That would be a huge exaggeration, of course. But we did sanction its use, provide instruction in some of the more advanced and subtle means, and - through extremely enthusiastic "advisors" - encourage its use.
You refer to "we" in the comment above. Could you please define EXACTLY who "we" are??
Would that be the President and the NSC? The congress? The CIA? The Special Forces Advisors??
Or could it be contract workers for any of "black" agencies that may have operations there?
And if you can define a specific "we", could you provide the exact act they performed and the authority they possessed??
Personally, the US has been a late-comer to the world of espionage and covert operations. What it knows was primarily taught to it by the British, especially in the area of covert operations and signals intelligence.
So should we blame it all on the Brits?? And just claim "we" were their talented students?? Hmmm....
My perspective is that there is a big difference between decisions made at the strategic level and those made by personnel on the scene. There are quite a few "mavericks" who exceed their authority in the name of "mission accomplishment" leaving the fall-out for the diplomats to sort out and cover up.
In other instances, you have agency directors involved in abuse of authority, and their underlings either trying to please their boss (who promotes them), or too frightened to confront him/her.
You would be amazed at how much BS is covered-up by embarassed politicians who granted no authority for these abuses to take place.
In the end, all decisions reside with human beings who bear the ultimate responsibility for their actions. And it is VERY difficult to either define or completely control the "we" who you are referring to.
Regards,
Ron |
