American invasions
-
Not to mention...[^] "US President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger meet with Indonesian president Suharto in Jakarta and give him tacit approval to invade and annex East Timor. Suharto complains that the integration of East Timor into Indonesia is being resisted by Communist sympathizers. According to declassified US Government documents, Suharto tells Ford and Kissinger, “We want your understanding if we deem it necessary to take rapid or drastic action.” Ford responds, “We will understand and will not press you on the issue.” Kissinger then advises Suharto not to take action until he and the president have returned to Washington. “It is important that whatever you do succeeds quickly.” Kissinger explains. “We would be able to influence the reaction in America if whatever happens, happens after we return.” [Republic of Indonesia, 12/6/1975 pdf file; John Pilger, 1994; CNN, 12/7/2001; BBC, 12/7/2001] The following day, Indonesia invades East Timor (see December 7, 1976). " That we in fact supported the regime from the outset. There's debate whether this qualifies as offensive weapons sales, which is illegal, but I think the results speak for themselves.
I've heard more said about less.
-
shiftedbitmonkey wrote:
I didn't allege that it was illegal, only that we were enablers, albeit indirectly and potentially without direct knowledge, but I doubt that.
Agreed. And it was wonderfully brave of Australia to volunteer to lead a force that freed East Timor from the cruel Indonesians. Anyone who noticed that Australia then claimed that they owned all of East Timor's substantial oil reserves, was told they were not being a dinkum cobber. ;)
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Yep. Everyone is the epitome of altruism!
I've heard more said about less.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
I am saying they had no plan for global domination.
First, global domination was the central point of communism from its very inception. Second, the Soviet Union was the heir apparent of European imperialism. The notion that they had 'no plan' for global domination is too absurd to even debate. It would have been an historic inevitability, and only a deluded, gullible, poorly read fool would contend otherwise.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Are you talking about "Communism" or the USSR? The Communist Manifesto doesn't really have anything about global domination...
But as Marx himself said – and Marxists are often fond of repeating it – "The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is, however, to change it."[^] Karl Marx's agenda was class struggle across the entire planet. That was one of his central themes.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
But as Marx himself said – and Marxists are often fond of repeating it – "The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is, however, to change it."[^] Karl Marx's agenda was class struggle across the entire planet. That was one of his central themes.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Yes but Communism seems to be moving towards anarchy instead of global domination (unless I suppose you could count them the same...) so that we can all be one giant commune, well that's how I interpreted it anyways. Either way I don't care for it. :)
Scorch wrote:
Yes but Communism seems to be moving towards anarchy
There has always been an expectation that the state would wither away in true communism. Doesn't that lead to anarchy, or at least a very libertarian system?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Scorch wrote:
Yes but Communism seems to be moving towards anarchy
There has always been an expectation that the state would wither away in true communism. Doesn't that lead to anarchy, or at least a very libertarian system?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
That was my thinking exactly. Also why places like the USSR and China aren't really "communist" cause their government seems to be the integral part. Then most people say "it just hasn't been tried in the right place!" but I doubt there will ever be a place in which it actually works.
-
No it was a smart a** reply to Stan's misguided comment about religious extremism.
Beauty is only a light switch away.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Our fight against communism
Was largely in your own minds and of your own invention.
Christian Graus No longer a Microsoft MVP, but still happy to answer your questions.
Christian Graus wrote:
Stan: Our fight against communism Ignorant Ass: Was largely in your own minds and of your own invention.
And it's deliberate, it's a *refusal* to admit the truth: ergo, not only an ignorant ass, not only an anti-American knee-jerk, but a liar.
-
I guess you're right. No point in arguing with morons.
Christian Graus No longer a Microsoft MVP, but still happy to answer your questions.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
I am saying they had no plan for global domination.
You cannot even imagine how wrong you are.
-
You forgot the rest of the world.
Mark Brock Click here to view my blog