Here Today... Gone To Hell!

well,i think thisorganization is one of the worst organization ever
They were guilty for more than 20 wars in the world,and for more human lives

When some country have different interest than cia,then they make a lot of problems for that country and in the end they make a war

For exampleCIA crushed ex yugoslavia (they bought couple politicans) and after that more than 300000 lost their lives in wars on ex yugoslavia

CIa also make a public view (the best reason is "massacre in markale Sarajevo",where after ten years oinvastigations said "Serbs didn't do that",but before 12 years that was a reason for nato bombing on bosnian serbs)

Also it's obviously that CIA or part of cia killed Kenedy.

Now,the biggest problem in the europe is Kosovo.CIA want indipendent kosovo and whole european union have to say "yes",because they now if they say "no" they will have a problem.

They also trained and funded Osama Bin Laden, bastards

They deal drugs too.

CIA is the new La Cosa Nostra.

The CIA admits that they used terrorism attacks against Iranian citizens in 1953 and claimed that Mossadeghs democratic government initiated the attacks. That way America reinstalled the repressive Shah regime.

During the last two years they supported 5 terrorist attacks in Iran. As of yet, no civillians died, but it's just a matter of time.

The CIA was aware of the planned japanese attacks on Peal Harbor. But they needed a reason to drop the bombs, so there was no warning for the soldiers.

The Bush-Regime spended 1,6 billion dollars since 2001 for media manipulation and spreading false news. When the congress tried to stop these actions, Bush said "I'm above the law, I'll continue". The definition of dictatorship is when a government places itself above the law.

America needs to be stopped (and to set that straight: I have American friends. I'm ok with everyone who does not support this imperialistic regime). Iran is a peaceful country. But if the US are stupid enough to attack Iran, then America will burn within days.

Just look at the IAEA contract:

Iran signed it and sticks to it.

USA signed it and everyday they openly admit that they don't care, that they develope new nuclear weapons and are willing to use them.

Israel didn't sign and still developes nuclear weapons and threatens other countries. The regimes in Israel and the US are a case for Den Haag.

If they had put american presidents on trial together with the nazi's at Nuremberg most of them would've gotten the death penalty.

Not most, but some of them for sure.

i wanna work for the NSA.

anybody can help?

Nope, but I hope you'll be fine during the dark years of ..... SARKO    :peace:

well.usa andthe most of european countriesare for kosovo indipedent,an d o n the other hand kosovo  is controling  by osama organization

Serbian army killed more than 5000 osama soldgers on kosovo 1998-1999,and nato bombing serbian troops

i can't get it

The post war ones would.


It's all about the money.

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was created in September 1947. The CIA grew out of the nation's wartime experience with the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and a postwar decision to create a central organization for defense (incase you didn't realize Pearl Harbor was 1942)

Iran is a peacful country??
"Since its investigation of Iran?s nuclear programs began during the latter half of 2002, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has discovered a series of clandestine nuclear activities, some of which violated Iran?s safeguards agreement with the agency.

Others did not, but have nevertheless raised suspicions regarding Iran?s claim that its nuclear programs are exclusively for peaceful purposes. During the course of the investigation, Iran has failed both to disclose some of its nuclear activities to the agency and misled inspectors about."

"Iran's successful test of a nuclear-capable missile demonstrates its "very active and aggressive military program" that is worrisome to the world, the State Department said Friday"

Sounds real peacful... where do you people come from??

Ok,but what about Serbia?
Serbia always have been on right side (first,second war).
Serbs fromBosnia was in was with very excremistic muslim regime,but usa was onmuslims side?

On Kosovo Serbs troop was in war against alqueda and narko cartels,but usa was bombing serbian troops there

i'm lost ... so if you have a nuclear program you can't be peaceful?

Most come from the biggest nuclear war power in the world.

Iran never ever in its history attacked another country. That's peaceful. There are no reasons to believe that Irans program of nuclear power has another reason than energy.

Right the CIA wasn't involved in PH, but so was the US-government, who founded the CIA.

 

It's really simple: As long as Iran doesn't attack another country, theres no reason to attack Iran.

And Iran won't as long as it's not attacked by someone else.

I'm more in fear of those contries who openly admit that they're willing to use WMD: USA & Israel.



Edit: Oh, and by the way, as mentioned, it was the US who destroyed Irans democracy in 1953

every country has the right on a peaceful nuclear program (UN says so)

only country that ever used nuclear weapon in anger was USA... so they have no right to be bitching to anyone.
america/america instelled governments have killed more people since 1945 than all the previous regimes in the world put together.

most dictators in the world since 1945 were hand picked and installed by the USA.
the whole "we're here to help" thing is a big hypocrisy. usa only helps usa.

the whole "democracy" thing in the usa is also a big farce, because in the end it all comes down to 2 parties...
and both of them do the same things, only thing is that the republicans are a little more blunt.

No they didn't.

Yes they did. They supported him as well as the Taleban in order to fight Russia in Afghanistan.

Yugoslavia was bound to fail.
it was 1990s... all comunist countries were breaking apart. USSR, Czechoslovakia...etc.etc.
IMO there was no need to interfere, since it would have happened anyway.
USA was also sponsoring Tito

you're right

Ex yugoslavia didb't be like ex ussr or other country
my father told me that they could travelled everywhere,and when tito died american president was on funeral

but i don't understand why CIA made muslims country in center of europe

The Taleban came into existence to bring 'stability' to Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawal.

Anyway, there's plenty  of evidence out there (and not just from those who have a stake in denying it) that the US/CIA did not fund or train Bin Laden or have any relationship with him whatsoever. The Afghan mujahideen was supported by Pakistan intelligence funneling US and Saudi money to fight the Soviet occupation, the foreign Arab fighters (Afghanistan is not Arab, Bin Laden is) arrived independently to fight "alongside" the Afghans though they were far from warmly welcomed and they were in part funded and trained by Bin Laden who after all, was and probably still is, a very rich man with no need of US support. He was fighting an ideological war, whereas the Afghans were fighting foreign occupiers.

The CIA did not even come into exsistence untill 6 years after the attack . while I loathe the CIA , at least get you facts right (so it doesn't look like I'm defending those ASSHOLES) ;)

Yeah, sorry, as I said earlier in the thread, I was mixing up here  ;)

Oh come on... of course the CIA (who didn't exist at the time if Pearl Habor) knew about (and hid from the Navy) the pending attacks so that we could limp into the Pacific at a disadvantage because we lost a significant portion of our fleet in one day.

I love that we are also defending a country that just hosted a conference about the non-existence of the Haulocaust... They are consistently attempting to hide the motivies of their Nuclear program... and oh by the way... they are allowing terrorists to enter into Iraq from across their border.

Not if you are doing it right... They are going against a treaty that they signed and are attempting to cover up their program as part of an energy program (ya, energy to remove Israel)

double post...oops

the wars going on in the Balkans have been going on for hundreds of years . Serbia should have Kosovo , however after the genocide of the 90s ,I feel they gave up all rights to the territory . I understand that , after the collaspe of the Turkish Empire , a lot of people wanted payback . Hell I don't blame them , but a lot of countries have claims on territories now occupied by other people . A very complex situation that won't be solved easily . I just wish that they could live in peace . In the 21st century warfare and starvation should be illegal and those in positions of power should have to pay for their inaction to accomplish that goal .

well Yugoslavia was a member of the 3rd world. it never officially aligned with USA or USSR,
but it was established as a communist state. it had a one party regime, and no freedom of speech.
the "travel anywhere" was because it was officially a 3rd world country, but still, there were some limitations
as to where a person travels.
My father is a captain, and he was always controled as to where he was going and why
(even tough my grandfather had influence).

also there were UDBA killings in abroad.

Bosnia was created thanks to Tito imo. he's the one who drew the borders of federal states of yugoslavia,
and bosnia was one of them. (Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia, Macedonia, Montenegro.).
when yugoslavia fell apart, it fell apart on those Federal units (of course, via refferendum... Montenegro left
the federation only last year)

imo bosnia is bound to fail, since it's artificially made. There's no sense of unity there, and all 3 nations are fighting
for diferent interest. There's no "Bosnian interest"... there's Croat, Serb, or Muslim interests.

to set a few things straight.

I'm currently working on an article for the German magazine Zenith, abouth what the iranian president Ahmadinejad said.

In research I checked the original versions of his speeches in which western media claims that he said "the holocaust has not happened" and "israel must be wiped off the map".

Both are simply lies. He never said that.

What he said was:

"The Holocaust isn't an excuse for repression against Palestine"

and

"The zionist regime must be eliminated from the pages of history".

Both statements have my full support.

Not when you've openly admitted your plan is to wipe out Israel...

Also, I was talking to my history teacher a few days ago and he told me that... "Iran is planning on sending troops into Iraq and if we try to stop them, they will bomb some of the US's assets in other countries."

i support you on that.
even tho some people will see anti-semitism in these comments.

there is a difference between fighting the *use* of holocaust as an escuse for violence and repression, and denying it.


acdcUSSR > you're history teacher is not very smart.
even if he is. why would you put credit in his comments.
check the news.
read alternative media.
don't believe your government.

this is from the AP (Dec. 13 2006):

TEHRAN, Iran ?  Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's conference questioning the Holocaust came to an end Tuesday, but not before hearing former KKK Imperial Wizard David Duke say that gas chambers were not used to kill Jews.

"The Zionists have used the Holocaust as a weapon to deny the rights of the Palestinians and cover up the crimes of Israel," Duke told a gathering of nearly 70 "researchers" in Tehran at Ahmadinejad's invitation.

"This conference has an incredible impact on Holocaust studies all over the world," said Duke, a former state representative in Louisiana who twice ran for president.

"The Holocaust is the device used as the pillar of Zionist imperialism, Zionist aggression, Zionist terror and Zionist murder," Duke told The Associated Press.

Also at the end of the conference, Mohammad Ali Ramini, an Ahmadinejad adviser who has called the Holocaust a "myth," announced that he will chair a committee to find "the truth on the genocide of Jews."

How much more clear can this be?

while not wanting to look like I'm defend Israel's repression of the Palestinean people , how good is your Farsi ?

I don't think the Iranian regime has tried to distance itself from comments made to western journalist . It is a theocratic regime(one of the most despicable forms of government) that oppresses it's own people .

"muerto a tyranos"
"sic siempre tyranos"

that made me laugh but seriously they killed JFK :yes:

The Good Shepard is a fucking awesome movie  : ok:

Do you guys think Al Queda is less dangerous than the CIA?

can't wait to hear the responses to that one.....

That's just silly.  First, a country that is a sponsor of Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which actively use violence to achieve political ends, is not "peaceful."  If it were, then the US wouldn't be getting as much shit as it is in this thread, as the CIA's involvement isn't technically warring with another country.  Second, even moderate Iranians want "the bomb."  I'm not saying they have intentions to give it to terrorists or to use it in war, but to say there's no reason to believe they're pursuing it is flat wrong.


Without Americans Presidents, the only trials at Nuremberg would have led to the slaughter of more Jews and political prisoners.  You're welcome.


Wait a minute...the guy who argues that America is bad for allowing people to own guns because they lead to violence is arguing that nuclear weapons are peaceful pieces of technology?  :rofl:


Thank you for writing this.  I was starting to think that all our critics were justified, but this reassures me that, in fact, many of you are just deluded.  Are you serious?  "All the previous regimes in the world put together?"  Hmm...let's count a few shall we:

Nazi Germany - well, WWII accounted for 62 MILLION deaths, and since the Nazis started it, I'll put those on their tab.

I doubt the US can top even that gaudy number, but just in case, these other mass killers could be added to it:

The British, French, and Spanish (among others) who destroyed so many native populations in the lands they conquered.

The vikings, moors, huns, Mongols, and so many others who tried to conquer the world, through violence.

The Roman Empire, which ruled much of the world, often through violence and conquest.

Yeah...but the US has killed more.  ::)


Be grateful you aren't speaking German twice over right now.  The next time you criticize the US, please kindly remember that Europe's inability to solve its own problems was a strong contributor to the US's rise as a world power.


Technically, democracy is a farce everywhere, as there isn't a truly democratic state in existence. 
****************************************************************************
None of the above, however, reflects my true position.  Rather, it reflects the fact that, in a desire to bash my homeland, most have selective memories and use faulty logic.  After all, how long does it take for YOU (all of you) to wash the blood off of your country's hands?  At what point can YOU take the high ground without it being hypocrisy?  There isn't a state in this world that isn't awash in the blood of those who conquered or were conquered.  Criticize all you like.  I hope it helps you deal with what is, undoubtedly, your own bloody past. 

Freedom, you are one of my favorite posters on here - and your last post is a huge reason why.   : ok:

I have no problems with people criticizing America, but if your'e going to do so, at least be correct about it.

Loved what you said to Wat-ever, the guys logic does a total 180 when it comes to the US or Israel, suddenly, violence and weapons is ok! so long as its the other side.  Then again, that is the same guy who said we deserved 9-11.  Ahh, ungrateful, short memory, mess up the facts foreigners.  LOVE you guys!   :peace:

"He received security training from the CIA itself, according to Middle Eastern analyst Hazhir Teimourian."

Who is Osama Bin Laden? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/155236.stm)


"As his unclassified CIA biography states, bin Laden left Saudi Arabia to fight the Soviet army in Afghanistan after Moscow?s invasion in 1979. By 1984, he was running a front organization known as Maktab al-Khidamar - the MAK - which funneled money, arms and fighters from the outside world into the Afghan war.

What the CIA bio conveniently fails to specify (in its unclassified form, at least) is that the MAK was nurtured by Pakistan?s state security services, the Inter-Services Intelligence agency, or ISI, the CIA?s primary conduit for conducting the covert war against Moscow?s occupation."

Bin Laden Comes Home To Roost (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3340101/)

this isn't topic about Iran ecremistic regime,this is story about organiation which make a wars on the world.

Lucky,yes ex yugoslavia was a member of third world,but in secerets prisons were 95% Serbs,my grandfather was 2 years on "goli Otok".

But for ex wars everybody have same guilty,only i want to say is that "Milosevic,Tudjman,Izetbegovic are people who was in deal with CIA"

In last 1.5 years in Iraq more than 100000 people killed,is this democracy?

wtf? who are you?  .... this makes no sense.... where am i?


anyway,
the CIA ain't responsible. It's just part of a global world system where countries or actors are looking for their best interest.
if it's not the CIA,  it's something else.

100,000 people for the 5 years of occupation yes , but no way in 18 months .

For the question about my Farsi: I'm learning it at University, and for the points in the original speeches that were unclear for me, I asked my teacher and other native Farsi speakers.

For the comment "Wen want to find out if the Holocaust has happened"

Yes, that is just ugly provocation. But it is clearly NOT denial.

Touched a nerve?

It's a fact, nothing more. Just something I like to remember before I go all holier than thou.

But that makes no sense at all  ???

Not really...I just like to occasionally remind America's critics that we are, in fact, generally nice and generous people, and that without us the world would be a very different place, and not necessarily for the better, as many are inclined to believe. 

Long live Patton's men!!

Let's get real here. There's no denying the american public are a nice and generous people, like all free nations, but that's not what we're talking about here, is it?

The U.S. Government never entered the war on goodwill, honor or whatever. They saw an opportunity and they took it.

And that goes for all their post war actions too. Assassinations, bribes and blackmail to control other sovereign states are not excused by what some percieve as a 70 year old noble deed.

it'd better, i think so.
it doesnt mean you guys (and please, do NOT see all americans as actors of these *actions*, you guys just live there and shop at wall-mart, it'd be like if i taken credit for the Declaration of the Rights of Man ... ) ONLY do bad things, but you do a lot of bad things ...

it's a like a guy in texas ranting " yeah ! we totally kicked sadam's ass !! yeah !" > No, you're fat, bald, 35 and you live in your mom's basement, brave dumb muscular marines kicked saddam's ass, not you.

freedom78 > you really need to seperate yourself from your country. you are not flag, you are not your country.

Which war?  WWII?  I suppose that you can perceive US involvement as a selfish action, if you wish, but that would be to ignore its obvious benefits to the people of Western Europe. 

Also, I'd ask that you read my original post again.  I never argue that the US hasn't done despicable things.  Rather, I merely point out that it's a convenient excuse for a world that is and always has been ripe with violence.  And, of course, the accusations that fly against the US do so in a hypocrisy vacuum, wherein we completely ignore the bloody history of every other state on this Earth while putting the last 60 years of US foreign policy under a magnifying glass and making exaggerated claims about how the US has "killed more than all previous regimes in the world put together."

I have NO problem criticizing the US, and talking about its failures, but for anyone to act as if they have the moral high ground from which to do so is plain hypocrisy.  The truth of the matter is that people love to blame the US, because they can't stand the fact that life on this planet is just plain fucked up sometimes.           

Oh, I understand that criticism of our foreign policy isn't necessarily a criticism of our people.  And I certainly don't think of myself as an unflinching supporter of all my country does.  If you asked me to defend many of our actions, I'd have to decline.  Again, I'm just fighting the idea that the US is the problem in the world...as if the world didn't have any problems before we came along. 

BTW, WAT-EVER: love the new avatar.  : ok:

I know very well the bloody and hypocrit history of the worlds nations, and it will be brought up when necessary.

The situation today however is one of the US being the only super power left, and they won't hesitate to execute that power while taking cover under old dogmas and debts. If you do the shit you have to take the criticism.

I'll be the first to codemn Iran or whomever if they attack another state, but until then the focus stays on those who actually wage war.

There are no bigger hypocrits than the United States in the year 2007.

fair enough ;)

on a broader range, pollux, every nation, maybe it be THE superpower, or big nations (FR, UK ...), they never use their power - or rarely - in the name of peace, and goodness.
everything is linked to private interests.

USA is facing critics cause with big powers come big responsabilities.
But i can assure you that other western countries are quite happy to be out of the spotlight.

one step would be to stop aiming at the government, but at private companies.
THEY are ruinging the world. THEY are the virus.
and i am sorry, but Free Market is the evil.
but again, we're not ready. we are just starting to realize.
just like communism failed to exist, Capitalism will fail soon, in a very tragic way. a very violent way.

Seconded.

I have absolutely no problem in crticising Germany, Iran or who fucking ever. All of them have done bad things in their history and I never denied that.

But at first, this is a thread about the AMERICAN secret ageny CIA, not about other countries' histories.
And second, in fact the world we live in TODAY would be way more peaceful without the US foreign policies.

True, but first the protector (government) of the system must be brought down. This will happen in our life time. One can only hope it will be more peacefull than last time.

man, i just realized i said that we needed to take down L'Oreal ....  *runs and hides*

Yes, I'd be running and hiding after that one too!  :rofl:

It's necessary NOW!  Everyone's so concerned about the US's abuses of power that they neglect all the other violence in the world. 


If you believe in realism, then that's how you'd expect it to work. 


How so?  I see so many other nations who criticize the US, yet do very little to assuage all the suffering and war in the world that has nothing to do with US involvement.  The US failed to stop the Rwandan genocide.  Then again, so did everyone else.  Is your country currently stopping the violence in Darfur?  Nope.  Hypocrisy isn't acting badly.  Hypocrisy is taking a principled, moral position, while effectively doing nothing to actually support it.   


At least someone gets my point and, yes, the things done in the name of profit and a good bottom line are very very sad.


This raises another problem with criticism of the US.  There are two distinct, critical voices out there.  First are those who resent US power (and the uses and abuses of it), and who want us back in our pre-WWII isolationist box.  Second are those who want us to use our power in cooperative and beneficial ways.  Of course, both can't be done, simultaneously.  The moment the US goes isolationist will be the same moment that someone, somewhere says "but we need you."  Of course, if the liberal view of collective security had a strong track record, which it doesn't, that would solve the problem. 


I certainly wasn't the first to take it off topic, as it went from a CIA thread to America bashing.



That's guesswork, at best.  Take the US out of the last 60 years, and Europe is either under Nazi or Soviet rule.  Without the US, do you think the Soviet's would have been a more responsible super power?

Of course, I'm NOT saying that US policy is right or justified, but you simply cannot pin all the violence in the world on the US.  However, I'm sure someone will try.   

well,my point isn't bashing Us,because i really respect Us system and way of life

but is CIA out of us goverment

Al Qaida is the most dangerous organization.

The CIA are no angels, they've done some things that were less than credible.



But the CIA has not flown civilian airliners into buildings.

Or, are they really THE government? ?:confused:

I blame the CIA for Vietnam.

@freedom:

right, but that isn't what I said. I didn't say take the US out of the last 60 years, I said take the US foreign policy out of TODAY or at least the last 7 years. They did wrong things before, but the worst is happening right now, and if we don't take care Bush will soon start another unjustified war. And then I'll take action, since I have a lot of friends in Iran.

I'm not forgetting or disregarding what goes on around the world, it's just not relevant to what we are discussing - the American CIA.

Just because something has always been does not make it right. You can't justify or disregard agression because 'that's normal'.

And I don't see what genocides and civil wars got to do with anything. Other nations can kill each other all they want, it's nor mine or your responsibility to take. I'm talking about the manipulation, the blackmail, the cultural imperialism, the wars, the killings, the prisons etc. that the US have been forcing on most of the world for the past 100 years. No, they're not the only one, but they are the leader of the pack. The one holding the strings.

And that is why they are, and should be, the focus of attention.

Damn , where have I been , I'll play : I haven't seen such a big heaping pile of BULLSHIT since that Clown . The US entered the WW ll after being attacked unprevokedly by a very brutal regime (read the rape of Nanking) . Sure US the government supplied Britain with war material , but the UK had gone to war to protect Poland from another brutal regime . Britain was fighting for her national survival . The US and Britain had and has a very intimate relationship . Both countries share the same culture , language , and laws , and both countries are obligated to defend the other in case of attack . To say that the US entered the war for ulterior motives , that she gave 450,000 of her bravest souls for anything other than the defence of the free world just shows that you sir are an IGNORANT FOOL .

On this, at least, we agree, and I think we both agree that that would be quite bad.


I'm not sure what you mean by this?  Is that a threat?


I'm not justifying anything.  I abhor many of the US's actions.  But I don't, for a moment, believe that such actions would be a rarity if the US existed as an isolationist state.
 

First, civil wars and genocides were meant to draw an example of a hypocrisy that is certainly not singular to the US.

Second, how can you so easily say that it's wrong to instigate violence, yet believe it's perfectly acceptable to allow genocides to occur?  And of course they're relevant.  Critics of US foreign policy want us to stop interfering, yet we're criticized (and rightly so) for NOT interfering to stop the Rwandan genocide, among other things.  I'm just saying the world can't really have it both ways.  What most say they want is for the US to, essentially, get out of others' business.  But what they really want is for the US to bear the cost and burden of intervening when it's deemed acceptable. 


And I'm as much against these things as anyone else.

May I remind you that the US government had a very friendly relationship with the Nazi regime until Hitler declared war to the US in 1941 and that they didn't care the smallest bit until then?

I recently released an article on what happens in Guantanamo in a German news magazine. It's in German, if ya like put it into babelfish.


http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/25/25219/1.html

I agree , these last 7 years have been , to borrow a "military " term , a "clusterfuck" . The US needs to leave that region at let the Sunni and Shai'a have at it . May the best man win !!!

That's a bit revisionist.  Roosevelt wanted to get us into the war, but there was a general sentiment of isolationism in the US.  But, it was just a matter of time until we went to war.  The Japanese attack on PH and the subsequent declaration of war by Germany just helped to move the time line up.

How funny you are. It seems you have no idea of either Sunni or Shi'a. And it seems you have no idea of Iraq, Iraqi history as well as the American (not only!!) influence on that region since the beginning on the last century.

@freedom: not revisionist, but you're right, I did cut it too short. Still, the oeconomic relations between the US and Nazi Germany were very friendly. And I don't wanna defend anyone here. I'm German and trust me neither am I proud of our history nor our current goverment...

I have a feeling that more Europeans are going to be irritated with their governments, as they keep electing leaders who are more cozy with Bush than their predecessors.

Wrong , The US had diplomatic relations with the Nazi regime , they were anything but very friendly , in fact they were rather frigid .

 I don't know where people come up this revisionist view of the world , but read the memoirs of the world the leaders of that time . The men who lived through era . If one did , one might realize a greater understanding of political science , and hence the conflicts that we all confront today .

We're straying a bit over to philosophical discussions here. I agree with most of what you say. There are no innocents and the problem lies everywhere. That much is true.

But the matter of fact is still that the US is the leader, and they are the only ones who could put an end to all the bullshit in our world.


Yet they choose to act like the biggest antagonizer of them all, all in the name of democracy and freedom.


Bottom line it's a global problem, a human problem. If we really want to do something about it we should start looking at the real enemy, not take elusive sides, cause that's what they want us to do. Whoever they/it are.

You are right sir , I readily profess my ignorance of those two cultures , however it is readily apparent , to even the most casual observer of the animosity between those two religions . I do know however that US influence in that region was minor and ancillary untill the mid 50s in Persia and very recent in Iraq

wrong, the most dangerous organization is UMP, in france.  :hihi:

aaha you got THAT right ;)

You're aware that the British Army, along with the US government created in Mesopotamia what is known as Iraq today during WWI?

 ?non siquetur...
 It was Rosevelt in 45 and Truman in 46 that ended British Imperialism

 ?non siquetur...
the US was an isolationist nation untill 7 Dec 1941

well, it's not THAT true ... lands and territories have been changing for ever. the WWI or WWII modifications are among others, all along time.

ancillary and minor role played by US Gov in Iraq pre 1990 . Prove me wrong if you can , where is your documentation .

The US role in the creation of the modern Middle East is minor, when compared to those of Britain and France.  Same with Africa.  But that hardly matters at this point.

No, they'd been doing activities in the pacific, mexico and latin/south america long before that.

"The US role in the creation of the modern Middle East is minor, when compared to those of Britain and France.? Same with Africa.? But that hardly matters at this point"

I thought that was the point you were trying to make

edit :  oops-attributed to the wrong person

point granted

You mean the southern provinces?

the US has an absolute dismal record in Latin and S. America and the Pacific , but that is not what we were debating .

You mean the southern provinces?

haha , thats how US foreign policy regarded that area untill Clinton

Is that what they're called now? :hihi:

I don't know, I just remember they had been taking land outside their borders before the war. But it's a unsignificant point anyway.

Joking, of course, though I personally think the US's failures in Latin America are among its worst. 

cia made al qaida
cia is mother of al qaida

nazis killed estimated 21 million people. Stalin on the other hand killed at least 20 000 000 of his own people.
so that thesis of your fails....
2nd,... here's what USA had to do in the past 60 years...
Korean War  2 800 000
Vietnam War  1 700 000

those are only 2 wars...
but you need to add all the dictators USA suported over the years in central, south america, africa, asia, and europe.
such as pinochet.
also the afgan, iraq, and iran wars.... USA was supplying wepons to all of them....
how many dictators through the years were sponsored by the CIA?
In Iraq, al quaida still used stingers provided by the CIA for the war in afganistan.

What the fuck?  You claimed that the US is the biggest killer ever, credit 4.5 million deaths to the US (ignoring that Korea was a UN action, fuckstick), and then claim that that somehow overcomes the 41 million that YOU attribute to Hitler and Stalin. 

You seem to have not understood my point, which is that your claim is completely ridiculous.  And, of course, you have not proven it to be otherwise.   

First off, I actually thank YOU for writing this. All I've really got to say is you don't think america killed millions of people? What about the Sioux, Lakota, Ojiwbe and other native peoples. They PURPOSELY gave the natives blankets infested with small pox. They fucked us over time and time again, and we're still getting fucked by them day after day.

Here's a lil' story about someone in my Family;
They go to the Bureau Of Indian Affairs to try and get a loan to start a business, they say they can't. The people at the BIA says the only loans we can get are $96,000 but only if you want to be a truck driver. This has been the case many, many times within members of my Family. We're fucked by the GOV'T, sending us away to small "reservations" when the white man comes in and invades our land, chasing us farther and farther away from the natural habitat, confined to small areas they call "reservations" but coming from my Family that grew up on the White Earth, MN rez "the Rez is more Jail then it is a reservation" Growing up, if you had something that was worth more then someone else, they'd get pissed and burn your fucking house down. How would you feel to be, let's say 16 with a brand new Mustang. One Indian sees it, then you're waking up rushing down the stairs, to be outside so you can live. As you're outside you're watching your house, burning because you worked and saved your money to get a car, and the other people, sometimes the white folks that didn't like you because you were part Native, and most of the time the Natives who didn't like you because you were part White. You were outta place, but growing up and having it better off then most others on the rez, they hated you. You'd pick up that you wouldn't want to live your life up there, you'd want to go and do something productive in your life.

I don't think you actually understand how the United States of America treated the Natives.

Have you watched Office Space lately?  Because I'm pretty sure you must have one of those Jump-to-Conclusions Mats. 

And, once again, you've proven that the ability to read words doesn't equate with the ability to understand what someone actually means.  If you've read any of my posts in this thread, you'll probably see that I am not justifying the use of violence by Americans, be it against native populations or in aggressive war to achieve foreign policy goals.  I'm simply trying to point out that some make ridiculously exaggerated claims regarding this country, and that they have no basis in reality.   

Honestly, I think that this "who killed more humans" discussion is just ugly.....

Does it really matter, who killed more? No, it doesn't. Murder is murder, and every country murdered humans.

By the way, this is off topic.

Agreed, on all three counts.  Anyway, back on topic.

So, um, the CIA.  All this has inspired me to perhaps pop in "The Good Shepherd" tonight, since my baseball team is on a channel I get, and the Republican debate is destined to become the Jerry Falwell tribute hour.

The coup to do away with Allende in Chile wasn't our finest hour, though you have to wonder what Chile was thinking prior to the coup.  They had just elected a Marxist leader.  The US had a tendency to be reactionary toward those types of things.  And then they nationalized US industries in Chile.  Whoops.  While I don't condone the coup, you have to wonder what Allende was thinking.  I mean, I get that he's a Marxist, but nationalizing US industries wasn't a smart move. 

This board has gone far too crazy left for my taste.  I think that is more of the reason for the conservatives leaving than anything else.  Many of the comments on this board can't even be reasoned with.  For me, it started with the threads regarding the U.S.'s role in September 11.

I must have arrived after most of those, as I can only recall one such conversation (and it was really just a weird tangent).

Some neo-cons left because they kept getting their asses handed to them. Many got banned, because they were fucking insane. The rest slithered away after Iraq turned into the cluster fuck I said it would. If you remember years back, I was one of the few guys speaking up (with the majority being pro war, pro Bush and calling into question my patriotism-they called me every name in the book.) Now my opinion is shared by the majority, this board only mirrors sentiment throughout this country. Boo fucking hoo.

You guys crack me up, you can't even get your facts about this board straight, much less anything to do with history, or the middle east.

I'm surprised he didn't try to blame Clinton or reference Ann Coulter in there....

"far too left crazy" is not supporting the war? hahah.  I guess the 2/3rds of the country have gone CA-RAZY!!!  :confused:  :rofl: hahah  yeah us "liberals and lefties" are killing the country!!   :rofl:

back on topic.   this thread is kinda gay, its really just a chance for more people to recklessly bash the US with incorrect information and exaggerated claims.  LIke someone else said, do you really think your country is so innocent?  give me a break.

I have always found it telling that the premier philosopher of the neo-con movement is a dope-addled moron who has been married five times, has no kids and is probably gay.

I can't imagine what someone's marriage(s) or sexual orientation have to do with this, though dope-addled certainly applies.   :smoking: <--- The last guy who still believes the neo-cons were right.

Addiction is a disease that affects all classes of society , rich , poor , black , white and everything in between . Don't assume it is a character flaw ; it is a disease .

Poor addicts.

I dont feel like going through 60 years of history to pull out all the numbers.
4.5 million in only 2 wars is enough to prove my point.
there is a number of unpublicized conficts that USA started or had someone else start them.

there's a number of dictators and mass murderers all over the globe installed by usa.

I did not say USA killed more people than Hitler and Stalin togather...
but USA definitely killed directly or through their henchmen more or close to 20 million in the past 60 years.

Yes you did ! And BTW have you forgotten about Soviet Hedgemony over Eastern Europe and Asia

well,usa was only one country which used nuclear weapon

In Serbia people 3x more dying from cancer since nato bombing 1999
nato used bombs with uranium,that's terrible

After a nato bombing,lot of babies was born with some "mistake" for example with threee hands

that's teribble man

While a horrible incident, I'm not certain how this relates to the topic at hand.  After all, Truman was the President, and could have rejected the use of the bomb in WWII.


That is terrible.  Actually, it's a substance known as depleted uranium, and as its side effects become more well known, pressure is increasing to eliminate its use.  Until a decade ago, though, most of its side effects were thought to be limited to those who had it come in direct contact with the human bloodstream.  It's been linked to cancers in more recent years. 

i don't get point why they used bombs with uranium?
Nato was 1000x time stronger than serbian army,and they could defeat us without uranium bombs.
I don't know fuckin reason for that

BTw since 1945 serbian and ex yugoslavia had comunistic goverment but not like ussr and other country of esast block,yugoslavia had some type of democratic comunisam,and 50% of population liked west and us culture,and with nato bombing 1999 people in serbia was disapointed.
For example,in little Serbian town "Surdulica-town with 35000 people",nato bombs killing 10 people,and4 of each was children.
Nato Bomb crashed one family house and killed family and his neighbours which whose watching tv.

Tell me reason for this?

i think that people in west european country and us don't know whole the truth about what their soldgers and armies doing across the earth

Buit people in

well,as i know serbian army crashed "f117-a-ivisiable",and i remember one very fanny graffit "Sorry we didn't know it is invisible"
But in the other hand i have two my friend whose was in kosovo in 1999 (one died by albanin teroristic organization) and other was live but he had a big trauma on "Kosare",where he and his 20 friends had fight with more than 500 alanian terorist.
Well in Kosovo world definately didn't know a truth. for example 1945 on kosovo live 60% of Serbs and 40 % of Albanian.1991 there lived 30% Serbs,because many of them runaway from albanian teror.
On the other hand,serbian army was in war (1998) with ecremistic organization of albanian which had a part of Al quaeda,but who fucked it.
Cia said Serbs are guilty and nato bombing serbia.

Nato forces did not use bombs with depleted Uranium , the larger caliber shells fired from guns used it . It is incredibly dense , and it is what is taken to bust through armor . BTW depleted means inert . While there are some health risks associated with it , it is nowhere near as dangerous as Serbian tanks . While your learning about that conflict , study up on Screbinecea(sp.?) . You should really get your propaganda from a source other than the Serbian Government .?

EDIT : NATO does use depleted Uranium in GBUs (bunker buster) , however my thesis still stands

What a stupid fucking remark . The Plane crashed due to design flaws that plague that airframe to this day . I guess Serbia shot down the one that crashed at the Dayton Airshow a few years ago . ::)  Serbia is armed with antiquated Soviet material that played hell shooting down planes? the Vietnam Era . Read the response above for a hint .

The military term for it is collateral damage , however if NATO had used the same technology that Serbia was using , the casualties would have been 100 to 1000 times as great . I don't think anyone condones the killing of innocent civilians, and I'll state again that I think all war and starvation should be illegal in the 21st century , but you try to portray Serbia as having no culpability in that conflict  , which is an assinine assumption .

fuckincrazy,just one thing Serbs live on that teritory more than 1000 years,and what the fuck you talkin about?

Second,us plain "thinderbold" use weapon for uranium for destroying tenks

third,did you realy believe that "f117a" felt down due to tehnical reasons,man that was propaganda.f117-a was crashed by soviet sistem Neva. In my town (Kragujevac third town in Serbia) are big field and there are more than 100 tenks.So you can see what success in military way had a nato bombing.
I don't said that Serbia won in that war,we lost but that was game between cat and mouse.
On the other hand 90% of tehnique of serbian army was ok after bombing,but serbia had to capitulate because nato started to bombing civilin targets like energy resource,and we hadn't electric energy 2-3 days in last 7 days of bombing.


About coletaral demage,i will ask you avbout it if your parents,child,brothers and sister be treating like that.Man,innocent civilian wa killed,and that was crime not coletaral demage.

I don't wanna say that we are right and you're wrong,only what to say that you have to respect people lives in the whole world.
Do you sometimes thinking that that child milica 4 year old whose killed in Serbian town Pancevo deserved that.
Just thinking what would be your react if it happened to your sister.

War is Hell.  Why are we debating this?

this is the worst thing which can happen to one nation

"i don't need your civil war"

do you think that axl think on Cia in civil war where he said :" "they shot kennedy"

no , I think it was Kennedy the vj from back in the day on mtv.

What an ignorant woman !

who is ignorant woman?

There was a woman on MTV named "Kennedy."  But it really has nothing to do with this topic.

while we're still talking about Yugoslavia... there's one funny trivia.

1991 was the 1st time in history that a destroyer had opened fire on the city it was named after.
(Destroyer "Split" opens fire on the city of Split in 1991) :D

it was probably also the 1st time a vessel had opened fire on its home port :)

I went limp when I found out she was a republican back in the day.

I'm from Indianapolis.  The USS Indianapolis carried the Hiroshima bomb across the Pacific, in secrecy, delivered it, and was sunk soon after by a Japanese submarine, after which most of the crew were eaten by sharks.  That's a tough one to beat, for historical significance or pure, multi-faceted horror.

bomb which killed 4 year old girl in Pancevo have a nick "John",so John do you proud?

Your attempt to lay blame for this conflict on the West is really becoming a pathetic annoyance . Rather than look to the West for causation , perhaps you should look a little closer to home . Serbia and Serbian Nationals instigated this conflict when they could not accept the basic human right of self determination . The WAR CRIMINALS Milosov?c and Radavan Karadzic (who by the way is still being hidden by elements within that area) are the people who brought the distruction to that region , not NATO .

yeah, I'm aware of that one. (I'm a history geek)
But my case was only an example of irony in ex yugoslavia
Split is my home town...