Personally, I sub out the chlorine for hydrogen and oxygen, which I know are safe because that’s what’s in water. It also helps keep my soup nice and warm whenever I sprinkle it in.

Eating sodium chloride is kind of insane. It would be like if you took my stuff and poured a bunch of hydrochloric acid on it and then sprinkled that all over your food. Yeah, no thanks.

Pretty much every country was a member.

“Every country was responsible for the invasion of Korea because everyone was in the UN.”

“Finland has no influence over the UN because we’re not on the security council.”

Choose one.

“Don’t start wars” is a lesson we’ll hardly need opportunities to learn about, no matter how many there are people are still going to start them again and again.

“Don’t start wars” is not the only lesson to learn, also, “Avoid getting involved in wars unless you have a very good reason, even if you didn’t start it.”

Not members of the Securit Council though who made the decision or the United Nations Command

Which returns to my previous point that “the UN” at the time was essentially just the US, the UK (whose support was bought with the coup in Iran), and France (who got US support in Vietnam in exchange).

But it also happened before I was born, so my possibilities on affecting the outcome are pretty limited.

Then why are we even talking about it? Because it provides an opportunity to learn from mistakes and avoid repeating them.

Well, your country is part of the UN and as you’ve emphasized it was a UN intervention so I’d say it’s pretty clear which side of the war you have a greater ability to influence and therefore a greater responsibility to critique.

In that case I return to my original statement. “Damn, maybe we should stop doing them then.” I don’t have any control over what North Korea does or did, but I do, at least theoretically, have influence as a voter and a citizen over what the US does, so I’m going to focus on the things within my ability to influence. And your response that “North Korea started the war” seems largely irrelevant.

How marketable would you say your illness was?

Your options would be: begging strangers on the internet for money and going viral, being rich enough to pay out the ass for really good insurance when you were healthy, declaring bankruptcy, and playing Luigi’s Mansion.

Can I just get a straight answer? Do you or do you not support UN intervention in the Korean War? Yes or no, no more evasion, no more word games.

You said that the Koreans “benefitted” from UN involvement, now you’re saying you don’t support UN involvement? Would you deprive Koreans of the benefit of being infected with smallpox?

Or is this another one of your word games, where I correctly understood your position, but because you didn’t technically explicitly say it it doesn’t count? The classic “motte and bailey” tactic?

You support UN/US intervention. UN/US intervention included infecting children with smallpox. You know this, I’ve told you repeatedly and you have neither denied nor condemned it, you haven’t even acknowledged it. Because you support it. In the same way someone who defends Nazi Germany and goes mysteriously silent whenever the Holocaust is brought up supports the Holocaust. You are fascist scum.

“I only support infecting children with smallpox, and this crazy leftist called me a fascist over it!”

Maybe try not supporting biological warfare if you don’t want to get called a fascist, fascist.

Right. You “”“oppose”“” the war in the sense that you oppose the North, in the sense that you support sending troops in. So when you say you “”“oppose”“” the war, what you’re actually saying is that you support it.

Why do you fascists always play these word games? We both understand that your position of “giving kids smallpox is good, actually” is completely abhorrent and indefensible, but that’s not going to change just because you twist some words around.

Oh, am I getting emotional? Over the dropping of chemical and biological weapons on civilians? Oh dear!

Maybe you should get more fucking emotional. Like what the fuck is wrong with you? You know the US literally recruited Unit 731 to help them commit atrocities, right? Maybe dropping the fucking plague and smallpox onto civilians shouldn’t be treated with fucking “poise and rationality!”

Anyone who defends that shit is too far gone to be reeducated.

War reparations after the following Continuation War helped us industrialize

Maybe the US should pay the DPRK war reparations, then.

Maybe they should’ve just done that without dropping chemical and biological weapons on innocent civilians first.

If only the Soviets had won, maybe monsters like you wouldn’t exist. No wonder you take the side of the Korean fascists, fascist collaborators gotta stick together, huh?

Well then, I hope you get to experience the same kind of “help” that the Korean people received. Maybe if someone drops chemical and biological weapons on you and your family, it’ll cause people to be wealthier 70 years from now. Sound good?

The UN at that time was a fairly new institution, and China’s seat was denied to it and given to Taiwan, leading to the USSR to boycott it. The UN that invaded Korea was mostly just the US and Western Europe, it doesn’t provide the moral cover you want it too. Hell, the only reason the UK supported it was because in exchange the US agreed to overthrow Iran’s democratic government that stood in the way of BP’s profits.

Ideally, neither the US nor the USSR and China would have been involved. But if you’re justifying US imperialism by arguing that the USSR and China were being imperialistic, then I see no reason why their positions wouldn’t be justified on the same logic by pointing to the US. It’s nonsense. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

Again, it’s a simple question, so go ahead and answer it. Who actually benefitted from the US bombing the hell out of Korea and deploying chemical and biological weapons on its people? And if no one benefitted, then why the hell do you support it?

And yes, for the record, I am “specifically angry at the US” because of the whole “chemical and biological weapons on civilians” thing in this instance and the “global campaign of bourgeois world domination and systematic overthrow of democratic governments” thing more broadly. I don’t understand why you people act like I’m not allowed to hate America.

If Koreans wanted the South Korean government, they could’ve fought for it. On their own. Without Americans coming in and dropping bombs and chemicals and slaughtering civilians in pursuit of their own interests, in defense of their propped up comprador regime.

Again, it was an internal matter for Koreans to settle among themselves. I have yet to see you provide any reason for the US to get involved. And even if they did have a valid reason, it certainly doesn’t justify the way they conducted the war.

The only thing close to resembling a justification that you’ve said is “the North attacked first.” But that doesn’t really matter to me. Revolution is inherently aggressive and revolution is not always bad, therefore, being the aggressor doesn’t always make a side bad. But even if I did consider the North to be in the wrong, we’re not the fucking world police. We had no business getting involved there. Why on earth should we send soldiers, ordinary people, to go off and fight and die on a completely different continent just to further the geopolitical influence of the US government, and the billionaires that control it?

Tell me, who were the beneficiaries of our intervention in Korea? Ordinary Koreans? The ones we dropped chemical weapons on even if they weren’t involved in the war? Ordinary Americans? What the hell did we get out of it? No, the beneficiaries were the Korean bourgeoisie and fascist collaborators and the American bourgeoisie, and no one else. Just like every other military conflict the US has ever been involved in, post WWII.

Again, neither side saw the partition as a permanent solution, both claimed the entire peninsula. The decision to partition the country was not made by Koreans, but by negotiations between the US and USSR. Koreans have a right to self determination, which includes not having to accept a foreign-imposed partition of their country. The US had absolutely no valid reason for getting involved in an internal conflict, it was pure imperialism.

You’re acting like North Korea and South Korea existed as separate, established entities prior to the Korean War. That’s nonsense. It’s projecting the modern state of affairs back into the past. The Korean War is when those entities were established as such. The were communists and anti-communists distributed throughout the whole of Korea, and neither side was interested in setting up a partition that would carve the country in two, until a compromise was negotiated effectively ending the war.

The Republic of Korea leadership was made up of compradors who had been propped up by fascist Japanese invaders and who had switched teams to being running dogs of the US as soon as it became convenient. The revolutionaries rose up against them, first attacking in the north and establishing a foothold before moving south. (My bad, I mixed up the situation with Vietnam) At this point, the US, seeking to assert dominance over a country thousands of miles away, intervened with one of the deadliest bombing campaigns in history, with an extremely high ratio of civilian deaths, many killed by biological and chemical weapons.

Even if the US hadn’t been so brutal towards Korean civilians, it still had no business getting involved. This whole argument of “defensive” wars thousands of miles away is nonsense. It’s the same argument the fucking Roman Empire used to justify conquering Europe:

There was no corner of the known world where some interest was not alleged to be in danger or under actual attack. If the interests were not Roman, they were those of Rome’s allies; and if Rome had no allies, then allies would be invented. When it was utterly impossible to contrive such an interest—why, then it was the national honor that had been insulted. The fight was always invested with an aura of legality. Rome was always being attacked by evil-minded neighbors, always fighting for a breathing space. The whole world was pervaded by a host of enemies, and it was manifestly Rome’s duty to guard against their indubitably aggressive designs. They were enemies who only waited to fall on the Roman people.

-Joseph Schumpeter

Yes, I’d say it’s very obvious that you prefer to spew bullshit everywhere, thank you for admitting it.

I don’t “consume” your bullshit tho, I reject and refute it, despite your attempts to smear it everywhere.

Maybe you shouldn’t hang your bullshit so low, then.