pollack@uicsl.UUCP (10/27/83)
#N:uicsl:16300025:000:629 uicsl!pollack Oct 27 02:44:00 1983 Does anyone out there have any reason to believe that the following events are not imminent? 1. A massacre of Marines in Honduras, to be immediately followed by a massive invasion of Nicaragua by land, air and sea. 2. The number of US "peacekeeping" forces in Lebanon is raised by an order of magnitude and have a small change in mission, from a force of "sitting ducks" to a force for "pacification". Somebody save me from this paranoia, PLEASE! (Or at least attempt to brainwash me into believing War is Peace and Freedom is Slavery and Reagan is Great for America.) Why is it so quiet on the political network? Jordan
pollack@uicsl.UUCP (11/02/83)
#R:uicsl:16300025:uicsl:16300030:000:1924 uicsl!pollack Nov 2 01:27:00 1983 "What I would do..." in response to LLenoir.. Regarding Lebanon, I would not have paid Israel to invade all the way up to Beirut in order to install a new "government" whose first task was to invite in a "peacekeeping force". Had Israel only occupied its 25-mile buffer zone, we would not be in this quagmire. The US entirely underwrote, both militarily and economically, the Israeli invasion. We secured their southern border with the Camp David agreement by buffering the Sinai, and exponentially increased arms shipments at least 8 months before the invasion. Regarding Grenada (and Nicaragua), I would have dealt with the progressive regimes when they came to power, offering American doctors, lawyers, teachers, farmers, and engineers with which to build their country. I would have encouraged them to not form an elite military force, but to use Costa Rica's example of a small police force to protect property and lives. In exchange, they would pay a basic fee for our military umbrella, allow limited and rapidly depreciated investment in tourism (like China has started), and not form military alliances with the USSR or non-recognized MNL's. Undoubtedly, Nicaragua and Grenada would have much rather been allied with the US then with Cuba. I would have encouraged this alliance, rather than having waged the economic and psychological warfare with them as we have for the past 3 years, trying to push them towards Marxist militancy and/or anarchy. Currently, you probably feel strongly patriotic and want to "support our boys" and rally behind Reagan. You should know, however that major military involvements are not spontaneous reactions to world events, but are carefully planned for years in advance. I, for one, having watched the plan for a "Resurgent America" unfold over the past few years, cannot rally behind Reagan. If I were in power, I would not have chosen the same path to war. Jordan
lllenoir@uok.UUCP (11/03/83)
#R:uicsl:16300025:uok:6600004:000:818
uok!lllenoir Oct 30 17:35:00 1983
Jordan,
What would you have the United States do?
We are the major military/political power
in this hemisphere. I for one would like
to keep it that way. Talk and threats will
only get you so far. Sometimes words must be
backed with action to get anything done.
Do you really think that the world would
be a better place if the United States
never got involved in the affairs of
other nations? (If you do consider what
post WW 2 Europe would be like now)
And also, action taken in one place
doesn't mean that that is the only solution
we will ever use. Sometimes words are
strong enough to get the job done.
Lionel Lenoir
University of Oklahoma
ps- I'd be very interested in knowing
what you would do in Lebanon, Grenada, etc
if it were in you power to take action.