MrRodgers
Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BoscoX
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Trouble is, none of this is new. The US supported or installed demonic, oppressive, fascist regimes all over the world since WWII, in the ME, in Africa, in S. America, the Caribbean, then even more during the cold war. Even going back to 1898 and the Spanish American war.
The US went in for the Standard Oil(s) and the United Food(s) of the western corp. elites. We sponsored or aided military coups and even trained them on how to keep their people down. All was for profit and hegemony and to keep these countries from being TOO democratic.
No news here, it has been and continues to be an American controlled world whether [they]...like it or not. And yes, whether we like it or not.
S.America is only now finally ridding themselves of all US military presence and banking serfdom. Yes, some continue to be mismanaged but will eventually learn. Brazil is [its] greatest hope so far.
A lot of unsupported and unsupportable wild-eyed conspiracy theory insanity there
We did try to help here and there, usually for selfish reasons but for very good reason. The Soviets were grooming all the countries they could for satellites to place nuclear missiles and launch wars of insurgencies from, and we had to counter that by courting these places ourselves
Let's look at a few examples of countries we influenced. Iran - people, including women, had a lot of freedom and they prospered financially. Now, without us, they are slaves to a death cult which is on a death mission for Allah
Venezuela. before, with us, capitalism and wealth and prosperity
Now, your people are in charge and citizens are fleeing their socialist masters, who Bernie Sanders is on record praising. One cannot find many essential goods at all, and the situation is dire
Nothing conspiratorial about any of that. Most of what I wrote is a matter of public record from Truman through the Bushes. The Russian bear was always the ruse and to overthrow Iran in '53 was by no means to stop the soviets...same with Iraq. It was all about US/western control of the oil. The soviets had nothing whatsoever going on in S.America, it was to be a bread basket for American corp. elites...that's it. Anytime the people rose up, our dictator-in-pocket would beat them down.
At the end of World War II, Washington was committed to an active internationalist agenda and would have pursued it even if the Soviet Union had not emerged as a geopolitical and ideological rival. That essential point was acknowledged in NSC 68, the 1950 National Security Council document that articulated America's Cold War strategy ``as one designed to foster a world environment in which the American system can survive and flourish.''
The belief that American security is endangered by events in places that most agree have no intrinsic strategic value is a longstanding tenet of U.S. foreign policy. In 1966 John McNaughton, one of then defense secretary Robert McNamara's chief aides, observed that it takes some sophistication to see how Vietnam automatically involves our [vital interests].'' As was the case with Vietnam, specific arguments for U.S. intervention in the Balkans are so recondite that they only make sense within the broader context of America's relentless pursuit of a world order that will safeguard its purported strategic and economic interests. Only then does it become apparent why the foreign policy elite sees so much at stake in an area that is, at best, of marginal strategic importance
Forget democracy and forget military strategic interests...it's all about US economic, industrial and military hegemony. AND the last two wars are just more prime examples. The so-called new 'war on terror' is the justification for anything now. Just Like Russia's green light to devastate Chechnya and China to go out to wipe out dissenters and falun gong
Iraq:
The decision to attack Iraq in March 2003 was discretionary; it was a war of choice. There was no vital American interest in imminent danger, and there were alternatives to using military force, such as strengthening the existing sanctions. Plus, yes just as Powell said, we broke...now it's 'ours' to fix. So we did promise to build a new modern democracy in Iraq upon which the US reneged. (Plus the US could have taken down Saddam from the inside just we [it] did in the ME in the 50's and 60's)
Gorbachev was promised that for the reunification of Germany to occur without soviet interference, NATO would not expand at all, there being no follow-up basis for the Warsaw pack to even remain in existence. So what happened ? NATO immediately expanded and to former soviet satellites and now even to Russian borders. The US reneged there too.
< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 2/8/2017 10:29:57 AM >
_____________________________
You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith
|
Video - How Welcome Is An American By Iraqi Locals? - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread