Carter blasts Bush over Iraq war

[mr.jaynes]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by mr.jaynes

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

I think we've learned that the enemy of my enemy is just another enemy.  That being said, no one could have forseen Al-Qaeda, not Carter or Reagan.  It's too easy to say that it was the wrong decision to make, but where would we be if the Soviet Union was still a major superpower?  Neither alternative is pretty.

They did however know about Bin Laden, even then.

They most certainly did not...do you have anything to back this up?   You can half-attribute a pinch of causation to both Carter and Reagan, but they had no idea who Bin Laden was.  OBL didn't even split from MAK until 1988...

His first fatwa was in 1996, smack dab in the middle of BJ's last term.

They knew him not as a cleric nor terrorist, but they did know him as a "Freedom Fighter" during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. And the "they" in question may not necessarily even refer to Carter or Reagan.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1523838,00.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/155236.stm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Afghanistan/Afghanistan_CIA_Taliban.html


That being said-and willing to acknowledge a mistake to some degree- the terrorist that was widely mentioned in that era was one Abu Nidal. The tale of Oliver North predicting Osama Bin Laden's potential impact is merely an urban legend.

[Hometown]

Under Carter our nation stood for Human Rights.  Under Bush our nation stands for Torture.

Anyone remember The Panama Canal?

Mr. Jaynes.  Thank you for mentioning our blundering heavy handed, oftentimes criminal role in Nicaragua and Guatemala.  The issue of Refuges (that we created) has been sadly lacking in TulsaNow's various threads discussing undocumented workers.  But that's another thread.

We'll see how class clown, chicken hawk, Junior is perceived in another 27 years.  Given his penchant for secrecy and his disregard for law, I imagine we'll be learning a lot about our recent history.

You Republicans have really outdone the Left this time.  You make the Left's past excesses look tame.

[mr.jaynes]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

That is up to admins, the CIA, military, et. al. to decide which ones benefit us strategically and which don't.  There was some dark, shady stuff in Central America during the Reagan years, I don't think anyone disputes it. For some reason, the powers that be decided what we did was in our best interests.

And I've yet to hear a rational and credible explanation from any of these agencies on the matter-not that they apparently feel any obligation to provide one.

From all I'd gotten, Guatemala and Nicaragua wanted to determine their own domestic policy without any intervention-much the same way we did before our revolution. Apparently, the powers-that-be in DC and New York saw such as a personal affront and would not tolerate such an act of impudence. And El Salvador? Well, Good God, judging by the bloody antics of the government there in the 1980s, I can't say I blame the people there for saying enough's enough and trying to better the situation.  

quote:
Re: Cuba.  Since the fall of the Soviet Union, I really don't get the point of an embargo.  American investment could do wonders for that place.  

I'm no defender of Cuba or its leadership, before or after their revolution, but perhaps the embargo is in place because Cuba openly defied the more darker aspects of the Monroe Doctrine.

I may not be a big fan of the current regime in Havana these days, but if there's universal literacy and education, and a health care system that seems to attract people from all over the world for medical attention; if they were able to solve the drug problem and prostitution there; if they were able to shut down organized crime's stranglehold on their country, what would anybody have to complain about (besides 4hr marathon speeches by their leader, or some degree of political oppression). As for the drug situation, it would seem that Cuba is the one place that drug traffickers fear the most, due to how they are known to deal with cocaine and drug trafficking. In my eyes, when it comes to dealing with the effects of the previous regime's corruptions and excesses, well, even if I'm no fan of the current government there, that kind of reform is commendable-even if the current form of government and its leadership isn't. Why would anybody object to that kind of progress?

Once again, it seems that the Castro brothers defied the big money and organized crime interests that controlled their nation for years, and tried to assert the sovereignty of their own nation. Perhaps the US Government saw this, and once again judged this kind of defiant stance an unforgiveable insult, and sought to punish them for their impudence.

As for the embargo, it was set up to disrupt and destabilize the current regime, but it's seem to take a different turn, as other nations have come in to invest in Cuba and these investors have done well for themselves economically through their ventures there. Let's face it, the embargo is a failure, didn't do what it set out to accomplish, and has made us look foolish in the eyes of the world.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by mr.jaynes
That being said-and willing to acknowledge a mistake to some degree- the terrorist that was widely mentioned in that era was one Abu Nidal. The tale of Oliver North predicting Osama Bin Laden's potential impact is merely an urban legend.

Interestingly enough, Abu Nidal was actually a part of the Baath party, and operated out of Baghdad, so the whole area is just a hornet's nest.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by mr.jaynes

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

I think we've learned that the enemy of my enemy is just another enemy.  That being said, no one could have forseen Al-Qaeda, not Carter or Reagan.  It's too easy to say that it was the wrong decision to make, but where would we be if the Soviet Union was still a major superpower?  Neither alternative is pretty.

They did however know about Bin Laden, even then.

Reading the stories you cited, it's hindsight.  It's the author using hyperbole to say we supported Bin Laden at one point.  FYI, I'm always skeptical of authors and web sites who make claims like: "there are still 10 million land mines in Afghanistan" sentences like that tell me there was a short-cut in someone's research and a lot of their facts flew out their donkey.  

We supported the movement OBL was involved with.  He was not a leader of it when our support started and he was amongst our allies at the time.  When Carter and Regan were in office he was one of thousands of freedom fighters.  The USSR was our primary enemy in those days, we supported those trying to thwart the occupation.  IOW- there is nothing sinister about having supported the freedom fighters, that was the foreign policy of the time.

Throughout history, people have turned weapons supplied by allies onto their former allies.  You deal with the present threats and there is always the chance that you will be fighting against those you once fought alongside.

[Hometown]

On one of those days when I'm struggling to find something nice to say about Republicans I usually cite Eisenhower because he had the guts to stand up against our military, but ever present in the back of my mind is what Eisenhower and our CIA did to Guatemala.  

Guatemala had freely elected a left leaning president who had campaigned with an agenda of Land Reform.  He started the process of redistributing land to Guatemala's Indian peasant farmers when an American corporation complained to Eisenhower.  Del Monte Corporation was going to lose some land in the redistribution scheme.  So Eisenhower had our CIA step in and arrange a coup against Guatemala's left leaning government.  We installed our pick and set up a puppet government in Guatemala City.  Our actions set in motion Guatemala's devastating civil war which was finally brought to an end in the late 90s.  Over 100,000 Guatemalans died because of our actions.

Canada had a long standing policy of automatically granting refugee status to Guatemalans.  We did not.

Late in his term Clinton apologized to the Guatemala for what we did.  He offered no reparations, nothing to compensate Guatemala for the damages.  Just an, I'm sorry.

Recently the world has complained about our cavalier disrespect for sovereign nations and our disregard for international treaties, but Latin America was already quite familiar with this aspect of our personality.  We have always acted as if we are in charge in Latin America.  You can imagine we are not at all admired.

Anyway, one of the few things we've done right in Latin America is honoring our agreements in respect to the Panama canal.  We can thank Carter for that.

I realize Oklahoma is land locked and many of you have never been outside of the state, but actions taken in Oklahoma ultimately impact our foreign policy and touch the lives of real people, just like you and me, all around the world.

Now go buy some Del Monte canned goods and think about all the little compromises we Americans have to make.

[cannon_fodder]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

On one of those days when I'm struggling to find something nice to say about Republicans

agreed.

quote:
Guatemala had freely elected a left leaning president who had campaigned with an agenda of Land Reform.

Read:  The government was going to take property away from people and give it to other people.

This is not an excuse for the US to intervene unless there was some treaty I do not know about, nationalization is a cost of doing business is less reputable parts of the world.  It is also the reason that many parts of the world can not attract foreign investment and remain in poverty.  

quote: Our actions set in motion Guatemala's devastating civil war which was finally brought to an end in the late 90s.  Over 100,000 Guatemalans died because of our actions.

I agree that we set the events in motion, but it appears to me that it was the straw that broke the camels back.  The government we put into power lasted 4 years until a military coup unseated it.  That coup then fought itself for power with general v. general.  Other forces saw a chance and drawing Cuban support joined in to form a communist government.  By the end of the spiral, 4 or 5 groups were fighting for power and our horse wasnt even in the race.

So it is safe to say the United States played a roll, but things were well on their way to trouble by that point.

quote:
He offered no reparations, nothing to compensate Guatemala for the damages.  Just an, I'm sorry.

Reparations are rarely a good idea.  They are scoffed at no matter what the amount, and then lead to fighting over who was the biggest victim.  No good would have come from reparations to Guatemala, the Panamanians, the Philippines, Cuba, Hawaiians, the Nicaraguans, the Vietnamese or any other group of people we have messed with.

quote:
Recently the world has complained about our cavalier disrespect for sovereign nations and our disregard for international treaties

What national treaties have we disregarded?  We have refused to join some (KYOTO) and pulled out of others (Strategic Arms) but I am not aware of any we have disregarded.

quote:We have always acted as if we are in charge in Latin America.

We do not act like we are in charge, we have put ourselves in charge.  Like it or not, that's the point of the Monroe Doctrine.  You'll note that Latin nations that keep it together have seen little if any US interference in recent history.  Again, not that we should have in the past... just pointing it out.

quote:
Anyway, one of the few things we've done right in Latin America is honoring our agreements in respect to the Panama canal.  We can thank Carter for that.

Building the canal and essentially creating and running Panama for 80 years has made that a stable, prosperous nation.  I'm not saying it was the right or wrong thing for us to do, but the result has been favorable to the people there.

We have done other good things in Latin America.  Like the $3,000,000,000.00 in direct aid we supply every year.  Or CAFTA creating jobs there.  Or helping stabilize Panama, Nicaragua,  Haiti, and several other areas when they needed it.  Clearly our relationship has been a bed of roses with might big thorns, but pretending we have done no good is a farce.  South America is far more prosperous than other formerly colonized areas and has seen remarkable stability.

All Carter did on that front was honor his predecessors agreement.  Lets give GW credit for honoring our SALT treaties and act like its a big deal.

quote:I realize Oklahoma is land locked and many of you have never been outside of the state

Ahhh-ha!  Oklahoma is not land locked, we have an inland sea port soooo there!

I would seriously question though, that anyone posting on this board has never left Oklahoma.  I shutter to think such a thing is possible with anyone that pretends to have a learned viewpoint on world affairs (or anyone for that matter).

[patric]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

Under Carter our nation stood for Human Rights.  Under Bush our nation stands for Torture.

It seems to trickle down to the street level.  Witnesses said this woman fought each time she was shocked until she finally died:

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) - Oklahoma City police say a woman who died after being shot with a Taser gun was handcuffed when she was shot.
Police say a surveillance camera at the mission caught most of the incident on tape but police would not release the video because the investigation is ongoing.
The two officers involved are on paid administrative leave.

It's a different America...

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

Under Carter our nation stood for Human Rights.  Under Bush our nation stands for Torture.

Anyone remember The Panama Canal?

Mr. Jaynes.  Thank you for mentioning our blundering heavy handed, oftentimes criminal role in Nicaragua and Guatemala.  The issue of Refuges (that we created) has been sadly lacking in TulsaNow's various threads discussing undocumented workers.  But that's another thread.

We'll see how class clown, chicken hawk, Junior is perceived in another 27 years.  Given his penchant for secrecy and his disregard for law, I imagine we'll be learning a lot about our recent history.

You Republicans have really outdone the Left this time.  You make the Left's past excesses look tame.

[}:)]

[mr.jaynes]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

On one of those days when I'm struggling to find something nice to say about Republicans I usually cite Eisenhower because he had the guts to stand up against our military, but ever present in the back of my mind is what Eisenhower and our CIA did to Guatemala.  

Guatemala had freely elected a left leaning president who had campaigned with an agenda of Land Reform.  He started the process of redistributing land to Guatemala's Indian peasant farmers when an American corporation complained to Eisenhower.  Del Monte Corporation was going to lose some land in the redistribution scheme.  So Eisenhower had our CIA step in and arrange a coup against Guatemala's left leaning government.  We installed our pick and set up a puppet government in Guatemala City.  Our actions set in motion Guatemala's devastating civil war which was finally brought to an end in the late 90s.  Over 100,000 Guatemalans died because of our actions.

Canada had a long standing policy of automatically granting refugee status to Guatemalans.  We did not.

Late in his term Clinton apologized to the Guatemala for what we did.  He offered no reparations, nothing to compensate Guatemala for the damages.  Just an, I'm sorry.

Recently the world has complained about our cavalier disrespect for sovereign nations and our disregard for international treaties, but Latin America was already quite familiar with this aspect of our personality.  We have always acted as if we are in charge in Latin America.  You can imagine we are not at all admired.

Anyway, one of the few things we've done right in Latin America is honoring our agreements in respect to the Panama canal.  We can thank Carter for that.

I realize Oklahoma is land locked and many of you have never been outside of the state, but actions taken in Oklahoma ultimately impact our foreign policy and touch the lives of real people, just like you and me, all around the world.

Now go buy some Del Monte canned goods and think about all the little compromises we Americans have to make.

Now that the US is mired in its misadventures in other hemispheres and is stretched too thin to do much to meddle in Latin america, it seems that nationa such as Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and others are looking to make their own way. It'll be curious to see what they do with this opportunity.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by mr.jaynes

Now that the US is mired in its misadventures in other hemispheres and is stretched too thin to do much to meddle in Latin america, it seems that nationa such as Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and others are looking to make their own way. It'll be curious to see what they do with this opportunity.

So are you complaining about our current non-involvement or complaining because we were too involved in the past?

[Conan71]

On one of those days when I'm struggling to find something nice to say about Democrats I usually cite Kennedy because he had the guts to stand up against our military, but ever present in the back of my mind is what Kennedy and our CIA did to the people of Cuba.  

One brutal dictator was replaced by another who wasn't so friendly to U.S. interests. Sam Giancana and the rest of Kennedy's mob supporters were going to lose some land, casinos, hotels, and money in the redistribution scheme.  So Kennedy had our CIA step in and arrange an invasion against Cuba's left leaning government.  After that little fiasco and our embargo of their goods, the human condition deteriorated to a complete cesspool.

Florida created a long standing policy of automatically granting refugee status to Cubans arriving on banana boats.

Late in his term Clinton secretly smoked contraband Cuban cigars with interns in his office.  He offered no reparations, nothing to compensate Ms. Lewinsky for the damages.  Just an, I'm sorry.

Blah, blah, blah, blah....

[mr.jaynes]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by mr.jaynes

Now that the US is mired in its misadventures in other hemispheres and is stretched too thin to do much to meddle in Latin america, it seems that nationa such as Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and others are looking to make their own way. It'll be curious to see what they do with this opportunity.

So are you complaining about our current non-involvement or complaining because we were too involved in the past?

I'm no big fan of our past involvement in that region, and I'm actually interested in seeing what the future will bring to that region.

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Florida created a long standing policy of automatically granting refugee status to Cubans arriving on banana boats.

Among the original group of Cubans who fled after the revolution were the gangsters, operatives of the brutal secret police and military, the landholders, etc., hardly the salt of the earth. They're the ones who got into drug trafficking and other nefarious schemes once they got here. They lost their country and they can't admit that maybe they brought some of that upon themselves.

[Hawkins]

Carter has clarified that he meant to say that Bush is now less popular than Nixon was at the time of his resignation.

He is right on the mark, and the truth hurts... particularly to those of us who are registered republicans that feel betrayed.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Hawkins

Carter has clarified that he meant to say that Bush is now less popular than Nixon was at the time of his resignation.

He is right on the mark, and the truth hurts... particularly to those of us who are registered republicans that feel betrayed.

I don't think we needed Carter to provide that "duh" statement.  All one has to do is look at the approval (or in this case disapproval) ratings.

The unspoken protocol in the past has been for previous Presidents to refrain from publicly commenting on sitting President's job performance and/or policies.