacy to the genocidal party, while running defense for it's atrocities. The genocide in East Timor was ended by a phone call from the US president, and I am of the firm belief that the genocide in Gaza could be ended by a similar call. Previous Israeli atrocities were ended by calls from Reagan and Bush Sr.

And we know the extent of US involvement in these coups and conflicts because the US declassified the info, becauase all info becomes declassified eventually.

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

According to Victor Marchetti, a former special assistant to the Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), a limited hangout is "spy jargon for a favorite and frequently used gimmick of the clandestine professionals. When their veil of secrecy is shredded and they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting—sometimes even volunteering—some of the truth while still managing to withhold the key and damaging facts in the case. The public, however, is usually so intrigued by the new information that it never thinks to pursue the matter further."

US declassification falls squarely into this domain. What gets released into the public record is enshrined as "The Truth" and what gets omitted is reserved to the domain of "Conspiracy Theory". Thus a guy like Allen Dulles can sit on the committee that investigates the assassination of the President and author the copy that the CIA was in no way at fault or otherwise involved in the actions of a disgruntled former agent's actions against the Chief Executive who personally fired Dulles three years earlier.

That’s the problem people have with the Chinese government. They can’t even acknowledge reality

The Chinese Communist Party has its own version of Limited Hangout and goes to some length to assert that the riots in Tienanmen were the result of outside agitation, the civilian death toll was minimal, and the reforms that followed succeeded in restoring trust in the national government.

Westerners choose to ignore the official party line and rely on the equally unreliable narrations of participants who were fully opposed to the party, heavily invested in an insurgent opposition, and outspoken in their desire to abolish the CCP and have its leadership executed.

So you end up with a bunch of smug liberals denouncing Chinese state media as controlled, while regurgitating talking points that came straight out of the John Birch Society and the Falun Gong.

It's propaganda all the way down. Nobody is giving you a complete and accurate picture of events. Any serious scholar must reconstruct events by bits and pieces, sifting through the enormous amounts of FUD. And when their work is completed... good luck finding it, because vanishingly few media moguls have an interest in promoting something that is insufficiently sensational.

Some commentators have defended the usage of whataboutism and tu quoque in certain contexts. Whataboutism can provide necessary context into whether or not a particular line of critique is relevant or fair, and behavior that may be imperfect by international standards may be appropriate in a given geopolitical neighborhood. Accusing an interlocutor of whataboutism can also in itself be manipulative and serve the motive of discrediting, as critical talking points can be used selectively and purposefully even as the starting point of the conversation (cf. agenda setting, framing, framing effect, priming, cherry picking). The deviation from them can then be branded as whataboutism

Wow. Fascinating. Thanks for the link.

"Whataboutism" can occasionally be an honest critique of a spurious argument.

When it's just a link on it's own, it's almost always cover for hypocrisy.

Yep that's exactly my point, the US is doing Whataboutism when it issues these PR stunts to condemn Chinese atrocities.

Really? Could that be because china isn't carpet bombing civilians?

That may be true, but it doesn't excuse the list at all.

My country is responsible for the majority of international violence since WWII. I find that morally unacceptable.

I make posts like this because I want my country to do better. But the sad reality is we have yet to learn our lesson. We have been aiding and abetting an ongoing Holocaust for almost two years now.

Things only come from murikkka. The American exceptionalism is rife.

careful, that doesn't fit the narrative

Pretty sure the range is unknown to this day, and 8k is incredibly excessive. The British ambassador that claimed 10k revised it to around 3k and even that was high compared to corroborating reports

I think I know the pictures you mean and those were PLA soldiers lynched by the mob before the tanks started rolling in.

Agreed, I was hoping to bring attention to the fact that beyond a short attention span, you’d see comparable if not exceeding levels of historic violence

"Trust me bro"

Reminds me of Hillsborough and “some fans”.

I had to do it, these people don't even read their own fake sources.