I must demand the same. Some of this cited history is new to me.
After about a half hour in validating nearly a dozen points made in the piece, I find ZERO inaccuracies. I will expend more time on this later.
Many comments register as gaslighting under the very strict definition of the word, particularly without citation, on par with nearly all prior threads critical of US involvement in uke-land.
CRITICS SHOULD CITE THE INACCURACIES WITH REFERENCES OR FOREVER BE LABELED TROLLING IGNORAMUS PROPAGANDISTS.
He blames Truman for North Korea’s invasion of the South, which was ordered by Kim Il Sung, and for the start of the Cold War which was started by Stalin’s blockade of Berlin.
The guys an idiot.
Your issue, it seems to me, may be unfamiliarity with the subject. History is poorly done in US education.
The modern standard short US history of the Cold War is “The Cold War: A New History”, John Lewis Gaddis
I highly recommend reading this first. Essential background for world affairs.
A lot in the article is the sort of stuff you would find from the Soviet POV or their fellow travellers and “agents of influence” in the US, like IF Stone.
What is wrong with this article? Well, its basic premise that the Soviet Union in particular and Communism in general wasn’t that bad (or even was acceptable or good). The article calls the Soviets friends: “Looking back, the U.S. under Truman began the policy of turning enemies (Germany, Japan) into friends and friends (the important war-time alliance with the USSR) into enemies.” The Soviet Union was a barbaric totalitarian regime that killed more people than the Nazis. At most, during WWII, The Soviet Union was an ally of convenience. Calling the Soviets “friends” shows that the author lacks a moral compass.
The author criticizes the idea that the two totalitarian regimes should be pitted against each other: “Harry Truman, infamously declared as a senator in 1940 in response to Operation Barbarossa that “If we see that Germany is winning, we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany and that way let them kill as many as possible.” This showed what little regard he had for the Russian and other Soviet people—which became more evident when he became president.” Every freedom-loving person should regret that this didn’t actually happen.
The author opposes helping South Korea against the Northern invasion and preventing Socialists and Communists from winning elections in Western Europe: “During his tenure in the White House, the U.S. helped rebuild the industrial capacity of Western Europe (in large part to prevent communists and socialists from winning elections), but he also launched a war on North Korea, destroying virtually every structure in the country through bombing, including incendiary and napalm weapons.”
The author says: “He initiated the Cold War, massively escalated the military budget, organized NATO, and used atomic weapons on civilian populations in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in large part to block the allied Soviets from gaining territory in Japan in the last days of the war.”
I mean, seriously, it sounds like pure Commie propaganda. He believes that the Communist expansion after WWII shouldn’t have been resisted by the US. Why should I believe what he says about the Ukrainians?