Was America's arming of terrorists in Columbia, death squads in El Salvador and guerillas in Nicaragua OK?

Question

or is that terrorism?

Answer 1

to get the truth, you would have had to have had a free press

to get a free press, you would have had to have had power spread democratically and justly

to get power spread democratically and justly,
you would have had to have had money spread democratically and justly

to get that, you would have had to have listened to the wisdom of some of the founding fathers, the ones who were true patriots

you would have had to grasp that money is power, and unjustly spread money is unjustly spread power, or overpower/underpower - or corruption, thieving

as it was, americans didnt listen and learn from the founding fathers who were true patriots, objective, honest, impartial, pro-justice, in their understanding

wealth concentrated, power concentrated, the free press stopped existing, the ones with the wealthpower did what they liked and pulled the wool over the eyes of the americans, who thought they still had a good govt, in the hands of the people

face it, your country's owners plundered, stole and murdered for convenience, like every other country, and let the people think their country was good and free, and let the people going on funding the military-industrial complex, ie the cabal of most powerful

global thugs, with the brains to hide behind the govt, the law, the people

the pity is, the people are the first to take the brunt of the robbed who come looking to try to get the plunder back

the pity is, the people take the brunt of the end of empire, the phase when the costs of defending against the attacks of the plundered exceed the profits of the plunder [economic plunder, it is easier to hide]

and the american people are plundered too - first the lower classes, next the middle classes, last, the upper classes - sucked like a milkshake - while some americans go on defending the govt that hasnt been democratic and free and just for many decades

the very nobility of the american dream is what the thugs use to hide behind, use as sheep's clothing for their wolfishness

if the patriot act had been called by its true name, the open betrayal act, support for it would have been less - it is the final act, preparatory to sucking the last out of americans before they move on to the next world empire - building the prisons to house the people who resist being fleeced to the bone

the thugs used the american people to fight their wars, and get their profits, and they will reward the american people at last, by robbing them to the bone

like every empire in the past, where the people have allowed wealth and power to concentrate, and the wealthpower thugs have plundered the world and then plundered the empire

look at silverstein, it is perfectly obvious and proven that he was centrally involved in the plans organising the planes so he could demolish the wtc, and get the billions insurance and get rid of a white elephant [financially speaking], combined with the bush gang's plans to 'reichstag' the americans into allowing them to plunder iraq

how big a thug is that?

demolishing a building with people inside it!!!!!!

why did americans [the same as all people in all empires so far] think that you could have wealth power concentration without thuggery? when has there ever been wealthpower concentration [which can only be by stealing from the people, to get enough moneypower to steal from the rest of the world] without thuggery?

didnt the founding fathers speak loud enough, often enough, about concentration of wealth destoying the republic? about why they took steps to limit fortunes to justice?

wasnt it obvious enough that money is power is corruption is theft is fascism is global thuggery?

didnt anyone show you smedley butler's words?

or were you too busy building a nation's infrastructure and trying to get a living wage out of rockefeller?

and you could all be on US$15 an hour including homemakers and students! and the whole world on that! and the world in liberty, equality, fraternity [friendliness], happiness and peace! and the planet not headed rapidly towards extinction soon!

read george seldes, the great quotations [not his the great thoughts] and elaine partnow, the quotable woman, for an education in reality - the two best books you could read for your happiness

Answer 2

NO, it's not right... However, with countries south of the border, it's best to take sides or else suffer greater consequences. I know it sounds stupid and idiotic but consider this: If you help the side that does "less harm" then you can avoid worse civil wars or skirmishes... why? because what happens in these sitations is that people end up fleeing their countries and go to others, like the US, making the immigration issue worse... Not because they are illegal, but because if there are civil wars or other things that cause civilians to fear for their lives and safety, the US is OBLIGATED to give them asylum... so, if you try to make a quick fix, less people are hurt, and less people come here... I think it's a short term solution to a problem that seems to get worse EVERY day!!! HAVE YOU SEEN the news on Telemindo and Univision!!!? Funny thing, though... now that the US is the top world power, everyone can blame their problems on it... back in the hey day, I believe it was Britain... For example, everyone KNOWS that the U.S. had slaves and plantations... but no one SEEMS to remember that slave labor was developed by the Dutch... hypocrites... anyway, I think the U.S> better think of something better than just the obvious south of the border, or once again, suffer the consequences of yet another situation they didn't start...

Answer 3

In Nicaragua Uncle Sam was a de facto partner in death squads because they backed the brutal Somoza regime. Uncle Sam has made an industry out of coddling dictators(so long as it benefits Washington). Think Pinochet. The Shaw of Iran. Saddam(when he fought Iran because Iran ousted the Shaw and took the embassy) Manuel Noriega. The Mujaheddin(because they opposed the Soviets) Bringing to rise Osama Bin Laden. Uncle Sam as even given a thumbs up to Luise Posada, a terrorist who blew up a jet killing hundreds of civilians(but he oppose Castro so it was OK) Now they are doing the same crap in the Middle East. It was this type of use you until I done and toss you out mentality that sunk the World Trade Center. Those poor souls were more a victim of US foreign policy than simple terrorism.

Answer 4

It's not okay. Hate is never okay, not when love can solve anything. The leader of this country pretends to be fighting a war on terrorism, but really America is the country of terrorists.
It is not okay to promote violence in the name of any cause.

And to "thoven8" or whatever, the guy who answered above me, your comment is ignorant and prejudiced. When I was younger I traveled to Ecuador to visit family staying there, and I found the people there to be kind, earnest, and much more open than American citizens. I find it to be absolutely disgusting that you choose to stereotype millions of people, in fact an entire continent, into a group that is "drug-crazed". Do you think that every tiny, innocent child in Columbia is a drug dealer? Every hard-working South American woman, stricken with poverty, a mindless slut? What about the five-year-old children who sell candy bars on buses so that their mother has enough money to feed them, those same children who make small, beaded dolls to sell on the streets instead of going to school, and learning to read? What about every single person who triumphs over these adversities, who overcomes poverty to lead a better life and make the world a better place? Are they inherently evil because of the color of their skin and the nation of their birth? There may be some bad people that live in South America, but there are many more in the country I live in.

Answer 5

That is called State terrorism. The history of the U.S. is full of dark episodes, they had intervened 100 ths of times in S. America many of those times to help topple democratically elected goverments, thousands of people torture and killed. Remember it is all in the interest of the Empire. Read the history of Guatemala, Chile, Dominicana, ect,ect,etc.....

Answer 6

No, this is the form on the national records in Washington, D. C. submit-Script: great, Libs hate the form, or think of this is a relic, and supply me thumbs down. additionally, Leslie Goudy placed a hyperlink down below approximately Reagan this is think to look like a Wikipedia hyperlink - don't be fooled, it is not - in basic terms liberal b.s. yet that web site has a quote from Obama, speaking approximately his mattress-part prayer: "A desire that we are in a position to stay with one yet another in a fashion that reconciles the ideals of each with the forged of all."

Answer 7

see what some of you uniformed people ever fail to realize or consider is that YES, the u.s. has often times backed some less than reputable groups, but they have done so in order to topple even LESS reputable groups that pose a bigger threat. the old saying the enemy of my enemy is my friend. keep your friends close and your enemies closer. picking the lesser of two evils is something EVERY country has done through the world's civilized history.

Answer 8

You forgot the training of Bin Laden and the assistance to Saddam Hussain's regime on that list.
Right or wrong, it is aimed at keeping our way of life secure. You don't have to agree with it, but unless you have a better plan, shadup.

Answer 9

?YOUR QUESTION IS NOT VERY CLEAR?