Skip to content

US Backed Dictators Cause Backlash Of Terrorism

December 8, 2007


3101-08-gwb.jpg “The [estimate] doesn’t do anything to change my opinion about the danger Iran poses to the world — quite the contrary.”
— President Bush

mahmoud_ahmadinejad.jpe “This was a final shot to those who … spread a sense of threat and concern in the world through lies of nuclear weapons.” – Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

How definitive are National Intelligence Estimates? The estimates reflect the consensus opinion of the nation’s 16 intelligence agencies, and while they provide a snapshot of current judgments about future events, estimates don’t always deliver the final word on a subject. The conclusions of a 2002 Iraq estimate were wrong in part because analysts, according to a Senate investigation, were led to “ignore or minimize” evidence that Iraq didn’t have an active program to develop weapons of mass destruction.

Iran Curveball

President Bush has been scrambling to rescue his Iran policy after this week’s intelligence switcheroo, but the fact that the White House has had to spin so furiously is a sign of how badly it has bungled this episode. In sum, Mr. Bush and his staff have allowed the intelligence bureaucracy to frame a new judgment in a way that has undermined four years of U.S. effort to stop Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

This kind of national security mismanagement has bedeviled the Bush Presidency. Recall the internal disputes over post-invasion Iraq, the smearing of Ahmad Chalabi by the State Department and … The estimate didn’t revise earlier predictions that Iran could have a nuclear weapon by around 2015 and concluded with only “moderate confidence” that Iran hasn’t restarted its program. At a congressional hearing on Thursday, a senior U.S. intelligence official cautioned against the idea that Iranian ambitions were “benign.”

Wow! Don’t you think that the USA with a new, more rational administration, could accomplish some kind of equity with Iran in seven more years? Iran, like any country, would only develop Nuclear Weaponry if they perceived a “clear and present” threat to their security. This is a very expensive undertaking for any country, no matter what the motivation. If this were to happen, a more wealthy country would have to underwrite the expenses … who would that be? Who has a high stake in Iran’s welfare? Russia, China … maybe even Pakistan. Proxy wars are made from this kind of scenario. Viet Nam was a grand example of a costly Proxy War against Communist China and the Soviet Union. This could be the final REDUX!

Iran’s nuclear program began in 1959 when the shah purchased a research reactor from the U.S.

Prime examples of the US setting up and backing corrupt dictators to serve our agenda, is the Shah, Saddam, and Osama Bin Laden, not to mention many South American countries. We gave them the same weapons and technology that are killing our soldiers today. The practice of nation building and democratizing other countries is a sad ‘quick fix’ for whatever policy the US seeks. This won’t work anymore. Look at Sudan. We have allowed atrocities, as bad as or worse than Saddam and the Shah, to kill and displace millions of human beings. The US arrangement with Sudan is pitiful … as long as the impression remains that they have credible intelligence about Bin Laden, the US is ‘hands off’.

This is a puppet show. The puppeteers are following a script. The world is on to our script and won’t take it anymore. The US arms the same elements that they expect to fight in the future … they allow a crisis to evolve in order to market intervention to the American public and select allies.

History repeats

To the populations back home the reason often given for was for “freedom”, “stability”, “containing the Soviet Union” and so on. For the people of the region that had their popular leaders overthrown and replaced with corrupt rulers, this was surely not freedom. Communism was an often used reason around the world, not just the Middle East, even if it was not the case. As Noam Chomsky details, it was often a convenient excuse, but the underlying threat was often that nations might be able to use their own resources and be an example for others to follow.

… the CIA played a considerable role in the overthrowing of Chilean President Salvador Allende in 1973 by Augusto Pinochet, who is credited with a 17-year reign of oppression and terror.

The U.S. government’s problem with Pakistan is similar to the one it had with Iran in 1979. The U.S. government placed Iranian Shah Reza Pahlavi in power in 1953, which extinguished the rising flames of democracy. This resulted in a populist Islamic revolution and extreme anti-American sentiment. Now, Pakistan’s brutal dictator, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, is facing a populist uprising.

pinochet.jpg shah-in-uniform.jpgallende.jpgsaddam_norevenge_vlrg_6awidec.jpggeneral_musharraf.jpgamin_dada_lg.jpghassanal_bolkiah_2002.jpgduvalier.jpgking-fahd_1.jpgfranco.jpggmarcos.jpgnoriegabig200.jpg

Twentieth-century American foreign policy is a paradox: the world’s oldest democracy repeatedly backs dictatorships in the name of freedom. Defenders of right-wing dictators argued they were a necessary evil. Blast the notion that this violation of core American values actually serves U.S. interests. The policy of coddling dictators has brought a backlash among foreign populations with long memories.  Book by historian, professor, David SchmitzThe United States and Right-Wing Dictatorships, 1965-1989

Comment at the back of the book,  “A crucial insight into the uncertain status of America in the world today.” by  Max Paul Friedman who co-authored Partisan Histories: The Past in Contemporary Global Politics

  1. March 21, 2009 5:31 pm

    Thank you Max, corrections have been made to this post to make it clear who said what. BTW, BossKitty writes in bold and often in color. I welcome corrections anytime. My apologies for any vague assertions.

  2. Max Paul Friedman permalink
    March 21, 2009 4:11 pm

    May I point out that the quotation attributed to me, Max Paul Friedman, is a blurb I wrote for the back of David Schmitz’s book, The United States and Right-Wing Dictatorships, 1965-1989. I have absolutely no connection to this webpage, and Moinansari’s outrage is better directed at the author who calls him or herself “bosskitty” and whose casual citation style made it seem as though I wrote the column.

  3. December 12, 2007 2:18 pm

    Capitalism is the enemy of democracy. Democracies and freedom do NOT go hand and hand , that is a fallacy. Freedom also does not go hand and with Capitalism. AS said above, often democracy is simply mob rule.

  4. December 12, 2007 2:12 pm

    I want to let readers know that on NY texan and Bosskitty have 3 great books up for great prices through Amazon. Me i got my copy of Shock Doctrine for the cover price cause a friend bought it for me – its cover price is 28 bucks. It is necessary reading , as is Chalmers Johnson – Both books give a great history , very current too, of what exactly the ameriKan imperialist Empire has been up to, both here and internationally. These books provide a great perspective and the knowledge we NEED ,to know exactly what, who and why the enemies of the people are, and how they operate. Both Klein and Johnson have done the entire world a service by writing these books. An example is the first in the Chalmers triology , Blowback, (a cia term) , most ameriKans were not aware that 911 was blowback – and it was spun so that we would not see this,though Bin ladin was quite clear. His second book Sorrows of Empire, and third, Nemesis are “easy reads” and after finishing them. One has little doubt that indeed our EMPIRE will go exactly the way of Empires past. It has too, the formula is in place , and the chain reactions are time tested and predictable – we are NOT the first over reaching empire in history. Its that simple. I cannot recommend these MUST READ books urgently enough. If you read no other political/historical books ever – these few will capture it all.

  5. moinansari permalink
    December 9, 2007 4:04 am

    Conquest is not in our principles. It is inconsistent with our government. Thomas Jefferson

    Paul Friedman’s febrile invective is a compendium of discredited Neocon assertions, unsubstantiated discomfiting claptrap, outright anachronistic distortion, vapid insipid fatuous doltish dalliance and pure unadulterated balderdash. His repellent manic-obsession and paranoid conspiratorial delusions about Pakistanis are a transparent attempt to justify his irredentist and revanchist agenda.

    It reminds us of the nonsense of another idiot

    “Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it”. (Adolf Hitler)

    Pakistanis refuse to take foster-parentage of the sarcophagus of a failed Western foreign policy of the perfidiously myopic irredentist and revanchist Neocons. America has rejected the Neocon disquisitions and fulminations and the sane world clamors for the denouement of their sick vamparish philosophy. This small cabal of myopic polemicists and public officials seek to ensnare our country in a series of perpetual mimetic wars that are not in America’s interests.

    A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.
    Thomas Jefferson

    Mr. Friedman’s selective amnesia fails to consider the fact that more than 1000 Pakistanis have died fighting the so called “war on terror”, and Pakistan has been a US ally since 1947. Pakistanis say “we don’t want your favors or your hate”. Leave Pakistan and Pakistanis alone.

    A majority of precocious Americans have clearly voiced disquisitions against the doltish and vindictive votary propagating this divisively daphenous demagogy. The world has presented copious monographs against this deleterious philosophy used as an excuse to wage The New Crusades Against Islam (TNCAI). An exegetical examination will show that the furtive condotierri supportive of Blackwater and other mercenaries has evinced shame to our country.

    I still have my Christmas Tree. I looked at it today. Sure enough, I couldn’t see any forests. — Steven Wright

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: