3 ms·
> In the late 1940s, Kim Gu had unification talks with Kim il-Sung but the CIA had him assassinated in 1949. Taking a look at Wikipedia, the assassin seems to
by nsajko 5y ago
> In the late 1940s, Kim Gu had unification talks with Kim il-Sung but the CIA had him assassinated in 1949.
Taking a look at Wikipedia, the assassin seems to have been an US Army Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC, of "ratlines" fame) asset. Are there indications of him also being employed by OSS or some of its descendants (among which CIA is included), or did you just mistake one part of the US government for another?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Gu#Death_and_legacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Gu#Death_and_legacy
- greesil 5y agoDoes it matter which organization actually carried out the orders?
- medium_burrito 5y agoIn almost every situation like this, every principal player is an asset of some organization. An intelligence agency would be stupid not to be supporting every side of the conflict.
- jchook 5y agoIt very well could be. A potential CIA tie is speculated on the Wikipedia for Ahn Doo-Hee. I read that he was CIA trained on a Historic.ly thread, which cited “Korea: A History” by Bong-youn Choy. I’ve been reading The Puzzle Palace recently and it’s interesting to hear how much reorganization and shuffling and sharing of responsibilities happened in the intelligence agencies after Perl Harbor and esp around Korea.
- frereubu 5y ago“Perl” Harbour is an enjoyable typo.