Australia to sign up to China Bank>>MOD WARNING<<

Notice America does no grandstanding to China. America went bankrupt to China years ago, China has not foreclosed for then it would get nothing.

 

Yes they supported the Indonesians fighting other Indonesians.... it was the Indonesians killing each other. The CIA missions were against military targets in support of the political objectives. If something is killed without intent its usually called manslaughter, not murder.

The US has a habit of supporting friendly causes when they are faced by superior military opposition - its called stropping outright slaughter. If you look at Libya the US wanted nothing to do with it, but when Gaddafi sent in African Merc's with armor and air support to attack civilian rebels who were trying to overthrow him - the US stepped in to stop mass killings. In your Indonesia example we have mass killings again, but as usual its the military establishment being abused by retarded (as in backwards) political ideologies and dictators, such as communism, to 'force' people to follow suit. The US has a history of trying to level the playing field in conflicts it has interest in but no real commitment to, so that the people have a chance to determine their own fate and not be forced.

 

Errr no, your making convenient assumptions to support your belief, when you should be trying to ascertain the truth - anything else is disingenuous and deserves to be argued against ad nauseum.

We've already established they did not meet the definition of a terrorist group... so even if some of the people whom they were working towards the same outcome with were deliberately targeting civilians to intimidate and threaten, it does not implicate the CIA with the hypothetical terrorist action.

Face it, Indonesians like to slaughter each other sometimes, see the "Indonesian killings of 1965&#8211;66" which was the Indonesian military itself!!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_killings_of_1965–66

"The CIA described the massacre as "one of the worst mass murders of the 20th century, along with the Soviet purges of the 1930s, the Nazi mass murders during the Second World War, and the Maoist bloodbath of the early 1950s.""

Do you have any links to your purported 'massacres' of even any killing of civilians by the CIA at all in Indonesia???? The Allen Lawrence Pope link doesnt have any case of the CIA targeted civilians.

 

One question you should (but probab;y will refuse to) answer directly, with a yes or no answer.
Was the US at war with Indonesia?
If the answer is no (it is), why was the US there, and why were they killing people?

As for terrorism,

How does that not apply to the US mass murders in Indonesia?

True, but you fail to mention that was done by the US sponsored dictator. Had the US not helped him into power (Their first attempt at removing the government being the aforementioned terrorism, those murders would not have happened.
Please link to US condemnation of those killings, or any other while the US sponsored man was in power, or working to getting it.
The US policy on this issue was silence, that being because they wanted it, and actively assisted it.

.

The CIA, as I have already linked to, ran bombing raids in Indonesia.
America was not at war with Indonesia.

http://www.countercurrents.org/lucas240407.htm

That might not be the best link as you'll claim bias, but it doesn't need to use bias in this case as facts are still facts.

 

The US was at war with communism, it was called the Cold War, and Indonesia found itself split along those same lines so the US provided a small amount of support to the anti-communist forces..... so yes.

That definition you posted is probably the worst definition of terrorism I've ever read LOL. It's actually the deliberate targeting of civilians with actual or threats of violence for intimidation, and is not limited to political means. You'd have to show the US targetted and attacked civilians, which you havent, and you still havent shown where this US mass murder was?

I dunno, the internet does not have the greatest coverage of real current affairs from the pre-internet age. You only get what people have actively uploaded which often only supports their own view of things. I'm sure I could find something.... if I do I'll post it when I have time to go looking. Most of the stuff online is conspiracy theorists trying to make something big out of their own small lives.

It's convenient to blame the US because they were fighting the USSR for regional alliances all over the world. Money was being thrown at all nations with any strategic value to outbid each other.... but its disingenuous to think the killing was in anyway related to the US efforts to ally with 'whoever' was in charge of Indonesia. Indonesia was important to both the USSR and USA because of its ability to control sea passage between the Indian and Pacific Oceans. Anyone who makes the distorted connection between the Indonesian's manner of rule and the US intentions has an agenda and is trying to mislead for some reason. Indonesia has a fascinating history.... but very sad.

So your point is now the lesser of two evils was still too evil. Perhaps you think he was the worse of two evils, and that the communists should have won? Well, communism does not have a very good track record when it comes to mass murder, see Stalin and Mao. You cannot blame the US for something someone they supported does in his own country to his own people for his own reasons. Lots of countries probably supported him, so you might as well blame everyone.... but perhaps you should instead put blame on the people who actually did it... the Indonesia military/government.

Assuming it was true, that is 5000 people 'of interest'. Since those 5000 were 'of interest' they would have been checked off the list when they were killed. This is not causality, that is just keeping a list up to date. You'd have to have evidence showing the CIA told the Indonesian military to kill them, but even then assuming your worse case dramatic anti-US position, it would only be 5000, compared to the millions the Indonesian Army slaughtered on its own. What likely happened is (assuming your link is true) the CIA told the Indonesian government about 5000 communist military personal who were guilty or implicit in military operations against the Indonesian government... end of story. It was then up to Indonesia to decide what to do about it - and they decided to kill them. You cannot blame the US for that.

 

So you're saying the US was at war, officially, with Indonesia, so these killings were acts of war.

If that is the case, I assume you can link to the declaration of war.

Of course, you can't because you lied.
America has never been at war with Indonesia, but you have to try to convince people it is so the US isn't guilty of murder.

Now, please link to the declaration of war, or admit the deaths directly caused by CIA bombing raids were murder.

 

I know you have little idea of these events, but they're a matter of public record.
The man accused of many of the mass murders in Indonesia was Prabowo.

http://www.insideindonesia.org/prabowo-and-human-rights

http://www.allannairn.org/2014/07/prabowo-part-2-i-was-americans-fair.html

Actually, you're wrong on another point (I'm hardly shocked at this).
Finding information on US sponsored and supported mass murderers is easy - but only if you want to find it.

 

Nah, I said the US was at war with communism, particularly the USSR. Indonesia sided with the USSR while the US was at war with the USSR so it could have been a lot worse for Indonesia.... the US could have wiped the floor with you guys if they'd wanted considering their already was indigenous rebellion, but they didn't. You should be thanking the US they showed restraint

 

So you admit the US was NOT at war with Indonesia, thus the CIA killings were murders.
It took some getting out of you but you finally admitted it, even if you had to wrap it up in BS.

In fact, the US of A's political ambitions have been used as excuses for many mass murders of civilians, most in countries you weren't at war with, so your country is guilty of mass murder.

Perhaps we can move on t the mass terrorist killings in Cambodia and Laos, another two countries you were never at war with, but murdered thousands of people when you bombed them.

Could you explain those massive sustained terrorist assaults, please?

 

LOL, do you really want me to repeat myself if your just going to ignore what I'm saying?

Welcome to the definition of a 'cold' war.... did the US ever declare war on the USSR, no, but that does not mean they didn't fight each other through proxies and against each others proxies - your being very convenient with your use of legal justification for military action. I've explained why the US acted, on two fronts (stop slaughter by Indon. military, stop spread of Soviet influence in areas of geostrategic sensitivity). So your point about the definition of murder by somehow implying the military killed by the CIA should be classified civilians is not really relevant or realistic to the real world. I know your opinions suit your view, but its not representative of the wider reality. You'd need to show some evidence of the US planning and killing civilians to classify it as murder.

Lhaos and Cambodia is the same flavor of reality, if you dont like it join the club. But the blame lies in the Soviet empire for trying to grow by force, again, another structural flaw of communism it has to spread outward to survive..... like a ponzi scheme

You can keep saying the US was a terrorist and murdered millions, but everyone knows your speaking out of your tailgate.

 

But, you were NOT at war with any, nor did they declare war on you so, no matter how many times you try to justify killing thousands for political ideals, it's still murder and terrorism.
If your point is acceptable, ISIS are equally free from guilt as they're fighting for their ideals, even though they're killing thousands.

No, the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims is terrorism, even when you claim it isn't.

 

Oh, and you didn't like my definition of terrorism.
Perhaps you'd like the one used by the oldest, and best university in the world.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/terrorism

Would you care to dispute Oxford university's definition?

 

The US is not having a cold war with ISIL..... I guess you've switched from Indonesia to Lhaos, Cambodia etc, basically the 'borders' did not exist for the Communists, so the US had to follow them across. It's part of what the Cold War was.... if you signed up on either the Soviet or US side, you joined the 'cold' war. Perhaps Indonesia should have remained neutral, and then the CIA would not have had to provide assistance to the Indonesian anti-communist rebellion (because it wouldn't exist!!).

 

It's not a particularly useful definition, because it leaves those concepts of unofficial and unauthorized wide open for interpretation, AND overall its generally poor because it does not match the realities of legal warfighting, they should add the words 'intentional' to tighten it up. Just because something is published, backed by a majority, or from a prestigious institution - does not mean it is ideal or even the best available. Terrorism is best described as the intentional intimidation of civilians by violence or the threat of violence.

 

Which ever way around you try to hide it in BS, the US attacked and murdered thousands of people in countries you weren't at war with.

 

LOL yea, not as many as other nations, by a long shot... Indonesia included. People die in wars, you just want to manufacture a particular view on when it is appropriate that suits your beliefs. The Cold War was real and about real things with real consequences and denying it to cherry pick anti-US numbers while avoiding their accuracy or the other numbers going on is that smell your complaining about so much.

 

I notice all these USA hate mongers never mention the billions in aid that the US provides around the world, or the tens of thousands of refugees they take in each year.

 

The US has attacked or interfered in more countries than any other terrorist nation since WWII.
I'm sorry your well documented history of mass murder is anti American.
You'll have to rewrite history so it doesn't make you look bad.

 

America gives billion in aid to a lot of countries, most of it going to Israel in the form of weapons.
Aid is a wonderful word that works very well when you want to make arms sales look nice.

Thanks for bringing it up.