The US Army Document That Proves the US is the World's Number One Sponsor of World Terrorism

Saturday, December 27, 2008

The US Army Document That Proves the US is the World's Number One Sponsor of World Terrorism

In a 'manual' which is officially to be released only to 'students from foreign countries on a case-by-case basis only', the US Army outlines a program of what it now calls 'irregular warfare', in fact US state sponsored terrorism, insurgency, and PSYOPS.
http://www.wikileaks.org/leak/us-fm3-05-130.pdf



The US Army document, cited above, is an arrogant, imperialistic and ill-considered response to a growing 'threat' --but a threat that is posed only to US monopolists and death merchants, i.e., the Military/Industrial Complex, a fancy name for Murder, Inc. The US has, in fact, squandered the limitless goodwill that had been extended our nation at the end of World War II.

The US has failed to make positive use of the world support for allied efforts to codify war crimes, to hold Nazi War Criminals responsibility for heinous crimes. But now --we have a recent US military document that the US Army would prefer to keep secret no doubt because it reveals to the world that those principles espoused at Nuremberg are either no longer operative or they were a fraud, the US didn't really mean it. Or perhaps they forgot to tell the world that the laws applied to everyone but themselves.

The Army has now revealed to the world that no nation is safe from US terrorism, US attack, US subversion of indigenous cultures and governments, US bullying or the US use of WMD against them. That is because the US believes itself to be a world-wide empire, in fact, a single nation that presumes to rule the world.



much more at:
http://existentialistcowboy.blogspot.com/2008/12/us-army-document-that-proves-us-is.html
via:
http://crooksandliars.com/mike-finnigan/mikes-blog-roundup-79

and try and be civilized for just once in our pathetic existence.

But I am willing to push that direction with you.

-Hoot

To bring and end to such abuses is to take the money away.

We need to cut in half the 'defense' budget.

Here's the way I see it: If Bushco didn't have enough manpower to invade Iraq, Bushco would have never invaded Iraq.

"The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein (Possibly the most eye opening book I have read in many years) explains how our corporate masters do this, did this, and are still doing this to the citizens of the U.S.

The book I am currently reading "Che" by John Lee Anderson (An excellent read so far) delves into why. In Guatemala it was the Eisenhower administration using the military and the C.I.A. to protect the interests of United Fruit using the guise of fighting Communism.

Latin America has a long history of U.S. might being used to destroy democracy to protect the ability of a few very rich people and corporations to subjugate and exploit the masses and keep them in abject poverty while they continue to rake in obscene amounts of wealth.

It is time to eat the rich.

During the Bay of Pigs, the War Party demanded war and JFK said, "No."
During the Cuban Missile Crisis, the War Party demanded war and JFK said, "No."
During the run-up in Vietnam, the War Party demanded war and JFK said, "No."

After Dallas, things changed completely and the War Party got their way.
And it's been that way, pretty much, ever since.

An excellent read on the subject from DUer MinM:

JFK and the Unspeakable

PS: Yeah. It's time to eat the rich. The thing is, they've got things set so We the People eat each other first.

Great Society indeed.

I'm not sure if that's sarcastic or not :/

-Hoot

Vietnam siphoned off the money needed to make it work.

By the time we got to the 90's, Poppy was blaming the "failed Great Society programs" for the L.A. Rodney King riots.

Warmongers are the scum of the earth.

How wars are funded at the expense of the greater good? How our current fiasco isn't in the federal budget, but is being paid with riders and emergency funding.

I hope there is a hell, and a special place in it for those.

Thanks for giving a damn, Der Fishie.

-Hoo

portray. When JFK assumed the Presidency in 1961 there were 300 American military advisors in Vietnam. In December of 1963, he had boosted that number to 16,000. Any discussions of ending American involvement in Vietnam were kept under tight wraps because JFK not want to give the pubs the "soft on communism" talking point. In effect he was willing to continue to allow Americans to die in SW Asia to support his reelection bid.

I see treason. But in reply to you pointing out that there were 16K advisors in SVN by '63, an excerpt:



There is other evidence as well that JFK was preparing to close that chapter after the election.

-Hoot

p.s. The word is quite not quiet, not an attack, just a pet peeve.

edit to fix link.

Ok to let americans die in a worthless endvor if it helps you get reelected. He had the constitutional authority to end our envolvement in Vietnam in 1963. He chose not to do that, rather he let it continue so he would not appear soft on communism during the 64 elections.

JFK inherited a prickly pear with advisers already in VN. His top people are begging him to escalate the situation and he tentatively does to provide training to the SVN. Are you really suggesting that the prudent thing for him to do was order an immediate withdrawal? When should he have done that? After the first was killed? That happened before he was sworn in as POTUS. After the Bay of Pigs fiasco and he realized he was being led down the garden path? Or maybe after the missile crisis?

I doubt that it was entirely the soft on communism angle that prevented him from the withdrawal, although I will admit it would have been a consideration, but you are entitled to the myopic view if you wish.

It remains that months after a number of conversations about withdrawal JFK was removed from the equation and the facts surrounding that play were obscured.

-Hoot

he was the one that made those decisions. He bears full responsibility for those decisions. Whatever advice or view on his part aided in his decision making process is rather immaterial. He could have with drawn those military personel from Vietnam at anytime he so chose to do so. He chose not to withdraw them. He raised the ante from three companies of advisors to a full division of advisors in less than years. This is not a myopic view of events. Blaming his advisors for those decisions misses the point. He is the one that responsible for those decisions, no one else.

and put us right back in there again.

Some of us knew this ages ago.

and his corrupt chickenhawk republicon cronies.

No honor. Whatsoever.

"Transnational criminal activities, including narco-trafficking, illicit arms dealing, and illegal financial transactions that support or sustain IW."
"1-22. The above list of operations and activities can be conducted within IW;"

I think it stands for Cocaine Importation.

-Hoot

Like military intelligence.

Some of the paramilitary types that engage in that kind of behavior need to be shown the door an possibly face prosecution for criminal activity. There's no place for that in this country.

There's a long tradition of it. Ask Gary Webb, oh, wait...

-Hoot

of people that don't grow eyes in the back of their heads.

but we have really good paint to cover up the damage.

Unless if you're brown, or don't make us alot of money...

38 minutes and a good warm-up to Bill's writings

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5875765740178483812&ei=IixYSfKEDJyyrQL6_ozhDg&q=william+blum+interview

I wonder how Obama will act in regards to such disclosures? Gotta wait till after the 20th to give him a chance....

Best case: Even if he's successful in changing such IW policies, it seems the damage to credibility will linger.

but I'm not sure it will stop until it subjugates us all or destroys the planet in the process.

We think the President of the United States can alter or help stop this process, but I fear that we are giving him far more power than he actually possesses.

I'm tired of Bush bumbling around, bombing whenever he feels we're being threatened. This document details a more intelligent approach to combating terrorism that I hope Obama will fully utilize.

Remember, this was NOT prepared by Bush flunkies. It was written by non-political military experts in special warfare training. As for what Special Forces really do you can forget most of the movies you've seen.

Has anybody read this?

"In a 'manual' which is officially to be released only to 'students from foreign countries on a case-by-case basis only'"

This is incorrect. Reading the distribution, it says it is available to all US government employees and contractors. Distribution to foreign students is on a case-by-case basis.

"1-21. Waging protracted IW depends "

That is an incorrect spin on the document. The description of IW that includes terrorism is an assessment of the threat we face, and the document shows our Special Forces soldiers how to deal with it.

"US subversion of indigenous cultures and governments"

Imagine a state full of terrorists trying to take down a non-terrorist government. Not hard, they exist. Special Forces tactics under this document would be to infiltrate the country and work with the people to try to get them to stop supporting and protecting the terrorists, and also to maybe catch or kill some of those terrorists. They're doing that in Iraq right now, and it works. But you want to call it "subversion" to try to peacefully get people to stop trying to kill us.

The alternative is to bomb them into the stone age. Which would you prefer?

As to the document as a whole, I prefer us to use our power WISELY all over the world to prevent terrorist attacks. Any weakness will only invite further attacks. Remember, they don't hate use for anything we did, they hate us because we are us, because we are not Muslim conquered territory.

they hate us for our freedoms silly. They don't hate us for anything we've done? Really?

Sham justification for the attacks they already wanted to perpetrate. They're still pissed off from getting their asses kicked back in 732 and finally losing world importance after WWI.

I am only talking about the millions of fanatics who desperately want to kill everyone who is not like them. Now that's not all Muslims. I have Muslims in my extended family, and they're pretty cool (voted for Obama, too). But if only one percent of Muslims are fanatics that's still 10 million bloodthirsty Muslims we need to deal with, and playing nice is a tactic that will only be perceived as weakness.

you never take your eye off the ball, do you?