You will have to read up on colonialism with regard to the Middle East - please note the Sykes-Picot secret agreement, 1916, prior to the defeat of the Ottoman Empire. But every continent has been affected by conquest and colonialism including other areas of the globe like the South Sea islands, etc. Jack Straw had it right that recent wars in Iraq and Afganistan trace back to poor policy by Britian and France and I fear we shall we cleaning up the debris for a very long time.
On Jul 26, 12:48 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > "... On Jul 26, 3:11 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: ..." > > > Best move on to the 90,000 plus details of the mess that is > > Afghanistan. > > I assume you're referring to morass of secret documents (the Afghan > War Diary) Wikileaks.org sent to Spiegal, a UK paper and the NYTimes > as well as publishing themselves on their website. > > Wiki wikileaks.org. They have a lengthy and admirable history of such > activities. They've uncovered some very damaging information over the > years and have been shut down many times -- as I suspect they are now > because there is no reaching their website. > > However, if you're really curious, Google this (without the quotes) > "site:wikileaks.org" Rather than clicking on the actual link, many > times the Google result list will show a blue link near the end of > each listing saying "Cached". This link is to the last cached copy of > a webpage from that site that Google had on its servers and will > display that page. If you try clicking on the main link, you'll just > get a "timed-out" or "host not responding" message, which tells me > that the site is being blocked. But you can still see the cached > documents from Wikilinks that are on Google. > > Spiegal has an interesting interview with Julian Assange, the editor > of Wikileaks, where he talks about what he does and the problems he's > had. (Link:http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,708518,00.html > ) > > Spiegal also has an interesting piece on their review of those 90,000 > secret war documents. It's a worthy read and can be found > athttp://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,708314,00.html. I > prefer foreign reporting on issues such as this because they lack the > American media bias (mainly to sensationalize). > > > Hate to say it, but I warned everyone before the Gulf War > > we were headed into a mire- many didn't even know where Iraq was > > located. Wow- they would finally say- this was the Cradle of > > Civilization- maybe the Garden of Eden! Who knew? BTW- this was the > > last "land war" simply to relieve Saddam of his ground forces and > > radar, etc. Anyone who can't spot an Arab bluff doesn't belong in > > national intelligence- it's a rough neighborhood but so was Europe for > > centuries and I think American Indians have their own version our > > history. > > No you don't. You love saying it and that's alright because you've > got a lot of company. Anyone with any knowledge of Aghan history, > especially with regard to those who've tried conquering the land, > knows it's a virtual impossibility. The only way to conquer that > nation would be to nuke it back to the stone age and even then there'd > probably be holdoouts in caves of the Kush. Even recent history shows > this. The old Soviet Union, which had no qualms about using totally > inhuman procedures and weapons, after eleven or twelve years, backed > out of Afghanistan sucking on their tails. > > Going into Afghanistan with conventional military forces, and bound as > we are by a more noble form of warfare (if such a thing can even be > said), was pure suicide as we are learning. If Bush was and Obama is > serious about nailing bin Laden and the rest of Al Queda, the only > answer is to fight fire with fire. Use their own wolf-in-sheeps- > clothing terrorist tactics against them. > > Bush didn't have the ability to do this since our intelligence > services, prior to 9/11, had pretty much ignored the Middle East. > None of our alphabet soup agencies had any deep moles in tactical and > strategic locations over there. Hell, one of the first things the CIA > found out was they had no one who could speak and understand Farsi or > any other Arab language. This oversight, for an international spy > agency, is abysmal. Funny, UK's MI6 was in the same shape and I > assume most EU spook agencies were as well. > > But that was nine years ago, and while there is no chance of having a > deep mole as yet, I have to assume we now have many Arabs working > under our cloak and some of them are on their way to being deep. I > also assume we've recruited a number of Arabs in various nations to > come under our cloak as well, but there is nothing better than having > a natural born American-Arab who has dug his way deep under cover in > places such as Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and the rest of the Arab > world. You can bet they have their spies settled well in among our > spooks as well. > > Time to resurge the old Mad comic book strip, Spy vs Spy. > > You also raise a point I've often wondered myself: Why, if the Middle > East and Central Africa are the cradles of our civilization -- the > place where our genetic forebears first roamed the planet -- did true > civilization not come to that part of the world? Why did civilization > emerge only when those early primates migrated far to the north? Was > it the weather? The microscopic primordial soupcon perhaps was too > full of deadlies? Why, indeed. > > And finally, on history, that is something that not only each side has > their version of, but within the ranks of each side there are splits > and divisions as to what really happened. Only over time, when many > buried documents come to light, generally after the death of the > people most involved, can we begin to put together a picture of > history that starts to come close to the truth -- which shall always > remain hidden in its totality. We will never know the complete truth.
