Kenya in Crisis

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Brianna

Freudian slip?


(hee hee!)

You're kidding, Bri.

There was white showing all the way around the iris, and nervous glances to either side to check on who might be listening. Fortunately, the lobby was empty but for us two.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Shall I compare tw trying to analyze politics to a thalidomide case trying to play the bagpipes...?

I can keep that up.

[Aliantha]

speaking of thalidomide, I saw on tv that they're going to use some form of the drug for something else. I'll have to look it up and see what it is.

Here it is. Cancer. You can read the rest of the article if you like.

Thalidomide, famous in the 60's because of limb deformities in babies born to women who had taken it for morning sickness, was withdrawn in 1961. Now doctors say it could be used as a treatment for cancer.
The drug has been seen to slow down weight loss in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer; severe weight loss is the direct cause of death in one in five patients with advanced cancer, according to doctors from Southampton University Hospital.

Patients who took 200mg of thalidomide daily during tests did not live longer than those who did not, but their increased weight was matched by increased physical capacity.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Aretha's doctor

I wouldn't have the slightest doubt (if such reports were to come to light) that the American CIA are responisible for the whole problem from the very beginning. Implementing political unrest (in another country) would be keeping in true form with standard CIA procedure if such unrest might lead to increased American influence and (ultimately) American control.

The British Empire relied on "Divide and Rule" tactics. The Americans rely on "Destroy and Reconstruct".

Everything is America's fault - as usual.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by classicman

Everything is America's fault - as usual.

Nope, just problems that have occurred after 1945.

And you think I'm joking...

But seriously, we have fucked up many countries.

Originally Posted by William Blum

“Between 1945 and 2005 the United States has attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments, and to crush more than 30 populist-nationalist movements struggling against intolerable regimes... In the process, the U.S. caused the end of life for several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life of agony and despair.” (Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Blum#Quotations

[ZenGum]

And on a similar note, some folks claim that the rise of LSD was due to the CIA using it to distract the anti-war movement:

In the book Acid Dreams, authors Martin A. Lee and Bruce Shlain explore the way drugs destroyed the focus of the anti-war movement, pointing to links between major drug-dealers and the Central Intelligence Agency.

(Mentioned in passing here.)

Given some of the things the CIA did do, I wouldn't rule out anything.
I'd love to work for the CIA. You get to do all sorts of crazy shit.

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Nope, just problems that have occurred after 1945.

You're not far from the truth. Considering most of what's happened since then I must admit that I have similar thoughts.

One incident that's still a question mark for me though is Korea. I'm inclined to believe that the Americans were "the good guys" there but I'm afraid to say it out loud for fear of getting a ton of agro from those who are more "in the know" than I am. What's your opinion?

Originally Posted by ZenGum

He owes them money.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by Aretha's doctor

One incident that's still a question mark for me though is Korea. I'm inclined to believe that the Americans were "the good guys" there but I'm afraid to say it out loud for fear of getting a ton of agro from those who are more "in the know" than I am. What's your opinion?

I don't know enough about the topic to give an answer. Most times conflicts don't even have good guys versus bad guys too so who knows.

[Undertoad]

but I'm afraid to say it out loud for fear of getting a ton of agro from those who are more "in the know" than I am. What's your opinion?

Thanks for asking, I think you're a moron.

Gov't-related deaths in the 20th C, including wars:

[classicman]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Nope, just problems that have occurred after 1945.

And you think I'm joking...

But seriously, we have fucked up many countries.

Blum is an ass with an axe to grind, but thats fine - blame it all on America. Its fine, really. Just stop and think REALISTICALLY where the world would be without all we've done as a country and world leader - good and bad.

[piercehawkeye45]

UT, your graph is skewed, keeping it to government related deaths take out a lot of them. And deaths have nothing to do with Aretha's question.

Classicman, I know Blum's stance and I don't take him to heart but he does put out some good solid stats. And stop being stupid and saying "blame it ALL on America". I have never ONCE done that and I explained that in a different thread yesterday. The US has done a lot of shit to other countries so we do have to take some responsibility for it. We exploit other countries and we do not do what is "good", but what protects our own interests, there is more than enough evidence to back those statements up.

Africa for example, I have a friend that went there to help out and he says all the Western corporations are in control, who sell their resources for extremely cheap prices and then sell back products to them for a bloated price. They also get screwed over by the WTO with behind the counter offers. If you don't think shit like this has anything to do with the welfare of foreign countries, I don't know what to tell you.

For your question, it would be stupid to guess because we are dealing with chaos theory (butterfly effect). If one thing was changed in the 1940's in a particular country, we will have no idea of what big changes would have happened in the 1960s or 1980s. It could be much better than it is today, or it could be much worse.

But we can have some insight in some situations. Iran, for example, why did operation Ajax happen in 1953? What would have happened if we didn't support a coup and replaced a socialist-leaning leader with the Shah? Why did the Iranians vote in Mohammed Mosadeeq? What did he do that turned the British and United States against him? What would have happened if we would have let them go?

I'll throw a guess out. The situation in Iran is very similar to what happened in Venezuela in 1999. A country exploited by Western oil companies decided to kick the corporations out. What is happening in Venezuela today (this is ignoring all the propaganda bullshit from both sides)? What has their GDP changed? How about their poverty rate? Are they better off before or after Chavez came in?

I will go back to my Africa example. What would happen if we stopped exploiting Africa? I will give you my guess. First, local rulers will get very rich and powerful from their resources and our prices will probably go up for various materials. Then because of the new rich and powerful leaders, militarism will be on the rise and we will see many wars and genocides with a scene most likely similar to Europe in the 700s to WWII. Political lines will change and empires will rise and fall. After a while, like Europe, will will finally see some stability in that area. Is that better than worse than what we have now? I don't know but hey, at least they are have more control than now.

We have also helped many other countries out so I can't ignore that. But once again, that gets into chaos theory. Bottom line, I have no idea what the world would be like and anything that claims too, is most likely dead wrong.

I am also tired of the idea that the world would be lost without US's help? We didn't need the British to get to where we are now and I have real doubts that many other countries need us either.

[Ibby]

UT, that graph is definitely wrong.

at least five million, if not over ten or fifteen million, chinese died as a result of Mao's policies. That isnt shown at all.

[Undertoad]

Sure it is. The high points on the graph are number killed per year and Mao was at it 40 years. Look at the yellow area.

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by Aretha's doctor

One incident that's still a question mark for me though is Korea.

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

I don't know enough about the topic to give an answer. Most times conflicts don't even have good guys versus bad guys too so who knows.

But ... but ... you were there! You and Radar both!

Or were you just overwhelmed by the stupid futility of it all for 23 & 1/2 minutes per week?