"recognizing the requirement for some concession, and shared movement toward addressing each other's grievances. "
So who does the United States negotiate with? A dialogue with Al Qaeda? How about the Palistinians? Didn't the world see how much Arafat was interested in peace after Camp David. That was his MOMENT. He could have wrote himself into history.
Concessions mean , you're playing right into their hands. Start making concessions, you guarantee another atrocious attack on US soil.
Because you have told the enemies of the US that such a practice will produce results.
What concessions should the United States be prepared to make? Shake hands with killers over the bodies of the dead in New York?
You are also making a broad assumption that parties on the other side are even interested in negotiation. That's not their stated intent.
The events of the past week, especially of the last two days, show the utter, practical untenability and moral bankruptcy of the revenge/retalitaion fixation in our conflicting political, deological and religious affairs.
Is national pride, say, more important to try to uphold than humanity's civilized existence, which will perhaps be permanently undermined -- with the ultimate extinction of the species itself a distinct possibility -- if we persist in this tit-for-tat, hardline escalation?
This is what happens when you demonize your opponent to the extent that they're rendered considerably less than human in the propagandized public eye.
For fear of showing weakness, dialogue and concessions are deferred. You can't talk to a monster, right?
Well, from their side, for reasons that seem just as compelling to them as ours do to us, they see us as monsters as well.
Not just principalities and powers, and movements, but individuals in all walks of life...need to mellow out.
It's easy to be hard.
But we must speak softly now, for the hour is growing late.
I can't help but think that the reason why intelligent life has never been found in the universe is not that it never actually existed, but that it once did -- and some super-armed, vengeful intractability resulted in a war that blew everyone away.
Universal existence could be God's little experiment, maybe within a fish-tank style glass enclosure on the Big Guy's coffee table.
And He gets up each day to see if, finally, anything good has come of it.
But He invariably finds that nobody has gotten it right.
"This is what happens when you demonize your opponent to the extent that they're rendered considerably less than human in the propagandized public eye."
Stories like this in the New York Times have been criticized as propaganda, too.
"At first, New York scared him. Everything seemed so big, so fast, so tough.
"But it didn't take long for Steve Wong -- who came from Hong Kong in 1996 on a temporary assignment with March & McLennan -- to stop feeling like a stranger.
"'Steve loved it here,"' said his wife, See See. "'He could learn more here, see more, visit more different places, talk to more different people.
"Mr. Wong, 34, and his wife rented an apartment in Jersey City, had a baby girl, Jacqueline, and decided that their future was in America. He dreamed that one day Jacqueline would go to an American college and he would join her there to get his PhD in philosophy. Then he planned to retire from Wall Street and teach others how to define what is important in life.
"Mr. Wong already had clear sense of how to rank life's offerings. He and his family traveled widely, read voraciously, visited every museum, zoo, and historic place they could find. He hated being away from his family, but he went to Scotland for his M.B.A. because of the British pedigree of his Hong Kong education was recognized there. During his year away he learned to to play piano and wear a kilt.
"'Steve took advantage of all the business, cultural and personal growth opportunities that life afforded him,'" said Clyde Fritz, a friend and colleague. '"He had his priorities aligned properly.'
"Later this month, Mr. Fritz, Mrs. Wong and Jacqueline will fly to Edinburgh to pick up Mr. Wong's degree. "
Other names in the Portraits of Grief: Juan Ortega Campos, 32; Thomas A. Hobbs, 41; Jack Andreacchio, 52; Eric Allen (Fireman), 44; James Gadiel, 23; Christopher Clarke, 34; Edward Geraghity (Fireman), 45; Robert Parro (Fireman) 35; Paul Grier, 36; Suzanne Youmans, 60; Sean Schielke, 27; Carlos Cortes, 57; John Pauolillo (Fireman), 51.
If you want to test your forebearance, speak all the names aloud.
That list is a heartwrenching one, Rick, but I doubt it would exist but for another list -- the chronicle of our self-serving interventions in others' affairs:
PHILIPPINES/l898-1910(-?)/Naval, troops/Seized from Spain, U.S. troops kill 600,000 Filipinos.
CUBA/l898-1902(-?)/Naval, troops/Seized from Spain, U.S. still illegally holds Navy base there over Cuban objections.
PANAMA/1901-03(-?)/Naval, troops/Broke off from Colombia in a U.S. organized 'rebellion', U.S. annexes Canal Zone.
HONDURAS/l903/Troops/U.S. Marines intervene in revolution.
DOMINICAN REP./1903-04/Troops/U.S. business interests protected in Revolution.
KOREA/1904-05/Troops/U.S. Marines land in Russo-Japanese War.
CUBA/1906-09/Troops/U.S. Marines land in democratic election.
NICARAGUA/1907/Troops/"Dollar Diplomacy" protectorate (psuedo- colony) set up.
HONDURAS/l907/Troops/U.S. Marines land during war with Nicaragua.
PANAMA/l908/Troops/U.S. Marines intervene in election contest.
NICARAGUA/l9l0/Troops/U.S. Marines land in Bluefields and Corinto.
HONDURAS/1911/Troops/U.S. business interests protected in civil war.
CHINA/1911-41/Naval, troops/Continuous occupation with flare-ups
CUBA/1912/Troops/U.S. business interests protected in Havana.
PANAMA/l9l2/Troops/U.S. Marines land during heated election.
HONDURAS/l9l2/Troops/Marines protect U.S. economic interests.
MEXICO/l9l3/Naval/Americans evacuated during revolution.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC/1914/Naval/Fight with rebels over Santo Domingo.
MEXICO/1914-18/Naval, troops/Series of interventions against Mexican nationalists.
HAITI/1914-34/Troops, bombing/19-year occupation after revolts.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC/1916-24/Troops/8-year U.S. Marine occupation.
CUBA/1917-33/Troops/Military occupation, U.S. declares Cuba an economic protectorate (psuedo-colony).
USSR/1918-22/Naval, troops/Five landings to fight Bolsheviks in effort to overthrow the fledgling socialist government.
PANAMA/1918-20/Troops/"Police duty" during unrest after elections.
HONDURAS/l9l9/Troops/U.S. Marines land during election campaign.
GUATEMALA/1920/Troops/2-week intervention against unionists.
TURKEY/1922/Troops/U.S. fought nationalists in Smyrna.
CHINA/1922-27/Naval, troops/Deployment during nationalist revolt.
HONDURAS/1924-25/Troops/Landed twice during election strife.
PANAMA/1925/Troops/U.S. Marines suppress general strike.
CHINA/l928-34/Troops/U.S. Marines stationed throughout the country.
EL SALVADOR/l932/Naval/Warships sent during Marti revolt.
KOREA/l951-53(-?)/Troops, naval, bombing, nuclear threats/U.S.& South Korea fight China & North Korea to stalemate; A-bomb threat in l950, and against China in l953. China accuses U.S. of biological warfare. Still have bases.
IRAN/l953/Covert/CIA overthrows democratically elected socialist premier, installs Shah as dictator.
GUATEMALA/l954/Command operation, bombing, nuclear threat/CIA directs exile invasion after new gov't nationalizes U.S. companies' lands; bombers based in Nicaragua.
LEBANON/l958/Troops, naval/U.S. Marine occupation against rebels.
PANAMA/1958/Troops/Flag protests erupt into confrontation.
VIETNAM/l960-75/Troops, naval, bombing, nuclear threats/Fought South Vietnamese revolt & North Vietnam during the Vietnamese civil war; over two million Vietnamese casualties in longest U.S. war; atomic bomb threats in l968 and l969.
LAOS/1961/Covert/Military buildup during guerrilla war.
PANAMA/l964/Troops/Panamanians shot for urging canal's return.
INDONESIA/l965/Covert/One million-plus killed in CIA-assisted army coup. CIA provides assassination lists to military, plus weapons.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC/1965-66/Troops, bombing/U.S. Marines land during election campaign.
GUATEMALA/l966-67/Covert/Green Berets intervene against rebels.
CAMBODIA/l969-75/Bombing, troops, naval/Up to 2 million killed in decade during/ after U.S. invasion of Cambodia and bombing, starvation, and political chaos.
OMAN/l970/Covert/U.S. directs Iranian marine invasion to intervene in Omani civil war.
LAOS/l971-73/Command operation, bombing/U.S. directs South Vietnamese invasion; "carpet-bombs" countryside.
CHILE/1973/Covert/CIA funds and backs coup ousts democratically-elected Marxist president and installs brutal military dictatorship.
CAMBODIA/l975/Troops, bombing/Intervenes to seize captured ship, 28 die in copter crash.
IRAN/l980/Troops, nuclear threat, aborted bombing/Raid to rescue Embassy hostages; 8 troops die in copter-plane crash. Soviets warned not to get involved in revolution.
LIBYA/l981/Naval jets/Two Libyan jets shot down in maneuvers.
EL SALVADOR/l981-?/Covert/U.S. mercenaries, military advisors, overflights aid anti- rebel war.
NICARAGUA/l981-90/Covert, naval/CIA funds, trains, equips and directs exile (Contra) invasions, plants harbor mines against revolution.
HONDURAS/l982-?/Troops/Maneuvers, help build bases near borders to intimidate Nicaragua.
LEBANON/l982-84/Naval, bombing, troops/Marines expel PLO and back Christian Phalangists, Navy bombs and shells Muslim positions.
GRENADA/l983-84/Troops, bombing/Invasion four years after socialist revolution. U.S. installs puppet government.
LIBYA/l986/Bombing, naval/Air strikes try to topple nationalist gov't.
BOLIVIA/1987/Troops/Coast Guard and Army assists raids on cocaine region.
IRAN/l987-88/Naval, bombing/US intervenes on side of Iraq in Gulf War.
LIBYA/1989/Naval jets/Two Libyan jets shot down.
PANAMA/1989-?/Troops, bombing/Nationalist government ousted by invasion. U.S. installs puppet government and refuses to hold new elections.
LIBERIA/1990-?/Troops/Foreigners evacuated during civil war; troops protect CIA communications/listening post.
SAUDI ARABIA/1990-?/Troops, jets/Iraq countered after invading Kuwait. Forces also in Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Israel.
IRAQ/1990-?/Naval, bombing, troops/Blockade of Iraqi and Jordanian ports; large-scale destruction of Iraqi military.
KUWAIT/1991-?/Naval, bombing, troops/Attacks on Iraqi military; effort to return dictatorial royal family to throne.
...A few years ago the Los Angeles Times carried a special report on the rainforests of Borneo in the South Pacific. By their own testimony, the people there lived contented lives. They hunted, fished, and raised food in their jungle orchards and groves. But their entire way of life was ruthlessly wiped out by a few giant companies that destroyed the rainforest in order to harvest the hardwood for quick profits. Their lands were turned into ecological disaster areas and they themselves were transformed into disfranchised shantytown dwellers, forced to work for subsistence wages--when fortunate enough to find employment.
North American and European corporations have acquired control of more than three-fourths of the known mineral resources of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. But the pursuit of natural resources is not the only reason for capitalist overseas expansion. There is the additional need to cut production costs and maximize profits by investing in countries with cheaper labor markets. U.S. corporate foreign investment grew 84 percent from 1985 to 1990, the most dramatic increase being in cheap-labor countries like South Korea, Taiwan, Spain, and Singapore.
Because of low wages, low taxes, nonexistent work benefits, weak labor unions, and nonexistent occupational and environmental protections, U.S. corporate profit rates in the Third World are 50 percent greater than in developed countries. Citibank, one of the largest U.S. firms, earns about 75 percent of its profits from overseas operations. While profit margins at home sometimes have had a sluggish growth, earnings abroad have continued to rise dramatically, fostering the development of what has become known as the multinational or transnational corporation. Today some four hundred transnational companies control about 80 percent of the capital assets of the global free market and are extending their grasp into the ex-communist countries of Eastern Europe.
Responsibility of all the references in that list cannot be laid at the feet of the United States. And the litney of interventions you site may have saved millions of lives as well.
The worst violation is to blame the US for the Khmer Rouge
"The Khmer Rouge subsequently established the state of Democratic Kampuchea, and instituted what was arguably the most radical experiment in social engineering of the twentieth century. In an effort to "purify" the "Khmer race" and create an absolutely classless utopian society, the Khmer Rouge began by emptying all Cambodian urban centers of their population, abolishing banking, finance and currency, outlawing all religions, reorganizing traditional kinship systems into a communal order, and eliminating private property so completely that even personal hygiene supples were communal."
Source: Yale University
The Khmer were Communist. Looks like owning your own toothbrush was considered too bourgeois for them.
You consider the war in Afghanistan an "intervention?" Seems to me, the United States was the victim of "intervention" on Sept. 11.
And since US "interventions" appear to never accomplish anything positive, I would assume you were also against the crippliing sanctions done privately on South Africa during Apartheid.
The severity of Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia played a major role in pushing the Khmer Rouge to a mad extremism, as "The Killing Fields" helped reveal to a mass audience.
As I look at the list I posted, I note the multiple times we intervened in China.
Imagine the furor that would arise if China, or any nation, for that matter, unequivocally intervened in our domestic, internal affairs just once.
Heck, the Right made a monstrous issue out of an allegation that Chinese money may have been used in a U.S. political campaign.
That's a hugely different thing than having Chinese troops posted all over our country to "protect" their interests, isn't it?
And yet that's exactly what our soldiers did in China.
Former Marine Corps Commandant Smedley Butler admitted that his role in enforcing Standard Oil's interest in China (and other corporate interests throughout Central America and the Caribbean) amounted to little more than "racketeering".
When there's a clear, ongoing record of the U.S. having become associated in millions of minds around the world with gangsterism, racketeering, oppression, repression -- a denial of the very independence and freedom we profess to champion -- it's easy to see why hatefilled terrorism against us should arise.
It amazes me that some will accept such a low and unethical standard for what America represents.
What kind of patriotism is it that settles for so much less than the best that our nation can and should be?
The South Africans themselves asked for such a boycott, and I remember how hard Randall Robinson had to push -- to practically twist arms -- to get ANY compliance with that boycott.
How to commemorate the six-month anniversary of 9/11?
With one final, obligatory effort to get folks to see why it happened, and why the ultimate responsibility for that day's horrors doesn't lie overseas, with "evil-doers", but within our own sordid history.
I wrote the following poem in the mid '70s, and it is quite prophetic, if I do say so myself.
AMERICAN PARADE
I am the ghost of a husband and father/who died in defense when the cavalry came/They slaughtered our women and butchered our babies/the "Indians'" blood is your permanent shame.
And we are the migrants who worked in your orchards/who lived on the average just forty-nine years/We suffered in squalor and pleaded for justice/but all we received were your crocodile tears.
And we are the martyrs of Attica prison/of Kent State and Jackson, of Watts and Detroit/survived by the angry-eyed unemployed workers/the ones you so cruelly rip-off and exploit.
And we are the victims of napalm and phosphorus/the yellow-skinned humans you murdered to save/from "communist heathens" who never once harmed us/We speak to you now from a rice-paddy grave.
So strike up the band and deliver your speeches/Believe all your lies if it eases your mind/But don't you dare stop as you march along Main Street/for the truth is relentlessly marching behind.
The ghost-memory and the solidarity of those whom we've damned is long and strong.
And there definitely is such a thing as karma, affecting not just individuals and their actions, but those of societies, systems, and nations as well.
I watched the CBS presentation of 9/11 last night. Heart-rending and powerful.
But it, and the manipulated events that we'll witness today, only make us more resentful toward outsiders, rather than remedial about our own abundant and longstanding, global sins...the underlying basis for spreading hatred against us.
So there's no point in continuing to post about this issue, or anything else.
America is trapped and doomed by its own prideful inability to take responsibility for its lethally counter-productive wrongs. We can't even admit them, like some sad drunk who won't acknowledge he's an alcoholic.
Rome went down for the same reason.
It's over.
So, I'll just walk away and vanish in the smokey middle distance.
May you know some small semblance of peace in your troubled times ahead.
America is trapped and doomed by its own prideful inability to take responsibility for its lethally counter-productive wrongs. We can't even admit them, like some sad drunk who won't acknowledge he's an alcoholic.
The fact is that in a pluralistic society, differing points of view are to be expected, and rarely does everyone agree on anything. How profound!
The world will revolve as it should and fate will lead us to whatever finality we are to meet, despite the selfish whinings of any one ideal, or any one person's belief system. It is the height of hypocrasy and self-seeking angrandisement to imagine that "I", have the answers and "YOU", do not, to any topic "or any purpose under heaven".
Not all fold. If everyone had that attitude there would be no politics or religion. People would just sit at home and twiddle their thumbs.
"There a radio was playing music, and the music was neither rock nor rap. It was Diana Krall, the jazz singer, elegantly rendering ``The Look of Love.''
``Beauty,'' Teachout wrote in early January, ``is becoming fashionable again.''"
Diana Krall has done better stuff than that, in my opinion.
Clarence Thomas was accused of being guilty of anything. That's the popular misconception. He wasn't accused of sexual harrassment.
Anita Hill said he was a jerk, who shouldn't be on the Supreme Court.
That should have taken place behind closed doors, but it got leaked. It was politics, and all's fair in that, but if you want to question Thomas, question he qualifications going into the job. That's entirely fair, because they were thin.
In all the years of so-called harassment, she never said a word or filed a complaint. She followed him from job to job. It was only when he was on the verge of being confirmed that she came forward, at the urging of others. Her accusations have not been confirmed and she has been exposed as a liar. Yet she has been raised up as some sort of victim. It's a farce and the people who supported her should be ashamed. They aren't, however, because black females in academic positions are automatically assumed to be blameless regardless of their words or actions.
As all of us on the "Left", who watched the Clinton Presidency closely always knew, the right DID pose a threat to not only the Clintons, but to Anita Hill as well...And the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" that Hillary spoke of, has now been acknowledged as a Real Thing, perpetrated on we the citizens by a few, with the backing of a man named Richard Mellon Scaife, A Traitor to America.
If anyone was a traitor it was Clinton. As for conspiracy it was just politics. Clinton's own actions opened the door for the attacks. Anita Hill was a liar.
David Brock's book, "Blinded by The Right", is now out and it is a scathing look into the conspiracy that WAS the Clinton investigations and allegations and impeachment proceedings and all because of the money that a madman along the lines of RASH Lymphnode could pump into conservative coffers and of one dilusional young "almost" journalist, David Brock.
Brock has proved himself a liar. So which lie are you supposed to believe?
If you didn't see him trash the people who cost us millions in wasted time chasing Clinton, as he appeared this morning on the "Today Show", you missed a most interesting show.(Of course, he will now be crucified by those whom he slept with for the last 10 years...as they did when he apologized to Clinton for lying about him). Clinton lied under oath. He committed a crime going after him was legitmate. If the liberals had an ounce of morality they would at least admit that.
I despise Clinton, but I think the Repubs put their foot in it big time going after him for something most people in his situation would have done. There is no doubt in my mind that they could and should have found REAL issues on which to impeach him.
Also... What things besides his lying about a B-Job were there, that were impeachable offenses?
When is it O.K to lie under oath ? Please explain. When you are the top legal official in the land and sworn to uphold the constitution, Lying under oath is enough, it's the foundation of our legal system. Some go to jail for it, others get offices at 400,000 paid by the taxpayer and hit the lectuture circut. Also there was his admission that he also gave misleading testimony as well. But then again it depends on what the word is, is. Personally I don't care what he did with his Cigars and with whom, many have and do have affairs I think it's wrong but it doesn't hurt me. But the thing he happened to lie under oath about just so happened to be sex. in surveys it shows most people lie about money as well as sex. So is that o.k if he were to lie about money under oath too just because everyone does it ? Tell that to the people at Enron. Remember, it wasn't the act that fried Nixon it was the cover up. If he had come out and said hey they did this and I didn't know about it and it's wrong he would have taken many political lumps but probably stayed in office for the rest of his term. But he covered it up. And resigned, as he should have. I would defend niether of them. Funny how some still do because he was their "guy" They both broke the law, plain and simple. the difference is, most won't defend what Nixon did nor should they, too bad we can't say the same for others. Again I'll ask, when is it O.K to lie under oath?
"The Repubs. had a vendetta for the guy and they got hurt, not him."
I don't know how Clinton could have gotten hurt any worse, except by being convicted and thrown out.
There are going to be people who will always contend that "justice wasn't served" during impeachment. But no amount of "justice" will ever satsify that goup. If they're still bitterly stewing about it, justice isn't what they're after.
The man was impeached. What the hell do they want?
"recognizing the requirement for some concession, and shared movement toward addressing each other's grievances. "
So who does the United States negotiate with? A dialogue with Al Qaeda? How about the Palistinians? Didn't the world see how much Arafat was interested in peace after Camp David. That was his MOMENT. He could have wrote himself into history.
Concessions mean , you're playing right into their hands. Start making concessions, you guarantee another atrocious attack on US soil.
Because you have told the enemies of the US that such a practice will produce results.
What concessions should the United States be prepared to make? Shake hands with killers over the bodies of the dead in New York?
You are also making a broad assumption that parties on the other side are even interested in negotiation. That's not their stated intent.
Remember, we're infidels.
Those sneaky fundamentalist bastards, some things just don't change.
LOL!
I AM an "infidel".
I have boxer shorts with figures of little, fat, grinning Christians on them.
Considering all those angry Islamics running around possessing rocket propelled grenades, I'd better get rid of them.
Plus my "white devil" pajamas.
Bad joke...
Please forgive me, all gods!
But seriously, Rick:
What the world needs now is love.
Not just for some, but for everyone.
Plus forbearance.
And the capacity to turn the other cheek.
The events of the past week, especially of the last two days, show the utter, practical untenability and moral bankruptcy of the revenge/retalitaion fixation in our conflicting political, deological and religious affairs.
Is national pride, say, more important to try to uphold than humanity's civilized existence, which will perhaps be permanently undermined -- with the ultimate extinction of the species itself a distinct possibility -- if we persist in this tit-for-tat, hardline escalation?
This is what happens when you demonize your opponent to the extent that they're rendered considerably less than human in the propagandized public eye.
For fear of showing weakness, dialogue and concessions are deferred. You can't talk to a monster, right?
Well, from their side, for reasons that seem just as compelling to them as ours do to us, they see us as monsters as well.
Not just principalities and powers, and movements, but individuals in all walks of life...need to mellow out.
It's easy to be hard.
But we must speak softly now, for the hour is growing late.
I can't help but think that the reason why intelligent life has never been found in the universe is not that it never actually existed, but that it once did -- and some super-armed, vengeful intractability resulted in a war that blew everyone away.
Universal existence could be God's little experiment, maybe within a fish-tank style glass enclosure on the Big Guy's coffee table.
And He gets up each day to see if, finally, anything good has come of it.
But He invariably finds that nobody has gotten it right.
And He walks away muttering...
Dennis:
"This is what happens when you demonize your opponent to the extent that they're rendered considerably less than human in the propagandized public eye."
Stories like this in the New York Times have been criticized as propaganda, too.
"At first, New York scared him. Everything seemed so big, so fast, so tough.
"But it didn't take long for Steve Wong -- who came from Hong Kong in 1996 on a temporary assignment with March & McLennan -- to stop feeling like a stranger.
"'Steve loved it here,"' said his wife, See See. "'He could learn more here, see more, visit more different places, talk to more different people.
"Mr. Wong, 34, and his wife rented an apartment in Jersey City, had a baby girl, Jacqueline, and decided that their future was in America. He dreamed that one day Jacqueline would go to an American college and he would join her there to get his PhD in philosophy. Then he planned to retire from Wall Street and teach others how to define what is important in life.
"Mr. Wong already had clear sense of how to rank life's offerings. He and his family traveled widely, read voraciously, visited every museum, zoo, and historic place they could find. He hated being away from his family, but he went to Scotland for his M.B.A. because of the British pedigree of his Hong Kong education was recognized there. During his year away he learned to to play piano and wear a kilt.
"'Steve took advantage of all the business, cultural and personal growth opportunities that life afforded him,'" said Clyde Fritz, a friend and colleague. '"He had his priorities aligned properly.'
"Later this month, Mr. Fritz, Mrs. Wong and Jacqueline will fly to Edinburgh to pick up Mr. Wong's degree. "
Other names in the Portraits of Grief: Juan Ortega Campos, 32; Thomas A. Hobbs, 41; Jack Andreacchio, 52; Eric Allen (Fireman), 44; James Gadiel, 23; Christopher Clarke, 34; Edward Geraghity (Fireman), 45; Robert Parro (Fireman) 35; Paul Grier, 36; Suzanne Youmans, 60; Sean Schielke, 27; Carlos Cortes, 57; John Pauolillo (Fireman), 51.
If you want to test your forebearance, speak all the names aloud.
Now what the heck happened in Operation Anaconda?!
A large part of our troops have been withdrawn/repositioned as a major rift is reported to have developed between our Afghan allies.
Or could it just be a disinformation trick to dupe the al-Qaida?
That list is a heartwrenching one, Rick, but I doubt it would exist but for another list -- the chronicle of our self-serving interventions in others' affairs:
PHILIPPINES/l898-1910(-?)/Naval, troops/Seized from Spain, U.S. troops kill 600,000 Filipinos.
CUBA/l898-1902(-?)/Naval, troops/Seized from Spain, U.S. still illegally holds Navy base there over Cuban objections.
PANAMA/1901-03(-?)/Naval, troops/Broke off from Colombia in a U.S. organized 'rebellion', U.S. annexes Canal Zone.
HONDURAS/l903/Troops/U.S. Marines intervene in revolution.
DOMINICAN REP./1903-04/Troops/U.S. business interests protected in Revolution.
KOREA/1904-05/Troops/U.S. Marines land in Russo-Japanese War.
CUBA/1906-09/Troops/U.S. Marines land in democratic election.
NICARAGUA/1907/Troops/"Dollar Diplomacy" protectorate (psuedo- colony) set up.
HONDURAS/l907/Troops/U.S. Marines land during war with Nicaragua.
PANAMA/l908/Troops/U.S. Marines intervene in election contest.
NICARAGUA/l9l0/Troops/U.S. Marines land in Bluefields and Corinto.
HONDURAS/1911/Troops/U.S. business interests protected in civil war.
CHINA/1911-41/Naval, troops/Continuous occupation with flare-ups
CUBA/1912/Troops/U.S. business interests protected in Havana.
PANAMA/l9l2/Troops/U.S. Marines land during heated election.
HONDURAS/l9l2/Troops/Marines protect U.S. economic interests.
NICARAGUA/1912-33/Troops, bombing/20-year occupation, fought guerrillas.
MEXICO/l9l3/Naval/Americans evacuated during revolution.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC/1914/Naval/Fight with rebels over Santo Domingo.
MEXICO/1914-18/Naval, troops/Series of interventions against Mexican nationalists.
HAITI/1914-34/Troops, bombing/19-year occupation after revolts.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC/1916-24/Troops/8-year U.S. Marine occupation.
CUBA/1917-33/Troops/Military occupation, U.S. declares Cuba an economic protectorate (psuedo-colony).
USSR/1918-22/Naval, troops/Five landings to fight Bolsheviks in effort to overthrow the fledgling socialist government.
PANAMA/1918-20/Troops/"Police duty" during unrest after elections.
HONDURAS/l9l9/Troops/U.S. Marines land during election campaign.
GUATEMALA/1920/Troops/2-week intervention against unionists.
TURKEY/1922/Troops/U.S. fought nationalists in Smyrna.
CHINA/1922-27/Naval, troops/Deployment during nationalist revolt.
HONDURAS/1924-25/Troops/Landed twice during election strife.
PANAMA/1925/Troops/U.S. Marines suppress general strike.
CHINA/l928-34/Troops/U.S. Marines stationed throughout the country.
EL SALVADOR/l932/Naval/Warships sent during Marti revolt.
KOREA/l951-53(-?)/Troops, naval, bombing, nuclear threats/U.S.& South Korea fight China & North Korea to stalemate; A-bomb threat in l950, and against China in l953. China accuses U.S. of biological warfare. Still have bases.
IRAN/l953/Covert/CIA overthrows democratically elected socialist premier, installs Shah as dictator.
GUATEMALA/l954/Command operation, bombing, nuclear threat/CIA directs exile invasion after new gov't nationalizes U.S. companies' lands; bombers based in Nicaragua.
LEBANON/l958/Troops, naval/U.S. Marine occupation against rebels.
PANAMA/1958/Troops/Flag protests erupt into confrontation.
VIETNAM/l960-75/Troops, naval, bombing, nuclear threats/Fought South Vietnamese revolt & North Vietnam during the Vietnamese civil war; over two million Vietnamese casualties in longest U.S. war; atomic bomb threats in l968 and l969.
LAOS/1961/Covert/Military buildup during guerrilla war.
CUBA/l961/Covert/CIA-directed exile invasion fails.
PANAMA/l964/Troops/Panamanians shot for urging canal's return.
INDONESIA/l965/Covert/One million-plus killed in CIA-assisted army coup. CIA provides assassination lists to military, plus weapons.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC/1965-66/Troops, bombing/U.S. Marines land during election campaign.
GUATEMALA/l966-67/Covert/Green Berets intervene against rebels.
CAMBODIA/l969-75/Bombing, troops, naval/Up to 2 million killed in decade during/ after U.S. invasion of Cambodia and bombing, starvation, and political chaos.
OMAN/l970/Covert/U.S. directs Iranian marine invasion to intervene in Omani civil war.
LAOS/l971-73/Command operation, bombing/U.S. directs South Vietnamese invasion; "carpet-bombs" countryside.
CHILE/1973/Covert/CIA funds and backs coup ousts democratically-elected Marxist president and installs brutal military dictatorship.
CAMBODIA/l975/Troops, bombing/Intervenes to seize captured ship, 28 die in copter crash.
IRAN/l980/Troops, nuclear threat, aborted bombing/Raid to rescue Embassy hostages; 8 troops die in copter-plane crash. Soviets warned not to get involved in revolution.
LIBYA/l981/Naval jets/Two Libyan jets shot down in maneuvers.
EL SALVADOR/l981-?/Covert/U.S. mercenaries, military advisors, overflights aid anti- rebel war.
NICARAGUA/l981-90/Covert, naval/CIA funds, trains, equips and directs exile (Contra) invasions, plants harbor mines against revolution.
HONDURAS/l982-?/Troops/Maneuvers, help build bases near borders to intimidate Nicaragua.
LEBANON/l982-84/Naval, bombing, troops/Marines expel PLO and back Christian Phalangists, Navy bombs and shells Muslim positions.
GRENADA/l983-84/Troops, bombing/Invasion four years after socialist revolution. U.S. installs puppet government.
LIBYA/l986/Bombing, naval/Air strikes try to topple nationalist gov't.
BOLIVIA/1987/Troops/Coast Guard and Army assists raids on cocaine region.
IRAN/l987-88/Naval, bombing/US intervenes on side of Iraq in Gulf War.
LIBYA/1989/Naval jets/Two Libyan jets shot down.
PANAMA/1989-?/Troops, bombing/Nationalist government ousted by invasion. U.S. installs puppet government and refuses to hold new elections.
LIBERIA/1990-?/Troops/Foreigners evacuated during civil war; troops protect CIA communications/listening post.
SAUDI ARABIA/1990-?/Troops, jets/Iraq countered after invading Kuwait. Forces also in Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Israel.
IRAQ/1990-?/Naval, bombing, troops/Blockade of Iraqi and Jordanian ports; large-scale destruction of Iraqi military.
KUWAIT/1991-?/Naval, bombing, troops/Attacks on Iraqi military; effort to return dictatorial royal family to throne.
http://www.michaelparenti.org/Imperialism101.html
...A few years ago the Los Angeles Times carried a special report on the rainforests of Borneo in the South Pacific. By their own testimony, the people there lived contented lives. They hunted, fished, and raised food in their jungle orchards and groves. But their entire way of life was ruthlessly wiped out by a few giant companies that destroyed the rainforest in order to harvest the hardwood for quick profits. Their lands were turned into ecological disaster areas and they themselves were transformed into disfranchised shantytown dwellers, forced to work for subsistence wages--when fortunate enough to find employment.
North American and European corporations have acquired control of more than three-fourths of the known mineral resources of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. But the pursuit of natural resources is not the only reason for capitalist overseas expansion. There is the additional need to cut production costs and maximize profits by investing in countries with cheaper labor markets. U.S. corporate foreign investment grew 84 percent from 1985 to 1990, the most dramatic increase being in cheap-labor countries like South Korea, Taiwan, Spain, and Singapore.
Because of low wages, low taxes, nonexistent work benefits, weak labor unions, and nonexistent occupational and environmental protections, U.S. corporate profit rates in the Third World are 50 percent greater than in developed countries. Citibank, one of the largest U.S. firms, earns about 75 percent of its profits from overseas operations. While profit margins at home sometimes have had a sluggish growth, earnings abroad have continued to rise dramatically, fostering the development of what has become known as the multinational or transnational corporation. Today some four hundred transnational companies control about 80 percent of the capital assets of the global free market and are extending their grasp into the ex-communist countries of Eastern Europe.
All that just might piss someone off enough to become a...terrorist.
Dennis:
Responsibility of all the references in that list cannot be laid at the feet of the United States. And the litney of interventions you site may have saved millions of lives as well.
The worst violation is to blame the US for the Khmer Rouge
"The Khmer Rouge subsequently established the state of Democratic Kampuchea, and instituted what was arguably the most radical experiment in social engineering of the twentieth century. In an effort to "purify" the "Khmer race" and create an absolutely classless utopian society, the Khmer Rouge began by emptying all Cambodian urban centers of their population, abolishing banking, finance and currency, outlawing all religions, reorganizing traditional kinship systems into a communal order, and eliminating private property so completely that even personal hygiene supples were communal."
Source: Yale University
The Khmer were Communist. Looks like owning your own toothbrush was considered too bourgeois for them.
You consider the war in Afghanistan an "intervention?" Seems to me, the United States was the victim of "intervention" on Sept. 11.
And since US "interventions" appear to never accomplish anything positive, I would assume you were also against the crippliing sanctions done privately on South Africa during Apartheid.
The severity of Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia played a major role in pushing the Khmer Rouge to a mad extremism, as "The Killing Fields" helped reveal to a mass audience.
As I look at the list I posted, I note the multiple times we intervened in China.
Imagine the furor that would arise if China, or any nation, for that matter, unequivocally intervened in our domestic, internal affairs just once.
Heck, the Right made a monstrous issue out of an allegation that Chinese money may have been used in a U.S. political campaign.
That's a hugely different thing than having Chinese troops posted all over our country to "protect" their interests, isn't it?
And yet that's exactly what our soldiers did in China.
Former Marine Corps Commandant Smedley Butler admitted that his role in enforcing Standard Oil's interest in China (and other corporate interests throughout Central America and the Caribbean) amounted to little more than "racketeering".
When there's a clear, ongoing record of the U.S. having become associated in millions of minds around the world with gangsterism, racketeering, oppression, repression -- a denial of the very independence and freedom we profess to champion -- it's easy to see why hatefilled terrorism against us should arise.
It amazes me that some will accept such a low and unethical standard for what America represents.
What kind of patriotism is it that settles for so much less than the best that our nation can and should be?
The South Africans themselves asked for such a boycott, and I remember how hard Randall Robinson had to push -- to practically twist arms -- to get ANY compliance with that boycott.
But sanctions tend to filter down to the regular people in negative ways, as you point out with iraq on a pretty regular basis.
Leadership tends to dig in the heels.
Ask a South African in Soweto what the effect of the sanctions were, you might get an answer you don't expect.
I thought one of the heros of that boycott was Paul Simon, who said, boycott be damned. I want to bring the music of South Africa to the world.
And he took it in the neck for it.
THE LAST MUSINGS
How to commemorate the six-month anniversary of 9/11?
With one final, obligatory effort to get folks to see why it happened, and why the ultimate responsibility for that day's horrors doesn't lie overseas, with "evil-doers", but within our own sordid history.
I wrote the following poem in the mid '70s, and it is quite prophetic, if I do say so myself.
AMERICAN PARADE
I am the ghost of a husband and father/who died in defense when the cavalry came/They slaughtered our women and butchered our babies/the "Indians'" blood is your permanent shame.
And we are the migrants who worked in your orchards/who lived on the average just forty-nine years/We suffered in squalor and pleaded for justice/but all we received were your crocodile tears.
And we are the martyrs of Attica prison/of Kent State and Jackson, of Watts and Detroit/survived by the angry-eyed unemployed workers/the ones you so cruelly rip-off and exploit.
And we are the victims of napalm and phosphorus/the yellow-skinned humans you murdered to save/from "communist heathens" who never once harmed us/We speak to you now from a rice-paddy grave.
So strike up the band and deliver your speeches/Believe all your lies if it eases your mind/But don't you dare stop as you march along Main Street/for the truth is relentlessly marching behind.
The ghost-memory and the solidarity of those whom we've damned is long and strong.
And there definitely is such a thing as karma, affecting not just individuals and their actions, but those of societies, systems, and nations as well.
I watched the CBS presentation of 9/11 last night. Heart-rending and powerful.
But it, and the manipulated events that we'll witness today, only make us more resentful toward outsiders, rather than remedial about our own abundant and longstanding, global sins...the underlying basis for spreading hatred against us.
So there's no point in continuing to post about this issue, or anything else.
America is trapped and doomed by its own prideful inability to take responsibility for its lethally counter-productive wrongs. We can't even admit them, like some sad drunk who won't acknowledge he's an alcoholic.
Rome went down for the same reason.
It's over.
So, I'll just walk away and vanish in the smokey middle distance.
May you know some small semblance of peace in your troubled times ahead.
Good-bye.
It would be sad to see you go, Dennis.
Sincerity and conviction of your variety is rare.
Lord knows you won't find that from me. :-)
The sky is falling.
Not at all the clouds are clearing.
America is trapped and doomed by its own prideful inability to take responsibility for its lethally counter-productive wrongs. We can't even admit them, like some sad drunk who won't acknowledge he's an alcoholic.
Utter nonsense.
Multiculturalism assails
Common sense until it fails:
Screeners x-ray granny
And pat down the nanny,
But ignore young Arab males.
— F.R. Duplantier
Bill Fold.
'Bill - Fold' 3/12/02 3:09am
Amen on the above post sir.
Good poem Wolvie, funny but sad all at the same time.
You know Lincoln didn't become president until March 4, 1861, don't you fold?
These have been six difficult months for diversity-mongers who preach that America is a mere ``mosaic''--coagulated groups rather than united individuals. And difficult months for the ``everything is just a matter of opinion'' chorus. These have been good months.
The fact is that in a pluralistic society, differing points of view are to be expected, and rarely does everyone agree on anything. How profound!
The world will revolve as it should and fate will lead us to whatever finality we are to meet, despite the selfish whinings of any one ideal, or any one person's belief system. It is the height of hypocrasy and self-seeking angrandisement to imagine that "I", have the answers and "YOU", do not, to any topic "or any purpose under heaven".
Not all fold. If everyone had that attitude there would be no politics or religion. People would just sit at home and twiddle their thumbs.
Jethro,
He said April 1861 didn't he ? Isn't April after March, hence he would have been President in April 1861 since he was president on March 4th ?
"There a radio was playing music, and the music was neither rock nor rap. It was Diana Krall, the jazz singer, elegantly rendering ``The Look of Love.''
``Beauty,'' Teachout wrote in early January, ``is becoming fashionable again.''"
Diana Krall has done better stuff than that, in my opinion.
He made it sound like that it took Lincoln a long time to call up troops. I just wanted to point out it wasn't very long.
You wouldn't recognize the obvious if it slapped you upside your head.
When the committee acts on Thursday, Pickering will likely swing amid unfounded charges of racial insensitivity. The anti-Pickering offensive is so vicious that even some liberals are crying "foul."
Sadly, the Timm Reids and Barbara Wellers on the Right are too few and far between, especially considering the legions of PC commissars in school systems, local and state governments, news organizations, trade and industry associations, labor unions, the federal bureaucracy and in Congress, all eager to gut the First Amendment rights of everybody who disagrees with them.
"Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" that Hillary spoke of, has now been acknowledged as a Real Thing"
Not vast, but narrow and certainly existant.
What can Clarance Thomas can't be incriminated of? Because he appears guilty of little more than peculiar weekend movie viewing.
Clarence Thomas was accused of being guilty of anything. That's the popular misconception. He wasn't accused of sexual harrassment.
Anita Hill said he was a jerk, who shouldn't be on the Supreme Court.
That should have taken place behind closed doors, but it got leaked. It was politics, and all's fair in that, but if you want to question Thomas, question he qualifications going into the job. That's entirely fair, because they were thin.
She said he asked her out a couple times and made off-color remarks in meetings and talked about watching porn films.
Harrassment got spun into the story.
I'll gladly back off if I'm wrong, but I don't think so.
It wasn't a trial, Bill.
It turned into a spectacle, not a trial.
I read it too. She didn't say he harrassed her. And only she can say that for certain, not me or you.
In all the years of so-called harassment, she never said a word or filed a complaint. She followed him from job to job. It was only when he was on the verge of being confirmed that she came forward, at the urging of others. Her accusations have not been confirmed and she has been exposed as a liar. Yet she has been raised up as some sort of victim. It's a farce and the people who supported her should be ashamed. They aren't, however, because black females in academic positions are automatically assumed to be blameless regardless of their words or actions.
"Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" that Hillary spoke of, has now been acknowledged as a Real Thing"
Not vast, but narrow and certainly existant.
You bet! We even have a secret handshake, decoder ring, black helicopters and a logo.
You're not a member, Dan.
You're not powerful enough.
As all of us on the "Left", who watched the Clinton Presidency closely always knew, the right DID pose a threat to not only the Clintons, but to Anita Hill as well...And the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" that Hillary spoke of, has now been acknowledged as a Real Thing, perpetrated on we the citizens by a few, with the backing of a man named Richard Mellon Scaife, A Traitor to America.
If anyone was a traitor it was Clinton. As for conspiracy it was just politics. Clinton's own actions opened the door for the attacks. Anita Hill was a liar.
David Brock's book, "Blinded by The Right", is now out and it is a scathing look into the conspiracy that WAS the Clinton investigations and allegations and impeachment proceedings and all because of the money that a madman along the lines of RASH Lymphnode could pump into conservative coffers and of one dilusional young "almost" journalist, David Brock.
Brock has proved himself a liar. So which lie are you supposed to believe?
If you didn't see him trash the people who cost us millions in wasted time chasing Clinton, as he appeared this morning on the "Today Show", you missed a most interesting show.(Of course, he will now be crucified by those whom he slept with for the last 10 years...as they did when he apologized to Clinton for lying about him). Clinton lied under oath. He committed a crime going after him was legitmate. If the liberals had an ounce of morality they would at least admit that.
I despise Clinton, but I think the Repubs put their foot in it big time going after him for something most people in his situation would have done. There is no doubt in my mind that they could and should have found REAL issues on which to impeach him.
I despise Clinton, but I think the Repubs put their foot in it big time going after him for something most people in his situation would have done.
Most people aren't the preident and sworn to uphold the laws of the country.
I agree. I just think that he did worse things, and the Republicans had to have seen the pitfalls in what they did.
Most people aren't the preident and sworn to uphold the laws of the country.
Most people who aren't President and had a jackal like Starr after him wouldn't have been questioned about such things in the first place.
I disagree. Remember though the first perjury happened in the civil suit.
OK, I'll do some digging and get back to you on this, Bill.
When is it O.K to lie under oath ? Please explain.
When you are the top legal official in the land and sworn to uphold the constitution, Lying under oath is enough, it's the foundation of our legal system. Some go to jail for it, others get offices at 400,000 paid by the taxpayer and hit the lectuture circut. Also there was his admission that he also gave misleading testimony as well. But then again it depends on what the word is, is. Personally I don't care what he did with his Cigars and with whom, many have and do have affairs I think it's wrong but it doesn't hurt me. But the thing he happened to lie under oath about just so happened to be sex. in surveys it shows most people lie about money as well as sex. So is that o.k if he were to lie about money under oath too just because everyone does it ? Tell that to the people at Enron. Remember, it wasn't the act that fried Nixon it was the cover up. If he had come out and said hey they did this and I didn't know about it and it's wrong he would have taken many political lumps but probably stayed in office for the rest of his term. But he covered it up. And resigned, as he should have. I would defend niether of them. Funny how some still do because he was their "guy" They both broke the law, plain and simple. the difference is, most won't defend what Nixon did nor should they, too bad we can't say the same for others.
Again I'll ask, when is it O.K to lie under oath?
"The Repubs. had a vendetta for the guy and they got hurt, not him."
I don't know how Clinton could have gotten hurt any worse, except by being convicted and thrown out.
There are going to be people who will always contend that "justice wasn't served" during impeachment. But no amount of "justice" will ever satsify that goup. If they're still bitterly stewing about it, justice isn't what they're after.
The man was impeached. What the hell do they want?
Pagination