Slashdot Mirror


"The Kissinger Cables": WikiLeaks Releases 1.7M Historical Records

An anonymous reader writes to note the latest large-scale document release from WikiLeaks: "The cables are all from the time period of 1973 to 1976. Without droning about too many numbers that can be found in the press release, about 200,000 of the cables relate directly to former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. These cables include significant revelations about U.S. involvements with fascist dictatorships, particularly in Latin America, under Franco's Spain (including about the Spanish royal family) and in Greece under the regime of the Colonels. The documents also contain hourly diplomatic reporting on the 1973 war between Israel, Egypt and Syria (the 'Yom Kippur war'). While several of these documents have been used by U.S. academic researchers in the past, the Kissinger Cables provides unparalleled access to journalists and the general public. 'The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer.' — Henry A. Kissinger, U.S. Secretary of State, March 10, 1975."

56 of 199 comments (clear)

  1. Please, please! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

    'Fascist Dictatorship' is verging on hate speech. Please use the term 'Stability-Enhanced Administration' or 'American Regional Security Ally'.

    1. Re:Please, please! by cold+fjord · · Score: 2, Insightful

      'Fascist Dictatorship' is verging on hate speech.

      Dictatorship of the Proletariat should be no more loved a term than "Fascist Dictatorship," but for some reason it gets a pass. That should be the last thing that happens, given the record - 100,000,000 killed in the last 100 years. (And don't look now - North Korea might just be warming up.)

      The 1970s, when many of the communications were written, were probably both the high point of Communist and Soviet Power and the struggle between Communism and freedom. It is unlikely that Communism would have collapsed as soon as it did in Eastern Europe, and most of the world, if freedom hadn't endured in the West to give aid and hope to the oppressed, and some remember that.

      So, when will Wikileaks start releasing Soviet and Communist archive material? Thats right, Assange probably doesn't consider them "bastards" to be crushed. Well, he going to Ecuador if he can, isn't he?:

      The following human rights problems continued: isolated unlawful killings and use of excessive force by security forces, sometimes with impunity; poor prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention; corruption and other abuses by security forces; a high number of pretrial detainees; and corruption and denial of due process within the judicial system. President Correa and his administration continued verbal and legal attacks against the independent media. Societal problems continued, including physical aggression against journalists; violence against women; discrimination against women, indigenous persons, Afro-Ecuadorians, and lesbians and gay men; trafficking in persons and sexual exploitation of minors; and child labor.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    2. Re:Please, please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Murdering democratically elected governments and replacing them with genocidal dictatorships that cused hundreds of thousands of victims doesn't sound like freedom to me, you psychopathic hypocritical bastards. And you'll still be surprised that the civilized world hates you. Fucking sociopathic criminals.

    3. Re:Please, please! by kilfarsnar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The 1970s, when many of the communications were written, were probably both the high point of Communist and Soviet Power and the struggle between Communism and freedom.

      Is a struggle between Communism and freedom really what was going on back then?

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    4. Re:Please, please! by Phrogman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It was a struggle between which type of control of the population would win. The Communist methods are obviously reprehensible, caused millions of deaths and ultimately failed. The western methods of exerting control over the general public are much less odious, but just as effective in the end. Either way, the people at the top own us, and we do what they want us to do.
      I have some hope though, when I see information like this released to the general public. It's a great thing to see the workings behind the scenes so we can get a better understanding of what was actually going on.

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    5. Re:Please, please! by dkleinsc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sure, it's freedom, as explained by Richard M Nixon's head:
      "We enjoy so much freedom, it's almost sickening. We're free to chose which hand our sex-monitoring chip is implanted in. And if we don't want to pay our taxes, why, we're free to spend a week with the Pain Monster."

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    6. Re:Please, please! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "So, when will Wikileaks start releasing Soviet and Communist archive material? Thats right, Assange probably doesn't consider them "bastards" to be crushed. Well, he going to Ecuador if he can, isn't he?"

      Assange is retreating to Ecuador because many of those "free Western" democracies you seem so fond of have given him little choice.

    7. Re:Please, please! by dhomstad · · Score: 2

      Saying Soviet Russia was a communist country is like saying the United States is a democratic country. USA is a democratic republic. Soviet Russia was far from a communist state. I realized that everyone thought Soviet Russia was communist, but they're the same dumbasses saying that about China now. China is far to privatized to ever claim it communist. Maybe I'm being an idealist...

      It was great learning that the United States saved the world in WWII. Not so fun learning that USA and it's allies were at fault for setting up the scenario http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles .

      --
      No trees were killed to send this message, but a great number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
    8. Re:Please, please! by Kiwikwi · · Score: 2

      The following human rights problems continued: isolated unlawful killings and use of excessive force by security forces, sometimes with impunity; poor prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention; corruption and other abuses by security forces; a high number of pretrial detainees; and corruption and denial of due process within the judicial system.

      Wait, is this quote about the USA or Ecuador?

      Those who live in glass houses...

  2. The full quote re: illegal/unconstitutional by SirGarlon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Kissinger: Before the Freedom of Information Act, I used to say at meetings, "The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer." [laughter] But since the Freedom of Information Act, I'm afraid to say things like that.

    My initial reaction was to think, "at least he admits it, privately."

    After I thought about it for a half a minute, this quotation made my day. I realized that the people of the United States had passed a law that put a man like that in fear. Add one point in the "democracy" column!

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    1. Re:The full quote re: illegal/unconstitutional by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      He sounds like he's joking there. I suspect that Kissinger was smart enough, and...er... ethically dis-inhibited enough, to be a truly epic troll when he felt like it.

    2. Re:The full quote re: illegal/unconstitutional by MartinSchou · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Notice what he said. "I'm afraid to say things like that".

      Say, not do. He's obviously not worried about doing illegal and unconstitutional things - he just doesn't want to talk about them.

    3. Re:The full quote re: illegal/unconstitutional by fsterman · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You know who got that law passed? People like Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked a trove of *historical* documents; Ralph Nader, the father of the modern progressive movement; and Frank Church, an Idaho Democrat who lead the charge to clean up Nixon's mess. How is it, some 30 years later, that their modern-day counterparts are spending life in a military prison, reviled by their own party, and hiding in the embassy of a 3rd world country?

      I think this was the "Yes we can" part of Obama's 2008 campaign message. I guess he should have cleaned house.

      --
      Is there anything better than clicking through Microsoft ads on Slashdot?
    4. Re:The full quote re: illegal/unconstitutional by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ok, so now they don't say things like that anymore, and just continue to do so covertly. That's not exactly one point in the democracy column. All FOIA does is ensure that badness is not documented. It does not prevent it from happening. To do that requires true transparency, and I don't think you're going to find any politician that's really interested in THAT. The problem began when people started running for office rather than being selected by the people. You look at George Washington and he never ran for office. He was foisted into the position expressly by the majority will of the people. Now days it's not about the will of the people. Lobiests, corporations, and lawyers present you with the folks that will most benefit them. So regardless of who wins there isn't a snowballs chance in hell that they're going to be doing the will of the people. Until we change that you will not see democracy.

    5. Re:The full quote re: illegal/unconstitutional by dbIII · · Score: 2

      I'm not so sure since he wasn't smart enough to understand how little he knew about South East Asia so didn't know when to ask for help and made some spectactular mistakes as a consequence. In hindsight we can laugh at such ideas as Vietnam being run out of Russia one week, then China the next, when what seems like the incredibly obvious reality now is that it was being run out of Vietnam. That little bit of stupidity was replaying the previous war where North Korea was being led by the nose by China at the time. The "madman theory" was another very stupid move but I'm not sure if Kissenger was to blame for that one - it's should have been obvious that the USSR had a lot of practise in dealing with madmen.

    6. Re:The full quote re: illegal/unconstitutional by daremonai · · Score: 4, Funny

      I wouldn't have believed this post if it weren't in boldface.

    7. Re:The full quote re: illegal/unconstitutional by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      . In hindsight we can laugh at such ideas as Vietnam being run out of Russia one week, then China the next, when what seems like the incredibly obvious reality now is that it was being run out of Vietnam.

      In hindsight we can laugh at such ideas as Al-Qaeda being run out of Afghanistan one week, then Pakistan the next, when what seems like the incredibly obvious reality now is that it was being run out of...

      Why do people keep mistaking machination for happenstance? Cognitive dissonance?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:The full quote re: illegal/unconstitutional by argStyopa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The fact that you call it "Nixon's Mess" shows that you're precisely part of the partisan yammering class.

      If you think Nixon was doing ONE THING that hadn't been done in spades by LBJ and Kennedy before him, you're hopelessly naive. Ike, perhaps not, but let's recall that - for example - Nixon's assertion that his tapes were inviolable Presidential material was BORN of his observation as a young congressman of the success of that tactic by Ike during the McCarthy hearings. (Ike *despised* McCarthy, and when State Dept files may have exonerated/validated some of his claims, Ike moved the cabinets wholesale into the Oval Office and claimed 'executive privilege' - an assertion the Senate witch hunters were happy to validate...).

      When Tricky Dick tried it, the rules of course changed....

      --
      -Styopa
    9. Re:The full quote re: illegal/unconstitutional by fsterman · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure I understand your point... I know that these behaviors preceded Nixon... the leak itself outlined the abuse of executive powers of prior presidents. The original leaks had nothing to do with Nixon himself and Nixon administration even encouraged the publicity of the leaks to some extent because they made Kennedy look bad.

      Nixon got in hot water because his hired goons to broke into Ellsburg's psychologists office. The pull-out from Vietnam didn't happen because of anything directly contained in the pentagon papers but because Nixon was trying to stave off impeachment.

      I don't think LBJ or his predecessors were innocent, but I do think executive privilege has allowed people (of both parties) to hide their activities until after punishment is viable...

      --
      Is there anything better than clicking through Microsoft ads on Slashdot?
  3. Kissinger by Maimun · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If the US did play entirely by the rules, the USSR would win the Cold War. The USSR was a fascist country, although the red sort of fascism, and observed no rules in its quest for dominance over Eurasia. I am glad the West's only country capable of standing against the USSR had politicians like Dr Kissinger that were focused on winning.

    1. Re:Kissinger by SharpFang · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wait, so "They are playing dirty" makes "We are playing dirty" right?

      Siding with scoundrels tends to return and bite you in the ass. Osama is the proof (and he did win with 9/11. Look at your law and your freedoms today.)

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    2. Re:Kissinger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If the US did play entirely by the rules, the USSR would win the Cold War. The USSR was a fascist country, although the red sort of fascism, and observed no rules in its quest for dominance over Eurasia. I am glad the West's only country capable of standing against the USSR had politicians like Dr Kissinger that were focused on winning.

      And we sir, are currently paying the price.

      One of the prices is the hatred towards us. Hatred that made a few folks fly planes into some towers back in 2001. The existence of the TSA and PATRIOT Act can be traced right back to this guy and his cohorts. Hatred that allows terrorists and dictators to build a following and allows them to stay in power.

      Bin Laden and Castro wouldn't have been able to do what they did if they didn't have the US as the focal point to blame for the problems that they and their people's hate.

      I see it all around the geopolitics of our World: we are paying the price for the past actions of people like this.

      The Middle East is stuck in their shit partly - I said PARTLY - because of the actions of people like this.

      And there's plenty more.

      And in the meantime, those people, like Kissinger, lived or are living a nice fat happy life.

    3. Re:Kissinger by TWiTfan · · Score: 2

      We must support fascism to defeat fascism. Yep, that sounds about like the kind of thinking I would expect from Kissinger. It also helps explain why they they love us so much in Central and South America these days.

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    4. Re:Kissinger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Instead, thanks to the magnanimous USofA we had the luxury of enjoying the freedom of being mass murdered by the fascist dictatorships you fucking hipocritical criminals replaced our democratically elected governments with. The world would almost certainly be a better, more free place if you fuckers had all been nuked into oblivion.

    5. Re:Kissinger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And in the meantime, those people, like Kissinger, lived or are living a nice fat happy life.

      And hundreds of thousands were brutally murdered (or worse) when those people (i.e. the USA) replaced their democratically elected governments with fascist dictatorships *in the name of fucking freedom*.

      Maybe if someone fucking *apologized* there would be a bit less resentment. I doubt it, though.

    6. Re:Kissinger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Jeezus, someone needs a history lesson. You are a brainwashed fool.

      There were no good guys. There are no good guys. You chose a side, and it happens to be one the most aggressive and violent side in history, so you get to pretend your history is 'truth'. But you're a fool for painting the kaleidoscope of history and winners and losers in black and white. You're a large part of the reason the rest of the world hates us - you don't have the wherewithal to comprehend other perspectives or insights.

      Btw - I'm on your 'side', I'm just not a fool.

    7. Re:Kissinger by Freddybear · · Score: 2

      We supported the USSR to defeat the Axis Powers. So yeah.

    8. Re:Kissinger by Qzukk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wow, and here I was thinking of an alternative where we managed to partner with people who weren't corrupt murderous assholes who we could train to fight without having our own weapons and training used against us.

      Who am I kidding? The only two possible choices for dealing with the USSR were bin Laden and Santa Claus! We did the best we could!

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    9. Re:Kissinger by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Informative

      Osama is one way it can return and bite you. The other way it can hurt you is with what the spooks call "blowback", as demonstrated most thoroughly in Iran and the US-supported Shah: We support the thugs, the people hate the thugs, so there's a popular revolt that replaces the thugs, and for some reason the new guys thoroughly hate us.

      Some other examples of where this dynamic comes into play:
      - Chile (thanks to Pinochet)
      - Venezuela (after the botched coup against Chavez)
      - Nicaragua and Panama (thanks to Manuel Noriega, another CIA asset)
      - El Salvador (with US-sponsored death squads)
      - Cuba (the US strongly supported the brutal Batista, which is why Castro hated us so much)
      - Lebanon (our support of Israeli cluster bombs in Beirut and the like bolsters Hezbollah)
      - Vietnam (they still are mad about the "killing millions of them and leaving land mines and chemical weapons all over the place" thing)
      - Iraq (we thought they had WMDs because we had sold them the weapons in question)
      - in the near future, Afghanistan

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    10. Re:Kissinger by ebno-10db · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The USSR was a fascist country, although the red sort of fascism

      Red fascism? Is that supposed to be an oxymoron? Fascism and communism were mortal enemies. You might want to look up a minor historical incident called World War II.

      What fascism and communism did have in common was that they were both totalitarian. Words have a meaning; use them appropriately.

      I am glad the West's only country capable of standing against the USSR had politicians like Dr Kissinger that were focused on winning.

      And how was Henry focused on winning? By sabotaging peace negotiations and prolonging the Vietnam war so Nixon could win in 1968? The Vietnam war was a quagmire for the US and as such the USSR loved it. They could grind down the US just by shipping a few weapons to North Vietnam. Hence he was giving aid to our enemies - the Constitutional definition of treason.

    11. Re:Kissinger by ebno-10db · · Score: 2

      since you seem to be sympathetic to the former U.S.S.R

      Clearly anybody who criticizes actions that led to blowback that has severely harmed the US and its citizens is sympathetic to the USSR. What next, Churchill was a Nazi sympathizer because he thought the bombing of Dresden was a mistake?

    12. Re:Kissinger by b4upoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't know how happy Kissinger is or the rest of his ilk. I do know that nations can not take treaties with the US seriously at all. Just the example of the treaties signed with native American peoples alone are enough to force me to believe that treaties with the US are worthless.
                          It is all very depressing. But I suspect that without slavery, forced labor, creation of deliberate poverty to force low wages, and usurping land and generally scheming to rob the world blind I doubt that the US would ever have existed at all. Human history seems to be all about this evil mindset. The Apache rampaged and attacked others and took what they wanted as normal practice. The later immigrants into the Americas did no differently at all. The one difference is that the Apaches did not hide what they did at all. Even admitting that such things go on is dangerous for Americans. Dr. King is an example of what our government can do when people speak out.

    13. Re:Kissinger by Phrogman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If the US had had more interest in actually promoting democracy and democratic changes when promulgating its foreign policy, the result would have been more democratic countries that used the US as a model, or at least viewed it in a positive way. On those few occasions when the US has acted in a manner that reflected its own ideals, this has often been the result.
      Sadly US foreign policy has usually been shortsighted, focused on advancing US corporate interests and ensuring "stability" in a region - with "stability" usually being in the form of a brutal dictatorship. Things that should at least theoretically not be in keeping with US ideals. Apparently its more important that say US Sugar keeps its control over the sugar industry than the people of the Dominican republic get to have democratic rule and fair laws etc. Mostly it seems the US ideals are seen as being for US citizens only, and that its okay if the rest of the world suffers wars, massacres, dictatorships, etc to make that possible. This is why so many foreign countries dislike the US so much in the end.

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    14. Re:Kissinger by dkleinsc · · Score: 2

      And how was Henry focused on winning? By sabotaging peace negotiations and prolonging the Vietnam war so Nixon could win in 1968?

      In Kissinger's worldview, the Democrats were part of the ongoing effort of Communists to take over the US, so it was absolutely imperative that they not be allowed to win.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    15. Re:Kissinger by roman_mir · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Fascism and communism were mortal enemies

      - no, you are mistaken.

      Stalin and Hitler were mortal enemies, not fascism and communism. Fascism and communism are one and the same, with fascism being a slightly more efficient version of communism, because at least fascists recognised that allowing SOME people who supported the regime to own and operate private property (as monopolies of-course) and pay taxes was a more preferable way to run businesses than to run them by a committee of non-owners making meaningless decisions and not having anything personal to gain from any of it as long as the State could keep using free labour (slave labour actually) to run the business.

      Now, understand that Marxism was an international idea, and as such it was completely impossible to implement.

      Why would a coal mine worker in Britain want to share the output of his work with a farmer in India exactly? Never mind about the logistics of this, but regardless of the logistics, the international property of Marxism is what made the pre-fascist time socialists in Germany fail and be replace with a more dictatorial approach to Marxism, a national vision.

      The reality is that it does not matter what we are talking about, socialism, fascism, communism. All of these are songs of one opera: collectivism.

      Collectivism is what unites these ideologies, hatred towards individualism, humanism, real private property ownership based on equal application of the law (free market competitive capitalism).

      Fascists and communists of the last century have much more traits that are similar than they have disagreements. The only problem for them at the time was that both were dictatorial powers that needed to dominate the region to prevent their own people from being able to compare their situation to other, freer nations and so they both wanted to dominate the rest and 2 huge powers cannot really coexist peacefully side by side with so many other smaller countries that could be used to pump resources from.

      It was not about ideology that the fascists and the communists were fighting, it was about resources and influence.

    16. Re:Kissinger by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      Mostly it seems the US ideals are seen as being for US citizens only,

      Err, as opposed to what other countries do...that promote the interests of their citizens above all others?

      Isn't that really what the basic function of a government is? To promote its interest above others in the world, when you get down to it?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    17. Re:Kissinger by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Isn't that really what the basic function of a government is?

      The basic functions of a government are supposed to be:
      - Prevent citizens from robbing, killing, raping, vandalizing, etc each other.
      - Prevent other countries from sending people to rob, kill, rape, vandalize, etc its citizens.

      Neither of those require oppressing people who live in other countries.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    18. Re:Kissinger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It was not about ideology that the fascists and the communists were fighting, it was about resources and influence.

      Exactly, it's not about the ideology. Fascism and communism are actually wonderful ideas. The problem was the competition for resources and influences.

      Let's break that down: competition for resources

      Competition is competitive.
      What are resources and influence? Capital
      And are these national governments regulated by some higher centralized power? No, there's no world government regulating them. Governments are free as individuals were free free in 19th century US

      So put this all together, all the death and destruction done by the fascists and communists were not due to the collectivist ideologies. It was due to free market competitive capitalism.

      QED

  4. Monty Python's song by dkleinsc · · Score: 2, Funny

    Henry Kissinger
    How I'm missing yer
    You're the doctor of my dreams.
    With your crinkly hair and your glassy stare
    And your Machiavellian schemes
    I know they say that you are very vain
    And short and fat and pudgy but at least you're not insane!
    Henry Kissinger
    How I'm missing yer
    And wishing you were here!

    Henry Kissinger
    How I'm missing yer
    You're so chubby and so neat.
    With your funny clothes and your squishy nose
    You're like a German parakeet.
    All right so people say that you don't care
    But you've got nicer legs than Hitler
    And bigger tits than Cher!
    Henry Kissinger
    How I'm missing yer
    And wishing you were here!

    I also always remember Tom Lehrer's comment that political satire died when they gave Kissinger the Nobel Peace Prize.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  5. The moral of the story... by coofercat · · Score: 2

    The moral of the story is that once you realise the "alright" president/prime minister/premier/whatever is actually up to all sorts of no-good, then the ones you don't think so much of are positively up to their necks in it.

    1. Re:The moral of the story... by dbIII · · Score: 3, Interesting

      From the documents released a few years ago Ford was bribed (donation to Republican party) by the leader of Indonesia to put pressure on Australia and other nearby nations to stay out of Indonesia's invasion of East Timor. Being bribed by a foreign power to set foreign policy is closer to treason than "alright", especially when President Ford flew halfway around the world to pick up the cash on the day of the invasion. Nixon looks like a saint in comparison.

    2. Re:The moral of the story... by phayes · · Score: 2

      Foreign policy wise, Nixon was pretty good. Normalizing relations with China while not abandoning Taiwan is an example of something that could have become a festering wound that he avoided.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    3. Re:The moral of the story... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm no Ford fan(he just had such a short term and relatively bland reputation that he seemed a viable candidate for a "eh, ok" designation); but Nixon isn't a saint even by those standards. His petty politicking around the Paris Peace accords cost us(not to mention the poor bastards who lived there) a substantial bill in blood in Vietnam.

    4. Re:The moral of the story... by ebno-10db · · Score: 4, Informative

      Normalizing relations with China while not abandoning Taiwan is an example of something that could have become a festering wound that he avoided.

      To give the devil his due, there are certain things that Nixon/Kissinger did right. You mentioned one of them. Others are détente and SALT I. But those are no reason to loose sight of the corrupt, murderous, and possibly outright treasonous things that they also did. History is full of such contradictions. For example, nobody likes to mention that without Stalin's forced industrialization in the 1920's and 30's, the Nazis probably would have won.

  6. Re:Think outside the box. by TWiTfan · · Score: 2

    The government isn't that clever by a longshot. Besides, it could just as easily backfire and remind everyone of all the scummy tactics we were engaging in just 40 years ago (and encourage more people to ask if we're still engaging in them today--which, sadly, we probably are).

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
  7. Re:Think outside the box. by SirGarlon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What would Machiavelli do?

    Well, I believe Machiavelli wrote a separate book on republics, which I haven't read, but the closest relevant chapter in _the Prince_ is probablyChapter IX, where he says:

    Therefore, one who becomes a prince through the favour of the people ought to keep them friendly, and this he can easily do seeing they only ask not to be oppressed by him. But one who, in opposition to the people, becomes a prince by the favour of the nobles, ought, above everything, to seek to win the people over to himself, and this he may easily do if he takes them under his protection. Because men, when they receive good from him of whom they were expecting evil, are bound more closely to their benefactor; thus the people quickly become more devoted to him than if he had been raised to the principality by their favours; and the prince can win their affections in many ways, but as these vary according to the circumstances one cannot give fixed rules, so I omit them; but, I repeat, it is necessary for a prince to have the people friendly, otherwise he has no security in adversity.

    I'm aware that Machiavelli's name is a synonym for ruthlessness, but if you actually read what he wrote, there's a lot more to it than that. He wrote a lot about the importance of gaining and keeping the people's support. So, I do not think Kissinger by and large took the right lessons from Machiavelli. Now, Lyndon Johnson, *there's* a true student of Machiavelli!

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  8. Mostly already available, but not the point by rabbin · · Score: 2
    These were mostly already available, but the value here is that they are now easily accessible and searchable. In addition, there is a history of previously declassified documents becoming re-classified:

    The previous declassification Executive Order 12958 signed in 1995, under the Clinton administration, was resisted by officials in the Defense Department and the U.S. intelligence community. The reclassification program was started in the fall of 1999 (Executive Order 13142). Security concerns were heightened by the Wen Ho Lee case, and "alleged" inadvertent release of nuclear secrets by the State Department.[1] 55 boxes of material were removed to the classified storage area on the sixth floor.[2]

    It sought to be covert for as long as possible, but was revealed by the National Security Archive in February 2006.[3] By that point over 55,000 pages had already been reclassified, many dating back more than 50 years.

    During the George W. Bush administration the scope of the program widened (Executive Order 13292), and was scheduled to end in March 2007.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._reclassification_program

  9. Re:Intellectual Midgets. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    True, the cheerleading for North Korea and China on Slashdot is almost embarrassing. Absent, but embarrassing.

  10. Re:Think outside the box. by Entropius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What Machiavelli talked about was how to achieve and hold power. That requires the people's support. But a Machiavellian, like any true politician, does it for his own sake, not for theirs -- and Machiavelli thus talked about how to reconcile this fundamental selfishness with the need to keep the people's support.

    The problem comes when there is a distinction between enacting policies that benefit the people, and feigning to so just in order to get their support while actually not having their best interests at heart. This is why transparency in governance is the ultimate enemy of politicians and yet the only thing that gives government a shade's chance of actually serving the public.

  11. Re:Intellectual Midgets. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Informative

    True, the cheerleading for North Korea and China on Slashdot is almost embarrassing.

    Absent, but embarrassing.

    I have to wonder at the thought processes of somebody who, when you say "Y'know, our support of Operation Condor was really pretty disgusting", somehow hears "I love Communism so much that I'd kiss Uncle Joe right on his death camps! Viva La DPRK!" and begins frothing at the mouth...

  12. Re:Intellectual Midgets. by kilfarsnar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Please forgive me if I'm harder on my own country than others. It is because it is my country, the one I have the most stake in and the most control over (Ha!). It's the same reason I'm more concerned with my own kid's behavior than that of other children.

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  13. Still today by kilfarsnar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What amuses me is that most people like to pretend that this type of stuff doesn't continue into the present day.

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  14. Re:so these are in the wild? by ebno-10db · · Score: 2

    and do i trust wikileaks to be impartial to the information in those documents?

    LOL of course not.

    Wikileaks has already demonstrated that they're willing to skew the data and completely misrepresent data if that misrepresentation supports their political views.

    As has the US government. Which is why no good student of history relies on a single source.

    And while the "Collateral Murder video", as originally released, was as much a piece of propaganda as any US government release, Wikileaks has a much better track record when it comes to raw dumps. Not necessarily because they're unbiased, but because they don't have the resources to edit them. If nevertheless the US government believes the cables have been selectively released, I'll look forward to their release of additional information to set the record straight.

  15. Re:Constitutional Republic VS DHS and Oath Breaker by ebno-10db · · Score: 3, Informative

    Usually called a Constitutional Republic. Real democracy will eat you

    Warning: the English language is subject to change over the centuries. Right wingers and libertarians particularly take note. In the 18th century the word "democracy", without further qualification, generally referred to direct democracy. We are currently the 21st century (check your calendars if you doubt it). At this time, and for many years, the term "democracy" has taken on a more general meaning, and may refer to either direct or representative democracy, with or without a constitution. This may be verified by using a new type of reference called a "dictionary".

    If you can't find anything more substantial to complain about than your fetish for using 18th century meanings for certain words, do you actually have anything to say?

  16. Re:Constitutional Republic VS DHS and Oath Breaker by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

    Taiwan and Japan? What did they ever to do support NK? You're really off your rocker.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  17. Re:Intellectual Midgets. by cusco · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Continually annoys me when these idiots scream "Well Stalin killed millions!" I don't give a shit, I didn't pay taxes in the Soviet Union that supported a war machine that assisted in the massacre of a huge percentage of the Central American civilian population. My tax dollars didn't ship weapons to Cuba, but they did pay for free weapons for apartheid South Africa. My government didn't approve sending warplanes to the North Vietnamese government, but it did give direct and explicit approval to carrying out genocide in East Timor. Yep, Mao wasn't a nice guy, but the citizens of my country didn't elect Mao to represent me. They elected Reagan and a pair of Bushes, who were every bit as bad without the excuse of Mao's morphine addiction.

    --
    "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin