4 ms·

The CIA gets unfrair treatment, partly I think because they are held to the same standards by the public as say the FBI. This is what intel agencies do though.

by _8j50 3y ago

The CIA gets unfrair treatment, partly I think because they are held to the same standards by the public as say the FBI. This is what intel agencies do though. They are not there for democracy, political agenda, law enforcement,etc... they are like the military, as you pointed out they do heinous things. But the part that irks me the most is your incorrect insinuation that they did what they did on their own. They acted on behalf of the american people and their elected leaders. Much like how the US military also did heinous things in times of war (as any military would). The CIA is partly a paramilitary organization, sanctioned by the american people. Like any such agency they harm civilians and interfere in foreign governments' politics and economy. Why does the US need to repair our reputation? Unless by repair you mean remind the world who to be afraid of. We do not live in a nice world where everyone gets along. The US government and military (and the CIA) have no obligation to the world, their obligations are entirely to protect the american people and economy. Look at the unresr and strife in american society today. This is with a good economy! Look at the mass global migration to the US, civil rights changes,etc... they all happened because of post world war 2 prosperity, if you think all these rights and niceties can be kept under a crashed economy I'd have to respectfully disagree. In any other century in history, a country like the US would be inavding and decimating continents by now. When the CIA intervenes, it is because their leaders were hostile towards the US. My challenge to you is if you are willing to face the chaos of a poor/powerless america and hope the alternative power-vaccum fillers would be nicer. China for example literally has police stations in western countries to crush dissent and I shouldn't need to say much abour Russia's election interference (and China!), if they were in the US's place, how would you think they would react to a hostile Iran in 1953? Even now, Russian mercenaries are toppling African governments left and right! My point is not to morally justify anything but to plead for perspective here.

rockemsockem 3y ago
I generally agree with everything you said, but it seems to me that the biggest criticism of the coup in Iran is that it did not ultimately wind up serving American interests effectively. The coup installed a US-favorable Shah for a few years where oil could be obtained cheaply and then we got decades of a theocratic government actively funding American enemies all over the world. Oh, and we did this to a country that we had given nuclear power to. Evaluating the CIA's move on the rubric you've set out does not produce a passing grade!!
- _8j50 3y ago
  The problem is, the US changes administrations every four years. By far the late 60s and 70s lacked supporting of these friendly regimes, with vietnam and all and then carter really messed up a lot countries by his non-interference (but maybe that's what americans wanted at the time?). The intent may have been good but regimes don't self-sustain without their original support easily. Unwillingness to finish what they started and taking half-measures to avoid pissing off the american public I think was their real fault. Even in recent years, Israel was more than willing to start a fight with Iran before they matures their nuclear program but it is the US fearing involvement that is holding them back. Maybe in a few years the world would have to deal with Iranian ICBMs. What happens when they try to nuke tel aviv? Does the US nuke Tehran? Is that better than what Israel would have done?
almatabata 3y ago
> China for example literally has police stations in western countries to crush > dissent and I shouldn't need to say much abour Russia's election interference > (and China!), if they were in the US's place, how would you think they would > react to a hostile Iran in 1953? If Russian or China had organized that coup you would never hear the end of it. You would hear scalding criticism in every western newspaper and rightly so. Just because other countries do horrible things does not excuse the actions of the CIA.
- _8j50 3y ago
  Criticism will be there but it would be hypocritical. I can support ukraine's defense for example but I can't say from a morally authoritative perspective that Russia is so horrible. Every country is an invasion away from ceasing to exist. That's why militaries and alliances exist. That's why NATO exists. The US has been trying to do something similar as NATO in the pacific but they are not doing well picking sides there. Look at most of western China for example, it was not China 80 years ago, it was all a result of invading and incorporating other countries like Tibet. I mean, western media will act high and mighty but this is just the reality of the world. This was the context under which the Korean and Vietnamese wars were fought by the US. Empires keep expanding until they collapse, this is still true today. I just like to remember what empire I live in and that partly thanks to war averse folks like you, we do try to avoid and minimize war and invasions but also spend a crapton of money into a military that serves as a deterrence of wider scale global conflicts, wars and instabilities. The CIAs actions don't need to be excused because the CIA does not act on its own. It acted on your behalf if you are an american (my behalf too). And I for one support electing level headed leaders who would look at classified information I don't know and then decide what the CIA would do on my behalf.
  - defrost 3y ago
    On your behalf, or on behalf of individual US companies, regular or (especially) Military "defence" contractors? The company responded by intensively lobbying the U.S. government to intervene and mounting a misinformation campaign to portray the Guatemalan government as communist. In 1954, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency deposed the democratically elected government of Guatemala, and installed a pro-business military dictatorship. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company Exactly how many democracies has the US toppled through fear that the "socialist leaning" elected people's government might not buy American or fully align with the US hegemony? How has that played out for the US in the long term (this thread, for example, being about Iran).
greiskul 3y ago
> Why does the US need to repair our reputation? Unless by repair you mean remind the world who to be afraid of. We do not live in a nice world where everyone gets along. The US government and military (and the CIA) have no obligation to the world, their obligations are entirely to protect the american people and economy. I won't try to reason with you using notions of "morality", or "doing the right thing", cause you are clearly not looking at the world like that. So how about repairing the US reputation, cause you don't like terrorists flying airplanes into buildings? The violence of terrorists attacks is not justified, but it is entirely expected for when a country acts like this. Imperialism will always face opposition and struggle, and anybody that supports it is helping to generate violence, both to oppressed people, and to the opressors themselves (or their inocent civilizians) when oppressed people fight back.
- _8j50 3y ago
  You shouldn't use moral arguments because there is no dispute there. Wat in general and extrajudicial killings are immoral yet that's how civilizations exist. The US at least attempts to avoid war and conflict by using its fear as a deterrent, which is why i commenter about the world fearing the US. > So how about repairing the US reputation, cause you don't like terrorists flying airplanes into buildings? The violence of terrorists attacks is not justified, but it is entirely expected for when a country acts like this. Again with the "justified". You don't see much terrorism after afghanistan's invasion right? My sticking point there is that the US shouldn't have helped them rebuild. This is a conflict between horrifically violent parties who have no chance of sorting things out diplomatically. The US will never stop supporting israel and abandon an ally, Israel is there to stay, they're not abandoning their historical homeland which is no longer historical because Israel has been a country for almost 80 years now. Violence is all that's left. And wouldn't you prefer violence that involved minimal civilian casualties? If that means the CIA playing "dirty" decimating one country and leaving them in shambles as a lesson to the rest, is it not worth it? In a world where other countries think the US is nice and docile more civilians die. In a world where countries are terrified at the thought of the US military or IC thinking about them, much less civilians die and suffer. The violent understand only violence as a language of negotiation. > Imperialism will always face opposition and struggle Oh please with that b.s., did the US colonize any arabic country? What was colonized for al-qaeda who were besties with the CIA to do 9/11? You think becoming a coward and abandoning your allies who are surrounded by genocidan enemies will satiate the murderous terrorists. Do you even undersrand that according to their extremist views, they have no desire to co-exist with you in this world? If they had the power, they would invade the whole world and decapitate all unbelievers. Why do you think ISIS was invading Iraq and Syria? America already pulled out! Their propaganda was to take over the levant and the world. You think these terrorists are misunderstood freedom fighters! That's not the case. Their intifada against the US is not because they are oppressed but because people who have the same faith as them are oppressed in palestine. Neither palestinians nor most of Israel's neighbors have an interest in a two state solution. Victory in these terrorists minds is not liberation of palestine but the genocide of jews and christians in the middle east. They have no interest in accepting their former land has been give away to the jews, not because the jews kicked them out but because their ancestors kept getting invaded by the ottomans then the british. It was not palestinian land that was given away, it was british land. It was as much palestine land then as it is today. Like it or not, this is not imerialism but a country being created as a result if an occupation, much like how america was created after native american land was invaded. Just about every country in the world is a result of one group invading a land that does not belong to them, countries are built on blood and ill-gotten gains. I suggest you cede native american land (if you are american, canadian, australian) before you ask israel to give up their only home. The palestinian people are oppressed because generations of hatred and raising their kids to dream of murdering their neighboring jews has put them in a corner where they either get oppressed or there is another jewish holocaust. If they were willing to accept history and move on to negotiate their own free and peaceful country that accepts the right of Israel to exist and if the muslim world as a whole decided to stop dreaming of genocide the palestine would be free. Put it a bit differently: I would prefer another 9/11 and invading another middle eastern country than not support Israel's right to existence. I don't support their incursions into the westbank or treatment of palestinians in general though. If any of Israel's neighbors could, they would have killed them off. Even Iran taunts israel with a nuclear holocaust all the time. So I suggest you pick a side, terrorists who kill babies for fun or not so nice Israelis who are willing to negotiate coexistence with their neighbors. I suggest you think long and hard about the outcomes to civilians and how much pain and suffering results in the side you pick.

by _8j50 3y ago

rockemsockem 3y ago

I generally agree with everything you said, but it seems to me that the biggest criticism of the coup in Iran is that it did not ultimately wind up serving American interests effectively. The coup installed a US-favorable Shah for a few years where oil could be obtained cheaply and then we got decades of a theocratic government actively funding American enemies all over the world. Oh, and we did this to a country that we had given nuclear power to. Evaluating the CIA's move on the rubric you've set out does not produce a passing grade!!

_8j50 3y ago
The problem is, the US changes administrations every four years. By far the late 60s and 70s lacked supporting of these friendly regimes, with vietnam and all and then carter really messed up a lot countries by his non-interference (but maybe that's what americans wanted at the time?). The intent may have been good but regimes don't self-sustain without their original support easily. Unwillingness to finish what they started and taking half-measures to avoid pissing off the american public I think was their real fault. Even in recent years, Israel was more than willing to start a fight with Iran before they matures their nuclear program but it is the US fearing involvement that is holding them back. Maybe in a few years the world would have to deal with Iranian ICBMs. What happens when they try to nuke tel aviv? Does the US nuke Tehran? Is that better than what Israel would have done?

almatabata 3y ago

> China for example literally has police stations in western countries to crush > dissent and I shouldn't need to say much abour Russia's election interference > (and China!), if they were in the US's place, how would you think they would > react to a hostile Iran in 1953? If Russian or China had organized that coup you would never hear the end of it. You would hear scalding criticism in every western newspaper and rightly so. Just because other countries do horrible things does not excuse the actions of the CIA.

_8j50 3y ago
Criticism will be there but it would be hypocritical. I can support ukraine's defense for example but I can't say from a morally authoritative perspective that Russia is so horrible. Every country is an invasion away from ceasing to exist. That's why militaries and alliances exist. That's why NATO exists. The US has been trying to do something similar as NATO in the pacific but they are not doing well picking sides there. Look at most of western China for example, it was not China 80 years ago, it was all a result of invading and incorporating other countries like Tibet. I mean, western media will act high and mighty but this is just the reality of the world. This was the context under which the Korean and Vietnamese wars were fought by the US. Empires keep expanding until they collapse, this is still true today. I just like to remember what empire I live in and that partly thanks to war averse folks like you, we do try to avoid and minimize war and invasions but also spend a crapton of money into a military that serves as a deterrence of wider scale global conflicts, wars and instabilities. The CIAs actions don't need to be excused because the CIA does not act on its own. It acted on your behalf if you are an american (my behalf too). And I for one support electing level headed leaders who would look at classified information I don't know and then decide what the CIA would do on my behalf.
- defrost 3y ago
  On your behalf, or on behalf of individual US companies, regular or (especially) Military "defence" contractors? The company responded by intensively lobbying the U.S. government to intervene and mounting a misinformation campaign to portray the Guatemalan government as communist. In 1954, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency deposed the democratically elected government of Guatemala, and installed a pro-business military dictatorship. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company Exactly how many democracies has the US toppled through fear that the "socialist leaning" elected people's government might not buy American or fully align with the US hegemony? How has that played out for the US in the long term (this thread, for example, being about Iran).

greiskul 3y ago

> Why does the US need to repair our reputation? Unless by repair you mean remind the world who to be afraid of. We do not live in a nice world where everyone gets along. The US government and military (and the CIA) have no obligation to the world, their obligations are entirely to protect the american people and economy. I won't try to reason with you using notions of "morality", or "doing the right thing", cause you are clearly not looking at the world like that. So how about repairing the US reputation, cause you don't like terrorists flying airplanes into buildings? The violence of terrorists attacks is not justified, but it is entirely expected for when a country acts like this. Imperialism will always face opposition and struggle, and anybody that supports it is helping to generate violence, both to oppressed people, and to the opressors themselves (or their inocent civilizians) when oppressed people fight back.

_8j50 3y ago
You shouldn't use moral arguments because there is no dispute there. Wat in general and extrajudicial killings are immoral yet that's how civilizations exist. The US at least attempts to avoid war and conflict by using its fear as a deterrent, which is why i commenter about the world fearing the US. > So how about repairing the US reputation, cause you don't like terrorists flying airplanes into buildings? The violence of terrorists attacks is not justified, but it is entirely expected for when a country acts like this. Again with the "justified". You don't see much terrorism after afghanistan's invasion right? My sticking point there is that the US shouldn't have helped them rebuild. This is a conflict between horrifically violent parties who have no chance of sorting things out diplomatically. The US will never stop supporting israel and abandon an ally, Israel is there to stay, they're not abandoning their historical homeland which is no longer historical because Israel has been a country for almost 80 years now. Violence is all that's left. And wouldn't you prefer violence that involved minimal civilian casualties? If that means the CIA playing "dirty" decimating one country and leaving them in shambles as a lesson to the rest, is it not worth it? In a world where other countries think the US is nice and docile more civilians die. In a world where countries are terrified at the thought of the US military or IC thinking about them, much less civilians die and suffer. The violent understand only violence as a language of negotiation. > Imperialism will always face opposition and struggle Oh please with that b.s., did the US colonize any arabic country? What was colonized for al-qaeda who were besties with the CIA to do 9/11? You think becoming a coward and abandoning your allies who are surrounded by genocidan enemies will satiate the murderous terrorists. Do you even undersrand that according to their extremist views, they have no desire to co-exist with you in this world? If they had the power, they would invade the whole world and decapitate all unbelievers. Why do you think ISIS was invading Iraq and Syria? America already pulled out! Their propaganda was to take over the levant and the world. You think these terrorists are misunderstood freedom fighters! That's not the case. Their intifada against the US is not because they are oppressed but because people who have the same faith as them are oppressed in palestine. Neither palestinians nor most of Israel's neighbors have an interest in a two state solution. Victory in these terrorists minds is not liberation of palestine but the genocide of jews and christians in the middle east. They have no interest in accepting their former land has been give away to the jews, not because the jews kicked them out but because their ancestors kept getting invaded by the ottomans then the british. It was not palestinian land that was given away, it was british land. It was as much palestine land then as it is today. Like it or not, this is not imerialism but a country being created as a result if an occupation, much like how america was created after native american land was invaded. Just about every country in the world is a result of one group invading a land that does not belong to them, countries are built on blood and ill-gotten gains. I suggest you cede native american land (if you are american, canadian, australian) before you ask israel to give up their only home. The palestinian people are oppressed because generations of hatred and raising their kids to dream of murdering their neighboring jews has put them in a corner where they either get oppressed or there is another jewish holocaust. If they were willing to accept history and move on to negotiate their own free and peaceful country that accepts the right of Israel to exist and if the muslim world as a whole decided to stop dreaming of genocide the palestine would be free. Put it a bit differently: I would prefer another 9/11 and invading another middle eastern country than not support Israel's right to existence. I don't support their incursions into the westbank or treatment of palestinians in general though. If any of Israel's neighbors could, they would have killed them off. Even Iran taunts israel with a nuclear holocaust all the time. So I suggest you pick a side, terrorists who kill babies for fun or not so nice Israelis who are willing to negotiate coexistence with their neighbors. I suggest you think long and hard about the outcomes to civilians and how much pain and suffering results in the side you pick.