Slashdot Mirror
UK National Archives Divulge Secrets
Sunil Sood writes "Yes, its that time of year again - no, not the New Year but when the UK National Archives release a whole lot of previously "classified" information (many govt papers in the UK, with only a few exceptions, are classified secret for a 'standard' 30 years) As normal, you have the usual combination of the amusing: The design of a coin to mark the UK joining the EEC was changed, after Prince Philip said he did not like the 'little p', and the more serious: it was believed the USA had plans for US airborne troops to seize the oil installations in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait in 1973."
What do you think military think-tanks and war games are for? They think up possible scenarios for just about anything and then research ways to acheive the considered goals. The ideas that work are made into operation plans and filed away for the off-chance that such a situation might arise.
We do.
Read, L
It should be noted that the intro to this piece -- and indeed, the BBC headline itself -- are a little misleading.
1. There is only one real fact in the piece: The British ambassador to Washington said that the American secretary of defense told him that "it was no longer obvious to him that the United States could not use force." Earthshaking, huh?
The rest of the piece is just more-or-less informed speculation.
2. Of course, I'm not trying to say American military planners *didn't* draw up contingency plans for seizing oil assets. In fact, quite the opposite: If they didn't, then they weren't doing their jobs. The BBC seems to consider this a remarkable revelation, but allow me to humbly suggest it would be more remarkable if military planners *didn't* include this fairly obvious scenario in their contingency planning.
- Alaska Jack
dude, they cover this in the FAQ...
Slashdot is U.K.-centric. We readily admit this, and really don't see it as a problem. Slashdot is run by Anglophiles, after all, and the vast majority of our readership is in the U.K. We're certainly not opposed to doing more international stories, but we don't have any formal plans for making that happen. All we can really tell you is that if you're outside the U.K. and you have news, submit it, and if it looks interesting, we'll post it.
Yes, but why don't we have plans to switch away from fossil fuels? Why don't we have plans to make a more self-reliant society? Why don't we have plans to benefit all of mankind?
It's kind of sad to look back at the ignoble plans we have made and realize that we haven't really changed.
Yet the US continues to treat this tyrannical monarchy as a "partner". Its all about money folks. Most major political figures since the 70s have prospered in one way or another from Saudi money. From Frank Carlucci (fmr Defense official) to Kissinger (former Dr. Strangelove impersonator) to Will Kennard (former FCC Chair) to former UK PM John Major to former President George Bush have been deeply involved in lobbying, consulting, or arms deals with the Saudi government. Most of this is facillitated by the Carlyle Group, a defense firm selling arms and influence to the highest bidder.
We buy their oil, they buy our weapons (and A LOT of them, no other arms buyng nation is even close) and they also enrich those making these deals happen - see again, the Carlyle Group. The word to people currently in office is clear - if you want to get rich when you retire, and I mean RICH, you make things easy for the Saudis now. They will take care of you later, typically to the tune of many millions of dollars.
Amazingly this means many people who were once US government officials spend their days brokering weapons deals with a nation that is deeply involved with terrorism abroad and despotism at home.
Whoah.. Some serious, serious issues you have there..
The Arab oil embargo could have seriously crippled the American economy. That alone is reason enough to go to war.
Let me get this straight. Someone doesn't want to sell it's own country's resources to the US, and you claim that it's grounds to go to war? That sounds remarkably like bullying to me.
I'd bet you'd be the first to scream blue murder if you'd ever heard that a middle eastern country had plans say, to detonate something in a big city in the US, because you refused to sell them something such as weapons, or high tech computing devices (necessary to kick start their high tech industy)..
Ever heard of diplomacy, and actually having to play nicely with others (say please and thank you instead of "Give me or else")?
Personally, I pay taxes to the government to make sure education, sanitation, medical care etc. are up to a reasonable standard..
Defence is a good one (that's why we have military, to make sure we're not attacked).
I'd be a little miffed, if it was revealed that they were playing silly buggers planning pre-emptive strikes for no reason.
Yes, one decade's ally is another decade's foe. But in 10 years, that expensive invasion plan is worthless, as the situations is entirely different.
"Being prepared" is having a solid defence, with retaliation scenarios drawn up. Not drawing up plans to go to war, causing international incidents. That would cost a lot more than the taxes you pay..
Backing Saddam with weapons against Iran is a funny way of leaving people alone.
Training Osama in terrorist tactics to be used against our political foes is a funny way of leaving people alone.
Not to mention how we've left enough alone in Latin America.
If that's part of "God's work", I may be ready to convert.
>Panema in the 80's
Panama was NEVER an enemy of the US... they sold drugs when they were "friends". They just stopped sending the profits to CIA black ops, and then they became enemies.
Enemies of the United States are usually a matter of political convenience: from what country did the Sept 11 hijackers -- and their funding -- come from?
Was it Iraq? Or was it Saudi Arabia?
Which country has contributed money to the GW Bush election campaign via "multinational" oil companies?
You never hear this in the US "fair and balanced" supposedly "liberal media".
Nuke the Russian tank divisions with nuclear-tipped cruise missiles while they're still in the process of occupying Finland. Provide military assistance to Sweden and make a stand in Norway and in the northernmost Sweden (for Kiruna and the other mines).
This is why I am amazed why our last two governments have been talking the public to accept that we must NATO for our safety's sake.
The owls are not what they seem