Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: US intervention in foreign lands  (Read 27833 times)

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4113
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #50 on: March 03, 2018, 03:22:29 AM »
Lead up to Iraq War

Two Prime Ministers One speech




It's almost as if they were both reading from the same page. Amazing ::)
Terry

Human Habitat Index

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 73
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #51 on: March 03, 2018, 03:46:40 AM »
You use the quote of f-ing ol' Albright (when did she say it?) to excuse further propagation of a propaganda lie fabricated by good ol' Saddam Hussein? Are you kidding? Or did some Russian agent turn you with some funny potion? (I'm not sure I'm kidding here.)

Quote
Would you care for a link to Hillary's laughter on viewing Gaddafi's gruesome death?
No. Would be too hypo-critical for my taste. And I don't have a video of my Libyan friend Abdul's reaction to counter it. Poor ol' Gaddafi died quick enough.

Gaddafi was a great man.

Libya & Gaddafi - The Truth you are not supposed to know

There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance. That principle is contempt prior to investigation. - Herbert Spencer

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6092
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #52 on: March 03, 2018, 01:44:26 PM »
I'm going to ask one more time, as it is the central question of this thread (that was part of an argument in the Russiagate thread, namely that Russiagate shouldn't be about the Mueller investigation/Trump impeachment exclusively, but also about other things, like US meddling in other countries):

Is it okay when the US meddles/interferes in other countries?

If no one is willing to say 'yes' to this question and explain why (maybe Rob Dekker and Martin Gisser would like to), I would consider the matter resolved.

Shall we now open a separate thread on foreign money in US politics?

In fact, the Rush Limbaugh of the left discusses both that, as well as US meddling in other countries, assisting in atrocities/war crimes, because of that foreign money in US politics (these things are all connected). If you simply refuse to even listen or consider because you can't stand the messenger, skip to around minute 10 to hear what Bernie Sanders has to say:

Compare, compare, compare

Martin Gisser

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 954
  • alias Mars Joh. P. Florifulgurator
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 92
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #53 on: March 03, 2018, 02:04:36 PM »
You use the quote of f-ing ol' Albright (when did she say it?) to excuse further propagation of a propaganda lie fabricated by good ol' Saddam Hussein? Are you kidding? Or did some Russian agent turn you with some funny potion? (I'm not sure I'm kidding here.)

Quote
Would you care for a link to Hillary's laughter on viewing Gaddafi's gruesome death?
No. Would be too hypo-critical for my taste. And I don't have a video of my Libyan friend Abdul's reaction to counter it. Poor ol' Gaddafi died quick enough.

Gaddafi was a great man.

Libya & Gaddafi - The Truth you are not supposed to know

[...]

"In Lybia homes are considered a human right" -- Hahaaahahahaha... esp. the right of some crazy SOG (son of Gaddafi) to confiscate other homes.
"The universe is irrelevant for all practical purposes, so better forget about being thrown into it." --Florifulgurator

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6092
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #54 on: March 03, 2018, 02:16:45 PM »
Is it okay when the US meddles/interferes in other countries?

If no one is willing to say 'yes' to this question and explain why (maybe Rob Dekker and Martin Gisser would like to), I would consider the matter resolved.
Compare, compare, compare

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1535
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 86
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #55 on: March 03, 2018, 02:54:42 PM »
Quote
Is it okay when the US meddles/interferes in other countries?

 I think it's really  bad for any country to interfere with the elections of any othe country. Elections are supposed to determine the direction of nations, presumably  with the best interest of their people in mind.

Election interference removes the best interests of a nation and replaces them with the interests of the interfering  nation. That's obviously  bad for the locals and good for for the aggressors.

The US is probably more guilty of this than any other nation. Their interference in Latin America held back the natural evolution of the region for decades and probably cost many lives. Russia, UK and lately China  are not innocent of this and share a significant part of the blame for the disorder they cause.

« Last Edit: March 03, 2018, 03:00:14 PM by Archimid »
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Martin Gisser

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 954
  • alias Mars Joh. P. Florifulgurator
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 92
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #56 on: March 03, 2018, 03:09:57 PM »
Is it okay when the US meddles/interferes in other countries?

Election interference [...]

The US is probably more guilty of this than any other nation.
Historically, yes.
I'm still waiting for a relevant recent example (from the Russiagate whataboutist crowd).

------------------------
The question of military interference:
(YES, theoretically: If it helps toppling a kleptocrat nepotist dictatorship and does not destroy the nation... So, my answer is: )
NO, for all practical purposes.

(BTW, I'm sufficiently confident that even evil Killary and her French friends (hint, hint...) have learnt the lesson of Libya.)
« Last Edit: March 03, 2018, 03:22:37 PM by Martin Gisser »
"The universe is irrelevant for all practical purposes, so better forget about being thrown into it." --Florifulgurator

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3653
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 362
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #57 on: March 03, 2018, 03:24:50 PM »
Election interference [...]

The US is probably more guilty of this than any other nation.
Historically, yes.
I'm still waiting for a relevant recent example (from the Russiagate whataboutist crowd).

If you don't like the election result - assist but don't assist the military coup.

Chile 1973

Quote
The CIA had also drawn up a second plan, Track II. The agency would find military officers willing to support a coup and provide them with support. They could then call new elections in which Allende could be defeated.

In September 1970, President Nixon found that an Allende government in Chile would not be acceptable and authorized $10 million to stop Allende from coming to power or unseat him. As part of the Track II initiative, the CIA used false flag operatives to approach Chilean military officers, to encourage them to carry out a coup.[17] A first step to overthrowing Allende required removing General René Schneider, the army chief commander. Schneider was a constitutionalist and would oppose a coup d'état. To assist in the planned kidnapping of Schneider, the CIA provided "$50,000 cash, three submachine guns, and a satchel of tear gas, all approved at headquarters..."[18]:361 The submachine guns were delivered by diplomatic pouch.

There is no hard evidence of direct U.S. assistance to the coup, despite frequent allegations of such aid. Rather the United States - by its previous actions during Track II, its existing general posture of opposition to Allende, and the nature of its contacts with the Chilean military- probably gave the impression that it would not look with disfavor on a military coup. And U.S. officials in the years before 1973 may not always have succeeded in walking the thin line between monitoring indigenous coup plotting and actually stimulating it
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Martin Gisser

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 954
  • alias Mars Joh. P. Florifulgurator
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 92
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #58 on: March 03, 2018, 03:32:56 PM »
Chile 1973
Well-known. Well-aged... yawn...

P.S.: The other 9/11 to commemorate every year. But that was in a different era, thus not much relevant for contemporary comparison.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2018, 04:43:52 PM by Martin Gisser »
"The universe is irrelevant for all practical purposes, so better forget about being thrown into it." --Florifulgurator

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6092
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #59 on: March 03, 2018, 05:03:58 PM »
Define 'recent', Martin.
Compare, compare, compare

Martin Gisser

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 954
  • alias Mars Joh. P. Florifulgurator
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 92
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #60 on: March 03, 2018, 05:38:42 PM »
Define 'recent', Martin.
Roughly, post Cold War (and its immediate repercussions). Ideally, 21st century.

(Yes, vague definition. Also it's not just about linear time, but also context. Would exclude e.g. Afghanistan.)
"The universe is irrelevant for all practical purposes, so better forget about being thrown into it." --Florifulgurator

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3653
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 362
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #61 on: March 03, 2018, 06:25:51 PM »
Chile 1973
Well-known. Well-aged... yawn...

P.S.: The other 9/11 to commemorate every year. But that was in a different era, thus not much relevant for contemporary comparison.
Why on earth would you think the behaviour of those who presume to govern us is different in the 21st century from what it has been for the last n thousand years (where n is not a small number) ? A fairly recent article in Bloomberg reminded the reader that the Monroe Doctrine is not dead. Yes, I have lost the article.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6092
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #62 on: March 03, 2018, 07:26:03 PM »
Define 'recent', Martin.
Roughly, post Cold War (and its immediate repercussions). Ideally, 21st century.

(Yes, vague definition. Also it's not just about linear time, but also context. Would exclude e.g. Afghanistan.)

OK, thanks. Does only meddling in elections count, on the level of the IRA troll farm? Or does interference in the form of promoting revolts count as well? I would say it does, as it influences the political process, possibly leading to regime change. It's a very crude form of electing, so to say.  ;)

If we count this kind of interference, one could point at the role of the US in the Arab Spring. New York Times article from April 14, 2011:

Quote
U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings

Even as the United States poured billions of dollars into foreign military programs and anti-terrorism campaigns, a small core of American government-financed organizations were promoting democracy in authoritarian Arab states.

The money spent on these programs was minute compared with efforts led by the Pentagon. But as American officials and others look back at the uprisings of the Arab Spring, they are seeing that the United States’ democracy-building campaigns played a bigger role in fomenting protests than was previously known, with key leaders of the movements having been trained by the Americans in campaigning, organizing through new media tools and monitoring elections.

A number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region, including the April 6 Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and grass-roots activists like Entsar Qadhi, a youth leader in Yemen, received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington, according to interviews in recent weeks and American diplomatic cables obtained by WikiLeaks.

Interesting question: Imagine Russia doing this. How would it be called?

The article also mentions the National Endowment for Democracy. I think I heard about it first when looking into the Ukraine stuff (which I won't mention as an example, as we've gone over a lot of it in the appropriate thread, and it's difficult to find a clear demarcation between what is Russian propaganda and what isn't). There's a lot of info on it that I don't have time to read this weekend. But an organisation spreading democracy from a country with a form of democracy that is far from perfect - if only because it is geared towards facilitating concentrated wealth - already sounds a bit iffy to me.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2018, 11:40:51 PM by Neven »
Compare, compare, compare

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6092
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #63 on: March 03, 2018, 07:57:12 PM »
Another potential recent example I haven't looked into yet: Honduras in 2009. From The Guardian on 5 Jan 2017 (only the paragraph referring to Honduras):

Quote
Americans can spot election meddling because they’ve been doing it for years

There are more recent examples too. Take the military overthrow of Honduras’ Manuel Zelaya in 2009. The then secretary of state – a certain Hillary Clinton – refused to describe the toppling of Zelaya as a “military coup”, which would have required the suspension of US aid, including to the armed forces. Rather than call for Zelaya’s reinstatement, Clinton called for new elections. US assistance – including military aid – continued as dissidents were treated brutally; as death squads re-emerged; as violence against LGBT people surged; and as widely boycotted unfair elections took place.
Compare, compare, compare

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3653
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 362
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #64 on: March 03, 2018, 08:18:08 PM »
US invasion of Grenada - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_invasion_of_Grenada
Quote
The US Invasion of Grenada was a 1983 United States–led invasion of the Caribbean island nation of Grenada, which has a population of about 91,000 and is located 160 kilometres (99 mi) north of Venezuela, that resulted in a U.S. victory within a matter of weeks. Codenamed Operation Urgent Fury, it was triggered by the ...

OK, not the 21st Century - but at my age - who's counting.

The brave US forces took on a bunch of Cuban conscripts upgrading the local airport, and surprise, surprise, they won. "Death From Above". They even made a movie about it.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4113
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #65 on: March 03, 2018, 08:54:10 PM »
Considerably less bloody, and notably unsuccessful was Obama's threat to the British voters. He promised that if they voted for Brexit, the country would be harshly dealt with WRT trade.


Nuland told congress that the US was spending $100M/an to alter Russian elections, presumably in addition to the $6M spent in the Ukraine.


Google about for the IDU, a particularly nasty purveyor of right wing BS.


Terry

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6092
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #66 on: March 04, 2018, 12:27:38 AM »
I've read some more about Honduras from what is deemed reliable sources like The Washington Post, The Guardian and Huffpost. Also things on Democracy Now! and The Intercept. From what I've read, I would suggest that this is a very good and recent example. I can post the links and quotes, but googling for 'Clinton Zelaya Honduras' works fast. Wikipedia entries on Zelaya and the 2009 Honduras coup d'état also give a good overview.
Compare, compare, compare

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3862
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #67 on: March 04, 2018, 02:34:23 AM »
1) I for one, will not confine discussion to US killings in this century, for two reasons.

a) the actions of the USA are a product of history
b) there are millions alive today directly affected by US action since at least WWII

2) That said, I am surprised people do not know about  US actions over the last two decades. The world tour continued apace, with gigs in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen, Ethiopia, Somalia, Syria,Libya,Ukraine,Philippines, Haiti, Honduras ... and thats just off the top of my head.

sidd



Rob Dekker

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2098
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 75
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #68 on: March 04, 2018, 03:05:24 AM »
I read up a bit on Honduras, and was looking for evidence that the US intervened.

I could not find any, and it looks like that is because the US did NOT intervene.

Opposition parties blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT denouncing the 2009 coup (or not denouncing it strong enough).
And they blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT cutting off all aid to Honduras (including humanitarian aid).
And they blame the US for NOT denouncing the elections that followed.
And they blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT denouncing the murder of Berta Caceres strong enough.

So if the US intervenes in another country it is blamed.
And if it doesn't intervene, it is also blamed.

The US can't do anything right, can it ?
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

zizek

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 301
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #69 on: March 04, 2018, 04:54:05 AM »
I read up a bit on Honduras, and was looking for evidence that the US intervened.

I could not find any, and it looks like that is because the US did NOT intervene.

Opposition parties blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT denouncing the 2009 coup (or not denouncing it strong enough).
And they blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT cutting off all aid to Honduras (including humanitarian aid).
And they blame the US for NOT denouncing the elections that followed.
And they blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT denouncing the murder of Berta Caceres strong enough.

So if the US intervenes in another country it is blamed.
And if it doesn't intervene, it is also blamed.

The US can't do anything right, can it ?

<snip, N.> How can you say shit like this on THE DAY Berta Cáceres was murdered by AMERICAN TRAINED ASSASSINS. Denounce? DENOUNCE ENOUGH? What the fuck are you talking about? A world renowned environmentalist was killed by a hit squad.  What is wrong with you? Who are you defending at this point?

Do not read just "a bit". READ A LOT. you are obviously struggling to understand the deep and complex implications of American imperialism
« Last Edit: March 04, 2018, 03:39:15 PM by Neven »

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3862
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #70 on: March 04, 2018, 05:27:54 AM »
In case anyone really wants to see what the USA has turned into, watch "Dirty Wars" by Jeremy Scahill.



My tax dollars at work.

You want to know where the next Osama bin Laden is coming from ? Just look into the eyes of those little children. The live ones i mean, ther's a lot of dead ones too. Those children will bring the war home to the USA.

That little girl left after Awlaki's assasination and her brothers ? They got her too, a little later.

sidd

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3862
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #71 on: March 04, 2018, 05:30:36 AM »
Re: "And if it doesn't intervene, it is also blamed."

The USA should stay the fuck home and take care of it's own. There would be a great deal fewer dead chilren, or live ones bent on revenge.

And I wouldn't feel so slimy when i write the IRS a check.

sidd


Rob Dekker

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2098
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 75
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #72 on: March 04, 2018, 07:03:03 AM »
Re: "And if it doesn't intervene, it is also blamed."
The USA should stay the fuck home and take care of it's own. There would be a great deal fewer dead chilren, or live ones bent on revenge.

I fact checked ONE country on your list. Honduras.
And I found no evidence that the US interfered there.

In fact, it appears that the main complaint by the opposition party was that the US did NOT interfere.

So, what is now left over of your "The USA should stay the fuck home" argument related to Honduras ?
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

Rob Dekker

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2098
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 75
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #73 on: March 04, 2018, 07:15:10 AM »
I read up a bit on Honduras, and was looking for evidence that the US intervened.

I could not find any, and it looks like that is because the US did NOT intervene.

Opposition parties blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT denouncing the 2009 coup (or not denouncing it strong enough).
And they blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT cutting off all aid to Honduras (including humanitarian aid).
And they blame the US for NOT denouncing the elections that followed.
And they blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT denouncing the murder of Berta Caceres strong enough.

So if the US intervenes in another country it is blamed.
And if it doesn't intervene, it is also blamed.

The US can't do anything right, can it ?

You are sick.

I feel a bit nauseous lately, but I think that has to do with the fact-free Russian propaganda that you and several others are venting on this fine forum.
 
Quote
What is wrong with you? Who are you defending at this point?

Not WHO, but WHAT.
What I'm defending is the truth.
That's why I check facts.
You should try it sometime.
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

Rob Dekker

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2098
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 75
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #74 on: March 04, 2018, 08:31:38 AM »
I'm going to ask one more time, as it is the central question of this thread (that was part of an argument in the Russiagate thread, namely that Russiagate shouldn't be about the Mueller investigation/Trump impeachment exclusively, but also about other things, like US meddling in other countries):

Is it okay when the US meddles/interferes in other countries?

If no one is willing to say 'yes' to this question and explain why (maybe Rob Dekker and Martin Gisser would like to), I would consider the matter resolved.

Sorry for the late reply, Neven, but I had to think about that question.

What I came up with is probably not surprising :

It depends.

There are different shades of gray here, and the US, as a super-power, has a LOT of programs.

For example, the US has humanitarian programs all over the world.
In my opinion, that's good, so if you consider that 'interference' the answer is YES.

Then there are humanitarian programs funded by the DoD.
Like building hospitals, and renovating schools and such. Here again, in my opinion the answer is YES.

Then there is promoting freedom of speech, and training independent journalists.
In my opinion that is also a good thing. So YES.

Then there is military training. The DoD trains almost every military on the planet, as long as the country they come from is not hostile to the US or has a record of gross human rights violations.
I believe that is a good thing, since a well-trained military is less likely to commit atrocities. So YES again.

Then there are open, UN approved military interventions, where we all (the UN) decide that some force committed a crime or poses a gross threat to world peace.
Here, I'd generally approve, but we need to make sure that the threat is based on real evidence.
So that's a general YES, with a 'be careful' notion.

Then there are covert operations, without UN approval. Could be anything from covert meddling in elections to covert support (like Nicaragua contras) to obtain a political objective.
These I disapprove of big-time. So the answer there is NO.

Any international 'interference' should be in the open, preferably approved by the UN, before it is acted upon.

So that's my opinion.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2018, 09:05:05 AM by Rob Dekker »
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

NevB

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #75 on: March 04, 2018, 11:59:57 AM »
I'm going to ask one more time, as it is the central question of this thread (that was part of an argument in the Russiagate thread, namely that Russiagate shouldn't be about the Mueller investigation/Trump impeachment exclusively, but also about other things, like US meddling in other countries):

Is it okay when the US meddles/interferes in other countries?

If no one is willing to say 'yes' to this question and explain why (maybe Rob Dekker and Martin Gisser would like to), I would consider the matter resolved.

Sorry for the late reply, Neven, but I had to think about that question.

What I came up with is probably not surprising :

It depends.

There are different shades of gray here, and the US, as a super-power, has a LOT of programs.

For example, the US has humanitarian programs all over the world.
In my opinion, that's good, so if you consider that 'interference' the answer is YES.

Then there are humanitarian programs funded by the DoD.
Like building hospitals, and renovating schools and such. Here again, in my opinion the answer is YES.

Then there is promoting freedom of speech, and training independent journalists.
In my opinion that is also a good thing. So YES.

Then there is military training. The DoD trains almost every military on the planet, as long as the country they come from is not hostile to the US or has a record of gross human rights violations.
I believe that is a good thing, since a well-trained military is less likely to commit atrocities. So YES again.

Then there are open, UN approved military interventions, where we all (the UN) decide that some force committed a crime or poses a gross threat to world peace.
Here, I'd generally approve, but we need to make sure that the threat is based on real evidence.
So that's a general YES, with a 'be careful' notion.

Then there are covert operations, without UN approval. Could be anything from covert meddling in elections to covert support (like Nicaragua contras) to obtain a political objective.
These I disapprove of big-time. So the answer there is NO.

Any international 'interference' should be in the open, preferably approved by the UN, before it is acted upon.

So that's my opinion.
Would it now be worth comparing this to Russia's international interventions and motives?

Red

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 181
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #76 on: March 04, 2018, 12:10:38 PM »

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6092
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #77 on: March 04, 2018, 12:36:13 PM »
Would it now be worth comparing this to Russia's international interventions and motives?

We could do this, but it will probably lead nowhere.

It has never been my intention to use this discussion to justify anything Russia might be doing, but rather to make the point that Russiagate could be used to also discuss these things, instead of exclusively focussing on Trump's removal (by all means, no matter the cost). The problem is not that one country or other is intervening in other countries' affairs, but that these interventions occur, and almost always for money and power. By studying the history of these interventions, the (repetitive) process behind it, the vicious cycle, by understanding the problem, a solution may emerge. That's what could be learned from Russiagate, if, for instance, the media would be willing to discuss it, instead of the colour of Manafort's underwear or Hope Hicks' upcoming book.

And the same goes for other parallel discussions:
- Trolling and astroturfing from US sources (as Martin has rightly pointed out).
- Foreign money in US politics in general (Russia no, Saudi Arabia, Israel and China yes?).
- Whether the very nature of social media and its business model - distracting people to buy something or form a certain opinion - should be questioned.

Trump is not the problem, the system is the problem. That doesn't mean Trump doesn't need to be replaced, but how he is replaced, is very important, as this will determine whether the system can be changed or not. If it isn't changed, the US will continue interfering, and other countries will continue to resist and revolt. And we'll continue to have the same worn-out discussions about fragments instead of the whole, with hardly anyone aware of their bias or conditioning.
Compare, compare, compare

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4113
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #78 on: March 04, 2018, 12:41:17 PM »
Maybe this site will lend some insight on this subject:
http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/176371/tomgram%3A_nick_turse%2C_the_coming_year_in_special_ops/


Good Link!!


The Exceptional Ones often appear Exceptionally Inept.


The (fairly) recent coup in Haiti has I believe been overlooked.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6092
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #79 on: March 04, 2018, 02:43:53 PM »
Indeed a good link. This paragraph ties in with my argument:

Quote
The only catch in all this (and it’s surely what led Leonhardt to write those lines of his) is the American people. Long divorced from their all-volunteer military in a draft-less country, we have largely ignored the war on terror and gone about our business just as President George W. Bush urged us to do two weeks after the 9/11 attacks.  ("Get down to Disney World in Florida. Take your families and enjoy life, the way we want it to be enjoyed.")  As those distant conflicts expanded and terror groups spread and multiplied, Washington helped the "non-war" atmosphere along by perfecting a new kind of warfare in which ever fewer Americans would die.  Half a century later, its quagmire qualities aside, the war on terror is largely the anti-Vietnam War: no body counts, few body bags, lots of proxy forces, armed robotic vehicles in the skies, and at the tip of the “spear” a vast, ever-more secretive military, those special ops guys.  As a result, if you weren’t in that all-volunteer military or a family member of someone who was, it wasn’t too hard to live as if the country’s “forever wars” had nothing to do with us.  It’s possible that never in our history, one filled with wars, have Americans been more deeply demobilized than in this era.  When it comes to the war on terror, there’s neither been a wave of support nor, since 2003, a wave of protest.

Russiagate could be a good starting point to discuss the problems of interference in general, and in what way the US is responsible for the meddling in its own politics. But the mainstream media won't discuss it (please, drop a link whenever it does), because of a) corporate interests and b) a total lack of demand from the population.

I already have problems with my conscience, knowing that some of my EU tax money is used for shady stuff in brown countries with resources, but I would absolutely hate to live in the US of A and have all those atrocities happen in my name. I can understand why people fall into the polarisation trap of Blue Team vs Red Team, because it offers a narrative where They do all the evil things, and all We have to do, is beat Them.
Compare, compare, compare

zizek

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 301
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #80 on: March 04, 2018, 02:50:42 PM »
I read up a bit on Honduras, and was looking for evidence that the US intervened.

I could not find any, and it looks like that is because the US did NOT intervene.

Opposition parties blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT denouncing the 2009 coup (or not denouncing it strong enough).
And they blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT cutting off all aid to Honduras (including humanitarian aid).
And they blame the US for NOT denouncing the elections that followed.
And they blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT denouncing the murder of Berta Caceres strong enough.

So if the US intervenes in another country it is blamed.
And if it doesn't intervene, it is also blamed.

The US can't do anything right, can it ?

You are sick.

I feel a bit nauseous lately, but I think that has to do with the fact-free Russian propaganda that you and several others are venting on this fine forum.
 
Quote
What is wrong with you? Who are you defending at this point?

Not WHO, but WHAT.
What I'm defending is the truth.
That's why I check facts.
You should try it sometime.

You are defending American's involvement in the murder of a pronounced environmentalist. On a forum that focuses on environmental crisis, nonetheless.

-----

People like her literally sacrificed their lives to protect the environment and the lives of her people. And you think you can decide who's responsible for her death after an evening of cursory google searching? You had no idea about the coup before yesterday. And all of a sudden you understand the long and complex history of US involvement in central america.

And what sort of fact checking are you doing?  How can you read something like this:
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/01/honduras-election-jaun-orlando-hernandez-nasralla

And decide American has no involvment?

Or this?
https://theintercept.com/2017/08/29/honduras-coup-us-defense-departmetnt-center-hemispheric-defense-studies-chds/

Or how about this?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/31/hillary-clinton-honduras-violence-manuel-zelaya-berta-caceres

Or this?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/28/berta-caceres-honduras-military-intelligence-us-trained-special-forces


What the fuck are you reading? Do you have a sticky note on your desk that says "America do no wrong. Everyone bad. American best in world"; and that's the extent of your research? When I type in "Honduras" +"United States", there's countless pages of sources, many of which are mainstream press, which hold America culpable to the violence and coup in Honduras.



If you don't want to listen to me. Fine. Whatever. Maybe Berta's own words can help:

Quote from: Berta Cáceres
The United States has a great responsibility for the violation of human rights in Honduras. They have financed and trained these repressive forces, not just right now, but for a long time. They have invaded this country. They have occupied it. They used us as a banana enclave, and still for mining enclaves.

Today as an enclave for multinationals, for the capitalist project on the subject of energy. The United States uses us as a laboratory for the invasion of brother and sister peoples. And they have the cynicism to say that what we do is terrorism. The government of the United States is terrorist, because massacring entire villages — boys, girls, women — that’s terrorism.

So we demand equal respect. Respect for the self-determination of our people, our lives, and our right to decide our own destiny. It could be crooked, whatever it may be, but it’s going to be ours.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3653
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 362
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #81 on: March 04, 2018, 03:18:15 PM »
HONDURAS. I reluctantly accept zizek's main point, that the woman in question would not have been dead but for US involvement in Honduras.

I think I posted on this thread that the Monroe doctrine is still extant, though somewhat changed, perverted?, from its original intention. The article in the link below, though highly charged with the writer's point of view, (Wayne Madsen), is hard to refute in its entirety.

However: take care -
"Wayne Madsen (born April 28, 1954) is an American journalist, author and columnist specializing in intelligence and international affairs. He is the author of the blog Wayne Madsen Report. He has been described as a conspiracy theorist.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2010/12/06/the-cia-and-pentagon-enforcing-the-monroe-doctrine-in-the-modern-age.html

Quote
The CIA and Pentagon: Enforcing the Monroe Doctrine in the modern age
The Central Intelligence Agency, assisted by the Pentagon through its components, the US Southern Command based in Miami and the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHINSEC) based in Fort Benning, Georgia, have become the modern enforcement arms for the arcane Monroe Doctrine. The Monroe Doctrine, adopted by Presidents James Monroe and John Quincy Adams, and extended by President Theodore Roosevelt's "Roosevelt Corollary" and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles's anti-Communist crusade, continues to place the nations of Latin America under the neo-colonialist jack boot of the United States.

President Barack Obama continues to enforce the Monroe Doctrine against progressive governments throughout Latin America and thus continues the policies of his recent predecessors, including Lyndon Johnson as seen in his invasion of the Dominican Republic; Richard Nixon by his bloody coup d'etat against Chilean President Salvador Allende and his creation of Operation Condor that targeted Latin American leftists for assassination, torture, and imprisonment; Ronald Reagan's invasion of Grenada; George H. W. Bush's invasion of Panama; Bill Clinton's constant interference in Haiti as president and after his term; and George W. Bush's attempted coup against Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Obama's support for the military coup against Honduras President Manuel Zelaya and his fingerprints on the attempted "police coup" against Ecuador's Rafael Correa are the latest examples of the continued use of the Monroe Doctrine using the assets of the CIA and Pentagon to enforce American domination over the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6092
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #82 on: March 04, 2018, 03:43:31 PM »
Slavoj, swearing and personal attacks detract from your argument and make it look weaker than it really is.  I try not to post when frustrated, but I know it isn't easy.

Here's some Chomsky to lighten up the atmosphere:  ;)

« Last Edit: March 04, 2018, 03:50:09 PM by Neven »
Compare, compare, compare

zizek

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 301
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #83 on: March 04, 2018, 03:57:00 PM »
There's a lot worse things I'd like to say. I am so disgusted with western exceptionalism and the defense of imperialist violence.
But I'll hold my tongue.  And I'll tone down my future posts. 

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4113
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #84 on: March 04, 2018, 10:11:42 PM »
It's not as though the US has been careful to cover her tracks. Noam didn't rely on obscure texts, whistleblowers, or a vast network of spies to uncover the indictable offences he listed above. He simply accepted easily obtainable information that in most cases emanate from the perpetrator.


The elder Bush didn't deny the facts of his war crimes, he reveled in the notoriety. Clinton didn't deny terrorizing Serbians, he just kept bombing civilians and infrastructure until their leaders capitulated to save citizen's lives.
It's not a new story - look into the overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy or the Surrender of California.


American's are schooled to think of themselves as almost a seperate species. We might wonder at the brightness of a pig, the gentleness of a cow, or the grace of a deer, but we'll kill them for food without cringing. Albright believed it was OK to kill half a million toddlers to promote America's aspirations in Iraq, she didn't hide her ghoulish outlook, but proudly told the world of these thoughts. Vlad the Impaler would have admired her moxie. Hillary laughed out loud while watching a peer being raped to death with a baynet, then over half the populace went out to vote for her.


I lived in the country for over 40 years as an adult. Most of my friends still live there, as do most of my enemies.
As a group they could be a great force for good, instead they are Americans.
Terry


sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3862
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #85 on: March 04, 2018, 11:25:40 PM »
The obscenity of indiscriminate massacre by the USA is only exceeded by the indifference to those massacres by her citizens. She kills in myriads, and her people are not sufficiently troubled to even learn the names of the murdered or the names of their countries.

sidd

Rob Dekker

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2098
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 75
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #86 on: March 05, 2018, 02:36:02 AM »
You guys fly through the topics, jumping from one opinion to the next, on a whole range of issues.

Can we please slow down, and focus on a single subject and go all the way to the details of the facts ?

Martin above asked for a recent example of US interference in other nations.
Neven came up with the example of the 2009 coup in Honduras.

I did some fact checking on that, and although it is clear that there are significant issues there (irregularities in elections, political assassinations and scores of other human rights violations) I found no evidence of ANY interference by the US during or after that coup.

Zizek did not agree with that and wrote this :

And what sort of fact checking are you doing?  How can you read something like this:
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/01/honduras-election-jaun-orlando-hernandez-nasralla

And decide American has no involvment?

Or this?
https://theintercept.com/2017/08/29/honduras-coup-us-defense-departmetnt-center-hemispheric-defense-studies-chds/

Or how about this?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/31/hillary-clinton-honduras-violence-manuel-zelaya-berta-caceres

Or this?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/28/berta-caceres-honduras-military-intelligence-us-trained-special-forces

I read all that and see NO evidence of US interference.

In fact the bulk of the criticism of the US points are ask for MORE interference by the US. I summarized that previously already :

- Opposition parties blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT denouncing the 2009 coup (or not denouncing it strong enough).
- And they blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT cutting off all aid to Honduras (including humanitarian aid).
- And they blame the US for NOT denouncing the elections that followed.
- And they blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT denouncing the murder of Berta Caceres strong enough.

Now maybe I missed something, but isn't this a fair summary of these articles regarding the events since 2009 ?

If not, then please point out exactly what I missed.

Regarding the murder of Berta Cáceres, I remember that very well, and I was also shocked by it.

But there is really no evidence of US interference there as far as I can see.
I read this :

Quote
The most notorious of these killings was the 2016 assassination of Berta Cáceres, a world-renowned social leader who campaigned for the environment and indigenous rights and who had been a leader of the movement of resistance to the coup. Under unusual international pressure, the Honduran government carried out an investigation into Cáceres’s murder that led to the indictment of eight individuals, including three current or former members of the military. A separate, independent investigation, using evidence in the possession of authorities, revealed that a vast criminal structure involving state agents, company executives, and one of Honduras’s most powerful families had planned the killing for months.

The only involvement that I can see here is that there were some members of the military involved that may have been trained by the US.
Is that what you mean with "US involvement" in the murder of Berta Cáceres ?

If so, realize that the US has training programs with military in 154 nations around the world.

And also, what do you think the US should do in this case ? Stop training with the Honduras military altogether, and let them figure out themselves how a military should behave ? And so you think that would make the situation in Honduras better or worse ?
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

SteveMDFP

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1090
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #87 on: March 05, 2018, 02:52:44 AM »

And also, what do you think the US should do in this case ? Stop training with the Honduras military altogether, and let them figure out themselves how a military should behave ? And so you think that would make the situation in Honduras better or worse ?

I think your particulars look essentially accurate.  But. . .

The school of the americas can't really be called standard military training. 

For almost two centuries, the Monroe doctrine kept all other major foreign powers out of the region, invited or uninvited, for good or for ill.  That puts some real responsibility on the US to at least speak up and alter aid practices when a military coup takes place.  Yes, silence is "non-interference," but really a shameful lack of taking responsibility.

I would argue that foreign intervention is *sometimes* fully warranted.  Like with Rwanda genocide. 


zizek

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 301
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #88 on: March 05, 2018, 03:34:28 AM »
You guys fly through the topics, jumping from one opinion to the next, on a whole range of issues.

Can we please slow down, and focus on a single subject and go all the way to the details of the facts ?

Martin above asked for a recent example of US interference in other nations.
Neven came up with the example of the 2009 coup in Honduras.

I did some fact checking on that, and although it is clear that there are significant issues there (irregularities in elections, political assassinations and scores of other human rights violations) I found no evidence of ANY interference by the US during or after that coup.

Zizek did not agree with that and wrote this :

And what sort of fact checking are you doing?  How can you read something like this:
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/01/honduras-election-jaun-orlando-hernandez-nasralla

And decide American has no involvment?

Or this?
https://theintercept.com/2017/08/29/honduras-coup-us-defense-departmetnt-center-hemispheric-defense-studies-chds/

Or how about this?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/31/hillary-clinton-honduras-violence-manuel-zelaya-berta-caceres

Or this?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/28/berta-caceres-honduras-military-intelligence-us-trained-special-forces

I read all that and see NO evidence of US interference.

In fact the bulk of the criticism of the US points are ask for MORE interference by the US. I summarized that previously already :

- Opposition parties blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT denouncing the 2009 coup (or not denouncing it strong enough).
- And they blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT cutting off all aid to Honduras (including humanitarian aid).
- And they blame the US for NOT denouncing the elections that followed.
- And they blame the US (and Clinton specifically) for NOT denouncing the murder of Berta Caceres strong enough.

Now maybe I missed something, but isn't this a fair summary of these articles regarding the events since 2009 ?

If not, then please point out exactly what I missed.

Regarding the murder of Berta Cáceres, I remember that very well, and I was also shocked by it.

But there is really no evidence of US interference there as far as I can see.
I read this :

Quote
The most notorious of these killings was the 2016 assassination of Berta Cáceres, a world-renowned social leader who campaigned for the environment and indigenous rights and who had been a leader of the movement of resistance to the coup. Under unusual international pressure, the Honduran government carried out an investigation into Cáceres’s murder that led to the indictment of eight individuals, including three current or former members of the military. A separate, independent investigation, using evidence in the possession of authorities, revealed that a vast criminal structure involving state agents, company executives, and one of Honduras’s most powerful families had planned the killing for months.

The only involvement that I can see here is that there were some members of the military involved that may have been trained by the US.
Is that what you mean with "US involvement" in the murder of Berta Cáceres ?

If so, realize that the US has training programs with military in 154 nations around the world.

And also, what do you think the US should do in this case ? Stop training with the Honduras military altogether, and let them figure out themselves how a military should behave ? And so you think that would make the situation in Honduras better or worse ?

How you came to such weak conclusions from the articles truly baffles me. I don't know if you simply didn't read the articles, or just ignored the parts you didn't like. I'll break it down for you next weekend when I'm not busy with school.

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4113
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #89 on: March 05, 2018, 03:58:17 AM »
zizek
I wouldn't waste your time. You've brought more than enough rocks to the table to convince any reasonable person.
Move on to your next point. You've already won this round.
Terry

Rob Dekker

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2098
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 75
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #90 on: March 05, 2018, 04:03:12 AM »

And also, what do you think the US should do in this case ? Stop training with the Honduras military altogether, and let them figure out themselves how a military should behave ? And so you think that would make the situation in Honduras better or worse ?

I think your particulars look essentially accurate.  But. . .

The school of the americas can't really be called standard military training. 

Thanks for bringing that up, since it was one of the items on my list I compiled after Neven's questioin of "what is acceptable intervention".

I'd love to hear some response from the other posters here on that list.

Quote
For almost two centuries, the Monroe doctrine kept all other major foreign powers out of the region, invited or uninvited, for good or for ill.  That puts some real responsibility on the US to at least speak up and alter aid practices when a military coup takes place.  Yes, silence is "non-interference," but really a shameful lack of taking responsibility.

You are right. However, the 2009 Honduras coup was not a clear-cut "military coup". It was not that some general decided to take over government by force.
It was the Honduras supreme court who decided that the president had violated a court order, and ordered the arrest of the president.
Even though that process was not clean, Clinton accepted it, and thus did not declare it as a "military coup", which would have had legal consequences under US law (like cutting off aid).

One may argue that Clinton made the wrong decision, but I can't see how some accuse the US of interference in Honduras 2009, while in FACT the US decided NOT to interfere in this case.
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

Rob Dekker

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2098
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 75
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #91 on: March 05, 2018, 04:05:24 AM »
zizek
I wouldn't waste your time. You've brought more than enough rocks to the table to convince any reasonable person.
Move on to your next point. You've already won this round.
Terry

Sure, you can do that, and keep on shouting in your echo chamber.

Or you can face the facts and have a real discussion.
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4113
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #92 on: March 05, 2018, 04:33:33 AM »

The topic is "U.S. intervention in foreign lands" - note the plural form of "land'.

Google "John Watkins", who died under the CIA's interrogation when they were attempting to remove a Canadian Prime Minister who had dared to sell Canadian wheat to a starving USSR.
For those without reading comprehension skills, you can watch the movie.


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0307934/

I understand that an Australian coup was far more successful.

Terry

Rob Dekker

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2098
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 75
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #93 on: March 05, 2018, 04:44:06 AM »

The topic is "U.S. intervention in foreign lands" - note the plural form of "land'.

Sure. But we were talking about Honduras right now.
Do you agree that in the case of Honduras 2009 and later, there is no evidence that the US intervened ? Or do you believe that the US SHOULD have intervened where it did not ?

And I compiled a list of what is acceptable intervention :
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2204.msg144534.html#msg144534
Do you agree with that list ?
If not, why not.
And if so, when did the US violate an item on that list ?

That would be a real discussion.
Are you up for that, Terry, or do you just want to continue to throw more mud and hope that something sticks ?
« Last Edit: March 05, 2018, 05:06:28 AM by Rob Dekker »
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4113
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #94 on: March 05, 2018, 04:48:52 AM »
zizek
I wouldn't waste your time. You've brought more than enough rocks to the table to convince any reasonable person.
Move on to your next point. You've already won this round.
Terry

Sure, you can do that, and keep on shouting in your echo chamber.

Or you can face the facts and have a real discussion.


The fact is that you appear incredibly obtuse.
If you can't see that America has a long standing policy of overthrowing weaker countries, there's little left for debate.


That is the truth that you must face.
Terry

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3862
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #95 on: March 05, 2018, 06:54:15 AM »
Ooo, ooo, we can all play this game.

No direct military intervention in Chile, 1973, ergo USA is blameless.
No direct military intervention in Argentina, 1976 , USA is blameless
No direct military intervention in Guatemala, 1954, USA is blameless.
No direct military intervention in Nicaragua, 1981, USA is blameless.
No direct military intervention in El Salvador 1981, USA is blameless.
No direct military intervention in Cuba, 1961, USA is blameless.

Why, the USA is indeed a paragon of virtue.

sidd

P.S. for US culpability in the Zelaya overthrow (not the first one either, there was a Zelaya overthrown by the USA in Nicaragua in 1909 ...)

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jul/23/opinion/oe-weisbrot23

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/27/opinion/in-honduras-a-mess-helped-by-the-us.html

http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/9/hillary-clinton-honduraslatinamericaforeignpolicy.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/04/19/hillary-clintons-dodgy-answers-on-honduras-coup/

https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/us-role-honduras-coup-and-subsequent-violence

And surprise, surprise, the leaders of the coup were trained in the School of the Americas.

https://www.democracynow.org/2009/7/1/generals_who_led_honduras_military_coup

The USA,  of course, remains blameless. No one can imagine that the coup plotters of the Honduras acted with any regard for the wishes of the US government.

I must agree with Mr. TerryM, that no amount of evidence will satisfy apologists for empire. But perhaps some with minds less closed will read and consider.

Rob Dekker

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2098
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 75
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #96 on: March 05, 2018, 07:01:17 AM »
Sure. But we were talking about Honduras right now.
Do you agree that in the case of Honduras 2009 and later, there is no evidence that the US intervened ? Or do you believe that the US SHOULD have intervened where it did not ?

And I compiled a list of what is acceptable intervention :
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2204.msg144534.html#msg144534
Do you agree with that list ?
If not, why not.
And if so, when did the US violate an item on that list ?

That would be a real discussion.
Are you up for that, sidd, or do you just want to continue to throw more mud and hope that something sticks ?
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6092
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #97 on: March 05, 2018, 09:46:35 AM »
Rob, when, according to you, did the US do things in other countries that weren't okay?
Compare, compare, compare

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4113
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #98 on: March 05, 2018, 10:33:59 AM »
Apparently we aren't the only ones who have noticed American influence in foreign elections.


https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/03/04/us-meddling-foreign-elections-cia-tradition-since-1948.html

It contains more than a few that I'd been unaware of.

I'm unsure what more can be gained by listing even more examples of America's meddling in the elections of both friends and foes.
AFAIK we're only about one away from consensus, and I doubt his objectivity.

Having established that the US has a long history of meddling, we can scream hypocrisy from the rooftops, but what is our follow up?

I believe that Trump won in an election that was as fair as most American presidential elections. If this is true then the present rush to impeach is flawed, as well as being misguided (I don't believe many Democrats want President Pence running as an incumbent in 2020).
Hobbling Trump may be a good plan, but I wish the emphasis was on blunting his domestic and environmental programs rather than undermining his rapprochement with Russia.

Terry

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6092
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #99 on: March 05, 2018, 12:17:21 PM »
Having established that the US has a long history of meddling, we can scream hypocrisy from the rooftops, but what is our follow up?

Again, as far as I am concerned, it's not about the hypocrisy, but about the follow-up. If we're all so offended and shocked at the Russian meddling, why don't we then question US meddling. This subject is simply never broached by the media, and the population meekly follows. Russiagate would be a perfect starting point for such a discussion, and other discussions. Maybe they're there and I'm not seeing them.
Compare, compare, compare