3 ms·
> But that will be their water under someone else's bridge and as long as that water sill allows them to reap the benefits of their "not proudest moments" then
by jancsika 2y ago
> But that will be their water under someone else's bridge and as long as that water sill allows them to reap the benefits of their "not proudest moments" then it's just going to happen again and again with the next generations getting a minor point of conversation.
You are claiming at once that deepening our understanding of historic CIA misdeeds misses the forest for the trees, and then ignoring the trees to project current CIA misdeeds out 50+ years.
It's like the coastline paradox and the gambler's fallacy had a baby.
- buran77 2y ago> You are claiming On the off chance that this was not written by some bad LLM that will miss the point again... I'm claiming that some countries with power are in a never ending cycle of pulling some appalling, odious crap that furthers their interest and keep that crap buried for a generation or so, then after enough time passes the crap surfaces and the new generation who also benefited from that offers some weak platitudes about how the appalling, odious crap "was not a very nice thing to do" while pulling their generation's version of odious, appalling crap to further their interest and keep that crap buried for a generation or so. And so on. In the chorus of voices that say today "wow, what the CIA was doing back then was pretty not ok" are people who benefit from what the CIA did and is still doing as we speak. People who vote, support, subsidize these acts, or take part in committing them even without knowing. If you just read to answer you'll never get the point. And big words can only take you so far in hiding it.