What we do with despots
POSTED BY: SignyM
UPDATED: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 19:33
VIEWED: 7760
PAGE 9 of 9
Quote:
Mind you, it is even worse to be in a country without a despot " owned " by the US
I dunno. Suharto managed to kill offf upwards of 300,00 ppl with the express permission of Kissinger, and with US arms and materiel:
Quote:
Kissinger, who does not find room to mention East Timor even in the index of his three-volume memoir, has more than once stated that the invasion came to him as a surprise, and that he barely knew of the existence of the Timorese question. He was obviously lying. But the breathtaking extent of his mendacity has only just become fully apparent, with the declassification of a secret State Department telegram. The document, which has been made public by the National Security Archive at George Washington University, contains a verbatim record of the conversation among Suharto, Ford and Kissinger. "We want your understanding if we deem it necessary to take rapid or drastic action," Suharto opened bluntly. "We will understand and will not press you on the issue;' Ford responded. "We understand the problem you have and the intentions you have." Kissinger was even more emphatic, but had an awareness of the possible "spin" problems back home. "It is important that whatever you do succeeds quickly," he instructed the despot. "We would be able to influence the reaction if whatever happens, happens after we return.... If you have made plans, we will do our best to keep everyone quiet until the President returns home." Micromanaging things for Suharto, he added: "The President will be back on Monday at 2 PM Jakarta time. We understand your problem and the need to move quickly but I am only saying that it would be better if it were done after we returned." As ever, deniability supersedes accountability.
Now I'm not saying that the root of ALL tyrannies lies with the USA. Pol Pot, as far as I can tell, was an entirely home-grown creation. (However, if you read "Confesssions of an Economic Hit Man" you'll get a view of how we engineered their creation.)
But we so often find ourselves on the side of tyranny that, since WWI reconstruction- and with the exception of our involvement in Serbia- I cannot find a single instance in which we actually supported democracy over tyranny. That's a pretty sad record. With our economic and military might, we could have done some good but we threw our weight behind the dark side.
AFA Burma is concerned - I can't imagine why the USA would want to destabilize the Burmese government -except possibly to light a little fire under China's *ss (Since they don't cooperate or trade extensively, that doesn't seem like much of a reason.) I think that like all unpopular governments it's easier to point to a "enemy", even a fictitious one -dubya does this all the time- to whip up support than it is to address the root causes of the problem. Look how they managed to tie their resident cause celebre to the explosions.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The evolving story-
Quote:
Uzbek toll rises as unrest spreads
Unrest is the bloodiest in Uzbekistan's post-Soviet history.
ANDIJAN, Uzbekistan -- The death toll from a crackdown by Uzbekistan security forces is mounting amid reports that unrest has spread from Andijan to at least three other towns.
More than 700 people reportedly have been killed in clashes last week in the region bordering Kyrgyzstan, The Associated Press reported Monday.
Quote:
U.S., UK Split Over Uzbek Violence
Condemnation by Britain of Uzbek soldiers who opened fire on protesters contrasts markedly to the near silence coming from its allies in Washington.
In London, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw on Sunday slammed the violence in the city of Andijan as "a clear abuse of human rights."
He was speaking as witnesses described how Uzbek soldiers fired into a crowd, including women, children and their own police comrades begging them not to shoot./quote]
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Finn, we started a discussion that I promised to continue. Up until a couple of day ago, my life was like a motorcycle with the throttle stuck wide open. If you're still interested, I would like to pursue it.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Now I'm not saying that the root of ALL tyrannies lies with the USA. Pol Pot, as far as I can tell, was an entirely home-grown creation. (However, if you read "Confesssions of an Economic Hit Man" you'll get a view of how we engineered their creation.)
I seem to recall reading that the US engineered the overthrow of the Cambodian Royal Family with the intent of trying to buy off whomever came to power later. Pol Pot simply stepped into this vacuum before anyone else making it impossible for the US to install their guy.
Quote:
But we so often find ourselves on the side of tyranny that, since WWI reconstruction- and with the exception of our involvement in Serbia- I cannot find a single instance in which we actually supported democracy over tyranny.
I am very cynical over Serbia as well, the West... Brits and Americans in particular helped to give post Tito Yugoslavia a big push in the wrong direction.
Quote:
That's a pretty sad record. With our economic and military might, we could have done some good but we threw our weight behind the dark side.
Or young Skywalker, you have become the darkside.
Quote:
AFA Burma is concerned - I can't imagine why the USA would want to destabilize the Burmese government -except possibly to light a little fire under China's *ss (Since they don't cooperate or trade extensively, that doesn't seem like much of a reason.) I think that like all unpopular governments it's easier to point to a "enemy", even a fictitious one -dubya does this all the time- to whip up support than it is to address the root causes of the problem. Look how they managed to tie their resident cause celebre to the explosions.
I would hazard a guess to one of two reasons:
1. " Burma is the world's largest exporter of teak and is a principal source of jade, pearls, rubies and sapphires. It is endowed with extremely fertile soil and has important offshore oil and gas deposits. However, its people remain very poor and are getting poorer. "
and / or
2. " The armed forces - and former rebels co-opted by the government - have been accused of large-scale trafficking in heroin, of which Burma is a major exporter.Prostitution and Aids are major problems. "
Maybe Bush doesn't want the competiton for his new Afgan poppy fields ?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/country_profiles/1300003
.stm
" Looking for a place to happen
Making stops along the way "
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Looking a little further, I googled "burma china oil" figuring that Burma might be one pearl in China's "string of pearls" which is to guarantee them China an oil supply and came up with this on the first hit:
Quote:
Burma: China has developed close ties to the military regime in Rangoon and turned a nation wary of China into a "satellite" of Beijing close to the Strait of Malacca, through which 80 percent of China's imported oil passes.
China is building naval bases in Burma and has electronic intelligence gathering facilities on islands in the Bay of Bengal and near the Strait of Malacca. Beijing also supplied Burma with "billions of dollars in military assistance to support a de facto military alliance," the report said.
www.littlespeck.com/region/CForeign-China-050119.htm
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So your saying it's not the Heroin....
Damn, I thought I was on to something there
" Looking for a place to happen
Making stops along the way "
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME