I refer to US support and diplomatic cover for Pakistan's
actions toward Bangladesh (East Pakistan) as well as the US bombing campaign
which helped set the stage for the rise of the Khmer Rouge. Indochina is still
dealing with the fallout from the US instigated war which (in reality) began
not in 1964 with the Gulf of Tonkin but at the end of World War II with US
support of the French attempt to re-subjugate Indochina. American support for
the 1954 partition of Vietnam moved the conflict into a new phase, a
specifically American phase that resulted in all of Indochina at war, millions
dead and a burgeoning drug trade.
Schanberg was part of an older generation of journalists that
will be missed. Even as a Christian I can be thankful for his work to expose
the crimes and evils of power.
I noticed a comment at the bottom of this NPR piece and it
echoes the sentiment that many express when it comes to Schanberg. He was not
always liked and the popularity of 'The Killing Fields' irked many. If you
haven't seen it, I daresay you should, if anything to interact with it.
This comment provoked me to respond. My Disqus account was all
but dormant. I haven't been commenting online for a long time but I thought
maybe, just maybe someone will be challenged to think outside the conformist
box. Plus, I'll admit I am always irritated by such sentiments. The man who
left this comment is quite hostile to all religion, a Materialist and Atheist
and yet interestingly his statement could have been written by a member of the
Christian-Right.
He wrote:
This journalist's
greatest "contribution" to journalistic lore was that American
bombing in Cambodia was somehow responsible for the killing fields in that
country. His was just another journalistic career greased by easy
anti-Americanism. Criticizing your country when it does something controversial
is one thing, but to blame it for the atrocities of those it is fighting really
took it to the next level of America-hatred. We now routinely get this type of
mendacity: Russia invades Ukraine? It's America's fault; China massacres
thousands of students? It's America's fault. The Sunnis kill 100s of thousands
in terror attacks in Iraq? It's America's fault... Forgive me if I don't shed
any tears over Mr. Schanberg's passing.
I responded:
The US cannot annihilate entire societies through bombs etc...
and then when the monsters arise, claim ignorance and impunity. The US
destabilised Cambodia long before 1975 and helped create the conditions that
led to Pol Pot's rise. And then, when Vietnam forced him out the US continued
(under Carter and Reagan) to support him. I guess if you want to live in a
world of fantasy and lies... my country right or wrong... then you are welcome
to do so. But some are committed to discerning the truth of the matter. The
Indochina Project was a massive crime, not a folly, a wicked crime of
genocidal murder. If that means you can't be proud as an American well then I'm
sorry the truth has offended you. I'm not interested in venerating
lies. Millions have died as a result of US policy since 1945. The
Totalitarian dictatorships are simplistic and foolish. They brutalise their own
people. The US model is far more efficient and effective. Keep your people fat,
happy, distracted, blindly patriotic and stupid and then you can rape, kill and
destroy the rest of the globe to feed your avarice. And if it's inconvenient
for you to do it, then there are always hirelings you can depend on. Pol Pot
was but one of many monsters the American Empire has utilised.
For more information
regarding US support for the Pakistanis look into 'The Blood Telegram' and the
response of the Kissinger and the Nixon administration.
US silence was not
just 'ignoring' the issue. US silence provided international and diplomatic cover
for what Pakistan was doing. It's not the first or last time the US has acted
this way. In fact just a couple of years later in 1975 Kissinger and Ford would
provide the same cover for Indonesia's Suharto and his invasion of East Timor.
This is after the US supported and backed him a decade earlier as he massacred
around a million people in the process of gaining power.
I was further reminded
of US support for dictators as just this evening I was watching a short piece
on Chad's former ruler Hissène Habré,
yet another US backed dictator whose crimes were ignored and in some cases
supported because he stood with the United States in Africa and in particular
against Gaddafi. He's but one of many.
While I realize this comes off as a sweeping generalization, those who identify as non-religious tend to be on what's considered the "left" of the political spectrum. While I disagree with them on theological matters, my observation has been that they nevertheless come across as thoughtful and compassionate, since their political convictions ally them with marginalized and vulnerable social strata.
ReplyDeleteBy contrast, those who are right-wing, such as the individual to whom you responded, tend to be overbearing, rude and condescending. They also generally lack empathy and pharisaically ascribe all social ills to "lack of personal responsibility", considering themselves above and beyond making any mistakes. While most of them are religious, there are a small minority, like this gentleman, who aren't. While I don't know this person individually, I do know that many of them grew up Christians and have since jettisoned the faith. However, since most of them come from evangelical or fundamentalist churches (the vast majority of which are sacralist), they retain certain modes of thinking in vestigial form, the "America good, everyone else bad" being one such glaring example.
Whatever the case, it looks like an anti-war veteran responded positively to your comment. In fact, most responses accorded with yours in some way shape or form.