Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Torture & the Crime of Aggressive War
The U.S. government's torture of detainees in the "war on terror" can be traced directly to a Feb. 7, 2002, memo signed by President George W. Bush.
This was conclusion #1 of the recently released final report of the Senate Armed Services Committee Inquiry into the Treatment of Detainees in U.S. Custody. Thanks primarily to this document, debate concerning one of the most shameful aspects of the "war on terror" has entered the mainstream debate after years on the edges of public discourse. [For more on the report, see Consortiumnews.com's "Torture Trail Seen Starting with Bush."]
Torture, however, is only one of the crimes associated with the "war on terror." A few prominent examples of other crimes waiting to be "sourced" are:
Extraordinary rendition, illegal detention, loss of habeas corpus, abuse and murder of civilians in Iraq and elsewhere, and the creation of millions of impoverished refugees.
With these crimes, the need to find the origin is every bit as imperative as with torture. But we don't need to ask the Senate Armed Services Committee to initiate 18-month investigations for each of these as well.
The question of responsibility for these and all other war crimes, including torture, was answered over 60 years ago at Nuremberg when high-ranking Nazis were brought to account for their atrocities in World War II.
On Sept. 30, 1946, Sir Geoffrey Lawrence, president of the International Military Tribunal, read the judgment of the first Nuremberg trial, which included these memorable words:
"To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
Torture, rendition, loss of liberties, unnecessary death and destruction are just some of the trees. Aggression is the forest.
And there can be no doubt that President George W. Bush and members of his inner circle have committed "the supreme international crime."
The invasion of Iraq is the clearest example of American aggression associated with the "war on terror." The invasion - launched on March 19, 2003 - violated the Nuremberg Charter (Article VI(a)), as well as the United Nations Charter (Article 2, Sec. 4 and Article 39) and U.N. Security Council Resolution #1441.
In addition, since "Operation Iraqi Freedom" violated both the Nuremberg Charter and the U.N. Charter - treaties signed and ratified by the U.S. government - the invasion also violated Article VI, Clause 2 (the Supremacy Clause) of the U.S. Constitution.
To many Americans -- and to the great majority of the rest of humanity -- it couldn't be more clear: starting an unprovoked war is an outrage, both legally and morally.
It is nothing short of mass murder. It cries out for prosecution, for justice, for accountability -- no matter how powerful the aggressors are.
With the Senate Armed Services Committee report, we have taken the first steps towards assigning responsibility for torture.
However if we ignore or marginalize the more fundamental crime of aggression, we risk accepting the unfortunate contemporary American assumption that aggressive war is a legitimate and useful tool of foreign policy - when employed by the U.S. President.
Until this assumption is unequivocally banished, it is likely that future U.S. administrations will repeat this "supreme" crime, further ensuring that torture and other war crimes which flow from aggression will be repeated as well.
It's good that the debate on accountability for torture finally has entered the mainstream. But the principles of accountability and rule of law do not end with a Senate committee report. We should be discussing the possibility of arresting and prosecuting George W. Bush and all others responsible for the unprovoked invasion of Iraq.
The search for the source of war crimes should be followed to its logical conclusion. It's time we saw the forest as well as the trees.
- Posted in
46 Comments so far
Show AllNo one could disagree with this article.
The most important question facing the people of America is not the need for war crimes but the forum.
To leave the process to the US Legal system would be as much a travesty of Justice as no trials at all, since the appellate process would put those convicted into the hands of the same system that has allowed them the open door to the commission of these crimes.
G.W Bush and his administration would have never considered their many crimes had they had the slightest idea that they would be held accountable anywhere but especially in the International Court of Justice.
Your silence will be your consent.
nurembergrevisited@gmail.com
At least, the era of alleged torture has come to an end.
From 60 minutes:
Kroft: There are a number of different things that you could do early pertaining to executive orders. One of them is to shutdown Guantanamo Bay. Another is to change interrogation methods that are used by U.S. troops. Are those things that you plan to take early action on?
Obama: Yes. I have said repeatedly that I intend to close Guantanamo, and I will follow through on that. I have said repeatedly that America doesn't torture. And I'm gonna make sure that we don't torture. Those are part and parcel of an effort to regain America's moral stature in the world.
However, Obama still faces some tough challenges,
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1864736,00.html
joehope sez:
Obama: "... I have said repeatedly that America doesn't torture."
***
What a coincidence. W has repeatedly said the exact same thing.
Same you can believe in, apparently.
Read the next line, "And I'm gonna make sure that we don't torture."
Cherry-picking quotes for propaganda purposes - how very appropriate for someone named Goebbels.
estebandido wrote:
Read "Confessions of an Economic Hit-man".
COMMENT:
I did, and you're right. Everyone should read this as a great companion book to Smedley Butler's to understand how the US really works in the world.
Well Joe, you can take this "News Flash", from one of the children of the people that have waited in vain for the US Gov to comply with anything that is said, promised, mentioned, even alluded to; unless they are 'made to do it', and even then, they often go back on their word after that as well.
Mr. Obama has already shown himself to be nothing but a "mouth piece" for change; his cabinet choices show this, his chief of staff is one who supports Israeli atrocities, of clandestine death squads and many others that have resulted in the current Ha mas/Israeli conflict escalation.
Now, if the American people want to regain their "moral stature in the world"*, they have a long long way to go. The only effective way would be to cut off the influence of the corporate and religious money that buys so much power with the "Prostitutes posing as Politicians" (actually, I hold literal Prostitutes in higher esteem, since they will readily admit what they do while the Politicians are loath to tell the truth about anything).
* If one were to take the "history of the USA" at face value, eliminate all of the biased opinion and propaganda, they would see that the USA in reality would best be depicted as with one of the Medieval 'world map', where the cartographer no knowing anything about the area, would draw in a dragon or monster's likeness with the caption 'monsters be here'--or a warning to that effect.
In other words the USA has never really had a 'moral stature' worthy of anything but a low esteem for the student of its history.
So like the Romans, except at an accelerated rate, the Americans are wasting time and resources on their own corruption while they destroy their own environment, reputation, credibility and any hope of ever ascending to a true leadership position in the world. They will allow a criminal president to strut and smirk and brag about his "lack of accomplishments", even after this VP admits to very serious
crimes on national TV no less.
I have come to the conclusion that unless the USA makes some major changes, and very very soon, they will simply go down in history as another negative example.
But then if that happens, my people have been here for at least 100k years, and we will be here forever. So we may just have that chance to ride our horses through the empty cities of the USA, and tell our grandchildren stories of the fools that had it all, and pissed it all away.
Good luck America you really need it.
Alfred Jodl was charged as a war criminal and hung after the Nuremberg trials.
He did not personally torture, or murder prisoners. His crime was that he issued an order that stated that Russian partisans and or soldiers captured on the Eastern front would NOT be protected by the Geneva Conventions.
In short he did the exact thing GW Bush did.
The very day the United States declared the Geneva Conventions quaint and that such protections did not apply to the Taliban or members of Al Qaeda a war crime was committed.
The real tragedy is that the US Congress went along with this as did the American people who voted a war criminal to a second term.
GwNorth wrote:
the US Congress went along with this as did the American people who voted a war criminal to a second term.
COMMENT:
True, so doesn't this make the US Congress (with the exception of Rep Barbara Lee, perhaps) and all of the American people who voted for GWB the second time, also war criminals?
Statutory law is just one aspect of justice. Case law citing previous precedent that a judge will allow as admissible is the other equally important arm.
The problem is that judges are appointed for life. And many were appointed by the neocon/mil-indust-complex administrations.
After my experiences with the U.S. legal system, there is exactly zero chance of obtaining any justice on this matter when hundreds of congressmen aided and abeted these war crimes, unless huge sums of money are backing the effort.
But moral men know a war crime when they hear of it. The best that can be hoped, IMO, is to procecute the captain at the wheel of this ship of horrors: GWB.
His conviction would be important for world healing. His conviction would be important to American security.
The bad news is that presidents are frequently forgiven later for making war mistakes overseas. But not for wrecking the economy. Hoover is still blamed for the depression of 1929, when in fact the roaring twenties was mostly caused by the same deregulation we just went through again. But Hoover did not give orders to torture that we know of.
With little king George, being stupid was no excuse for violating his oath of office to protect and presserve the constitution of the United States of America. To torture the so-called "enemy" is unlikely to result in legal peril for him. But to debauche the only thing that started the country: the bill of rights, was to become a traitor to all ideals held sacred by many of the American people and freedom lovers around the world.
I would think that further investigation into the insurance industry's allowing FEMA to wire buildings for operation "Godzilla" would produce far more paydirt. The insurance industry was one of the biggest bankrollers of GWB's campaign. Just like the Watergate buildings, The World Trade Center buildings are the key to strange insurance swops right before 911, as I understand it.
The above is all just my opinion only.
"If you want to know what happened, Follow the money." - Deepthroat
ByeMonkeyBush:
COMMENT:
I don't quite follow that this is a reply to my comment.
I certainly didn't mean that US judges, nor an international court, could or should prosecute voters for war crimes because they elected a war criminal to continue criminal behavior in their name.
While I can agree with what you said here, my point (oft repeated elsewhere) is that the American people are war criminals for electing a known war criminal to represent them. Those that voted for an obvious war criminal may not suffer any consequences, however they are morally guilty for the crimes committed by the known criminal they chose to represent them and should know so and their children should know so.
Only if people understand that they are party to heinous crimes against other nations because of whom they choose to represent them, crimes such as the mass murder of innocent people, of genocide, of murder for profit; only if their children know this history of the crimes their parents were aiding and abetting, is there even a glimmer of hope that the criminal actions of the government of the United States, which they put in place and are responsible for, will cease.
The recent article in the December Harpers Magazine gives a good discussion of how and what to do. GWNorth's comment on Alfred Jodl hit the nail on the head.
Can we trust our judical system? I'm not sure. But we have to try. What is most important is to educate the American people. They have been seduced by the old chestnut of the ticking time bomb (which would never happen anyway). I would like a Congressional investigation run by either or both houses. The real scandal is that in 2004 the Democrats were afraid to use torture as an issue. They thought it was a losing issue and they were preobably right. The most important thing is to make the American people realize that torture is both ineffective compared with other interrogation measures, and is decidedly immoral. Even in 2008 Obama did not emphasize the issue.
I'm not too worried about last minute pardons. Anyone who accepts a pardon is implicitly acknowledging guilt. He would have to testify before Congress and could not use the Fifth Amendment because he would be in no danger of prosecution excpt for purgery when testifying. Also, anyone who had accepted a pardon could not safely travel in any country which was likely to claim universal jurisdiction on war crimes. Also the ICC could claim jurisdiction.
The important thing is educate the American people so that no President or Congress will allow torture in the future. It will take a lot of grass roots pressure.
A pardon for Bush and his henchmen may be a great strategy.
First, Mr. Obama issues a pardon to Bush, Cheney and other notables.
Second, these above are brought into the Congress to testify on their actions relevant to the crimes of aggressive war, torture, etc.
The pardons will act as legal immunity in the USA, so they must answer the questions.
Then they are sent to the Haig in the Netherlands to face criminal prosecution on their testimony.
If they cannot be sent to the Haig, then they would never be able to travel outside the USA for fear of being tried as war criminals.
Plus they will be disgraced for all of history as vile war criminals, and they may be subject to legal suits within the USA by their victims.
Look! Once again it's the war on terror popping up like a whacked mole in a game that will never end, diverting our attention from other progressive concerns.
The goal of this war is to 'prevent future terrorism'. Aggressive war becomes understandable as the strategy necessary to keep terrorism from occurring.
The use of torture becomes understandable as a tactic to gain info to deter that future terrorism.
(note - understandable does not mean justified)
If America wants to bring war criminals to justice, it must first end this insane and unwinnable global war, just as World War 2 had to end in order to bring Nazi war criminals to justice.
---
"The most important question facing the people of America..." - countcoup
I disagree - the most important question is "Does America want to be a nation stuck in an unwinnable and ever-expanding war forever?"
this is why , if americans really are as conscientious as they like to believe or portray themselves , they should not be surprised if the world looks at NOT JUST "american policy" but AMERICANS as a nation as people who condone or tolerate crimes against humanity "for the sake of their security and prosperity" . and should not be surprised if - down the road - americans ADD to the perception of themselves as corrupt intellectually, morally and culturally.
while leaders are the first to be noted as being responsible for bad or evil policies - they do not get to do what they do in a vacuum. there has to be a CONDITION , whether they created it or not , in which they operate with the hubris that they do ..and that is provided by the population whose own behavior (disinterest in civics, personal greed and selfishness, willingness to look the other way, voting against their own interests, unbridled "patriotism", empty sloganeering and public rituals of nationalism, intellectual inability, worshipping mediocrity, not listening nor even having any interest in real history.etc) - gives the leaders the confidence that they can get away with what they do.
what was it that some people said -after the second world war?
"EVIL thrives not because of evil men only...but because of those that stayed silent".
when americans , who SHOULD have known better, voted george bush into power...and before that their "conservatism" laying the groundwork for decades...that was already a step into evil that we see in torture..
they REPEATED it in 2004.
when the USA "shocked and awed" iraq and the world - americans were NOT THAT stupid...all they had to do in the clarity of their own simple lives was to ask:
does any nation HAVE any right to invade another nation that clearly can't even threaten ? it was so SIMPLE to just learn and inform themselves...but NOOOOOOOOo....americans were only TOO WILLING to be misled. it was the underlying principle that allowed bush to promote the lies because all americans hid behind "patriotism" after 9/11...
and they were not intelligent or mature enough to QUESTION WHY 9/11 happened. they only looked at "the enemy" but never ASKED honestly -- what are WE doing that makes people hate us?
americans avoided it because it would show them EXACTLY what they are seeing NOW --
that america HAS been interfering in the affairs of other regions AND as a consequence creates ENEMIES where there were NONE before.
that is why -- this is not just the responsibility of bush, cheney, etc == who merely took advantage of what americans were ONLY TOO WILLING TO PERMIT as a nation because they were too wrapped with their RATRACE for "security" and "prosperity" and getting whatever the heck they wanted the second they wanted it.
and THAT is the definition of what Benjamin Franklin warned about:
"should this nation fall...it shall fall not because of foreign enemies or threats, real or imagined...it shall fall because the people are CORRUPT".
intellectually, morally, and culturaly. the leaders like bush and the war party and the corporations that take advantage of the WILLINGNESS of americans to be "led" like sheep -- even if they ought to have known better (you can't forever be driving SUV's and NOT think of the consequences of GAS GUZZLING somewhere down the line, you can't PRETEND that you are RICH by BORROWING, you can't pretend you are MORAL by going to church and waving a flag knowing your country has taken advantage of other weaker nations...etc.) -- are just the RESULT and the EXPRESSION of what americans HAVE become.
a corrupt nation.
Teddy wrote:
AMERICANS as a nation as people who condone or tolerate crimes against humanity "for the sake of their security and prosperity" .
COMMENT:
A Government of the people, BY the people who condone or tolerate crimes against humanity are no less guilty than those who make the orders (Administration), provide the money (Congress), shoot or bomb innocent people (when the military engage in unwarranted attack, all people attacked are innocent).
Consider: if a man owns a pack of pit bulls, someone in his family lets his dogs run free, the dogs proceed to rip the neighbors children into shreds, the man is told by others spreading the news throughout the neighborhood about what his dogs are doing, but the man shrugs and goes back to his beer and easy chair to watch to Jack Bauer commit war crimes on TV leaving the mad dogs to continue their carnage, is not the man as guilty as his mad dogs? Perhaps even more so, because mad dogs will do what mad dogs do, but the owner is responsible for allowing them loose.
The American people have had countless opportunities to choose (elect) border collies that keep the sheep from going astray and the wolves at bay, yet the American people keep choosing (electing) rabid pit bulls and foaming-at-the-mouth rotweilers for their leaders. Are not the American people guilty of the mass deaths and maimings of those many millions in those many wars in its history?
The only avenue to justice is through the American people. The criminals in question will only see justice if the politicians are left with no other choice than to prosecute. And the only way that could happen would be if the American people could wake up and realize this country is NOT a monarchy, and the will of the King is NOT the American way. Dick Cheney's opinions notwithstanding, the President is NOT a monarch who, because he has the power of life and death over the entire world, can do anything he wants, at anytime he wants, in any way that he wants. This is how he has been proceeding since entering the executive branch, and it must stop. The only way to stop this is to vigorously prosecute those who knowingly eviscerated the Constitution..
Prosecution remains, as it always has been, our only protection against those who break laws. If the lawbreaking is allowed to stand, and allowed to move forward, it will be just that much more difficult to bring the lawbreakers of the future to justice. What are laws for, if not the invocation of the entire populace that there are limits to all who live, and the freedom to murder and maim is beyond the limits, and as such, should be grounds for redress of grievance by and for the American people. And that is where all the power is, if there is any, with the people. Time for the people of this nation to stand for what is right, not what is wrong, stand for those who have no voice, and in the case of George W. Bush, no lives at all.
Time to stop this insanity from rolling forward from here. If we the people do not stop these madmen, the blowback in future will shock and awe all those who are forced to experience it...the vengeance of the world exacted because of our lack of enforcement of the very laws we claim to be so proud of. We claim to be for justice and the rule of law...time to prove it and hold them all accountable.
guntotinganglion -- So well put !
and what's more -- apart from consequences in the future that americans will rue the day they let these things pass - that come as "blowback" from other nations which WILL have their day despite what the US powers that be think that they can continue their march to "supreme global dominance" - it's also , equally important for americans - what they will see in their OWN country .
what the USA does in its foreign policies is NEVER separate from the consequences and what it does IN its own borders and with americans themselves.
they ought to have learned that by now.
merely "blaming the chinese for their cheap labor" is only HALF the story. it CAME as a consequence of global imperial capitalist pressures and structure imposed , unjustly, BY the USA and western nations on other weaker nations that were not "as fast" as capitalism demands .
but when one looks at its MICRO economics and structure:
just look at the harrowing "rat race" in the corporate structure of america ITSELF.
do NOT the functioniaries of wall street and the corporate world all RUN like rabbits and rats trying to "compete"? is it NOT a corporate - usa inspired, designed "efficiency" mechanism of making workers do the job of three at wages for one?
is this NOT the consequence also of the "rush to the bottom line"?
is the rush to the bottom line for "cutting costs" and seeking cheaper labor elsewhere NOT an AMERICAN CAPITALIST scheme itself that , through labor and capital dogmatic theoris of SUPPOSEDLY "supply and demand" which really is designed to work FOR capitalists AGAINST labor and resources - and IS an ARTIFICIAL construct promoted as "the natural state of things" in an ECONOMY - is itself the root of problems?
there is ENOUGH FOOD in the world. even AFRICA can feed itself. but why are people starving ?
it's not ONLY because of petty dictators. they are merely PLAYERS within a GLOBAL CAPITALIST SYSTEM of "arrangements" that play governments and regimes and whichever happen to be the opportunists of the moment WITHIN that global structure defined and designed and promoted BY the US led consensus of capitalist "expansion" (which really means HOARDING of resources and wealth to a few) .
it's more fundamentally because of that structure that dictates an ARTIFICIAL system of "access", "supply and demand" to INCREASE profit and "value of money capital" over actual resources and people and labor who are the TRUE capital of nations and the world - by WITHHOLDING access and control depending on what is more "profitable" and on which regime is more amenable to the continuance of that system of "wealth sharing" .
the food technology (even without the food conglomerates technology- which are designed more towards MONOPOLY than actual equitable distribution) - has always been long sufficient , based on age -old nature respectful ways humans have relied on - which by itself - if they are left to BE self-sufficient in their regions rather than interfered with by corporate entities seeking profit that destroy their self-sufficient economies would instinctively be the controlling factor in populations...
it is like in the animal kingdom...lions, and other species, like one organism - just instinctively lower their birthrates according to what nature dictates at given times. humans ALSO will do that - albeit with the institutions of human "morality" or civilization's mores - but which are inherently human versions of "instinctive" self-control.
but INSERT interferences such as PROFIT SEEKING that destroys the natural order of things as humans have long lived with - and you accelerate INSTABILITY of entire geo-biological balances according to the regional necessities and conditions.
there are always going to be FEWER people who live in desert areas - their societies will adapt and have always adapted - because they instinctively apply in their social orders what nature and the earth gives.
but DENY them or those that live in more "habitable" areas with good land and pasture -- their self-sufficient livelihoods through the control of corporate profitmaking -
and you - in the scheme of millenia - instantly see untold suffering and starvation -- and chaos and IN IT the rise of opportunistic entities: dictators, rivalries come to the fore, all seeking for gain towards receding or HOARDED resources that should have have been brought to that point.
and what REALLY dictates this?
GLOBAL SCHEMES of capital flows while people are TRAPPED physically in regions that such capital flows DISTURBED severely but leave them stranded in the middle of those disturbances ...because thousands of miles away,,,more "civilized" nations with their "capital" wanted to "expand" and having EXHAUSTED their expansion within their borders for their MONEY capital which loses its value (since it began with NO value anyway) - must then go abroad to exploit some more in order to maintain its "value" .
and what does this lead to?
it leads to finding more "territory" which is actual LANDS and resources because they are the ONLY TRUE resources that have REAL value ..as well as the people themselves.
but then the GAME repeats itself -- MONEY CAPITAL once again DIMINISHES the value of the very lands and people and resources it interferes with - in order to keep raising ITS value higher than those that are real resources and "capital".
that's of course where global banking and private entities come in.
they are like the DO NOTHINGS of the world - whose main expertise is COUNTING money . but in reality -- they have NOTHING real to contribute. they don't MAKE art, they don't produce MUSIC, they don't bend their backs to plant rice in a paddy, they don't actually WEAVE a basket or a coat, they don't COOK, they don't climb a tree to take its fruit,
all they do is COUNT MONEY - which is the only real "capital" they have -- and all it is , is , fundamentally , WORTHLESS PAPER AND INK - that are worth MORE than the claims placed on them by these bankers and financiers and their "class" of money capitalists.
that's how they make themselves "useful". but in reality -- they are PARASITES on the COMMONS of people and resources and lands .
they ought to be gotten rid of, starting with SHAMING them, again and again and again every time they STRUT among groups of people showing how "important" they are.
like i related some days ago:
i was rather shocked (pleasantly so) - to overhear , in a nursing home - a very old lady , who was once a nurse, but still very feisty and clear headed, being wheeled by her visitor.
she happened to take note how the CEO of the place was going about his rounds walking - to check that everything and 'everyone' was working as required...(such as a nurse aide completing her backbreaking duties for , say , 10 old people in one MORNING shift only, including bathing , dressing, feeding, walking them, etc. on top of tons of paper work) -
and she stopped the CEO :
"excuse me....hello....i want to know -- who are you? i don't think i ever saw you before."
"oh - i am the Boss here, the CEO ".
"what do you do? "
"oh --i make the important decisions to keep things working well".
"oh -- really? you walk around like that with your big belly going out in that fancy suit? and you punch in and out making sure people work for us?....you think you're that important? the really important people here are the women who take care of us -- who bathe us and feed us and make us smile..but whom you pay so little so you can walk around like you're so important".
i was really shocked at how she put it down to the essentials.
meaning : the ENTIRE structure of "governance" and "efficiency" is REDUNDANT in ways that it is the "manager class" that is more often than NOT -- the one that has IRRELEVANCIES but gets teh lion's share of the wealth that the workers and REAL CAPITAL of PEOPLE and their backbreaking work create...so the "money capitalists" can skim the cream off the cake and leave crumbs to those that actually SUPPORT them in their privileged status of "making important decisions".
The author of this piece states the facts many of us have observed on CD for years. The question that needs to be posed is this: Who is going to bring these criminals to justice?
Congressional hearings regarding the corruption of the Bush administration and Congress have been ongoing for years, yet nothing ever comes of them.
When are Bush and the rest of the criminals in our government, who issued the orders and/or aided and abetted the criminals, going to be held accountable?
Unless and until the corporate-owned US Congress and White House are turned out of office, things will only get worse. The looting of the US Treasury, illegal wiretapping, torture, endless wars, etc. will continue.
When our government stops meeting the needs of the electorate, then it is our duty to change the government.
Cavedweller, Saginaw Bill, et al,
Yes. We must repeal those acts and others (PATRIOT ACT and many more) and we will also have to make sure that no one complicit in the crimes--Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Reid, etc.--remains in congress to block legal proceedings. The way Mr. Obama is going, maybe they will all--Republican and Democrat--have positions in the administration. Then we need to get their successors to waive the 5-minute limit on each member's time in hearings, so that each can bloviate to their heart's content and then ALSO pursue a line of questioning without danger of dodging and avoidance by the (immune but still loyal and private-sector job-seeking) witness. Or they can all cede their time to an experienced questioner who will actually get to the truth.
It may be the job of the Justice Dept. to prosecute crimes, but we might consider it a big step forward if they just stop committing the major ones and stay out of the way for others. Is there hope for more? Everyone wants to "get over it", "get on with it" "move on", call it old news and forget it. Everyone, especially the Obama administration, has its pet agenda and does not want to give it up while alienating its corporate donors by pursuing justice and repealing pro-big-business laws. It's a tough row to hoe and will not happen unless we have far more support than we do and make a MUCH larger noise than we are. Congressional hearings are one way to do that: rip the cover off the ugly truth and make many many many more people so mad they fear a revolution in the halls of BAU.
(Business As Usual)
Simple, no. Easy, even less.
Cavedweller et. al.
Step one: Congress repeals the Military Commissions Act provision granting immunity to those involved in torture, and those authorising torture.
Step two: Congress repeals the provisions in the revised FISA Act granting immunity to those involved in warrantless wiretapping of Americans' private electronic communications on American soil by NSA, and those who authorised this systematic warrantless surveillance in violation of existing law.
Step three: Step aside, and let the new Attorney General Eric Holder utilize the ordinary investigative resources of the FBI and the federal grand jury process (including grants of immunity in exchange for truthful testimony when needed) so that indictments can be returned, a fair public trial held,and the defendants' rights are protected.
I see no need to have more Congressional hearings, factfindings or reports, and no need to resort to an international tribunal.
It is the job of the Department of Justice to prosecute federal crimes. Torture, illegal wiretapping, and conspiracy to commit war crimes are all existing federal felonies.
This seems perfectly straightforward to me.
Simply enforce the laws as they are written, using the criminal justice system that is already in place.
Bill from Saginaw
Bill:
As usual, it's clear by your writing that you've given due consideration to what needs to be done. I agree with what you write. I simply don't think that there is anyone in the US government with the political will to "enforce the laws as they are written."
The Democrats are complicit with the Republicans in initiating and advancing these crimes.
What we need now is leadership from outside the existing Washington political crowd. Unfortunately, Congress has gerrymandered the voting districts to make it nearly impossible to beat incumbants in an election. Any ideas?
Hi Bill,
Your three points would be a sensible start, but have the same probability as the discovery of a unicorn that shits gold bars and pisses biodiesel.
What will happen - as happened in the 1700s - is that individual folks will start making decisions. They will finally heed Jefferson:
"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
So as far as TJ was concerned, it was actually a DUTY to overthrow a corrupt government. Or, to use his florid prose: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Note in the extract from the DofI above, that Jefferson did not say 'provide another government for their future security': it appears here (and elsewhere in his writings) that he was open to the idea of testing other non-coercive forms of social organisation.
It must also be borne in mind that Jefferson was not one to let an ambiguous phrase in, except by design. He was aware of de la Boetie's "Discourse on Voluntary Servitude" (from the mid-1500s) and was a good friend of Diderot; Jefferson's writings also indicate a sympathy for VOLUNTARISM.
Cheers
GT
GT's Market Rant
Doesn't Peter Dyer know that extraordinary rendition is a practice that was put into effect by President Clinton??
Doesn't Peter Dyer know that Bill Clinton used extraordinary rendition at least twice?
Wake up folks!
Using extraordinary rendition twice is not the same as what Bush did. Bush abused his powers. If Clinton used extraordinary rendition, then he used it to protect America. That is completely different than what Bush did.
Joe, Joe, Joe, haven't you been paying attention, bud? Bush has also been protecting America. Pull your head out, man. Seriously.
Caretaker, you are correct about Clinton's record, and that may be part of the reason for Obama's, and the Democrats', collective reluctance to investigate these issues. Obama can't create a de facto statute of limitations at 20 January 2001, and doesn't want to implicate his Secretary of State's husband and many in his administration in war crimes.
So instead he is granting a de facto pardon to all human rights violators. We lose a lot with this approach: we cannot regain the lost respect of our allies nor reverse the increased contempt for us which swells the ranks of terrorist groups, we cannot deter future administrations from crimes, and we lose our ability to speak out against abuses abroad and to be an example for the world.
It's merely a continuation of the triumph of politics over law, expediency over morality and hypocrisy over principle.
Alex
It amazes me that otherwise enlightened and clear thinking people can go on and on about the accountability of politicians and stop there. That they have engaged in criminal acts and should face justice should need no further discussion.
At the same time, most of us acknowledge that governments, politicians and administrators at many levels are firmly in the pockets of the leaders of finance and industry and that nothing happens without the approval if not under the explicit direction of these entities. Circumstantial evidence of this situation, as well as pointers to the identities of these individuals, has been published ad nauseam on this site and others.
Why then are we not connecting the dots and ask that the ultimate perpetrators be exposed to the light of day and held accountable?
Isn't it clear that by going after the politicians at any and every level, we're simply purging one set of go-fers to make room for the next?
Can we discuss this?
Go on...
Revolution anyone?
More and more serious commentators are calling for it as the only solution. Of course they can't mention the 'R' word.
The question I see is this: Are we too far down the black hole to be able to claw our way back out? Is it Check yet are are we Mate already?
Who could lead in a total surveillance world when even Mr. Yes-We-Can looks more and more like a Trojan Horse?
Why is everybody so shocked that the US government would launch an unprovoked war and military occupation, and behave with utter dishonesty while doing so?
If you start at (to pick a point at random - there was plenty of government lying and corruption before this), say, the breach of the Black Hills treaty, you can then move on to...
* the slaughter at Wounded Knee;
* the slaughter in the Philippines;
* the slaughter in Cuba;
* the Maine;
* the Lusitania/Huns Bayonetting Nuns;
* the 'Day of Deceit' and the 8-point plan to provoke Japan;
* the Gulf of Tonkin;
* the 'babies from incubators' in Kuwait;
* the 'weapons of mass destruction/yellowcake from Niger/chemical factory trucks' story.
See the thread?
All.Absolute.Fucking.Lies.
Go back even further - to the point at which newly minted US government resulting from the Revolution (over taxes), sent a 15000 man force against its own people... after they refused to pay a brand new shiny Whiskey tax. To the point where Samuel Adams thought that uprisings against kings were laudable, but anyone who fomented rebellion against the new US government should be executed.
And as we all know, there has been precisely one nation that has used a genuine weapon of mass destruction (the atom bomb).
So why does everyone act so fucking surprised when the US's patricians act like lying murdering fucktards?
It's like wondering why priests forced to sublimate normal sexual function, subsequently end up diddling the most vulnerable.
There will come a day - in a half-century or so - when the truth of recent history will come to light. Everyone who is currently accused of being a 'conspiracy theorist' will be proved right (just as those who saw the holes in the propaganda from WWI to WWII to VietNam to Kuwait were called conspiracy theorists, and have since been vindicated).
Government is always brutal. All it HAS is force and the threat of force. All it understands is force.
If you choose to stand in its way and it turns its reptilian gaze upon you, it will send its armed mercenaries to snuff out your life, and the lives of your family. Then, to add a final insult to the indignity of being killed by your overlords, the government will give medals to those armed mercenaries (as if they did anything brave or laudable).
The parasitic scum who run countries have too much at stake in the game - they enrich themselves off the sweat of their livestock (you). If those livestock 'arc up', then they have to be butchered.
Let's hope that people wake up one day and kill off the infestation of "homo cheneyensis" that currently infests our planet: this parasitic subspecies of humanity (identifiable by their sociopathy and attraction towards power) must be exterminated before we can get on with social progress.
Cheerio
GT
GT's Market Rant
Don't you mean "the infestation of 'homo redshieldiensis' " ?
COUNTRY OR STATE Dates of intervention Forces Comments
SOUTH DAKOTA 1890 (-?) Troops 300 Lakota Indians massacred at Wounded Knee.
ARGENTINA 1890 Troops Buenos Aires interests protected.
CHILE 1891 Troops Marines clash with nationalist rebels.
HAITI 1891 Troops Black revolt on Navassa defeated.
IDAHO 1892 Troops Army suppresses silver miners' strike.
HAWAII 1893 (-?) Naval, troops Independent kingdom overthrown, annexed.
CHICAGO 1894 Troops Breaking of rail strike, 34 killed.
NICARAGUA 1894 Troops Month-long occupation of Bluefields.
CHINA 1894-95 Naval, troops Marines land in Sino-Japanese War
KOREA 1894-96 Troops Marines kept in Seoul during war.
PANAMA 1895 Troops, naval Marines land in Colombian province.
NICARAGUA 1896 Troops Marines land in port of Corinto.
CHINA 1898-1900 Troops Boxer Rebellion fought by foreign armies.
PHILIPPINES 1898-1910 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, killed 600,000 Filipinos
CUBA 1898-1902 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, still hold Navy base.
PUERTO RICO 1898 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, occupation continues.
GUAM 1898 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, still use as base.
MINNESOTA 1898 (-?) Troops Army battles Chippewa at Leech Lake.
NICARAGUA 1898 Troops Marines land at port of San Juan del Sur.
SAMOA 1899 (-?) Troops Battle over succession to throne.
NICARAGUA 1899 Troops Marines land at port of Bluefields.
IDAHO 1899-1901 Troops Army occupies Coeur d'Alene mining region.
OKLAHOMA 1901 Troops Army battles Creek Indian revolt.
PANAMA 1901-14 Naval, troops Broke off from Colombia 1903, annexed Canal Zone 1914.
HONDURAS 1903 Troops Marines intervene in revolution.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1903-04 Troops U.S. interests protected in Revolution.
KOREA 1904-05 Troops Marines land in Russo-Japanese War.
CUBA 1906-09 Troops Marines land in democratic election.
NICARAGUA 1907 Troops "Dollar Diplomacy" protectorate set up.
HONDURAS 1907 Troops Marines land during war with Nicaragua
PANAMA 1908 Troops Marines intervene in election contest.
NICARAGUA 1910 Troops Marines land in Bluefields and Corinto.
HONDURAS 1911 Troops U.S. interests protected in civil war.
CHINA 1911-41 Naval, troops Continuous occupation with flare-ups.
CUBA 1912 Troops U.S. interests protected in civil war.
PANAMA 1912 Troops Marines land during heated election.
HONDURAS 1912 Troops Marines protect U.S. economic interests.
NICARAGUA 1912-33 Troops, bombing 10-year occupation, fought guerillas
MEXICO 1913 Naval Americans evacuated during revolution.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1914 Naval Fight with rebels over Santo Domingo.
COLORADO 1914 Troops Breaking of miners' strike by Army.
MEXICO 1914-18 Naval, troops Series of interventions against nationalists.
HAITI 1914-34 Troops, bombing 19-year occupation after revolts.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1916-24 Troops 8-year Marine occupation.
CUBA 1917-33 Troops Military occupation, economic protectorate.
WORLD WAR I 1917-18 Naval, troops Ships sunk, fought Germany for 1 1/2 years.
RUSSIA 1918-22 Naval, troops Five landings to fight Bolsheviks
PANAMA 1918-20 Troops "Police duty" during unrest after elections.
HONDURAS 1919 Troops Marines land during election campaign.
YUGOSLAVIA 1919 Troops/Marines intervene for Italy against Serbs in Dalmatia.
GUATEMALA 1920 Troops 2-week intervention against unionists.
WEST VIRGINIA 1920-21 Troops, bombing Army intervenes against mineworkers.
TURKEY 1922 Troops Fought nationalists in Smyrna.
CHINA 1922-27 Naval, troops Deployment during nationalist revolt.
HONDURAS 1924-25 Troops Landed twice during election strife.
PANAMA 1925 Troops Marines suppress general strike.
CHINA 1927-34 Troops Marines stationed throughout the country.
EL SALVADOR 1932 Naval Warships send during Marti revolt.
WASHINGTON DC 1932 Troops Army stops WWI vet bonus protest.
WORLD WAR II 1941-45 Naval, troops, bombing, nuclear Hawaii bombed, fought Japan, Italy and Germay for 3 years; first nuclear war.
DETROIT 1943 Troops Army put down Black rebellion.
IRAN 1946 Nuclear threat Soviet troops told to leave north.
YUGOSLAVIA 1946 Nuclear threat, naval Response to shoot-down of US plane.
URUGUAY 1947 Nuclear threat Bombers deployed as show of strength.
GREECE 1947-49 Command operation U.S. directs extreme-right in civil war.
GERMANY 1948 Nuclear Threat Atomic-capable bombers guard Berlin Airlift.
CHINA 1948-49 Troops/Marines evacuate Americans before Communist victory.
PHILIPPINES 1948-54 Command operation CIA directs war against Huk Rebellion.
PUERTO RICO 1950 Command operation Independence rebellion crushed in Ponce.
KOREA 1951-53 (-?) Troops, naval, bombing , nuclear threats U.S./So. Korea fights China/No. Korea to stalemate; A-bomb threat in 1950, and against China in 1953. Still have bases.
IRAN 1953 Command Operation CIA overthrows democracy, installs Shah.
VIETNAM 1954 Nuclear threat French offered bombs to use against seige.
GUATEMALA 1954 Command operation, bombing, nuclear threat CIA directs exile invasion after new gov't nationalized U.S. company lands; bombers based in Nicaragua.
EGYPT 1956 Nuclear threat, troops Soviets told to keep out of Suez crisis; Marines evacuate foreigners.
LEBANON l958 Troops, naval Marine occupation against rebels.
IRAQ 1958 Nuclear threat Iraq warned against invading Kuwait.
CHINA l958 Nuclear threat China told not to move on Taiwan isles.
PANAMA 1958 Troops Flag protests erupt into confrontation.
VIETNAM l960-75 Troops, naval, bombing, nuclear threats Fought South Vietnam revolt & North Vietnam; one million killed in longest U.S. war; atomic bomb threats in l968 and l969.
CUBA l961 Command operation CIA-directed exile invasion fails.
GERMANY l961 Nuclear threat Alert during Berlin Wall crisis.
LAOS 1962 Command operation Military buildup during guerrilla war.
CUBA l962 Nuclear threat, naval Blockade during missile crisis; near-war with Soviet Union.
IRAQ 1963 Command operation CIA organizes coup that killed president, brings Ba'ath Party to power, and Saddam Hussein back from exile to be head of the secret service.
PANAMA l964 Troops Panamanians shot for urging canal's return.
INDONESIA l965 Command operation Million killed in CIA-assisted army coup.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1965-66 Troops, bombing Marines land during election campaign.
GUATEMALA l966-67 Command operation Green Berets intervene against rebels.
DETROIT l967 Troops Army battles African Americans, 43 killed.
UNITED STATES l968 Troops After King is shot; over 21,000 soldiers in cities.
CAMBODIA l969-75 Bombing, troops, naval Up to 2 million killed in decade of bombing, starvation, and political chaos.
OMAN l970 Command operation U.S. directs Iranian marine invasion.
LAOS l971-73 Command operation, bombing U.S. directs South Vietnamese invasion; "carpet-bombs" countryside.
SOUTH DAKOTA l973 Command operation Army directs Wounded Knee siege of Lakotas.
MIDEAST 1973 Nuclear threat World-wide alert during Mideast War.
CHILE 1973 Command operation CIA-backed coup ousts elected marxist president.
CAMBODIA l975 Troops, bombing Gas captured ship, 28 die in copter crash.
ANGOLA l976-92 Command operation CIA assists South African-backed rebels.
IRAN l980 Troops, nuclear threat, aborted bombing Raid to rescue Embassy hostages; 8 troops die in copter-plane crash. Soviets warned not to get involved in revolution.
LIBYA l981 Naval jets Two Libyan jets shot down in maneuvers.
EL SALVADOR l981-92 Command operation, troops Advisors, overflights aid anti-rebel war, soldiers briefly involved in hostage clash.
NICARAGUA l981-90 Command operation, naval CIA directs exile (Contra) invasions, plants harbor mines against revolution.
LEBANON l982-84 Naval, bombing, troops Marines expel PLO and back Phalangists, Navy bombs and shells Muslim positions.
GRENADA l983-84 Troops, bombing Invasion four years after revolution.
HONDURAS l983-89 Troops Maneuvers help build bases near borders.
IRAN l984 Jets Two Iranian jets shot down over Persian Gulf.
LIBYA l986 Bombing, naval Air strikes to topple nationalist gov't.
BOLIVIA 1986 Troops Army assists raids on cocaine region.
IRAN l987-88 Naval, bombing US intervenes on side of Iraq in war.
LIBYA 1989 Naval jets Two Libyan jets shot down.
VIRGIN ISLANDS 1989 Troops St. Croix Black unrest after storm.
PHILIPPINES 1989 Jets Air cover provided for government against coup.
PANAMA 1989 (-?) Troops, bombing Nationalist government ousted by 27,000 soldiers, leaders arrested, 2000+ killed.
LIBERIA 1990 Troops Foreigners evacuated during civil war.
SAUDI ARABIA 1990-91 Troops, jets Iraq countered after invading Kuwait. 540,000 troops also stationed in Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Israel.
RAQ 1990-? Bombing, troops, naval Blockade of Iraqi and Jordanian ports, air strikes; 200,000+ killed in invasion of Iraq and Kuwait; no-fly zone over Kurdish north, Shiite south, large-scale destruction of Iraqi military.
KUWAIT 1991 Naval, bombing, troops Kuwait royal family returned to throne.
LOS ANGELES 1992 Troops Army, Marines deployed against anti-police uprising.
SOMALIA 1992-94 Troops, naval, bombing U.S.-led United Nations occupation during civil war; raids against one Mogadishu faction.
YUGOSLAVIA 1992-94 Naval NATO blockade of Serbia and Montenegro.
BOSNIA 1993-? Jets, bombing No-fly zone patrolled in civil war; downed jets, bombed Serbs.
HAITI 1994 Troops, naval Blockade against military government; troops restore President Aristide to office three years after coup.
ZAIRE (CONGO) 1996-97 Troops Marines at Rwandan Hutu refugee camps, in area where Congo revolution begins.
LIBERIA 1997 Troops Soldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners.
ALBANIA 1997 Troops Soldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners.
SUDAN 1998 Missiles Attack on pharmaceutical plant alleged to be "terrorist" nerve gas plant.
AFGHANISTAN 1998 Missiles Attack on former CIA training camps used by Islamic fundamentalist groups alleged to have attacked embassies.
IRAQ 1998-? Bombing, Missiles Four days of intensive air strikes after weapons inspectors allege Iraqi obstructions.
YUGOSLAVIA 1999 Bombing, Missiles Heavy NATO air strikes after Serbia declines to withdraw from Kosovo. NATO occupation of Kosovo.
YEMEN 2000 Naval USS Cole, docked in Aden, bombed.
MACEDONIA 2001 Troops NATO forces deployed to move and disarm Albanian rebels.
UNITED STATES 2001 Jets, naval Reaction to hijacker attacks on New York, DC
AFGHANISTAN 2001-? Troops, bombing, missiles Massive U.S. mobilization to overthrow Taliban, hunt Al Qaeda fighters, install Karzai regime, and battle Taliban insurgency. More than 30,000 U.S. troops and numerous private security contractors carry our occupation.
YEMEN 2002 Missiles Predator drone missile attack on Al Qaeda, including a US citizen.
PHILIPPINES 2002-? Troops, naval Training mission for Philippine military fighting Abu Sayyaf rebels evolves into combat missions in Sulu Archipelago, west of Mindanao.
COLOMBIA 2003-? Troops US special forces sent to rebel zone to back up Colombian military protecting oil pipeline.
IRAQ 2003-? Troops, naval, bombing, missiles Saddam regime toppled in Baghdad. More than 250,000 U.S. personnel participate in invasion. US and UK forces occupy country and battle Sunni and Shi'ite insurgencies. More than 160,000 troops and numerous private contractors carry out occupation and build large permanent bases.
LIBERIA 2003 Troops Brief involvement in peacekeeping force as rebels drove out leader.
HAITI 2004-05 Troops, naval Marines land after right-wing rebels oust elected President Aristide, who was advised to leave by Washington.
PAKISTAN 2005-? Missiles, bombing, covert operation CIA missile and air strikes and Special Forces raids on alleged Al Qaeda and Taliban refuge villages kill multiple civilians.
SOMALIA 2006-? Missiles, naval, covert operation Special Forces advise Ethiopian invasion that topples Islamist government; AC-130 strikes and Cruise missile attacks against Islamist rebels; naval blockade against "pirates" and insurgents.
SYRIA 2008 Troops Special Forces in helicopter raid 5 miles from Iraq kill 8 Syrian civilians
I hated your list Teddy.
Good posting, bookmarked.
http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html
ZOLTÁN GROSSMAN
Faculty member in Geography and Native American Studies, The Evergreen State College
Lab 1, Room 3012, 2700 Evergreen Pkwy. NW,
Olympia, WA 98505 USA
grossmaz@evergreen.edu
Tel. (360) 867-6153
Faculty home page
Writings
Presentations
Maps
Community service
Favorite stuff
FROM WOUNDED KNEE TO IRAQ:
A CENTURY OF U.S. MILITARY INTERVENTIONS
by Dr. Zoltan Grossman
The following is a partial list of U.S. military interventions from 1890 to 2009.
Below the list is a Briefing on the History of U.S. Military Interventions.
The list and briefing are also available as a powerpoint presentation.
This guide does not include:
* mobilizations of the National Guard
* offshore shows of naval strength
* reinforcements of embassy personnel
* the use of non-Defense Department personnel (such as the Drug Enforcement Administration)
* military exercises
* non-combat mobilizations (such as replacing postal strikers)
* the permanent stationing of armed forces
* covert actions where the U.S. did not play a command and control role
* the use of small hostage rescue units
* most uses of proxy troops
* U.S. piloting of foreign warplanes
* foreign or domestic disaster assistance
* military training and advisory programs not involving direct combat
* civic action programs
* and many other military activities.
Among sources used, beside news reports, are the Congressional Record (23 June 1969), 180 Landings by the U.S. Marine Corp History Division, Ege & Makhijani in Counterspy (July-Aug, 1982), "Instances of Use of United States Forces Abroad, 1798-1993" by Ellen C. Collier of the Library of Congress Congressional Research Service, and Ellsberg in Protest & Survive.
Versions of this list have been published on Zmag.org, Neravt.com, and numerous other websites.
Translations of list: Spanish French Turkish Italian Chinese Greek Russian Czech Tamil Portuguese
Quotes in Christian Science Monitor and The Independent
Turkish newspaper urges that the United States be listed in Guinness Book of World Records as the Country with the Most Foreign Interventions.
(Death toll estimates from wars can be found in the Historical Atlas of the 20th Century by alphabetized places index, map series, and major casualties .)
A BRIEFING ON THE HISTORY
OF U.S. MILITARY INTERVENTIONS
By Zoltán Grossman, October 2001
Published in Z magazine. Translations in Italian Polish
Since the September 11 attacks on the United States, most people in the world agree that the perpetrators need to be brought to justice, without killing many thousands of civilians in the process. But unfortunately, the U.S. military has always accepted massive civilian deaths as part of the cost of war. The military is now poised to kill thousands of foreign civilians, in order to prove that killing U.S. civilians is wrong.
The media has told us repeatedly that some Middle Easterners hate the U.S. only because of our "freedom" and "prosperity." Missing from this explanation is the historical context of the U.S. role in the Middle East, and for that matter in the rest of the world. This basic primer is an attempt to brief readers who have not closely followed the history of U.S. foreign or military affairs, and are perhaps unaware of the background of U.S. military interventions abroad, but are concerned about the direction of our country toward a new war in the name of "freedom" and "protecting civilians."
The United States military has been intervening in other countries for a long time. In 1898, it seized the Philippines, Cuba, and Puerto Rico from Spain, and in 1917-18 became embroiled in World War I in Europe. In the first half of the 20th century it repeatedly sent Marines to "protectorates" such as Nicaragua, Honduras, Panama, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic. All these interventions directly served corporate interests, and many resulted in massive losses of civilians, rebels, and soldiers. Many of the uses of U.S. combat forces are documented in A History of U.S. Military Interventions since 1890: http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html
U.S. involvement in World War II (1941-45) was sparked by the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, and fear of an Axis invasion of North America. Allied bombers attacked fascist military targets, but also fire-bombed German and Japanese cities such as Dresden and Tokyo, party under the assumption that destroying civilian neighborhoods would weaken the resolve of the survivors and turn them against their regimes. Many historians agree that fire- bombing's effect was precisely the opposite--increasing Axis civilian support for homeland defense, and discouraging potential coup attempts. The atomic bombing of Japan at the end of the war was carried out without any kind of advance demonstration or warning that may have prevented the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.
The war in Korea (1950-53) was marked by widespread atrocities, both by North Korean/Chinese forces, and South Korean/U.S. forces. U.S. troops fired on civilian refugees headed into South Korea, apparently fearing they were northern infiltrators. Bombers attacked North Korean cities, and the U.S. twice threatened to use nuclear weapons. North Korea is under the same Communist government today as when the war began.
During the Middle East crisis of 1958, Marines were deployed to quell a rebellion in Lebanon, and Iraq was threatened with nuclear attack if it invaded Kuwait. This little-known crisis helped set U.S. foreign policy on a collision course with Arab nationalists, often in support of the region's monarchies.
In the early 1960s, the U.S. returned to its pre-World War II interventionary role in the Caribbean, directing the failed 1961 Bay of Pigs exile invasion of Cuba, and the 1965 bombing and Marine invasion of the Dominican Republic during an election campaign. The CIA trained and harbored Cuban exile groups in Miami, which launched terrorist attacks on Cuba, including the 1976 downing of a Cuban civilian jetliner near Barbados. During the Cold War, the CIA would also help to support or install pro-U.S. dictatorships in Iran, Chile, Guatemala, Indonesia, and many other countries around the world.
The U.S. war in Indochina (1960-75) pit U.S. forces against North Vietnam, and Communist rebels fighting to overthrow pro-U.S. dictatorships in South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. U.S. war planners made little or no distinction between attacking civilians and guerrillas in rebel-held zones, and U.S. "carpet-bombing" of the countryside and cities swelled the ranks of the ultimately victorious revolutionaries. Over two million people were killed in the war, including 55,000 U.S. troops. Less than a dozen U.S. citizens were killed on U.S. soil, in National Guard shootings or antiwar bombings. In Cambodia, the bombings drove the Khmer Rouge rebels toward fanatical leaders, who launched a murderous rampage when they took power in 1975.
Echoes of Vietnam reverberated in Central America during the 1980s, when the Reagan administration strongly backed the pro-U.S. regime in El Salvador, and right-wing exile forces fighting the new leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua. Rightist death squads slaughtered Salvadoran civilians who questioned the concentration of power and wealth in a few hands. CIA-trained Nicaraguan Contra rebels launched terrorist attacks against civilian clinics and schools run by the Sandinista government, and mined Nicaraguan harbors. U.S. troops also invaded the island nation of Grenada in 1983, to oust a new military regime, attacking Cuban civilian workers (even though Cuba had backed the leftist government deposed in the coup), and accidentally bombing a hospital.
The U.S. returned in force to the Middle East in 1980, after the Shi'ite Muslim revolution in Iran against Shah Pahlevi's pro-U.S. dictatorship. A troop and bombing raid to free U.S. Embassy hostages held in downtown Tehran had to be aborted in the Iranian desert. After the 1982 Israeli occupation of Lebanon, U.S. Marines were deployed in a neutral "peacekeeping" operation. They instead took the side of Lebanon's pro-Israel Christian government against Muslim rebels, and U.S. Navy ships rained enormous shells on Muslim civilian villages. Embittered Shi'ite Muslim rebels responded with a suicide bomb attack on Marine barracks, and for years seized U.S. hostages in the country. In retaliation, the CIA set off car bombs to assassinate Shi'ite Muslim leaders. Syria and the Muslim rebels emerged victorious in Lebanon.
Elsewhere in the Middle East, the U.S. launched a 1986 bombing raid on Libya, which it accused of sponsoring a terrorist bombing later tied to Syria. The bombing raid killed civilians, and may have led to the later revenge bombing of a U.S. jet over Scotland. Libya's Arab nationalist leader Muammar Qaddafi remained in power. The U.S. Navy also intervened against Iran during its war against Iraq in 1987-88, sinking Iranian ships and "accidentally" shooting down an Iranian civilian jetliner.
U.S. forces invaded Panama in 1989 to oust the nationalist regime of Manuel Noriega. The U.S. accused its former ally of allowing drug-running in the country, though the drug trade actually increased after his capture. U.S. bombing raids on Panama City ignited a conflagration in a civilian neighborhood, fed by stove gas tanks. Over 2,000 Panamanians were killed in the invasion to capture one leader.
The following year, the U.S. deployed forces in the Persian Gulf after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, which turned Washington against its former Iraqi ally Saddam Hussein. U.S. supported the Kuwaiti monarchy and the Muslim fundamentalist monarchy in neighboring Saudi Arabia against the secular nationalist Iraq regime. In January 1991, the U.S..and its allies unleashed a massive bombing assault against Iraqi government and military targets, in an intensity beyond the raids of World War II and Vietnam. Up to 200,000 Iraqis were killed in the war and its imemdiate aftermath of rebellion and disease, including many civilians who died in their villages, neighborhoods, and bomb shelters. The U.S. continued economic sanctions that denied health and energy to Iraqi civilians, who died by the hundreds of thousands, according to United Nations agencies. The U.S. also instituted "no-fly zones" and virtually continuous bombing raids, yet Saddam was politically bolstered as he was militarily weakened.
In the 1990s, the U.S. military led a series of what it termed "humanitarian interventions" it claimed would safeguard civilians. Foremost among them was the 1992 deployment in the African nation of Somalia, torn by famine and a civil war between clan warlords. Instead of remaining neutral, U.S. forces took the side of one faction against another faction, and bombed a Mogadishu neighborhood. Enraged crowds, backed by foreign Arab mercenaries, killed 18 U.S. soldiers, forcing a withdrawal from the country.
Other so-called "humanitarian interventions" were centered in the Balkan region of Europe, after the 1992 breakup of the multiethnic federation of Yugoslavia. The U.S. watched for three years as Serb forces killed Muslim civilians in Bosnia, before its launched decisive bombing raids in 1995. Even then, it never intervened to stop atrocities by Croatian forces against Muslim and Serb civilians, because those forces were aided by the U.S. In 1999, the U.S. bombed Serbia to force President Slobodan Milosevic to withdraw forces from the ethnic Albanian province of Kosovo, which was torn a brutal ethnic war. The bombing intensified Serbian expulsions and killings of Albanian civilians from Kosovo, and caused the deaths of thousands of Serbian civilians, even in cities that had voted strongly against Milosevic. When a NATO occupation force enabled Albanians to move back, U.S. forces did little or nothing to prevent similar atrocities against Serb and other non-Albanian civilians. The U.S. was viewed as a biased player, even by the Serbian democratic opposition that overthrew Milosevic the following year.
Even when the U.S. military had apparently defensive motives, it ended up attacking the wrong targets. After the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in East Africa, the U.S. "retaliated" not only against Osama Bin Laden's training camps in Afghanistan, but a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan that was mistakenly said to be a chemical warfare installation. Bin Laden retaliated by attacking a U.S. Navy ship docked in Yemen in 2000. After the 2001 terror attacks on the United States, the U.S. military is poised to again bomb Afghanistan, and possibly move against other states it accuses of promoting anti-U.S. "terrorism," such as Iraq and Sudan. Such a campaign will certainly ratchet up the cycle of violence, in an escalating series of retaliations that is the hallmark of Middle East conflicts. Afghanistan, like Yugoslavia, is a multiethnic state that could easily break apart in a new catastrophic regional war. Almost certainly more civilians would lose their lives in this tit-for-tat war on "terrorism" than the 3,000 civilians who died on September 11.
COMMON THEMES
Some common themes can be seen in many of these U.S. military interventions.
First, they were explained to the U.S. public as defending the lives and rights of civilian populations. Yet the military tactics employed often left behind massive civilian "collateral damage." War planners made little distinction between rebels and the civilians who lived in rebel zones of control, or between military assets and civilian infrastructure, such as train lines, water plants, agricultural factories, medicine supplies, etc. The U.S. public always believe that in the next war, new military technologies will avoid civilian casualties on the other side. Yet when the inevitable civilian deaths occur, they are always explained away as "accidental" or "unavoidable."
SECOND, ALTHOUGH NEARLY ALL THE POST-WORLD WAR II INTERVENTIONS WERE CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME OF "FREEDOM" AND "DEMOCRACY," NEARLY ALL OF THEM IN FACT DEFENDED DICTATORSHIPS CONTROLLED BY PRO-U.S. ELITES.
Whether in Vietnam, Central America, or the Persian Gulf, the U.S. was not defending "freedom" but an ideological agenda (such as defending capitalism) or an economic agenda (such as protecting oil company investments). In the few cases when U.S. military forces toppled a dictatorship--such as in Grenada or Panama--they did so in a way that prevented the country's people from overthrowing their own dictator first, and installing a new democratic government more to their liking.
Third, the U.S. always attacked violence by its opponents as "terrorism," "atrocities against civilians," or "ethnic cleansing," but minimized or defended the same actions by the U.S. or its allies. If a country has the right to "end" a state that trains or harbors terrorists, would Cuba or Nicaragua have had the right to launch defensive bombing raids on U.S. targets to take out exile terrorists? Washington's double standard maintains that an U.S. ally's action by definition "defensive," but that an enemy's retaliation is by definition "offensive."
Fourth, the U.S. often portrays itself as a neutral peacekeeper, with nothing but the purest humanitarian motives. After deploying forces in a country, however, it quickly divides the country or region into "friends" and "foes," and takes one side against another. This strategy tends to enflame rather than dampen a war or civil conflict, as shown in the cases of Somalia and Bosnia, and deepens resentment of the U.S. role.
Fifth, U.S. military intervention is often counterproductive even if one accepts U.S. goals and rationales. Rather than solving the root political or economic roots of the conflict, it tends to polarize factions and further destabilize the country. The same countries tend to reappear again and again on the list of 20th century interventions.
Sixth, U.S. demonization of an enemy leader, or military action against him, tends to strengthen rather than weaken his hold on power. Take the list of current regimes most singled out for U.S. attack, and put it alongside of the list of regimes that have had the longest hold on power, and you will find they have the same names. Qaddafi, Castro, Saddam, Kim, and others may have faced greater internal criticism if they could not portray themselves as Davids standing up to the American Goliath, and (accurately) blaming many of their countries' internal problems on U.S. economic sanctions.
One of the most dangerous ideas of the 20th century was that "people like us" could not commit atrocities against civilians.
* German and Japanese citizens believed it, but their militaries slaughtered millions of people.
* British and French citizens believed it, but their militaries fought brutal colonial wars in Africa and Asia.
* Russian citizens believed it, but their armies murdered civilians in Afghanistan, Chechnya, and elsewhere.
* Israeli citizens believed it, but their army mowed down Palestinians and Lebanese.
* Arabs believed it, but suicide bombers and hijackers targeted U.S. and Israeli civilians.
* U.S. citizens believed it, but their military killed hundreds of thousands in Vietnam, Iraq, and elsewhere.
Every country, every ethnicity, every religion, contains within it the capability for extreme violence. Every group contains a faction that is intolerant of other groups, and actively seeks to exclude or even kill them. War fever tends to encourage the intolerant faction, but the faction only succeeds in its goals if the rest of the group acquiesces or remains silent. The attacks of September 11 were not only a test for U.S. citizens attitudes' toward minority ethnic/racial groups in their own country, but a test for our relationship with the rest of the world. We must begin not by lashing out at civilians in Muslim countries, but by taking responsibility for our own history and our own actions, and how they have fed the cycle of violence.
Teddy wrote:
In the few cases when U.S. military forces toppled a dictatorship--such as in Grenada or Panama--they did so in a way that prevented the country's people from overthrowing their own dictator first, and installing a new democratic government more to their liking.
COMMENT:
Dictatorships? Well, yes but and probably.
In the case of Grenada's popular Bishop the only people that might have engaged in "overthrowing" were the wealthy investment class with plenty of help from their friends in the CIA. As it turned out, instead of relying on the CIA and undependable locals, RayGun, probably under orders from the Cheney-of-his-day: GHW Bush, turned the might of the US military on some Cuban construction workers and a handful of Grenada's "young men in uniform."
However, the US has no right under international or moral law to murder people, and overthrow governments it doesn't like to install those it does. In the case of both these countries, Grenada's Bishop and Panama's Noreiga were enemies of the wealthy with popular followings among the poor. In Bishop's case his great crime was being a leftist, in Noriega's it was disobeying his old boss GHW Bush.
The reasons given by RayGun and George the First for invading sovereign countries and killing people were outright lies.
Leftist President Maurice Bishop of Grenada was assassinated by elements yet unproven, although there were plans long before his assassination by the US to invade Grenada.
Bishop's assassination occurred October 19, 1983, US president Reagan's invasion began October 25, 1983, a mere six days later. One of the excuses given for invading was the turmoil after the assassination.
Only six days to plan and equip an invasion and sail to Grenada! Wow! Surely that must be a record in high-speed scrambling by those responsible for logistics. Unless of course...but, no the US wouldn't kill the leader of a foreign country. Of course not.
The object of the US attack were primarily Cubans, who in Castro's good-will way had sent medical personnel to treat the citizens which the US-owned medical school wasn't or couldn't, as well as engineers and workers to build an international airport to bring tiny Grenada into the modern era.
The US lied that the Cubans were building a military installation which RayGun claimed was a threat somehow to the US. Threat my ass. The only "threat" was another country leaning toward the socialism which stymies capitalistic usury.
After murdering construction workers for capitalism, the US went ahead and built, the international airport the Cubans had started and would have paid for instead of US taxpayers.
Thanks a helluva lot for the bill, Ronnie, you half-assed, two-bit actor. As an actor you weren't good enough to fool anyone who wasn't a brainless jingoist that you didn't know what Olie and the boys were doing at all those meetings over the years in your home. Your own home. Napping all those days were you? Okay, I'll stop talking to the dead now.
The US went after Noriega in Panama, not because the Panamanian people were suffering under his dictatorship anymore than they had under previous governments, quite the contrary: Noriega, who had been on the payroll of the CIA, began objecting to what the US asked of him in the drug trade for shipping of arms to contras and measures that would be detrimental to Panama's poor.
Noriega a friend of Panama's poor? Sort-of. The friends of the US and Noriega's enemies at the time when he allegedly stole his election from a wealthy opponent were the wealthy, and Noriega found himself needing the support of the poor. The poor did, eventually indeed, became dissatisfied with Noriega, not because of his rule but because sanctions by the US to force Noriega out fell, as always, harshest on the poor, while having little effect on the rich. As in Iraq today.
As for being a dictator, Noriega ran for election and according to him, won, according to his enemies lost, but if he was a bastard, "he was our bastard," at least until he wasn't.
Noriega got uppity with president George the First, who had been his boss when Bush was head of the CIA, and Bush intended to slap him down. That is the meat of the story. As Chomsky said "Compared to Bush's buddies in Baghdad and Beijing, Noriega looked like Mother Teresa."
Grenada and Panama both belong in the long list of nations abused by the US: both belong in the list of violations of nation's sovereignty, by the US, a war crime, "the supreme war crime."
As for Noreiga, he served jail time for drug crimes committed during the very time period when he was working for the drug-peddling, illegal arms trading, CIA under GHW Bush.
During the press to arrest Noriega in the city of Panama, a working class neighborhood was bombed out, shot up, and burned down and "at least" 2500 innocents killed according to international counters. In addition to many being incinerated in a holocaust of flames, were those killed execution style in the back of the head as they were lying face-down on the ground. Shades of Mai Lai.
Innocent people. I knew that neighborhood in Panama years ago. I wonder if the beautiful Maria still lived there. Wonder where she is. Wonder if the bastard Bush killed her.
We, the People, are, according to the Constitution, the government. After 2001 and the appointment of Bush to the Oval Office, we might have been forgiven for the excesses of this administration but not after making it close enough for them to be able to steal in 2004. Enough people voted for him and Cheney then to make that possible and to make us equally culpable. If this were a dictatorship and there were no official accountability to the people, it would be obviously different. Except for a relative few voices in the confused wilderness, most of America went right along, if not outwardly, then at least by their quiet “consent”. We may be a police state technically, where dissent is criminalized and such, but until that is officially changed, we are all responsible for the atrocities of the government, because we ARE the government. As long as we insist on the fiction that this is a free and democratic (small d) nation then we must bear the ultimate responsibility, and shame, for what has been done in our name and just ignoring it and staying tuned to American Idol or whatever Brittany is doing can never absolve us of this. We, as a whole, may have short memories (witness that things like this economic mess we're in happen again and again and again...) but the same can't be said of the rest of the world. How long do we have until they band together to say enough is enough and try to rid this world of the cancer that is the US?
Hello there. There is hope for all former drug addicts. One of them is Drug Intervention Mississippi rehab center. Drug intervention is proved effective here. Please visit this website.
__________________________________________________________________________________
cristiano
Drug Intervention Mississippi