Huh? I mentioned that I had a problem with war crimes, coverup of same, etc. You then brought up the Philippine occupation, asking when I wanted to talk about it (paraphrasing here). I said sure, we can talk about that if you want, along with a number of other unsavory operations. If you failed to notice it, that was my snark response to your snark response about the Philippines. I then also pointed out that it was Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam that were directly relevant.
War crimes and coverup: Relevant. Both in relation to Vietnam (Ellsberg, Russo) and Iraq/Afghanistan (Manning, Assange).
Philippines: Not really relevant. You brought that up. Only relevance is in the larger context of international/war crimes (which may not have been technically/legally true at the time of the Philippine occupation, but whatevs.)
My examples (Iran, Guatemala): Equally irrelevant. Raised in response to the equally-irrelevant citation of the Philippines.
So really not sure what your "previously" is trying to get at.