reply to post by pexx421
I'm going to try to stop with the "quote" "reply" "quote" "reply" format I've been using. That's my usual way, but my posts are running to
excess, and I'm sure are tiresome to read, so I'll try a different route.
You mention Unocal specifically, and I appreciate that. it gives me a target to boycott. I've not seen any specific threats they made against the
Taliban, but I'll dig into it.
For your ID of the fledgling democracies, and Nelson Mandela in particular, I can only say that I never had any great love for the man, as I always
saw him, and his organization, as in the enemy camp, but not a specific threat against the US, nor am I aware of any US actions against him. I was
also under the impression that he was the guerrilla faction, not the government faction (to be overthrown as 'legitimate'), and that his guerrillas
eventually won, placing him in power - so I've always thought his example was quite the opposite from a "successful US overthrow". To be painfully
honest, I've never differentiated him from Robert Mugabe, and have always seen them as two peas from the same pod. Africa is a strange place, and
perhaps harder to make sense of than the middle east. Lots of good mercenary stomping ground for several years, because everyone is constantly trying
to overthrow everyone else, but basically a dangerous and non-sensical place. The way folks suffer there will rip the heart right out of you if
you've got one to begin with, yet it keeps going on, and has forever in the past, even beyond the era of colonialism. Even the muslims took advantage
of the place - that's how the slave traders got slaves to trade to begin with, from islamic exploitation of the natives.
I'm not sure what angle you're approaching MKULTRA from, but in my view it was illegal because of 1) operations conducted WITHIN the US (a big fat
no-no for CIA) and 2) the percentage of subjects who were not given the opportunity for informed consent or refusal. Also, I'm unclear if you are
trying to link that with corporate malfeasance or what. I personally blame it on pseudoscience run amok, but that's just my own opinion. It doesn't
follow, for me, to condemn an entire organization for a single illegal operation years prior, or even a small group of illegal operations. Sure,
prosecute the offending parties, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Where were the attacks prior to WWII? On the shores of Tripoli, for one place. The US wasn't at war with anyone when those started, so I'd have to
class them as "unprovoked". There were also a couple of cases, in Tennessee I believe, where lone jihadists went off under cover of more serious
events. Then there's the "Muslim Brotherhood" connection, which has operated in the US for quite a long time, but most of that is planning and
strategy, rather than simple coarse attacks. That's just the US involvement. If we include the rest of the world, the unprovoked attacks go back for
quite a long time before the US even was. I'm assuming we are restricting the discussion to Islamic attacks at this point.
I have a sneaky suspicion that neither we nor Israel will be dealing with Iran in any sort of direct confrontation, but I bet it will be dealt with
all the same. That's just my gut feeling, together with a couple of other things I've noticed to inform it. I could be wrong. I think all this
"Iranian attack imminent" hysteria is really just the right hand distracting the attention from what the left hand is doing. You know that the
Saudis, among others, have a long history of bad blood with Iran, right? I'd be watching THAT space. The Persian/Arab rivalries go back a long time,
further even that the sunni/shia rift. BOTH of those differences of opinion will likely figure into what's coming, I would think. This is a BAD thing
for the Iranian people. They really ought to wrest control back before it's too late, and prevent the governing body there from creating any more
"excuses" for an attack. They really could get back to their former glory, with the right care and feeding.
Technically, as I said before, Afghanistan and Pakistan are in southwest Asia, not the Middle East. Therefore I didn't include them in my assessment.
I believe that hostilities OUGHT to be going on there, and that the Iraq war should not have happened at all at this point in time. Be that as it may,
taking history as a guide, hostilities will NEVER end in the middle east, US presence or not.
Regarding Afghanistan in particular, we really ought to be there, and be fighting like we meant it. That war should have been wrapped up 5 years ago,
but it's been terribly mismanaged, in my opinion. That's not the soldiers faults, that's the generals and politician's faults. The soldiers are
doing a hell of a job with what they've been given to work with, including the ridiculous ROE's, and the silly-assed higher ups who think you can
somehow fight a "nice war". What an oxymoron. We'll always get mired up trying to fight nice wars, and then we'll have what we have right here in
this thread - wars that drag on and on, and folks getting thoroughly fed up with them. Better in my opinion to do it right, get it done, get back to
a state of peace.
Regarding your list of corporate types (Monsanto was the only specific there, but I'm getting a better idea of what you mean), I don't do business
with any of them directly already. "Big Oil" perhaps indirectly, as I sometimes use synthetic materials probably derived from oil. Now, if EVERYONE
would jump on that bandwagon, their fate would be sealed. I'm not holding my breath, though. I presume they would then have to go the route of the
insurance industry, and get government to pass a law to force us to buy from them, but there again, I'm not going to, and if everyone else did the
same, what are they gonna do? Not enough jails or guards for ALL of us. As it is, I'll likely have to bite that bullet (probably literally) all by my
lonesome. So be it.
For your casualty figures, they seem inflated to me, but of course I wasn't there to count them myself, so I reckon I'll have to let them stand. On
a couple of specific points, though, the 20-40 million mark for Indians seems pretty grossly inflated, especially if the "we" we're talking about
there is really the US. The most reliable estimates I've seen of the native US population is around 4 million total at the zenith, and not all of us
were exterminated. I wouldn't be here now if we had been. The Phillipines estimate, I don't know enough to argue about. I can point out, however,
that that was another case of pre-WWII muslim troubles, as we were there fighting islamic "Moros". I'm not real clear on WHY we were there in the
first place, however, so it's possible you have a point there. The Laos and Cambodia figures also seem pretty high, considering that we were just
there bombing the living hell out of the Ho Chi Minh trail, and interdicting arms and equipment supplies carried mostly by North Vietnamese. Cambodia
in particular is curious, as you mention 3/4 of a million deaths on that part of the trail, but are strangely silent on Pol Pot's far more thorough
purge. Fair enough, though, since Pol Pot was just killing off his own, and wasn't acting on behalf of the US.
He was, as a matter of fact, in the opposition camp.
Always glad to oblige, and I'm happy I could keep you entertained. Until next time, then!