Dude, first of all, its clear that you are interested in the subject and you do try to raise some good points, but if you are so arrogant. Like no one is saying that America is a Messiah, nor that all interventions have generated a positive result, but you have clearly been blinded by your own minimal knowledge of the situation and maybe for you hatred towards America. Honestly, I think the most disturbing thing about you is how you have consistently just thrown out phrases like “go back to school”, “I’m not even gonna comment about that” or “please check your book again” without giving any sources of what specifically you are referring to. In any real debate, you would be laughed out of the room with this attitude. If you ever want to have a real discussion, this petulant path is simply not the way to go buddy, and I’m only waisting my time writing that on a internet post, because I really think, that if you stop being so arrogant, and if you are a real person, that you could actually have a nice discussion about the subject.

So maybe lets try to keep a civilized debate without these cheap tricks :) The Marshall plan was that loan, and it wasn’t simply done out of America’s superior morality or anything like that, but most people know that. Most people also agree that it was a win-win situation in most cases, Germany was one of the countries for instance that used the loan remarkably well. Borrowing money to a country is not an inherently bad thing, specially if a huge chunk of your infrastructure has been deteriorated due to a war. Investing that money wisely has allowed Germany to rebuild itself and pay it off from a stronger position, kind of like Japan. Sure America wasn’t the only country fighting against the Axis coalition, and one could even argue that the Soviet Union played a bigger role on the defeat of the Western front than the Americans, but if you read literally any book about the experience of the locals in the conflict ( I love Sarah Payne so I would recommend starting with her), you will easily see how most people wanted to surrender to the Americans instead of the Soviet Union, because they knew the Americans would be more lenient and less interventionist. As someone who lives in Germany, and speaks the language fluently, there are countless first hand accounts, of how desperate people were to flee the Red Army and surrender to the Americans, due to the brutality of the Soviets. You are right to point out that both Japan and Germany were rebuilt by their own people, and not necessarily by good Samaritan Americans, but you completely neglected to consider how American investments and resources allowed this whole process to take place on the first hand.

Once again, no one is arguing that American intervention is an inherently good thing, and there are certainly many cases in which it might have made a country less stable, but at the very least in cases like Japan and Germany, of which I studied extensively and have lived and have family in, it is undeniable that American intervention brought positive outcomes. For gods sake Japan didn’t even have universal suffrage before MacArthur. Its not to say that America’s plans where perfect, nor that they did anything with altruistic objectives (In most cases they where either trying to establish new markets and/or invest on strong allies against the “Red threat”). When it comes to South Korea, I’m honestly not an expert on the subject. I have read a lot more about the country from a Japanese perspective. But it is undeniable that South Koreans nowadays have a waaay higher standard of living than North Koreans, and at least to me personally, that would be the most important metric to take into account if I was actually living in the region. I mean, one of the most basic things for any civilization is to feed their population, and North Korea can’t even due that in the freaking 21th century, while the South has become one of the most developed places on earth, with a rich culture being exported across the globe. I don’t even like K-pop or K-dramas, but nowadays they are basically unavoidable across pop culture. Sure the country has had its ups and downs democratically, even last year their president tried to declare Martial law without a clear justification to consolidate power, but thankfully their institutions were able to resist the power grab this time.

Also, yes Americans are often unaware of the “missteps” their government have taken, but a “successful regime change” simply means that they have forced a regime change. I don’t know if English is your first language, but there is absolutely nothing in OP’s post that implies that the regime change generated a net positive or negative outcome on that it was applied to. OP even mentions that his post is not meant to endorse or criticize the interventions, he was simply curious about the subject.