5 Comments

And -- it started with CIA assassinated of Lumumba....

Expand full comment

The US is now a completely militarized empire. Like a hammer always looking for a nail. The whack-a-mole strategy of the “rules based order.”

Expand full comment

Trump’s Pledge to Exit Afghanistan Was a Ruse, His Final SecDef Says - Defense One

https://www.defenseone.com/policy/2021/08/trumps-pledge-exit-afghanistan-was-ruse-his-final-secdef-says/184660/

Trump’s Pledge to Exit Afghanistan Was a Ruse, His Final SecDef Says. Chris Miller now says talk of a full withdrawal was a “play” to convince a Taliban-led government to keep U.S. counterterrorism forces.

Expand full comment

Facebook's Partner: The Atlantic Council (5 Frightening Facts) (rumble.com)

https://rumble.com/vleq6v-facebooks-partner-the-atlantic-council-5-frightening-facts.html

Facebook's Partner: The Atlantic Council (5 Frightening Facts)

Expand full comment

Good lord. I certainly feel for the Congolese people and I hope they are able to live in peace and security as soon as possible -- and perhaps get some long-overdue reparations from Belgium for Old King Leopold's unspeakable crimes. But this conflict simply does not concern the United States. The security situation in the Congo possesses no direct threat to the United States or its vital security interests. The rationale for intervention appears to be an unsubstantiated and vague charge that a non-state actor involved in the Congolese conflict has "aligned" itself with the Islamic State movement.

When vague charges like this are presented as the rationale for an intervention, we need to start asking for specifics. When we hear that a group is "linked" or "connected" or "involved" with another group, we need to ask what those "links," "connections" and "involvements" actually consist of. We need specifics. Terms like "linked" are so vague that they can mean virtually anything. I am "linked" to the Democratic Party because I once attended a speech by John Kerry. Is this "link" in any way indicative of a relationship where I have influence over the Democratic Party, where I do its bidding in the world, or vice versa? No. It's completely superficial and meaningless.

If we allow the media and political establishment to use vague and ambiguous "links" between groups and governments as a blank-check for intervention, we are abdicating our duty as citizens. We need to know the specifics. Do not let anyone get away with describing relationships in fuzzy terms -- demand to know specifics!

Expand full comment