OK, how about the US interfering with the internal affairs of its close allies? Sorry but the US should not do that. There is a long record (since the 50's) of the CIA funding conservative parties in Australia, Canada and England, as well as PAC's and similar groups in those countries to further certain business interests. For instance during the Medicare debate in Canada during the 60's the CIA did spend several million on the opposition to the current Canadian Medicare system.
-- Larry C. Lyons ColdFusion/Web Developer Certified Advanced ColdFusion 5 Developer EBStor.com 8870 Rixlew Lane, Suite 204 Manassas, Virginia 20109-3795 tel: (703) 393-7930 fax: (703) 393-2659 Web: http://www.ebstor.com http://www.pacel.com email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done. -- > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2002 1:42 AM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: History of American interventions > > > >From what I know, the basic facts are correct. > > Of course, political debate, policy analysis, etc. can be > waged endlessly on > how those facts should be interpreted. > > Furthermore, without _all_ of the facts, some of these events > might be hard > to properly address and debate. I don't fault the writer for > not delving > into all of the facts. Clearly his purpose was to give an overview and > promote a particular doctrine, so I do not expect him to go > into detail. > However, that doesn't mean his basic thesis is sound, since > we don't really > have the time or inclination to investigate each incident in > detail and find > cause to eliminate the ones that might undermine the writers position. > > Clearly, the U.S. has engaged in some nefarious activity that no > clear-headed person could condone, such as over throwing a > democratically > elected government. But the overall thesis of this page is > that 1) The U.S. > should never interfere in another country; 2) The U.S. should > not protect > U.S. business interests aboard. As a general principle, I > reject both of > these suppositions. > > H. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Cameron Childress [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 2:56 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: History of American interventions > > > Interesting. I would be interested in seeing this same > timeline minus the > opinions and slanted statements. Without having a solid background in > modern history it's really difficult (obviously the author's > intention) to > separate the facts and opinions, and to put it all into context. > > -Cameron > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jon Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 9:23 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: History of American interventions > > > > > > Obviously biased, but it's an interesting quick timeline. > > > > http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/US_Interventions_WBlumZ.html > > > > jon > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
