Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (11252)	4/13/2001 6:51:38 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

and that the history of interventions shows a tendency of bias? toward helping self--rather than toward helping others...just a tiny ethical point. I believe that US government leaders have tried to help the US (or sometimes just themselves) more then other countries but that article seems to be looking to place the US in the worse light in every case it mentions. It also makes rather extreme allegations with little or nor evidence to support them. Just a few examples - taking the side of Chiang Kai-shek against the Communists, even though the latter had been a much closer ally of the United States in the world war. We worked much closer with Chiang Kai-sjek during WWII. South Korea, 1945-53: After World War II, the United States suppressed the popular progressive forces in favor of the conservatives who had collaborated with the Japanese. This led to a long era of corrupt, reactionary, and brutal governments. We supported free elections in the South and then defended it from a massive invation from the North. Also the North was, and still is far more brutal and opressive then the South. The CIA orchestrated a wide-ranging campaign of sabotage, terrorism, dirty tricks, and psychological warfare against East Germany. This was one of the factors which led to the building of the Berlin Wall in 1961. Sure we had spies and tricks against the East, it worked both ways. I can't think of any activity against East Germany that would rightfully be consdidered terrorism. The main reason the wall was built was to keep the population from fleeing to the West. It was more of a prison wall then a fortress wall. Libya, 1981-89: Libya refused to be a proper Middle East client state of Washington. Its leader, Muammar el-Qaddafi, was uppity. He would have to be punished. U.S. planes shot down two Libyan planes in what Libya regarded as its air space. Libya's government can consider anything it wants but by international convention the airspace in question was over international waters. The planes where shot down after they locked on or fired on American planes. You attack some one stronger then you and negative consequences are likely. Thats life. Iraq, 1990s: Relentless bombing for more than 40 days and nights, against one of the most advanced nations in the Middle East, devastating its ancient and modern capital city; 177 million pounds of bombs falling on the people of Iraq, the most concentrated aerial onslaught in the history of the world; I see there is no mention that Iraq invaded Kuwait to start this war. What should we have used instead of bombs? Sternly written letters of concern? Or perhaps do what the Iranians did when they fought Iraq and use mass wave assaults of poorly trained and equiped infantry. Tim Tim