I agree with your premise, but there are exceptions. The fight against fascism was a just war, as is Ukraine's defense against a fascist that invaded their country.
The Spanish American war and WWI were illegitimate and fit within your narrative.
The American civil war was about slavery, it was imitated by the south, because the federal go…
I agree with your premise, but there are exceptions. The fight against fascism was a just war, as is Ukraine's defense against a fascist that invaded their country.
The Spanish American war and WWI were illegitimate and fit within your narrative.
The American civil war was about slavery, it was imitated by the south, because the federal government would not make slavery legitimate in all states.
The revolutionary war, legit, save for those neo Royalists in America who crave for an unimpeachable supreme despot.
Oh yes I agree, William. An armed conflict may have many roots, some justified, some not, and some just fabricated. Argentina actually has some historical claim on the Falklands, though it was dormant until the junta thought it useful to exploit. And for that matter, Lincoln could have followed Buchanan and let the South secede. Perhaps most wars become legitimate when one side wins and writes the history, and given enough time (which may be many generations) that becomes the accept narrative. The point is that when a conflict is begun or used by one group as a rationale to distract from other issues then a lot of damage is done for very cynical reasons.
I quite agree too about opposing Putin and in this context it is interesting how he changed the rationale from "fighting fascists" to opposing the West which supposedly hates Russia. (Bush's "they hate us for our freedoms" comes to mind as another ridiculous statement, but then the same lies used in Vietnam were recycled for Iraq.)
To look at Lincoln again, he rightly changed the war's justification from holding the country together to ending slavery, which certainly kept Britain and France away from supporting the Confederacy. So one may have to dig deeper to see what is really going on. A news program about how "North Korea could hit the U.S. with its missiles" is a stupid topic, as Kim isn't going to bomb Guam or Hawaii. But under much worse circumstances it could be the same kind of absurdity that was used as an excuse to go after Saddam. And as Thom pointed out, this is what governments do when they want to justify their actions.
I agree Doc. Most wars and military actions have ulterior motives. For instance the real reason Bush Daddy invaded Panama to arrest Noriega, is because Noriega was a bagman for the CIA who did one thing a bagman shouldn't every do, and dip his paws in the bag.
A little background, the Bank of Panama is an offshore branch of the Federal Reserve, as is Liberia, both were authorized by the Edge act. The CIA had a branch, the Marine Midland Bank, located next to the Vatican Embassy on Avenida Balboa, the bank of Panama was not far away.
Drug money was laundered through the Bank of Panama. It's paper currenty was (in 1975) the US printed dollar, it;'s coins were minted by the Philadelphia mint, of the same stock, weight and size of American coins, They even work in vending and slot machines.
How do I know, I was stationed in Panama for three years, I even met Manuel Noriega. The man is a brutal thug, he had the people terrorized.
As regards the Bank of Panama I researched and wrote a paper for my MBA on the Fed, the GosBank of Russia, Switzerland, Israel and the Bank of England
As fpr the civil war, I am aware that Lincoln only responded to secession after the cadets from the Citadel fired on Ft Sumter, and his intention was to save the union. He only signed the Emancipation Proclamation after the "victory"at Antietam, the purpose of which was to warn England off of siding with the Confederacy. England had abplished slavery in 1807, and England was very dependent on Southern Cotton and tobacco. Brisk trade between confederate states and England, including gold. Lincoln's act was a political manuever to keep the English out of the war, otherwise they were disposed to side with the confederacy.
I agree with you about North Korea, it is absolutely ridiculous that he could attack even Japan, he knows that if he launched a nuke, Pyrongyang would be glass, and that is the only city in North Korea that resembles a city in the real world.
There are corporate and political malefactors whose incomes and status depend on this tension
Nicaragua was a made in the U.S. catastrophe.
The dictator Somosa was made in America, the population was illiterate. I drove the PanAmerican highway in 1975 from Texas to Panama, and was the last American to drive it, because after I passed through Nicaragua, the frontier was closed.
I do not know what sin, besides being a ruthless dictator, Somosa was guilty of, but the Nixon Ford administration supported the Sandinistas, and by the time Reagan was president, it was used as a way station for cocaine from Colombia, pilots under hire from the CIA flew small arms to Nicaragua and picked up the Cocaine, Which wound up mostly in Los Angeles, there was a TV Series called Snowfall, which was about the real life operation and CIA involvement, to fund the Iran Contra affair. Names have been changed and the protagonist Franklin St James, is a fictionalized account of the L.A. drug lord.
The State Department and CIA were responsible for the overthrow of Salvador Allende.by the fascist corporate fiendly of Pinochet. The whole affair was sanctioned by Milton Friedman and the Chicago Boys (University of Chicago School of Economics) whose theory of economic advantage was the motivator and excuse. Allende was a socialist and nationalized natural resources.
We can't have that, it deprives international corporations of profits.
Venezuela was forced into looking to Cuba,Iran,Russia for help, the same way that American corporations forced Fidel to look to Russia for patronage.
Chavez sin was nationalizing its petroleum, thus depriving Exxon Mobil of profits, a big no no, in short order the State Department and CIA declared war on Chavez, and have tried to overthrow him, from within and without, even using special operators.
They have forced Venezuela to align with Iran, Russia, Cuba and now they can call Venezuela socialist or communist, two buzz words which send the feeble American brain spinning.
MI6 and the CIA are directly responsible for the Mullahcracy in Iran, when they overthrew Mossadegh because he too nationalized the oil. British petroleum and Dutch Royal Shel;l were affected, but I presume that American oil companies saw an opportunity to profit, and they did by eventually installing Mohammad Reza Pahlavi as shah.
The British East India Company, got to use the British army, free of charge, to conquer India and South Africa. As does the U.S.Government in service to the corporations.
Any attempt by any country to claim sovereignty over it's natural resources is labeled socialism, which, thanks to the cold war, is associated with communism, which is a political theory, not an economic theory (to wit; Communist China and it's hyper capitalist economy).
As we know, we have the best government money can buy. And government exists, primarily, to protect and facilitate the controlling economic interests.
No dispute here. And we can add Mobutu in the Congo, Duvalier in Haiti and many, many more to the "anti-Communist" (i.e. pro-big corporate interest) rolls that the U.S. propped up. And then Washington is surprised when the population of a country turns on them! The Somoza family was around a long time, one even graduating from West Point, but U.S. involvement in Central America goes way, way back. I went through Iran before the revolution and could see what was coming, just as I predicted Allende's murder even before he took office, not that anyone in authority wanted to hear such things.
Anyway, after visiting 122 countries I have become very cynical about any big power's involvement in other nations. As my high school science teacher said when I began to take long trips, "You'll meet a lot of good people. But watch out for the suits." He was right.
Looks like you have been around as well. I carried a red passport until I retired, Seen a lot of action, stuff you don't see in evening news.
I like your description of anti communism (pro big corporate interest), and the media plays the pied piper role, acting as a sock puppet for the chamber of commerce and financial institutions.
And of course, People don't realize that the media are corporations, with a board of directors, who are answerable to their shareholder, each board member usually represents a major shareholder (a corporation), and most corporations have board members that are interlocking with other corporations.
I agree with your premise, but there are exceptions. The fight against fascism was a just war, as is Ukraine's defense against a fascist that invaded their country.
The Spanish American war and WWI were illegitimate and fit within your narrative.
The American civil war was about slavery, it was imitated by the south, because the federal government would not make slavery legitimate in all states.
The revolutionary war, legit, save for those neo Royalists in America who crave for an unimpeachable supreme despot.
Oh yes I agree, William. An armed conflict may have many roots, some justified, some not, and some just fabricated. Argentina actually has some historical claim on the Falklands, though it was dormant until the junta thought it useful to exploit. And for that matter, Lincoln could have followed Buchanan and let the South secede. Perhaps most wars become legitimate when one side wins and writes the history, and given enough time (which may be many generations) that becomes the accept narrative. The point is that when a conflict is begun or used by one group as a rationale to distract from other issues then a lot of damage is done for very cynical reasons.
I quite agree too about opposing Putin and in this context it is interesting how he changed the rationale from "fighting fascists" to opposing the West which supposedly hates Russia. (Bush's "they hate us for our freedoms" comes to mind as another ridiculous statement, but then the same lies used in Vietnam were recycled for Iraq.)
To look at Lincoln again, he rightly changed the war's justification from holding the country together to ending slavery, which certainly kept Britain and France away from supporting the Confederacy. So one may have to dig deeper to see what is really going on. A news program about how "North Korea could hit the U.S. with its missiles" is a stupid topic, as Kim isn't going to bomb Guam or Hawaii. But under much worse circumstances it could be the same kind of absurdity that was used as an excuse to go after Saddam. And as Thom pointed out, this is what governments do when they want to justify their actions.
I agree Doc. Most wars and military actions have ulterior motives. For instance the real reason Bush Daddy invaded Panama to arrest Noriega, is because Noriega was a bagman for the CIA who did one thing a bagman shouldn't every do, and dip his paws in the bag.
A little background, the Bank of Panama is an offshore branch of the Federal Reserve, as is Liberia, both were authorized by the Edge act. The CIA had a branch, the Marine Midland Bank, located next to the Vatican Embassy on Avenida Balboa, the bank of Panama was not far away.
Drug money was laundered through the Bank of Panama. It's paper currenty was (in 1975) the US printed dollar, it;'s coins were minted by the Philadelphia mint, of the same stock, weight and size of American coins, They even work in vending and slot machines.
How do I know, I was stationed in Panama for three years, I even met Manuel Noriega. The man is a brutal thug, he had the people terrorized.
As regards the Bank of Panama I researched and wrote a paper for my MBA on the Fed, the GosBank of Russia, Switzerland, Israel and the Bank of England
As fpr the civil war, I am aware that Lincoln only responded to secession after the cadets from the Citadel fired on Ft Sumter, and his intention was to save the union. He only signed the Emancipation Proclamation after the "victory"at Antietam, the purpose of which was to warn England off of siding with the Confederacy. England had abplished slavery in 1807, and England was very dependent on Southern Cotton and tobacco. Brisk trade between confederate states and England, including gold. Lincoln's act was a political manuever to keep the English out of the war, otherwise they were disposed to side with the confederacy.
I agree with you about North Korea, it is absolutely ridiculous that he could attack even Japan, he knows that if he launched a nuke, Pyrongyang would be glass, and that is the only city in North Korea that resembles a city in the real world.
There are corporate and political malefactors whose incomes and status depend on this tension
Nicaragua was a made in the U.S. catastrophe.
The dictator Somosa was made in America, the population was illiterate. I drove the PanAmerican highway in 1975 from Texas to Panama, and was the last American to drive it, because after I passed through Nicaragua, the frontier was closed.
I do not know what sin, besides being a ruthless dictator, Somosa was guilty of, but the Nixon Ford administration supported the Sandinistas, and by the time Reagan was president, it was used as a way station for cocaine from Colombia, pilots under hire from the CIA flew small arms to Nicaragua and picked up the Cocaine, Which wound up mostly in Los Angeles, there was a TV Series called Snowfall, which was about the real life operation and CIA involvement, to fund the Iran Contra affair. Names have been changed and the protagonist Franklin St James, is a fictionalized account of the L.A. drug lord.
The State Department and CIA were responsible for the overthrow of Salvador Allende.by the fascist corporate fiendly of Pinochet. The whole affair was sanctioned by Milton Friedman and the Chicago Boys (University of Chicago School of Economics) whose theory of economic advantage was the motivator and excuse. Allende was a socialist and nationalized natural resources.
We can't have that, it deprives international corporations of profits.
Venezuela was forced into looking to Cuba,Iran,Russia for help, the same way that American corporations forced Fidel to look to Russia for patronage.
Chavez sin was nationalizing its petroleum, thus depriving Exxon Mobil of profits, a big no no, in short order the State Department and CIA declared war on Chavez, and have tried to overthrow him, from within and without, even using special operators.
They have forced Venezuela to align with Iran, Russia, Cuba and now they can call Venezuela socialist or communist, two buzz words which send the feeble American brain spinning.
MI6 and the CIA are directly responsible for the Mullahcracy in Iran, when they overthrew Mossadegh because he too nationalized the oil. British petroleum and Dutch Royal Shel;l were affected, but I presume that American oil companies saw an opportunity to profit, and they did by eventually installing Mohammad Reza Pahlavi as shah.
The British East India Company, got to use the British army, free of charge, to conquer India and South Africa. As does the U.S.Government in service to the corporations.
Any attempt by any country to claim sovereignty over it's natural resources is labeled socialism, which, thanks to the cold war, is associated with communism, which is a political theory, not an economic theory (to wit; Communist China and it's hyper capitalist economy).
As we know, we have the best government money can buy. And government exists, primarily, to protect and facilitate the controlling economic interests.
No dispute here. And we can add Mobutu in the Congo, Duvalier in Haiti and many, many more to the "anti-Communist" (i.e. pro-big corporate interest) rolls that the U.S. propped up. And then Washington is surprised when the population of a country turns on them! The Somoza family was around a long time, one even graduating from West Point, but U.S. involvement in Central America goes way, way back. I went through Iran before the revolution and could see what was coming, just as I predicted Allende's murder even before he took office, not that anyone in authority wanted to hear such things.
Anyway, after visiting 122 countries I have become very cynical about any big power's involvement in other nations. As my high school science teacher said when I began to take long trips, "You'll meet a lot of good people. But watch out for the suits." He was right.
Looks like you have been around as well. I carried a red passport until I retired, Seen a lot of action, stuff you don't see in evening news.
I like your description of anti communism (pro big corporate interest), and the media plays the pied piper role, acting as a sock puppet for the chamber of commerce and financial institutions.
And of course, People don't realize that the media are corporations, with a board of directors, who are answerable to their shareholder, each board member usually represents a major shareholder (a corporation), and most corporations have board members that are interlocking with other corporations.