Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: US intervention in foreign lands  (Read 143951 times)

Rob Dekker

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2386
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #200 on: March 24, 2018, 09:12:53 AM »
Or the nuclear threats against Denmark and Poland by the Putin regime.
I think those words don't present what was said at the time accurately. Maybe 'pleadings and warnings made by the Russian government' might capture the truth more accurately.

Mmm. No, it was pretty explicit :

Quote
Not long ago, Vladimir Zhirinovsky ... argued on television that Russia should use nuclear weapons to bomb Poland and the Baltic countries — “dwarf states,” he called them
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/anne-applebaum-war-in-europe-is-not-a-hysterical-idea/2014/08/29/815f29d4-2f93-11e4-bb9b-997ae96fad33_story.html?utm_term=.e0ba9e554237

and
Quote
The Russian ambassador in Copenhagen says Danish warships would become 'targets for Russian nuclear missiles

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-threatens-denmark-with-nuclear-weapons-if-it-tries-to-join-nato-defence-shield-10125529.html
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

SteveMDFP

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2587
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 612
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #201 on: March 24, 2018, 02:45:16 PM »
. .
As McNamara counsels in Lesson #7: Belief and seeing are both often wrong.
McNamara relates lesson 7 to the Tonkin Gulf incident. “We see what we want to believe."

@1:06:30 and also @1:17:40 about Vietnam and the total misunderstanding on both sides.


It's a very good, thought-provoking film.  I think the most important lesson is the first one, "empathize with your enemy."  That is ultimately what averted catastrophe in the Cuban missile crises.  McNamara put himself in Kruschev's shoes, and so could strategize a response to defuse, to step back from the brink.  It's possible we're all still here because of McNamara's thoughtfulness at that moment.

Johnson's inability to empathize with the leaders of N Vietnam shows the counter example of what can happen.  Had US leaders understood the motives of the "enemy," we wouldn't have had that catastrophe.  The conflict, for the Vietnamese, was a civil war and a war for independence.  The US had no compelling interest in the former aspect and should have been sympathetic to the latter ambition.  The Marxist ideology of the North needn't have been a compelling reason to fight; the Red Scare was mostly yet another failure to empathize.  Would-be enemies should talk with each other before rattling sabers.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9576
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1340
  • Likes Given: 618
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #202 on: March 24, 2018, 03:35:05 PM »
Okay, everyone, put yourself in Putin's shoes!

*runs for cover*   ;D
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Hefaistos

  • Guest
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #203 on: March 24, 2018, 04:02:40 PM »
...Vladimir Zhirinovsky ...

Rob, you don't know too much about Russian politics, now do you?

Quote
The Russian ambassador in Copenhagen says Danish warships would become 'targets for Russian nuclear missiles

Wow, Danes are probably already taking cover!
So, what do you suggest Rob, in the eventuality of a nuclear war, shouldn't Russia be allowed to nuke Nato ships?

ivica

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1507
  • Kelele
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 100
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #204 on: March 24, 2018, 06:22:49 PM »
"The numbers of casualties of U.S. wars since Sept. 11, 2001 have largely gone uncounted, but coming to terms with the true scale of the crimes committed remains an urgent moral, political and legal imperative, argues Nicolas J.S. Davies."

"How Many Millions of People Have Been Killed in America’s Post-9/11 Wars? – Part One: Iraq" by By Nicolas J.S. Davies, March 22, 2018

"Our estimate is that about 2.4 million people have probably been killed in Iraq as a result of the historic act of aggression committed by the U.S. and U.K. in 2003.  In this report, I will explain in greater detail how we arrived at that estimate and provide some historical context.  In Part 2 of this report, I will make a similar up-to-date estimate of how many people have been killed in America’s other post-9/11 wars."

"Nicolas J.S. Davies is the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq. He also wrote the chapter on “Obama at War” in Grading the 44th President: a Report Card on Barack Obama’s First Term as a Progressive Leader."

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6799
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1049
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #205 on: March 24, 2018, 10:43:33 PM »
America's finest news source: They might as well have been terrorists

Rather macabre in view of the designation of all military aged males as combatant militants.

“Fortunately, we were able to hit the location with pinpoint accuracy, ensuring that those inside—who for all we know were some of the most dangerous jihadists on the planet—would no longer be able to carry out a series of devastating attacks. In fact, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if our nation is far, far safer than it was 24 hours ago.”

https://www.theonion.com/successful-u-s-airstrike-kills-30-iraqis-who-may-as-we-1820636516

sidd

Rob Dekker

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2386
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #206 on: March 25, 2018, 05:54:24 AM »
Rob Dekker  March 24, 2018, and before.

So what would you do Rob if you were in the US Presidents shoes to get USA interventions in foreign lands acceptable to your standards over the long term?

I compiled a list of what kind of intervention is allowed in my opinion :
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2204.msg144534.html#msg144534
What's your opinion on this list ?

Quote
Including what specific actions would you like to see from the current and future US administrations and congress to bring Russia & China and their leaders (?) to account and/or change their rhetoric, behavior and/or actions in the world?
First of all, I think Russia's actions are much, much more egregious than China's at the moment.

For Russia, there is a LOT more we can still do to isolate the Russian oligarchy and their money.
And we could boycott the World Cup, which in my opinion is just a PR show for Putin.
And lots more, but that is outside the scope of this thread.
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

Rob Dekker

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2386
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #207 on: March 25, 2018, 07:59:42 AM »
Reviewing the list I can easily recall many occasions and events in which the US acted contrary to that list. The details of each are not necessary, as all I am asking is would you therefore agree that there have been occasions where the US has acted contrary to your own affirmative list?

I mentioned Nicaragua as an example. Especially combined with the Iran weapons deals in the Iran - contra scandal.
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2204.msg144796.html#msg144796

Quote
What is your general opinion of the US Govt of the day about those occasions?

As I mentioned in the link above, I think Reagan should have gone to jail for that.

Quote
And lastly, how do you feel about the numerous criticisms directed at various US Govts about those occasions when they occurred and subsequently overall today in hindsight?

They were totally appropriate.
 
One side note here. There were journalists on the left, like the late Robert Parry, who helped uncover the truth in the Iran - contra scandal.
He was right at that time, but (maybe as a result) he developed a bias against the US, and that lead him to ignore basic facts and follow outlandish anti-American, pro-Russian conspiracy theories against Ukraine and about MH17, to the point of attacking open-source journalists like Bellingcat and even 60 minutes Australia for simply presenting the truth and the evidence.

I think there is a lessen to be learned there : You have to RESPECT the facts and the evidence, and you have to use reason and rational thought to interpret the things that happen around us, or else you will develop a bias.

Quote
Do you believe that such prior actions by US Govts has naturally led to a deterioration in the esteem and credibility in which other national govts and people's of the world view the US as a whole or not?

That's not easy to answer. I personally think that Trump's erratic and flip-flop "foreign policy" statements (like about NATO), as well as insulting statements against other countries (the "shit-hole" remark, and the allegations against Mexico come to mind), and the lies about just about anything, do much more harm for the US credibility as seen from abroad, than foreign policy blunders like the Iran - contra scandal did.

And I also think that the mistakes that the US made can NEVER be used as an excuse for misdeeds and aggression and deadly foreign policy decisions (Russia comes to mind) made by other countries. That will always be what-about-ism.

But maybe you can answer this question better than me.
Do you live outside of the US ?
« Last Edit: March 25, 2018, 08:35:11 AM by Rob Dekker »
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

Red

  • Guest
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #208 on: March 26, 2018, 10:22:26 PM »
Fifteen years ago last week, the U.S. invasion of Iraq began. It was to be beyond glorious.  It was to signal the start of an unprecedented new era in which a single imperial superpower, left alone on the planet, would organize more or less everything to its own taste for the first time in history -- and by force of arms, if necessary.  There had never been such a moment in this world of ours.  And don’t forget, for the top officials of George W. Bush’s administration and their neocon backers, geopolitical dreamers of the first order, the invasion and occupation of Iraq was just a starting point, while all those protesters out in the streets insisting that such an invasion would be catastrophic were obviously fools of the first order. No question about it, the invasion would be a “cakewalk” with even better to follow.

Well, what a piece of cake that walk would turn out to be, inaugurating as it did a rolling catastrophe of sprouting terror movements, failed states, and uprooted populations across the Greater Middle East and then Africa -- and only 14 years later, the Trump era. After all, without the invasion of Iraq, the pouring of staggering numbers of American dollars into disastrous, never-ending wars, and the subsequent “invasion” of this country by (fears of) an onslaught of terrorism, ISIS, and refugees, President Trump would have been unimaginable.

Standing at the side of some highway to hell, he is the American equivalent of a failed state and, as TomDispatch regular John Feffer, author most recently of Aftershock: A Journey into Eastern Europe’s Broken Dreams, suggests today, he’s in the process of making everything oh-so-much worse.  Think of Donald Trump as the invasion of Iraq raised to a global level.  In the years after the 9/11 attacks but before he arrived on the scene, the U.S. helped unsettle parts of the planet stretching from Pakistan to at least Libya.  As Feffer so vividly points out, President Trump now seems intent on unsettling the rest of the planet by going to war, in his own unique fashion, with the international community.  Consider his approach the latest version of the shock-and-awe or “decapitation” tactics which began that 15-year-old invasion. What could possibly go wrong? Tom
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/

from a little further on:
Consider these telling changes in the Trumpian era. When the State Department released last year’s human rights report, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson didn’t even bother to hold the traditional press conference or present the findings himself, though he was in Washington at the time.  This year’s report, unreleased and overdue, will reportedly give shorter shrift to women’s rights and discrimination of various kinds, prompting an outcry from more than 170 human-rights organizations. "This sends a clear signal that women's reproductive rights are not a priority for this administration, and that it's not even a rights violation we must or should report on," an unnamed State Department official typically told Politico.

The writing has been on the wall in big block letters from the earliest moments of the Trump era. In May 2017, in his first town hall meeting with State Department staff, Tillerson warned that human rights should not become an obstacle in the U.S. pursuit of national interests, a shot across the department’s bow that contributed to a wave of subsequent resignations. Similarly, the administration’s first National Security Strategy barely mentioned human rights.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2018, 10:28:37 PM by Red »

Red

  • Guest
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #209 on: March 31, 2018, 11:23:44 AM »
Trump’s Recycling Program
War Crimes and War Criminals, Old and (Potentially) New
By Rebecca Gordon

A barely noticed anniversary slid by on March 20th. It’s been 15 years since the United States committed the greatest war crime of the twenty-first century: the unprovoked, aggressive invasion of Iraq. The New York Times, which didn’t exactly cover itself in glory in the run-up to that invasion, recently ran an op-ed by an Iraqi novelist living in the United States entitled “Fifteen Years Ago, America Destroyed My Country,” but that was about it. The Washington Post, another publication that (despite the recent portrayal of its Vietnam-era heroism in the movie The Post) repeatedly editorialized in favor of the invasion, marked the anniversary with a story about the war’s “murky” body count. Its piece concluded that at least 600,000 people died in the decade and a half of war, civil war, and chaos that followed -- roughly the population of Washington, D.C.

These days, there’s a significant consensus here that the Iraq invasion was a “terrible mistake,” a “tragic error,” or even the “single worst foreign policy decision in American history.” Fewer voices are saying what it really was: a war crime. In fact, that invasion fell into the very category that led the list of crimes at the Nuremberg tribunal, where Nazi high officials were tried for their actions during World War II. During the negotiations establishing that tribunal and its rules, it was (ironically, in view of later events) the United States that insisted on including the crime of “waging a war of aggression” and on placing it at the head of the list. The U.S. position was that all the rest of Germany’s war crimes sprang from this first “crime against peace.”
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176404/tomgram%3A_rebecca_gordon%2C_making_atrocities_great_again/#more

Alexander555

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2503
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 185
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #210 on: March 31, 2018, 04:12:52 PM »
It's not a good time for war criminals. The germans were able to move to an other part of the world. But with today's technology it will become harder and harder. Digital fingerprints, iris scans at airports. So if they move the war tribunal from the hague to Asia, many wil not be able to leave the US anymore. And the new world order is developing.

SteveMDFP

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2587
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 612
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #211 on: March 31, 2018, 04:17:54 PM »
And the new world order is developing.

We need global, integrated jurisprudence to deal with war criminals.  What we have isn't integrated, it's disintegrating.

Seems more like new world disorder to this observer.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6799
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1049
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #212 on: March 31, 2018, 09:38:01 PM »
Trump sez US out of Syria soon ? Not so quick, Pentagon has other ideas.

https://www.voanews.com/a/us-syria-manbij/4324347.html

sidd

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6799
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1049
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #213 on: March 31, 2018, 09:38:39 PM »
A look back at leftist warmongers in the USA:

https://www.thenation.com/article/the-lefts-embrace-of-empire/

sidd

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #214 on: April 01, 2018, 09:37:24 PM »
A look back at leftist warmongers in the USA:

https://www.thenation.com/article/the-lefts-embrace-of-empire/

sidd
Ramen
A very good read!


Most of us will never have an opportunity to alter the way Republicans run their business, but we can, should, and must, turn the Democratic Party into an institution that mirrors our own morals, and carries out our own agenda.
It's the only party that we have.
Terry

Red

  • Guest
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #215 on: April 02, 2018, 10:47:51 AM »
It’s one of those stories of the century that somehow never gets treated that way. For an astounding 25 of the past 26 years, the United States has been the leading arms dealer on the planet, at some moments in near monopolistic fashion. Its major weapons-producers, including Boeing, Raytheon, and Lockheed Martin, regularly pour the latest in high-tech arms and munitions into the most explosive areas of the planet with ample assistance from the Pentagon. In recent years, the bulk of those arms have gone to the Greater Middle East. Donald Trump is only the latest American president to preside over a global arms sales bonanza. With remarkable enthusiasm, he’s appointed himself America’s number one weapons salesman and he couldn’t be prouder of the job he’s doing.
Earlier this month, for instance, on the very day Congress was debating whether to end U.S. support for Saudi Arabia’s brutal war in Yemen, Trump engaged in one of his favorite presidential activities: bragging about the economic benefits of the American arms sales he’s been promoting. He was joined in his moment of braggadocio by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the chief architect of that war. That grim conflict has killed thousands of civilians through indiscriminate air strikes, while putting millions at risk of death from famine, cholera, and other “natural” disasters caused at least in part by a Saudi-led blockade of that country’s ports.

That Washington-enabled humanitarian crisis provided the backdrop for the Senate’s consideration of a bill co-sponsored by Vermont independent Senator Bernie Sanders, Utah Republican Senator Mike Lee, and Connecticut Democratic Senator Chris Murphy. It was aimed at ending U.S. mid-air refueling of Saudi war planes and Washington’s additional assistance for the Saudi war effort (at least until the war is explicitly authorized by Congress). The bill generated a vigorous debate. In the end, on an issue that wouldn’t have even come to the floor two years ago, an unprecedented 44 senators voted to halt this country’s support for the Saudi war effort. The bill nonetheless went down to defeat and the suffering in Yemen continues.

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176405/tomgram%3A_william_hartung%2C_selling_arms_as_if_there_were_no_tomorrow/#more

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6799
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1049
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #216 on: April 03, 2018, 08:45:55 PM »
Trump repeats that he wants out of Syria, he might lose to the Pentagon again, just like he did with Afghanistan. He don't like losing ... but then neither do the warmongers.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/381455-trump-signals-he-wants-us-troops-out-of-syria

sidd

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6799
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1049
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #217 on: April 03, 2018, 09:03:31 PM »
Sjursen on futile wars: recaps the sorry history of US carnage in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen and concludes with the lament:

"we were told the U.S. was a force for good, an “indispensable nation,” a bringer of liberty. In reality, we were a counterproductive force for chaos, the armed wing of an increasing rogue, though ostensibly democratic, regime in Washington."

Read the whole thing. Sjursen is rara avis, a professional soldier who is ready to take his superiors and country to task.

https://original.antiwar.com/Danny_Sjursen/2018/04/02/unbridgeable-gap-who-we-were-and-who-we-thought-we-were/

sidd

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6799
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1049
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #218 on: April 03, 2018, 09:41:19 PM »
Iraq is indeed a gift that keeps on giving:Leupp on consequences at counterpunch:

" The French are sending Special Forces to Manbij in northern Syria, a city held by Kurdish peshmerga backed by U.S. forces. Why? To thwart a Turkish advance on the city, backed by Turkish-allied forces in the scattershot “Syrian Free Army” created out of whole cloth by the CIA since 2011."

Leupp has unkind things to say about the warmongers supporting continued US syrian intervention, too. Read the whole thing:

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/04/03/let-other-people-take-care-of-it/

sidd

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9576
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1340
  • Likes Given: 618
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #219 on: April 04, 2018, 10:50:08 PM »
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

JimD

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2272
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #220 on: April 05, 2018, 12:45:48 AM »
It's possible we're all still here because of McNamara's thoughtfulness at that moment.

Actually it was more the ex-US ambassador who had been in Moscow for years and knew Khrushchev intimately who guided the discussion in a particular direction, that McNamara and JFK over-riding the gung ho joint chiefs, ending up agreeing with the ambassador's advice was as useful - but if had not been in the room after being invited in by JFK in the first place?

Umm?  Sorry but nope on either case.

It is clear that Vasili Arkhipov saved the USSR, the US and the world during the Cuban missile crisis.

Quote
Vasili Alexandrovich Arkhipov (Russian: Василий Александрович Архипов, IPA: [vɐˈsʲilʲɪj ɐlʲɪkˈsandrəvʲɪtɕ arˈxipɔːf], 30 January 1926 – 19 August 1998) was a Soviet Navy officer credited with casting the single vote that prevented a Soviet nuclear strike (and, presumably, all-out nuclear war) during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Such an attack likely would have caused a major global thermonuclear response which could have destroyed much of the world.[1] As flotilla commander and second-in-command of the diesel powered submarine B-59, only Arkhipov refused to authorize the captain's use of nuclear torpedoes against the United States Navy, a decision requiring the agreement of all three senior officers aboard. In 2002 Thomas Blanton, who was then director of the US National Security Archive, said that Arkhipov "saved the world".[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasili_Arkhipov

Contrary to what many myths state, the Soviets were not stared down at all.  Orders were given to launch on the US and the only reason we are still here is that Arkipov refused.  It is not always the leaders who decide these things. 

This is a forgotten lesson in my opinion. When push comes to shove you want to be very careful what kind of pressure the US/Europeans put on the Russians.  Do not think you are going to back them into a corner and get them to blink.  It is far more likely that you will have to back up your bluster with force.  Don't forget the experiences of Napoleon and Hitler.  A little tidbit for our American readers: More Russians likely died at Stalingrad than the US has lost in all of its wars put together.  Don't confuse our culture and ways of thinking with theirs.  Americans make the same kind of mistakes when dealing with N. Korea today and Vietnam in the past.
We do not err because truth is difficult to see. It is visible at a glance. We err because this is more comfortable. Alexander Solzhenitsyn

How is it conceivable that all our technological progress - our very civilization - is like the axe in the hand of the pathological criminal? Albert Einstein

JimD

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2272
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #221 on: April 05, 2018, 01:51:16 AM »
I compiled a list of what kind of intervention is allowed in my opinion :
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2204.msg144534.html#msg144534
What's your opinion on this list ?


Rob

I reviewed your list and read over your posts here on this issue.

I must say that most of what you seem to consider 'facts'  supporting your list are anything but.

The US does nothing out of the goodness of its heart.  It is an empire (in decline and struggling to to maintain position) and everything it does is with the intention of maintaining its power and wealth.  This is what I learned from a career helping it do this very thing.

From your list:

Quote
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.

We do not do these things without there being an bigger objective.  We routinely execute such programs with the full knowledge that local power brokers are going to siphon off a great amount of the money.  This is like a secret bribe.  We do something which appears good in the press while we use it to bribe a local politician who then does something for us.  Like provide a mining concession.  It is a form of colonialsim.  The DOD builds all kinds of things like this in places like Afghanistan with the full knowledge that the money goes to the corrupt leaders in large part.  This process is and has been repeated endlessly around the world for a hundred years.

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

We do not promote freedom or freedom of speech or train independent journalists except in cases where we are trying to destabilize some country which we are trying to manipulate or disrupt.  We routinely support dictators in taking away peoples freedom and ability to speak.  We throw democratically elected governments out of power and put in authoritarian ones.  We have done this very thing dozens of times.  If your money flows in our direction you can be the worst humans rights violator, run a secret service which tortures its own citizens and murders people by the thousands.  You can be democratic and oriented towards determining your own fate and we will destroy you.  We have done this dozens of times.  I personally have helped do both of these things in the past.

Quote
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.

No a well trained military is just better at killing and more efficient at executing atrocities.  We train those who are going to help us gain or hold economic power.  I have helped train brutal murderers as that was US policy.  The US created the Savak who's murderous treatment of the opponents of the Shah resulted in the Iranian revolution.  Which was necessary because we overthrew its democratically elected government and put the dictator in power.  We train rebel groups all the time to overthrow governments.  We train terrorists to do the same.  In Syria we have trained and supplied Al Queada fighters to try and topple the Syrian government - do you remember Sept 11?  We are so moral aren't we?

Quote
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.

Oh yes!  Korea right.  Do you know the history of Korea?  The US moved troops into Korea litterally a week after the bombs were dropped on Japan.  Why to prevent the Korean army, fighting under the leadership of Kim Il Sung, who had led them fighting the Japanese through WWII, from taking control of their own country.  But he was supported by the Chinese of course and we wanted to be able to have a strategic presence to threaten them.  So WE installed a dictator in S. Korea to prevent their full exercise of their rights to their own country (virtually everyone in the country wanted Kim to run the country).  When the war came to throw out the dictatorship and the illegal US forces we put together a UN mandate to protect the south from the commies.  Pure bullshit.  We put together UN resolutions and NATO coalitions to wage war all the time.  But not for altruistic reasons.  Look at Vietnam, Libya, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, Bosnia and so on.  It is just empire projects with the assistance of our super colonies (they get to share in the spoils) in NATO and the EU.  I could go on but this point of yours is just crazy.

Quote
hen 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.

Another area where I have deep personal experience.  I do hope you realize that such actions are the bulk of US involvement and interventions around the world.  We are almost everywhere whether in the form of our intel corps or via our special operations forces.  And such activities are always present at every UN, NATO and independent US military activity like Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, etc, etc.  So if you don't like this then you should not like any of your above items either.  They are all part of a system and do not work independently in any way.  The State Dept runs one program, the CIA another, the DOD this one, USAID that one, the IMF another, or the World Bank, etc, etc.  Everyone has the same goal and that is to maintain and if possible grow the empire.  No one cares about the innocent, the children (if we did why did the US run programs which resulted in the deaths of several hundred thousand Iraqi children, or why do we support what Israel does to Palestinian children), or women and old men.  We care about power and wealth.

The problem for the US is not learning to actually live up to our mythological propaganda about who and what we are...it is about how to carefully manage our decline in the face of climate change and collapsing global carrying capacity.  We don't care if everyone else dies as long as we are the ones left standing.  Machiavelli would understand the US well and likely approve on general terms if not specifics.  Are we smart enough to manage this?  Well the Donald implies not, but he will not be around for that long and the 'adults' will be back to running things.  But then with all of his stupidity he has not yet blundered as bad as the Hillary/Obama team did when it helped overthrow the democratically elected government in the Ukraine, put in power real Nazi's, gave the Crimea back to the Russians, and likely helped the Russians decide to assist us with our 2016 election.  But hey he still has time and now with Dr. Stangelove ..err Bolton.. on board along with Pompeo he has improving prospects to really make American morality and ethics shine for the rest of the world.

I was a once a programmed idealist like you seem to be.  Just about nothing you have been told about what we do is the 'truth'.  Trust no one, verify everything, assume you are being lied to because you undoubtedly are being lied too.  If you want to help the world you need to stop the US in its tracks as there is not enough good we are doing to fill a 5 gallon bucket and death and destruction will follow us everywhere we go until there is no one left to steal from. If you are from the US and want to end up on top of the pile of rubble the world is going to turn into then I guess supporting everything we do is a workable option.

Cheers!

We do not err because truth is difficult to see. It is visible at a glance. We err because this is more comfortable. Alexander Solzhenitsyn

How is it conceivable that all our technological progress - our very civilization - is like the axe in the hand of the pathological criminal? Albert Einstein

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #222 on: April 05, 2018, 02:13:00 AM »
It's possible we're all still here because of McNamara's thoughtfulness at that moment.

Actually it was more the ex-US ambassador who had been in Moscow for years and knew Khrushchev intimately who guided the discussion in a particular direction, that McNamara and JFK over-riding the gung ho joint chiefs, ending up agreeing with the ambassador's advice was as useful - but if had not been in the room after being invited in by JFK in the first place?

Umm?  Sorry but nope on either case.

It is clear that Vasili Arkhipov saved the USSR, the US and the world during the Cuban missile crisis.

Quote
Vasili Alexandrovich Arkhipov (Russian: Василий Александрович Архипов, IPA: [vɐˈsʲilʲɪj ɐlʲɪkˈsandrəvʲɪtɕ arˈxipɔːf], 30 January 1926 – 19 August 1998) was a Soviet Navy officer credited with casting the single vote that prevented a Soviet nuclear strike (and, presumably, all-out nuclear war) during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Such an attack likely would have caused a major global thermonuclear response which could have destroyed much of the world.[1] As flotilla commander and second-in-command of the diesel powered submarine B-59, only Arkhipov refused to authorize the captain's use of nuclear torpedoes against the United States Navy, a decision requiring the agreement of all three senior officers aboard. In 2002 Thomas Blanton, who was then director of the US National Security Archive, said that Arkhipov "saved the world".[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasili_Arkhipov

Contrary to what many myths state, the Soviets were not stared down at all.  Orders were given to launch on the US and the only reason we are still here is that Arkipov refused.  It is not always the leaders who decide these things. 

This is a forgotten lesson in my opinion. When push comes to shove you want to be very careful what kind of pressure the US/Europeans put on the Russians.  Do not think you are going to back them into a corner and get them to blink.  It is far more likely that you will have to back up your bluster with force.  Don't forget the experiences of Napoleon and Hitler.  A little tidbit for our American readers: More Russians likely died at Stalingrad than the US has lost in all of its wars put together.  Don't confuse our culture and ways of thinking with theirs.  Americans make the same kind of mistakes when dealing with N. Korea today and Vietnam in the past.
I first heard of Vasili from Khrushchev's son Sergei on the 50th anniversary of Kennedy's death.


My understanding is that the sub was about to fire their nuclear missiles, as opposed to a nuclear torpedo. They would have taken out the east coast, according to Sergei.


3 oxygen deprived submariners who held the fate of the world in their hands.
Terry

Rob Dekker

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2386
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #223 on: April 06, 2018, 05:33:12 AM »
Thank you Jim, for the comments on my list of acceptable interference.

Looking at your responses, I guess your answer for each one of them is NO.
Please remember that my list applies to ALL nations, not just the US.
So would you use the same judgement when applied to other nations, like Russia, interfering in other nation's business ?

Also you mentioned a couple of things that were new to me.
For example :
Quote
In Syria we have trained and supplied Al Queada fighters...

Do you have a reference to that ?
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6799
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1049
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #224 on: April 06, 2018, 05:38:54 AM »
Re: " list applies to ALL nations, not just the US "

perhaps, but i refer again to the title of this thread.

sidd

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6799
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1049
  • Likes Given: 0

Rob Dekker

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2386
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #226 on: April 06, 2018, 08:02:02 AM »
Sometimes you wind up on the side of the organ eaters:

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/204261/syria-guy-who-was-eating-heart-he-was-part-daniel-greenfield

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23190533

sidd

Sidd, I cannot find any evidence that Abu Sakkar ever received any help from the US. Do you have any ?

In fact, here are Abu Sakkar's own words (from your link) :
Quote
We are defending the Islamic nation and this is how the Arabs and the West treat us? What did the West do? Nothing."

And I can't find any evidence for Jim's claim that "In Syria we have trained and supplied Al Queada fighters..." either.

From where do you guys get this stuff ?
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #227 on: April 06, 2018, 08:27:14 AM »
People have apparently decided to allow you to find your own rocks.


Your shtick has passed it's best used before date.


It's grown stale.
Terry


Are you so one dimensional as to not be capable of taking another tack?

Rob Dekker

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2386
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #228 on: April 06, 2018, 08:30:22 AM »
Are you so one dimensional as to not be capable of taking another tack?

Actually my current tack of fact-checking outrageous claims serves me well.
I don't intend to change it.
Sorry.
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #229 on: April 06, 2018, 09:40:25 AM »
Are you so one dimensional as to not be capable of taking another tack?

Actually my current tack of fact-checking outrageous claims serves me well.
I don't intend to change it.
Sorry.
It's become both rude and unproductive, but -

Se la vi
Terry

Rob Dekker

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2386
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #230 on: April 06, 2018, 10:16:30 AM »
Actually my current tack of fact-checking outrageous claims serves me well.
I don't intend to change it.
Sorry.
It's become both rude and unproductive, but -

Se la vi
Terry

You probably mean "c'est la vie", but regardless, the day that fact-checking becomes "rude and unproductive" is the day that the truth dies. So let's fact-check outrageous statements :

Still looking for evidence that the US ever supported Abu Sakkar, and that "In Syria we have trained and supplied Al Queada fighters...".
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

JimD

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2272
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #231 on: April 06, 2018, 05:41:33 PM »
Thank you Jim, for the comments on my list of acceptable interference.

Looking at your responses, I guess your answer for each one of them is NO.
Please remember that my list applies to ALL nations, not just the US.
So would you use the same judgement when applied to other nations, like Russia, interfering in other nation's business ?

Also you mentioned a couple of things that were new to me.
For example :
Quote
In Syria we have trained and supplied Al Queada fighters...

Do you have a reference to that ?

Ok. Here are some search terms for google which will help.

us training al queada rebels in syria

syrian rebel training program

cia arming syrian rebels

al qaeda rebels in syria

All of these will lead you to information relating to this issue.  And you can go link to link from the ones you find with these searchs.  Note that Al Qaeda groups like many others change their names all the time (but not their ideology) and you have to follow those paths to keep on track.  There is a lot to read here but it will become clear.  I also know a lot of this due to my former career and I can't share any of that here.  Note there are lots of ways to spell Al Qaeda so use the other varieties as well.  Al Qaeda is also known in Syria as Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (JFS), Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), and Al Nusra for example.  the US has routinely trained other groups who shortly thereafter either joined the Al Qaeda groups or gave them their weapons.  Which was a forgone conclusion and, if we did not intend to do this deliberately, we would not have executed those programs.  Hope this helps you.

Re your point about other nations and Russia in particular.  Do you think the scale of say Russian or Chinese interference in other countries affairs is even 10% of what the US does?  The election interference for instance.  The US has meddled in the Russian elections every cycle since the fall of the USSR.  Do they not have the right to defend themselves?  Example:

Quote
...“If you ask an intelligence officer, did the Russians break the rules or do something bizarre, the answer is no, not at all,” said Steven L. Hall, who retired in 2015 after 30 years at the C.I.A., where he was the chief of Russian operations. The United States “absolutely” has carried out such election influence operations historically, he said, “and I hope we keep doing it.”...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/17/sunday-review/russia-isnt-the-only-one-meddling-in-elections-we-do-it-too.html

There are no innocents in the relations between countries (Machiavelli again) and you have no real friends.  The only thing in the long run which counts is winning or at least remaining as close to the top of the totem pole as possible.  This is the core difference between our main outlooks on what is correct in human behavior. Morals and ethics are useful ways of behaving with either everyone, or just with those who are members of our families, tribes and countries.  It is a belief of mine that this is the core difference between the basic liberal and conservative camps.  I have seen no evidence on any scale of consequence that countries will do anything different than what the first two sentences say.  Have you?

I have said it here before.  There is not going to be a kumbaya moment in the climate change alleviation debate due to the above core point on human behavior and our basic nature.  We are going to go down fighting tooth and nail for the last resources and bag of rice.  Each of us will sacrifice any other country or people for the sake of our own.  Humanity will survive this mess but 'civilization' as we know it since the Enlightenment I have serious doubts about.

Note:  If anyone really wants to get my attention you need to private message me as I seldom come back to a post to see responses as by the time I have the time I have forgot about most of them and caused trouble on some other blog which I write on.  8)
We do not err because truth is difficult to see. It is visible at a glance. We err because this is more comfortable. Alexander Solzhenitsyn

How is it conceivable that all our technological progress - our very civilization - is like the axe in the hand of the pathological criminal? Albert Einstein

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9576
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1340
  • Likes Given: 618
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #232 on: April 06, 2018, 06:05:41 PM »
Jim, in case you didn't know, you can click 'Notify' at the bottom of the thread, and you then get the comments mailed to the address in your profile.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #233 on: April 06, 2018, 06:35:01 PM »
Jim
Some, or at least one of us doesn't really look at his e-mail on even a monthly basis. This particular one would be very interested in more info on the titles you've written, a brief synopsys and instructions on how to acquire one.
I doubt that Neven would object to a one time unpaid ad hiding in the comments. :D
Terry

zizek

  • Guest
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #234 on: April 06, 2018, 08:39:51 PM »
Are you so one dimensional as to not be capable of taking another tack?

Actually my current tack of fact-checking outrageous claims serves me well.
I don't intend to change it.
Sorry.
Rob. We have bombarded you with sources that cite perpetrator's admissions, victim's testimonials, academic's polemics, journalistic accounts.  And your respond by quoting Wikipedia, moving the goalposts, and invoking straw man arguments.

Debating with you is exactly like debating a climate change denier:

Rob: American did not interfere in the Honduras.
Me: Provide you reputable sources describing how america armed and trained anti-revolutionary forces, Clinton's own admission to involvement in the Honduras, testimonial from renowned environmental activist.
Rob: But where is the proof? It just looks like partisan bickering to me. And Cáceres, well I don't see a video of an american blowing her brains out, so how do we know if america was involved?


Now, arguing with a climate change denier:

Denier: There is no proof humans are causing climate change
Me: provide extensive list of sources proving otherwise.
Denier: Doesn't look like proof.  Probably just academics achieving political goals
« Last Edit: April 06, 2018, 09:00:32 PM by zizek »

zizek

  • Guest
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #235 on: April 06, 2018, 09:26:45 PM »

You probably mean "c'est la vie", but regardless, the day that fact-checking becomes "rude and unproductive" is the day that the truth dies. So let's fact-check outrageous statements :

Still looking for evidence that the US ever supported Abu Sakkar, and that "In Syria we have trained and supplied Al Queada fighters...".

Remember earlier in this thread where I constantly quoted Brzezinski's admission to supporting Islamic fundamentalists with the goal of starting a war and destabilizing both Afghanistan and the USSR? I do, but yet you still never admitted to US intervention. Rather, you just cited atrocities committed by Russians.  Which would be great in the Re: Russia intervention in foreign lands thread. 

Quote
the day that fact-checking becomes "rude and unproductive" is the day that the truth dies.
Naw. In fact, fact checking can be incredibly rude and unproductive. Like, lets say, someone is trying to convince me that the earth orbits the sun. And I respond with the absolute certain truth that Taco Bell's BEEF CRUNCH TACO SUPREME is a crunchy corn taco shell filled with seasoned ground beef, reduced-fat sour cream, crisp shredded lettuce, real cheddar cheese and diced ripe tomatoes.... See, the truth is rude and unproductive. But the truth never died. No, instead, I just suck and only care about Taco Bell.


Your obsession with portraying yourself as a hero of truth and justice is hilarious.  In the Russia thread, you conclusively point the finger at Russia for the Skripal poisoning. And there is literally no proof that it was Russia. Nothing. zilch. A fucking hunch.

This is where truth dies.  When evidence & facts are a necessity for your enemies defense, but merely a convenience for your own moment at stand. 
« Last Edit: April 06, 2018, 10:03:43 PM by zizek »

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #236 on: April 06, 2018, 09:45:21 PM »
Se la vi is exactly what I meant. I don't truck wit no Frog talk, this hood is little Italy  ::)
Terry

Rob Dekker

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2386
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #237 on: April 07, 2018, 04:42:40 AM »
..
Also you mentioned a couple of things that were new to me.
For example :
Quote
In Syria we have trained and supplied Al Queada fighters...

Do you have a reference to that ?

Ok. Here are some search terms for google which will help.

...

All of these will lead you to information relating to this issue.  And you can go link to link from the ones you find with these searchs.  Note that Al Qaeda groups like many others change their names all the time (but not their ideology) and you have to follow those paths to keep on track.  There is a lot to read here but it will become clear.  I also know a lot of this due to my former career and I can't share any of that here.  Note there are lots of ways to spell Al Qaeda so use the other varieties as well.  Al Qaeda is also known in Syria as Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (JFS), Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), and Al Nusra for example.

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to go on a wild goose chase on internet trying to find evidence for YOUR  claims.

This is how it works : YOU made the claim, so YOU provide the evidence.
 
Quote
the US has routinely trained other groups who shortly thereafter either joined the Al Qaeda groups or gave them their weapons.  Which was a forgone conclusion and, if we did not intend to do this deliberately, we would not have executed those programs.  Hope this helps you.

Where do you get this nonsense ?
There are some incidents where US trained rebels were kidnapped by Al Nusra, and a report where they lost some pick-up trucks. And there was the problem of Jordanean intelligence officers sells US weapons on the black market. But I can find no evidence that "the US has routinely trained other groups who shortly thereafter either joined the Al Qaeda groups or gave them their weapons.".

Please, Jim. Back up your statements with some references.
Without that, there is no reason to believe your increasingly outrageous statements.
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6799
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1049
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #238 on: April 07, 2018, 06:24:51 AM »
We didn't support Mobutu directly, just some of his pals. We didn't support Osama directly, just some of his pals. We didn't support the Azov battalion directly, just some of their pals. We didn't support the organ eater directly, just some of his pals.

Oldie but a goodie. I am sure others can come up with more.

sidd

zizek

  • Guest
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #239 on: April 07, 2018, 01:27:29 PM »
..
Also you mentioned a couple of things that were new to me.
For example :
Quote
In Syria we have trained and supplied Al Queada fighters...

Do you have a reference to that ?

Ok. Here are some search terms for google which will help.

...

All of these will lead you to information relating to this issue.  And you can go link to link from the ones you find with these searchs.  Note that Al Qaeda groups like many others change their names all the time (but not their ideology) and you have to follow those paths to keep on track.  There is a lot to read here but it will become clear.  I also know a lot of this due to my former career and I can't share any of that here.  Note there are lots of ways to spell Al Qaeda so use the other varieties as well.  Al Qaeda is also known in Syria as Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (JFS), Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), and Al Nusra for example.

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to go on a wild goose chase on internet trying to find evidence for YOUR  claims.

This is how it works : YOU made the claim, so YOU provide the evidence.
 
Quote
the US has routinely trained other groups who shortly thereafter either joined the Al Qaeda groups or gave them their weapons.  Which was a forgone conclusion and, if we did not intend to do this deliberately, we would not have executed those programs.  Hope this helps you.

Where do you get this nonsense ?
There are some incidents where US trained rebels were kidnapped by Al Nusra, and a report where they lost some pick-up trucks. And there was the problem of Jordanean intelligence officers sells US weapons on the black market. But I can find no evidence that "the US has routinely trained other groups who shortly thereafter either joined the Al Qaeda groups or gave them their weapons.".

Please, Jim. Back up your statements with some references.
Without that, there is no reason to believe your increasingly outrageous statements.

Rob, every time anybody has posted references you've either ignored them or moved the goal posts.

Red

  • Guest
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #240 on: April 07, 2018, 04:48:37 PM »
https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/the-world-will-not-mourn-the-decline-of-u.s.-hegemony

It would be interesting to see a reliable opinion poll on how the politically cognizant portion of the 94 percent of humanity that lives outside the U.S. would feel about the end of U.S. global dominance. My guess is that Uncle Sam’s weakening would be just fine with most Earth residents who pay attention to world events.

According to a global survey of 66,000 people conducted across 68 countries by the Worldwide Independent Network of Market Research (WINMR) and Gallup International at the end of 2013, Earth’s people see the United States as the leading threat to peace on the planet. The U.S. was voted top threat by a wide margin.

There is nothing surprising about that vote for anyone who honestly examines the history of “U.S. foreign affairs,” to use a common elite euphemism for American imperialism. Still, by far and away world history’s most extensive empire, the U.S. has at least 800 military bases spread across more than 80 foreign countries and “troops or other military personnel in about 160 foreign countries and territories.” The U.S. accounts for more than 40 percent of the planet’s military spending and has more than 5,500 strategic nuclear weapons, enough to blow the world up 5 to 50 times over. Last year it increased its “defense” (military empire) spending, which was already three times higher than China’s, and nine times higher than Russia’s.

Think it’s all in place to ensure peace and democracy the world over, in accord with the standard boilerplate rhetoric of U.S. presidents, diplomats and senators?

Do you know any other good jokes?
 
 From way back in '09
https://www.newstatesman.com/north-america/2009/07/pilger-obama-america-world
The monsoon had woven thick skeins of mist over the central highlands of Vietnam. I was a young war correspondent, bivouacked in the village of Tuylon with a unit of US marines whose orders were to win hearts and minds. “We are here not to kill,” said the sergeant, “we are here to impart the American Way of Liberty as stated in the Pacification Handbook. This is designed to win the hearts and minds of folks, as stated on page 86.”

Page 86 was headed WHAM. The sergeant’s unit was called a combined action company, which meant, he explained, “we attack these folks on Mondays and we win their hearts and minds on Tuesdays”. He was joking, though not quite. Standing in a jeep on the edge of a paddy, he had announced through a loudhailer: “Come on out, everybody. We got rice and candy and toothbrushes to give you.”

Silence. Not a shadow moved.

“Now listen, either you gooks come on out from wherever you are, or we’re going to come right in there and get you!”

Red

  • Guest
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #241 on: April 08, 2018, 01:03:46 PM »
If you want to know something about life in America these days, consider how New York Times columnist David Leonhardt began his first piece of the year, “7 Wishes for 2018”: "Well, at least it’s not 2017 anymore. I expect that future historians will look back on it as one of the darker non-war years in the country’s history...”

Think about that for a moment: 2017, a "non-war year"? Tell that to the Afghans, the Iraqis, the Syrians, the Yemenis, the Somalis, or for that matter the parents of the four American Green Berets who died in Niger last October. Still, let’s admit it, Leonhardt caught a deeper American reality of 2017, not to speak of the years before that, and undoubtedly this one, too.

Launched in October 2001, what was once called the Global War on Terror -- it even gained the grotesque acronym, GWOT -- has never ended.  Instead, it’s morphed and spread over large parts of the planet.  In all the intervening years, the United States has been in a state of permanent war that shows no sign of concluding in 2018.  Its planes continue to drop a staggering tonnage of munitions; its drones continue to Hellfire-missile country after country; and, in recent years, its elite Special Operations forces, now a military-within-the-U.S.-military of about 70,000 personnel, have been deployed, as Nick Turse has long reported at this website, to almost every imaginable country on the planet.  They train allied militaries and proxy forces, advise and sometimes fight with those forces in the field, conduct raids, and engage in what certainly looks like war.

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.

In a sense, then, David Leonhardt was right on the mark.  In so much of the world, 2017 was a grim year of war, displacement, and disaster.   Here, however, it was, in so many ways, just another "non-war year."  In that context, let Nick Turse guide you into the next "non-war year" and the “non-war” force, America’s special operators, who are likely to be at its heart. Tom

The rest at:
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176371/tomgram%3A_nick_turse%2C_the_coming_year_in_special_ops/#more

Red

  • Guest
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #242 on: April 08, 2018, 01:10:47 PM »
http://www.tomdispatch.com/images/managed/costofwar_projectmap_large1.jpg

[Note to TomDispatch Readers: Welcome to 2018!  Given TomDispatch’s history, all 15 years of it, how appropriate that this year begins with a look at America’s never-ending wars.  My latest piece focuses on a unique map produced by the Costs of War Project at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs that's being published for the first time at this site.  It’s an honor to feature it. Tom]

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176369/tomgram%3A_engelhardt%2C_seeing_our_wars_for_the_first_time/

Rob Dekker

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2386
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #243 on: April 09, 2018, 10:52:15 AM »
..
Also you mentioned a couple of things that were new to me.
For example :
Quote
In Syria we have trained and supplied Al Queada fighters...

Do you have a reference to that ?

Ok. Here are some search terms for google which will help.

...

All of these will lead you to information relating to this issue.  And you can go link to link from the ones you find with these searchs.  Note that Al Qaeda groups like many others change their names all the time (but not their ideology) and you have to follow those paths to keep on track.  There is a lot to read here but it will become clear.  I also know a lot of this due to my former career and I can't share any of that here.  Note there are lots of ways to spell Al Qaeda so use the other varieties as well.  Al Qaeda is also known in Syria as Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (JFS), Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), and Al Nusra for example.

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to go on a wild goose chase on internet trying to find evidence for YOUR  claims.

This is how it works : YOU made the claim, so YOU provide the evidence.
 
Quote
the US has routinely trained other groups who shortly thereafter either joined the Al Qaeda groups or gave them their weapons.  Which was a forgone conclusion and, if we did not intend to do this deliberately, we would not have executed those programs.  Hope this helps you.

Where do you get this nonsense ?
There are some incidents where US trained rebels were kidnapped by Al Nusra, and a report where they lost some pick-up trucks. And there was the problem of Jordanean intelligence officers sells US weapons on the black market. But I can find no evidence that "the US has routinely trained other groups who shortly thereafter either joined the Al Qaeda groups or gave them their weapons.".

Please, Jim. Back up your statements with some references.
Without that, there is no reason to believe your increasingly outrageous statements.

Rob, every time anybody has posted references you've either ignored them or moved the goal posts.

That is not true. I always responded, and never "moved the goal posts".
But even if you think so, why don't you try me on this one ?

Provide ANY evidence that :
"the US has routinely trained other groups who shortly thereafter either joined the Al Qaeda groups or gave them their weapons" or that
"In Syria we have trained and supplied Al Queada fighters."

You know, ANY evidence at all....

If you can't, isn't it time to re-think your opinions about what is happening in Syria ?
This is our planet. This is our time.
Let's not waste either.


sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6799
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1049
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #245 on: April 09, 2018, 09:45:07 PM »
Operation Everlasting Quagmire. Operation Neverending Story. Operation Shit Show. Operation Moral Repugnance. Operation Flailing Empire.

Sjursen recaps US carnage in the middle east with more appropriate code names.

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-war-on-reason-in-the-middle-east-with-orwellian-code-names/

sidd

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #246 on: April 09, 2018, 09:45:23 PM »
sidd
The Hersh piece is a winner!
Interesting that Porton Down should again have a hand in defusing what would have been very destructive propaganda bombs. Perhaps next time some politician will think to ask before screaming chemical weapons from the rooftops.
Two false flags in such rapid succession leads one to ask why TPTB are in such a rush?


Is it true that the UK is going to bulldoze Skripal's home, as well as the restaurant and pub where they'd visited prior to being found on the park bench?
If so that's an amazing effort to destroy evidence from the scene of a crime.


International law apparently only applies when others may have done something shady.


What a shame
Terry

JimD

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2272
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #247 on: April 10, 2018, 12:47:27 AM »
..
Also you mentioned a couple of things that were new to me.
For example :
Quote
In Syria we have trained and supplied Al Queada fighters...

Do you have a reference to that ?

Ok. Here are some search terms for google which will help.

...

All of these will lead you to information relating to this issue.  And you can go link to link from the ones you find with these searchs.  Note that Al Qaeda groups like many others change their names all the time (but not their ideology) and you have to follow those paths to keep on track.  There is a lot to read here but it will become clear.  I also know a lot of this due to my former career and I can't share any of that here.  Note there are lots of ways to spell Al Qaeda so use the other varieties as well.  Al Qaeda is also known in Syria as Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (JFS), Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), and Al Nusra for example.

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to go on a wild goose chase on internet trying to find evidence for YOUR  claims.

This is how it works : YOU made the claim, so YOU provide the evidence.
 
Quote
the US has routinely trained other groups who shortly thereafter either joined the Al Qaeda groups or gave them their weapons.  Which was a forgone conclusion and, if we did not intend to do this deliberately, we would not have executed those programs.  Hope this helps you.

Where do you get this nonsense ?
There are some incidents where US trained rebels were kidnapped by Al Nusra, and a report where they lost some pick-up trucks. And there was the problem of Jordanean intelligence officers sells US weapons on the black market. But I can find no evidence that "the US has routinely trained other groups who shortly thereafter either joined the Al Qaeda groups or gave them their weapons.".

Please, Jim. Back up your statements with some references.
Without that, there is no reason to believe your increasingly outrageous statements.

Rob

I did provide the information.  I googled those terms exactly as I gave them to you while I was writing the post.  You will find in the first 10 links for each one of the search terms there were multiple examples of what I was talking about. I would say I went out of the way to help you out.  But I must say that this is clearly a subject for which you are far from informed as this is not obscure information.  Some of this occasionally made it onto the regular nightly mainstream news a few years ago. If you have followed the war in Syria there have been many who have complained about this very issue of the US government helping Al Qaeda to include members of US Special Operations Forces who have asked why they were killing these people in Afghanistan and helping them in Syria.  The enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.  Sometimes you should shoot both of them or let them kill each other.

Here is a specific one I dug up just for you.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-america-armed-terrorists-in-syria/

Perhaps you would like some other examples of what the US does all the time?

I presume you are aware that prominent members of the Ukrainian opposition to the Ukrainian's who support Russia are real life Nazi's? We trained and supported their toppling the previous 'democratically elected' Ukrainian government. My father and mother would be rolling in their graves to know the US got in bed with Nazi's. I will leave that one for you to research just in case you have been drinking the coolaid about what has happened in the Ukraine.

Here is one of many links you can find describing US involvement in the 2009 coup in Honduras.

https://www.thenation.com/article/how-hillary-clinton-militarized-us-policy-in-honduras/

Here is a list of 35 countries where the US has supported fascists, druglords and terrorists.

https://www.salon.com/2014/03/08/35_countries_the_u_s_has_backed_international_crime_partner/

It is endless and irrefutable. 



We do not err because truth is difficult to see. It is visible at a glance. We err because this is more comfortable. Alexander Solzhenitsyn

How is it conceivable that all our technological progress - our very civilization - is like the axe in the hand of the pathological criminal? Albert Einstein

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3342
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 409
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #248 on: April 10, 2018, 04:09:57 AM »
Another recent relevant piece:

https://theintercept.com/2018/04/09/video-a-brief-history-of-u-s-intervention-in-iraq-over-the-past-half-century/

A Brief History of U.S. Intervention in Iraq Over the Past Half Century

video
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: US intervention in foreign lands
« Reply #249 on: April 10, 2018, 04:54:58 AM »
Oliver Stone's series is a good introduction.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1494191/

After you've stopped steaming and stuttering you can try reading some real history, you know, the kind not always written by the winner.

Terry