mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Extra Stuff > Soap Box

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2016-12-05, 02:51   #1
kladner
 
kladner's Avatar
 
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!

1004810 Posts
Default Worldwide Nightmare Theatre, Empire of Chaos Enhanced and Expanded

I am going to break the "Nightmare Mid-East Theatre, Empire of Chaos edition" box, and include the much broader aims that these operations have always had at the root. The previous thread title just doesn't cut it anymore. It was always inaccurate by way of incompleteness, in any case.

So here is Tom Engelhardt, a long-time commentator on the Empire of Chaos, editor, and promoter of the trenchant commentary of others.

Tomgram: Engelhardt, The Most Dangerous Country on Earth
Was 11/8 a New 9/11?
Quote:
The Election That Changed Everything and Could Prove History’s Deal-Breaker
By Tom Engelhardt

For decades, Washington had a habit of using the Central Intelligence Agency to deep-six governments of the people, by the people, and for the people that weren’t to its taste and replacing them with governments of the [take your choice: military junta, shah, autocrat, dictator] across the planet. There was the infamous 1953 CIA- and British-organized coup that toppled the democratic Iranian government of Mohammad Mosadegh and put the Shah (and his secret police, the SAVAK) in power. There was the 1954 CIA coup against the government of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala that installed the military dictatorship of Carlos Castillo Armas; there was the CIA’s move to make Ngo Dinh Diem the head of South Vietnam, also in 1954, and the CIA-Belgian plot to assassinate the Congo’s first elected prime minister, Patrice Lumumba, in 1961 that led, in the end, to the military dictatorship of Mobutu Sese Seko; there was the 1964 CIA-backed military coup in Brazil that overthrew elected president Jango Goulart and brought to power a military junta; and, of course, the first 9/11 (September 11, 1973) when the democratically elected socialist president of Chile, Salvador Allende, was overthrown and killed in a U.S.-backed military coup. Well, you get the idea.

In this way, Washington repeatedly worked its will as the leader of what was then called “the Free World.” Although such operations were carried out on the sly, when they were revealed, Americans, proud of their own democratic traditions, generally remained unfazed by what the CIA had done to democracies (and other kinds of governments) abroad in their name. If Washington repeatedly empowered regimes of a sort Americans would have found unacceptable for ourselves, it wasn’t something that most of us spent a whole lot of time fretting about in the context of the Cold War.

At least those acts remained largely covert, undoubtedly reflecting a sense that this wasn’t the sort of thing you should proudly broadcast in the light of day. In the early years of the twenty-first century, however, a new mindset emerged. In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, “regime change” became the phrase du jour. As a course of action, there was no longer anything to be covert about. Instead, the process was debated openly and carried out in the full glare of media attention.


Last fiddled with by kladner on 2016-12-05 at 02:55 Reason: link in title
kladner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2016-12-05, 11:04   #2
Nick
 
Nick's Avatar
 
Dec 2012
The Netherlands

150110 Posts
Default

A few tips from Tim Snyder at Yale:
Quote:
Americans are no wiser than the Europeans who saw democracy yield to fascism, Nazism, or communism. Our one advantage is that we might learn from their experience. Now is a good time to do so. Here are twenty lessons from the twentieth century, adapted to the circumstances of today.
1. Do not obey in advance. Much of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then start to do it without being asked. You've already done this, haven't you? Stop. Anticipatory obedience teaches authorities what is possible and accelerates unfreedom.
2. Defend an institution. Follow the courts or the media, or a court or a newspaper. Do not speak of "our institutions" unless you are making them yours by acting on their behalf. Institutions don't protect themselves. They go down like dominoes unless each is defended from the beginning.
3. Recall professional ethics. When the leaders of state set a negative example, professional commitments to just practice become much more important. It is hard to break a rule-of-law state without lawyers, and it is hard to have show trials without judges.
4. When listening to politicians, distinguish certain words. Look out for the expansive use of "terrorism" and "extremism." Be alive to the fatal notions of "exception" and "emergency." Be angry about the treacherous use of patriotic vocabulary.
5. Be calm when the unthinkable arrives. When the terrorist attack comes, remember that all authoritarians at all times either await or plan such events in order to consolidate power. Think of the Reichstag fire. The sudden disaster that requires the end of the balance of power, the end of opposition parties, and so on, is the oldest trick in the Hitlerian book. Don't fall for it.
6. Be kind to our language. Avoid pronouncing the phrases everyone else does. Think up your own way of speaking, even if only to convey that thing you think everyone is saying. (Don't use the internet before bed. Charge your gadgets away from your bedroom, and read.) What to read? Perhaps "The Power of the Powerless" by Václav Havel, 1984 by George Orwell, The Captive Mind by Czesław Milosz, The Rebel by Albert Camus, The Origins of Totalitarianism by Hannah Arendt, or Nothing is True and Everything is Possible by Peter Pomerantsev.
7. Stand out. Someone has to. It is easy, in words and deeds, to follow along. It can feel strange to do or say something different. But without that unease, there is no freedom. And the moment you set an example, the spell of the status quo is broken, and others will follow.
8. Believe in truth. To abandon facts is to abandon freedom. If nothing is true, then no one can criticize power, because there is no basis upon which to do so. If nothing is true, then all is spectacle. The biggest wallet pays for the most blinding lights.
9. Investigate. Figure things out for yourself. Spend more time with long articles. Subsidize investigative journalism by subscribing to print media. Realize that some of what is on your screen is there to harm you. Learn about sites that investigate foreign propaganda pushes.
10. Practice corporeal politics. Power wants your body softening in your chair and your emotions dissipating on the screen. Get outside. Put your body in unfamiliar places with unfamiliar people. Make new friends and march with them.
11. Make eye contact and small talk. This is not just polite. It is a way to stay in touch with your surroundings, break down unnecessary social barriers, and come to understand whom you should and should not trust. If we enter a culture of denunciation, you will want to know the psychological landscape of your daily life.
12. Take responsibility for the face of the world. Notice the swastikas and the other signs of hate. Do not look away and do not get used to them. Remove them yourself and set an example for others to do so.
13. Hinder the one-party state. The parties that took over states were once something else. They exploited a historical moment to make political life impossible for their rivals. Vote in local and state elections while you can.
14. Give regularly to good causes, if you can. Pick a charity and set up autopay. Then you will know that you have made a free choice that is supporting civil society helping others doing something good.
15. Establish a private life. Nastier rulers will use what they know about you to push you around. Scrub your computer of malware. Remember that email is skywriting. Consider using alternative forms of the internet, or simply using it less. Have personal exchanges in person. For the same reason, resolve any legal trouble. Authoritarianism works as a blackmail state, looking for the hook on which to hang you. Try not to have too many hooks.
16. Learn from others in other countries. Keep up your friendships abroad, or make new friends abroad. The present difficulties here are an element of a general trend. And no country is going to find a solution by itself. Make sure you and your family have passports.
17. Watch out for the paramilitaries. When the men with guns who have always claimed to be against the system start wearing uniforms and marching around with torches and pictures of a Leader, the end is nigh. When the pro-Leader paramilitary and the official police and military intermingle, the game is over.
18. Be reflective if you must be armed. If you carry a weapon in public service, God bless you and keep you. But know that evils of the past involved policemen and soldiers finding themselves, one day, doing irregular things. Be ready to say no. (If you do not know what this means, contact the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and ask about training in professional ethics.)
19. Be as courageous as you can. If none of us is prepared to die for freedom, then all of us will die in unfreedom.
20. Be a patriot. The incoming president is not. Set a good example of what America means for the generations to come. They will need it.
--Timothy Snyder, Housum Professor of History, Yale University,
15 November 2016.
---
(PS: If this is useful to you, please print it out and pass it around!
1 December 2016)

Nick is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2016-12-06, 03:00   #3
kladner
 
kladner's Avatar
 
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!

274016 Posts
Default

That is some good advice from Snyder, Nick. I don't know how much of it I have the guts to follow.
Quote:
9. Investigate. Figure things out for yourself. Spend more time with long articles. Subsidize investigative journalism by subscribing to print media. Realize that some of what is on your screen is there to harm you. Learn about sites that investigate foreign propaganda pushes.
I support Consortium News, though it is hard for me to absorb all that comes across without screaming. The following, from Consortium, is by Ray McGovern, retired CIA analyst and co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. It hits some of the high (really, abysmal) points in the career of a “an ass-kissing little chickenshit,” as David Petraeus was called to his face by his one-time superior.
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/11/3...or-senior-job/

Quote:
In 2007, Adm. William Fallon, commander of CENTCOM with four decades of active-duty experience behind him, quickly took the measure of Petraeus, who was one of his subordinates while implementing a “surge” of over 30,000 U.S. troops into Iraq.

Several sources reported that Fallon was sickened by Petraeus’s unctuous pandering to ingratiate himself. Fallon is said to have been so turned off by all the accolades in the flowery introduction given him by Petraeus that he called him to his face “an ass-kissing little chickenshit,” adding, “I hate people like that.” Sadly, Petraeus’s sycophancy is not uncommon among general officers. Uncommon was Fallon’s outspoken candor.
But back to the beginning of the article.
Quote:
The news that President-elect Donald Trump called in disgraced retired Gen. David Petraeus for a job interview as possible Secretary of State tests whether Trump’s experience in hosting “The Celebrity Apprentice” honed his skills for spotting an incompetent phony or not.

Does Trump need more data than the continuing bedlam in Iraq and Afghanistan to understand that one can earn a Princeton PhD by writing erudite-sounding drivel about “counterinsurgency” and still flunk war? Granted, the shambles in which Petraeus left Iraq and Afghanistan were probably more a result of his overweening careerism and political ambition than his misapplication of military strategy. But does that make it any more excusable?
I feel that "revered Senior Statesman," Colin Powell, is equally contemptible, for very similar reasons. I suggest reading up on Powell's role in the coverup of the My Lai massacre to get a sense of why I hold this opinion.

To wrap up, "Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose."

Last fiddled with by kladner on 2016-12-06 at 03:03
kladner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-01-12, 22:24   #4
ewmayer
2ω=0
 
ewmayer's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
República de California

231528 Posts
Default

How "60 Minutes" Became a Pentagon Mouthpiece for Drone War | naked capitalism
ewmayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-05-22, 21:27   #5
ewmayer
2ω=0
 
ewmayer's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
República de California

100110011010102 Posts
Default

o A Murderous History of Korea | Bruce Cumings, London Review of Books
Quote:
North Korea celebrated the 85th anniversary of the foundation of the Korean People’s Army on 25 April, amid round-the-clock television coverage of parades in Pyongyang and enormous global tension. No journalist seemed interested in asking why it was the 85th anniversary when the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was only founded in 1948. What was really being celebrated was the beginning of the Korean guerrilla struggle against the Japanese in north-east China, officially dated to 25 April 1932. After Japan annexed Korea in 1910, many Koreans fled across the border, among them the parents of Kim Il-sung, but it wasn’t until Japan established its puppet state of Manchukuo in March 1932 that the independence movement turned to armed resistance. Kim and his comrades launched a campaign that lasted 13 difficult years, until Japan finally relinquished control of Korea as part of the 1945 terms of surrender. This is the source of the North Korean leadership’s legitimacy in the eyes of its people: they are revolutionary nationalists who resisted their country’s coloniser; they resisted again when a massive onslaught by the US air force during the Korean War razed all their cities, driving the population to live, work and study in subterranean shelters; they have continued to resist the US ever since; and they even resisted the collapse of Western communism – as of this September, the DPRK will have been in existence for as long as the Soviet Union. But it is less a communist country than a garrison state, unlike any the world has seen. Drawn from a population of just 25 million, the North Korean army is the fourth largest in the world, with 1.3 million soldiers – just behind the third largest army, with 1.4 million soldiers, which happens to be the American one. Most of the adult Korean population, men and women, have spent many years in this army: its reserves are limited only by the size of the population.

The story of Kim Il-sung’s resistance against the Japanese is surrounded by legend and exaggeration in the North, and general denial in the South. But he was recognisably a hero: he fought for a decade in the harshest winter environment imaginable, with temperatures sometimes falling to 50° below zero. Recent scholarship has shown that Koreans made up the vast majority of guerrillas in Manchukuo, even though many of them were commanded by Chinese officers (Kim was a member of the Chinese Communist Party). Other Korean guerrillas led detachments too – among them Choe Yong-gon, Kim Chaek and Choe Hyon – and when they returned to Pyongyang in 1945 they formed the core of the new regime. Their offspring now constitute a multitudinous elite – the number two man in the government today, Choe Ryong-hae, is Choe Hyon’s son.

...

But if American commentators and politicians are ignorant of Korea’s history, they ought at least to be aware of their own. US involvement in Korea began towards the end of the Second World War, when State Department planners feared that Soviet soldiers, who were entering the northern part of the peninsula, would bring with them as many as thirty thousand Korean guerrillas who had been fighting the Japanese in north-east China. They began to consider a full military occupation that would assure America had the strongest voice in postwar Korean affairs. It might be a short occupation or, as a briefing paper put it, it might be one of ‘considerable duration’; the main point was that no other power should have a role in Korea such that ‘the proportionate strength of the US’ would be reduced to ‘a point where its effectiveness would be weakened’. Congress and the American people knew nothing about this. Several of the planners were Japanophiles who had never challenged Japan’s colonial claims in Korea and now hoped to reconstruct a peaceable and amenable postwar Japan. They worried that a Soviet occupation of Korea would thwart that goal and harm the postwar security of the Pacific. Following this logic, on the day after Nagasaki was obliterated, John J. McCloy of the War Department asked Dean Rusk and a colleague to go into a spare office and think about how to divide Korea. They chose the 38th parallel, and three weeks later 25,000 American combat troops entered southern Korea to establish a military government.

It lasted three years. To shore up their occupation, the Americans employed every last hireling of the Japanese they could find, including former officers in the Japanese military like Park Chung Hee and Kim Chae-gyu, both of whom graduated from the American military academy in Seoul in 1946. (After a military takeover in 1961 Park became president of South Korea, lasting a decade and a half until his ex-classmate Kim, by then head of the Korean Central Intelligence Agency, shot him dead over dinner one night.) After the Americans left in 1948 the border area around the 38th parallel was under the command of Kim Sok-won, another ex-officer of the Imperial Army, and it was no surprise that after a series of South Korean incursions into the North, full-scale civil war broke out on 25 June 1950. Inside the South itself – whose leaders felt insecure and conscious of the threat from what they called ‘the north wind’ – there was an orgy of state violence against anyone who might somehow be associated with the left or with communism. The historian Hun Joon Kim found that at least 300,000 people were detained and executed or simply disappeared by the South Korean government in the first few months after conventional war began. My own work and that of John Merrill indicates that somewhere between 100,000 and 200,000 people died as a result of political violence before June 1950, at the hands either of the South Korean government or the US occupation forces. In her recent book Korea’s Grievous War, which combines archival research, records of mass graves and interviews with relatives of the dead and escapees who fled to Osaka, Su-kyoung Hwang documents the mass killings in villages around the southern coast.[*] In short, the Republic of Korea was one of the bloodiest dictatorships of the early Cold War period; many of the perpetrators of the massacres had served the Japanese in their dirty work – and were then put back into power by the Americans.

Americans like to see themselves as mere bystanders in postwar Korean history. It’s always described in the passive voice: ‘Korea was divided in 1945,’ with no mention of the fact that McCloy and Rusk, two of the most influential men in postwar foreign policy, drew their line without consulting anyone. There were two military coups in the South while the US had operational control of the Korean army, in 1961 and 1980; the Americans stood idly by lest they be accused of interfering in Korean politics. South Korea’s stable democracy and vibrant economy from 1988 onwards seem to have overridden any need to acknowledge the previous forty years of history, during which the North could reasonably claim that its own autocracy was necessary to counter military rule in Seoul. It’s only in the present context that the North looks at best like a walking anachronism, at worst like a vicious tyranny. For 25 years now the world has been treated to scaremongering about North Korean nuclear weapons, but hardly anyone points out that it was the US that introduced nuclear weapons into the Korean peninsula, in 1958; hundreds were kept there until a worldwide pullback of tactical nukes occurred under George H.W. Bush. But every US administration since 1991 has challenged North Korea with frequent flights of nuclear-capable bombers in South Korean airspace, and any day of the week an Ohio-class submarine could demolish the North in a few hours. Today there are 28,000 US troops stationed in Korea, perpetuating an unwinnable stand-off with the nuclear-capable North. The occupation did indeed turn out to be one of ‘considerable duration’, but it’s also the result of a colossal strategic failure, now entering its eighth decade. It’s common for pundits to say that Washington just can’t take North Korea seriously, but North Korea has taken its measure more than once. And it doesn’t know how to respond.
ewmayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-05-23, 01:17   #6
kladner
 
kladner's Avatar
 
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!

100111010000002 Posts
Default

So many fertile fields, in which to sow conflict, and reap bounteous arms sales. Korea, the Middle East, Africa, the Balkans, Turkey, Ukraine.....
kladner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-06-28, 06:50   #7
kladner
 
kladner's Avatar
 
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!

1004810 Posts
Default California Scheming: Democrats Betray Single-Payer Again

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/06...e-payer-again/
Quote:
Nothing better illustrates the political bankruptcy of the Democratic Party—for all progressive intents and purposes—than California State Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon’s announcement on Friday afternoon that he was going to put a “hold” on the single-payer health care bill (SB 562) for the state, effectively killing its passage for at least the year.
The article says that the Super-majority Democrats in the Assembly are sparing Jerry Brown from having to actually confront his specious support of Single Payer during his election campaign. No pesky "Republican Obstruction" here. The implication is that if the bill hit Brown's desk, he might hem and haw, but would have to veto it.

NOTE: I really wasn't sure where to put this, but the US is part of the wide world, after all. If there is a Health Care thread in Soapbox, I would welcome this being moved.

Moderator reply: My gut feeling is that I would put it on the clutterbot thread merely to control this thread's topic and then spawn a new thread for it if generates much activity. No action needed as yet unless directly requested.

Last fiddled with by only_human on 2017-06-28 at 13:41 Reason: moderator reply
kladner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-06-29, 04:42   #8
kladner
 
kladner's Avatar
 
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!

26·157 Posts
Default

Thanks, Ross. It does not seem to be going anywhere. Let it sit.
kladner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-07-02, 02:28   #9
kladner
 
kladner's Avatar
 
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!

100111010000002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kladner View Post
Thanks, Ross. It does not seem to be going anywhere. Let it sit.
.....and sorry for the careless placement.
kladner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-07-15, 18:55   #10
kladner
 
kladner's Avatar
 
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!

26·157 Posts
Default  Kushner and Bannon Team Up to Privatize the War in Afghanistan

https://www.thenation.com/article/ku...n-afghanistan/
Of course, this is no surprise. Why just sell arms, if someone can make big bucks hiring people to use them?
Not only would more money be funneled to war profiteers. We've also seen how little accountability mercenaries have. Besides, the government can claim (im)plausible deniability for anything that happens.

Quote:
Jared Kushner has been busy, and not only with the Russians. This week, amid the hoopla surrounding his meeting with a Moscow lawyer about the 2016 election, the The New York Times published an intriguing story about his role in a plan to privatize the war in Afghanistan.

Last Saturday, Trump adviser in chief Stephen Bannon, with Kushner’s backing, went to the Pentagon to arrange a discussion between Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and “two businessmen who profited from military contracting,” the Times reported. These weren’t ordinary contractors: They were Erik Prince, the notorious founder of Blackwater, the all-purpose mercenary army, and Stephen Feinberg, a New York financier who owns and controls DynCorp International, the largest US contractor in Afghanistan.

Last fiddled with by kladner on 2017-07-15 at 18:56
kladner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-07-16, 01:30   #11
ewmayer
2ω=0
 
ewmayer's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
República de California

2·3·11·149 Posts
Default

War & Cholera Decimate Yemen, But Saudi Bombing Gets More US Help | naked capitalism

But look over here - Trump tweeted something nasty about some other Twitter twit, and stuff ... and Jared and Ivanka are, like, not fans of presumptive 2020 DNC out-of-touch-oligarch-candidate Mark Zuckerberg! Ooh, and Russia! Russia! Russia!
ewmayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dutch Election Day (a.k.a. political nightmare!) VictordeHolland Soap Box 19 2017-10-31 12:35
Nightmare Mid-East Theatre, Empire of Chaos edition kladner Soap Box 275 2017-07-27 22:29
Chaos GODLIKE PC 23Chaos23 Hardware 14 2016-06-22 01:30
Mystery Economic Theatre 2013 Fusion_power Soap Box 309 2014-01-17 20:51
'Cost for various things worldwide' thread TauCeti Lounge 23 2005-01-26 03:51

All times are UTC. The time now is 11:30.

Sat Nov 28 11:30:05 UTC 2020 up 79 days, 8:41, 3 users, load averages: 1.67, 1.37, 1.26

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.