Who are the Real War Criminals?

The following is a comparison list of countries attacked by bombing, sabotage or attempted government overthrow since world war II.

The attackers are:  Iran (bad guys all around)

North Korea (deadly danger to global peace)

and the USA (the good guys, naturally)

International aggression:

Let’s start with Iran:  None

North Korea: None

The USA:

China 1945-46;

Syria 1949;

Korea 1950-53;

China 1950-53;

Iran 1953;

Guatemala 1954;

Tibet 1955-70’s;

Indonesia 1958;

Cuba 1959;

Democratic Republic of the Congo 1960-65;

Iraq 1960-63;

Dominican Republic 1961;

Vietnam 1961-73;

Brazil 1964;

Belgian Congo 1964;

Guatemala 1964;

Laos 1964-73;

Dominican Republic 1965-66;

Peru 1965; Greece 1967;

Guatemala 1967-69;

Cambodia 1969-70;

Chile 1970-73;

Argentina 1976;

Turkey 1980;

Poland 1980-81;

El Salvador 1981-92;

Nicaragua 1981-90;

Cambodia 1980-95;

Angola 1980;

Lebanon 1982-84;

Grenada 1983-84;

Philippines 1986;

Libya 1986;

Iran 1987-88;

Panama 1989-90;

Iraq 1991;

Kuwait 1991;

Somalia 1992-94;

Iraq 1992-96;

Bosnia 1995;

Iran 1998;

Sudan 1998;

Afghanistan 1998;

Yugoslavia-Serbia 1999;

Afghanistan 2001;

Iraq 2002-03;

Somalia 2006-07;

Iran 2005-present;

Lybia 2011.
This list does not mention Syria, Argentina or Yemen among more recent additions to the overthrow or attempted overthrow of legitimate governments and destabilization of sovereign countries scenario. Nor does it mention Israel and Saudi Arabia as aggressor nations fully dependent on US Military “aid” in their murderous overthrow efforts and successes.

After reading this list no doubt remains in my mind that the bad guys are clearly Iran and North Korea, with the US a victim of aggression caught in the crossfire between those two major aggressors.

My personal op-ed: It is my opinion therefore that the US should immediately reinstate the draft and get serious about overthrowing all governments of all nations threatening the peace of the world, beginning with Russia and China, with the EU on notice to behave and solidly support NATO, with Britain as the policeman of the EU, then just keeping that ball bouncing until Washington is the unchallenged imperial seat of the entire planet.

Mr. Trump, it’s time to really think biggly and make America, not just great again (anyone can do that and surely your ego demands more) but greater than ever; greater than any empire ever was; the very last empire to rule planet earth until Jesus returns to remove this burden from you and place you at his right hand on his heavenly throne. Can’t you already hear the angels singing, Praise to Donald Trump and God Bless America…? Of course you can!

22 thoughts on “Who are the Real War Criminals?

  1. franklparker

    You need to identify your source(s) for the above. I can thin k of several dubious claims, not least the one that Iran has not invaded or contributed to the destabilisation of other nations.


    1. Sha'Tara Post author

      It is possible the list is skewed somewhat against the US. If you are referring to the war between Iran and Iraq, we all know who was sponsoring Iraq in that one as Hussein’s Iraq was a puppet state of the US until his invasion of Kuwait, an invasion which he was, by the way, goaded into by the State Department. I know that when it comes to US military interventions you and I will never agree. I have too many first hand accounts of CIA and US atrocities in Latin America and Vietnam to believe that such cannot be the case anywhere else. I also know that the US military industrial complex is guilty of massive and unreported war crimes on a global scale and that its criminal activity is on the rise. The vast number of refugees globally are the result of that activity. And yes my friend, I am definitely biased on this issue but I also know that if I was biased pro-US, that would not be considered a problem in WASP Europe and North America.


  2. goroyboy

    I admire your thought provoking post. I think Ken Burns did a nice job on the Vietnam war as did PBS’s Frontline on “Bush’s War”. What is your premise if any ? Do you think solely companies like Halliburton are responsible? Arms suppliers? Extremists like Bannon and Cheney?


    1. Sha'Tara Post author

      Thank you. Unfortunately (as Frank Parker points out, perhaps indirectly) my information doesn’t come from direct sources, but from decades of heart breaking experiences with refugees and victims of the US MIC. I don’t watch TV… or read press. I rely heavily on researchers found on these blogs. When I learn to trust them, I reblog some of their posts. When they so cosily agree with my own experiences, I get seduced because I want to believe what I am reading is the truth. It usually is, and in a generic sort of way, it is the truth. But I don’t have, or do statistics. I do heart. Mind. Rational thought. If the shoe fits and all of that. You know who’s responsible for the condition of our world? Mankind, generic, anywhere, everywhere. For not caring. For being selfish. For aggression against helpless victims. For not being compassionate. If it were a chess game, every piece on the board, the black and the white, is responsible, not just a king or a bishop. All of them are equally guilty if they had to face a just judge. All of them have the potential to be fully aware of this. Blind justice would sweep her arm across the board and wipe off every single piece.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Phil Huston

    You fail to mention that a number of these were politically infused push-back as various regions were being equally corrupted and ripped off and manipulated by other “super powers.” If America was so badass we’d own Cuba. Politicians from around the globe set to meddling with the little guys like geological and resource chess pieces. I’m doing an America chest thump, I just thnk it’s complete onsided bullshit to blame all that meddling on the US alone. Yeah yeah yeah, America is power mad and rotten, but not unilateral in its abuse of the little guy.


  4. Woebegone but Hopeful

    Don’t forget Russia (once USSR), China, France & UK, all got dirty hands in one form or another since end of WWII. We don’t know the first two so much because they have wide land borders which enables them to move without too much fuss, most of the time.
    It’s what big powers do (and powers that were big powers who try to pretend they still are or were…that’s be France & UK- although in our case we’d have to borrow someone’s navy, ours is a bit small these days)


    1. Sha'Tara Post author

      There’s a lot of ways a person can reply to that, Roger. As to those “other powers” who got dirty hands, not doubt that is true. France in particular was extremely nasty in Vietnam and Algeria. But at least that was ended, was it not? Vietnam was quietly handed over to the US Military so the tortures, mass murders, burning of entire villages with Napalm, and the killing of a million plus civilians could be tacked on America’s list of war crimes. France withdrew from Algeria shortly after Charles de Gaulle became president of France. Soviets, yes to that in their territories, or in Afghanistan, although we’ll never know the real story behind that debacle. But the main point is the blatant hypocrisy: America doesn’t go a-killing for profits or power, oh no, it’s to spread democracy and protect human rights, or to stop communism, or maybe to preempt a dastardly attack upon the homeland’s shores by the Tibetan navy.

      I’ll stick to my list since I know that most of it is dead on. As I said to Phil, bottom line is, let’s see the counter list. Then we can compare. Let’s see which “power” did the most egregious killing in undeclared wars since WWII. How about this: to those who defend US Military interventions, name one that could be declared legitimate before an unbiased international court of justice. Just one.

      To me, anyone who defends US militarism is guilty of abysmal historical ignorance, and possesses as much credibility as someone defending Hitler’s militarism in Europe from 1940 to 1945.
      Basically the thinking is, we’re the winners therefore we cannot be wrong. Might makes right. Our manifest destiny to rule the world was given to us by our Godollar and it takes a lot of innocent blood to mix the ink used to print the Godollar. Hence the necessary collateral damage.

      Yes, the gods still demand blood sacrifices, in fact more than ever before.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Woebegone but Hopeful

        And my perspective runs thus….
        Big powers do as big powers are. That is the accumulation of control or influence and the effort to maintain that control and influence.
        Historically, they come and they go. USA’s turn on centre stage; to replace Britain and France who have declined. Russia is relatively new, and China…there always seems to be China.
        Now the USA like those two is continental, but unlike Russia and China does not link to other land masses, so its application is transcontinental, which is more noticeable. Russia and China move across land borders which is less noticeable, particularly in relatively less ‘news worthy’ regions. During the Cold War Russia intervened in other nations, Hungary ’56, Czechoslovakia ’68, blundered in Afghanistan in ’79 (nations should stay out of those lands, no one ever controls those peoples), wandered about Africa in 1960/70s and gave up on it- China now works there…with money.
        It’s never one nation is the only guilty party. The bigger ones will always have smaller ones ready to do work for them. It’s part of our tragedy.
        If one historical model takes place and the USA splits up into smaller nations, then rest assured there would be someone else who would arise to take part in the contest, possible a European conglomerate, or a Middle Eastern power base, or one centred around Iran (thinking Persian empire). It goes on and on, until we either get the message or settle into the smear allotted to us.


      2. Woebegone but Hopeful

        Apparently I am a neorealist, all these years and I was unaware I had a label…..


      3. Sha'Tara Post author

        Neorealist? First I went, say what? So much modern/current terminology leaves me shrugging my shoulders! So I looked it up, or tried to, but the term has too many definitions! We all have labels, like it or not. Civilization is held together with labelling post-its. I’m an anarchist, don’t you know? I don’t belong to anything (except where there is no choice, and then I don’t care anyway) and I don’t believe IN anything. If I were to define “neorealist” I would say it’s someone who bases her/his viewpoints on the truism, “A thing is what it is and it isn’t something else.”
        My one, only, final solution to all of man’s social interactions problems is summed up in one word: compassion. As a “neorealist” you have already seen that what I propose will not be accepted, so you’ve come up with another solution that fits in very well with the demise of our so-called “democracies” and that would be, in a nutshell, a benign global dictatorship, or so I read it. That makes total sense. It is very dangerous, of course, but we are irrevocably headed down the path of totalitarianism in any case, and with the downfall of the US of A empire, it is likely that China and Russia will have the smarts to form a new partnership and a new empire. That will not be a democracy, you can bet the house on that.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. Woebegone but Hopeful

        That just about sums it up Sha’ Tara.
        From one standpoint a neorealist is someone who says that as long as we have nations we’ll have ‘stuff’. Of course by this definition a nation could have been 15,000 years ago a collection of small huts with about 20 people led by Big Ugh, and they don’t get on with another collection of 20 people led by Big Blugh.
        The idea is that if everyone realises that nations just try and get the best for themselves and its nothing personal, then we can all sit down together and sort out how to divide up the cake, which would be a novelty.
        And the problem with my benign dictatorship is you have to have an ongoing occurrence of benign wise folk with no personal flaws and no one trying to topple them….That would be a novelty!!
        Apparently one school of neorealists say that the best balance is a world divided up by equal two super-powers….Hmmm?
        Perhaps the Survival Instinct will kick in and one day there will be an outbreak of ‘WTF are we doing to this world!’
        I keep thinking of novelties….


  5. rawgod

    Ah, come on folks, it just overgrown male children playing with their penises, I mean, their nuclear toys, and whatnot. Mine is bigger than yours, and all that rot. Meanwhile, the guys with the biggest “weapons” are those who don’t have to expose themselves, or prove anything to anyone. Yeah, that’s it, countries like Norway, Sweden, Canada, Australia… maybe even Japan… But let’s get with the real program, get rid of all the “nations,” let’s create the World of Earth, and throw away all the borders… All they do is make one set of people hate another set of people… The World of Earth, or whatever they are going to call it, if they call it anything at all, is the best gift we today can give to future generations. You want novel thinking, S’T, sorry, this idea isn’t new. But that doesn’t mean it won’t work. It just needs to be given a chance. But then, the USofA will never go for it, what are they if they are not the most powerful, dare I say it, SHITHOLE in the world. Oops…


    1. Sha'Tara Post author

      Quote: “But let’s get with the real program, get rid of all the “nations,” let’s create the World of Earth, and throw away all the borders… All they do is make one set of people hate another set of people… The World of Earth, or whatever they are going to call it, if they call it anything at all, is the best gift we today can give to future generations.”
      Oh, you old Hippie, you, you’re just huggable and lovable. Yes indeed, let’s bring that on. Let’s just not allow “them” to sidetrack us this time, OK? If I believed in anything including wishes, I’d have but one: please can we just live in peace and work out our little, and I mean LITTLE, differences amicably, one-on-one? “Imagine”… Imagine there’s no heaven
      It’s easy if you try
      No hell below us
      Above us only sky
      Imagine all the people living for today

      Imagine there’s no countries
      It isn’t hard to do
      Nothing to kill or die for
      And no religion too
      Imagine all the people living life in peace

      Read more: John Lennon – Imagine Lyrics | MetroLyrics


      1. rawgod

        I Just quoted those same lines to Roger last week, but the more we put them in print, the more chance of someone hearing what they are really saying. Lennon said he actually had no idea what he was doing when he wrote “Imagine,” that the words just flowed out of him. His conscious mind may not have known, but I’m sure his subconcious mind–his spiritual mind– did. There is far too much truth in them to beg total unawareness. But hey, chaos theory says it can happen, so maybe it did.


      2. Sha'Tara Post author

        However it happened, it happened. In the case of “Imagine” I think it had quite an impact world wide, and still does, perhaps more than ever. If we can imagine all that shit we do in the world, surely we can imagine its opposite and have it manifest, unless “money” is a magical natural force for evil.


      3. rawgod

        Money, at least the concept of it, IS, in my mind, a major source of negative influence. Yeah, you know I cannot say “evil,” I do not believe in it, though the world suckers me into agreeing with that concept occasionally, like in Down Trodder’s SHITHOLE proclamation. But I soon enough recover my senses, no matter what the world throws at me.
        But your “money,” my “gold,” same difference, it is a cause of preventing true spiritual evolution. Gold ties a helluva lot of people to seeking it out and trying to possess it, and therefore tieing them tighter and tighter to the world of “samsara,” the Sanskrit word that describes and includes all things which cannot pass through the veil of death. The stronger the ties to Samsara, the more incarnations that will be needed to move from physical inertia to spiritual advancement. This is why I say, and truly believe, anyone who tries to sell you something, anything, spiritual is selling you a ball of nothingness. The spiritual already belongs to everyone, and cannot be bought or sold. It is the one truly “worthless” commodity in life, if you will forgive the word “commodity,” because no value can be placed on it.
        Money, its pursuit and possession, blinds those who believe in it. The more they have, as witness Dollar Toll-collector and his crew, the more they need to have, and the more they need to have, the more they will do absolutely “anything” to get it. Even the great philanthropists of the world, if they are not willing to give every coin they possess to help others, then all they are seeking is the false approval of those they deign to help, and those who think they are giving away something that has value to them. Oh, it has value to them, for sure, but not the value of true charity, but the value of appearing charitable.
        I may not be expressing myself to the best of my ability or desire, S’T, but I have thought long and hard on this topic, and the more I come to understand, the less I see anything positive being created by the concept of gold.
        The thing is, a nation can produce all the coin or paper money it wants to, with or without a Fort Knox of gold to back it up, because nothing positive comes of hoarding that gold, nor does anything truly positive come of printing something based on a standard that is totally without any real value.
        For example, in 1986 I visited the then Eastern Bloc communist-run country of Poland, to search out the town where my mother had been born. I was a virtual pauper at the time, here in Canada. I had saved long and hard to make this pilgrimage to my mother’s birthplace, and I had about $200US with me. U*pon arrival, I was told by the authorities that I had to exchange ALL my American money to Polish złotys. Not being a truster of any authorities, I held back half my money, but agreed to exchange $100US. Unbelievably, I was given about Z3,500,000 in bills that ranged from Z5 to Z100,000. In an instant, I went from being a pauper to being a rich man, as long as I stayed in Poland. Well, parts of Poland anyway. In Warsaw, no one wanted my Złotys, they all wanted my American dollars. But once I got out of Warsaw, to the city of Krakow for example, I could buy a whole meal for Z1. If I had stayed there, well, at least up to the time the communist government was overthrown, I could have lived like a king. As it was, I was on two week vacation, and I could not stay forever. (Well, I could have, but not being able to speak the language beyond “please (preposzam),” “thank you (djenkuje),” and “Where is a washroom? (I forget how to say that now),” I decided Canada was the place to be, and I chose not to stay. However, as my stay drew closer to its close, my status in Poland changed, and it became apparent I had to get out of there right away. But the government would not let me change my flight date, for some specious reason, so I decided to hop on the Moscow Express to Paris. I bought a train ticket across Europe for about Z5 or something utterly ridiculous like that, and I got on the train. That ride was an adventure in itself, but I eventually crossed the border into West Berlin through the Brandenburg Gate, and went to a money exchange store to see what I could get for the Z3,000,000 (approximately) I had left. The clerk at the exchange literally laughed at me. That paper, he told me, had absolutely no value outside Poland, and I might as well use it to wipe my ass with. Otherwise, it was so much confetti. So, in about 10 days, I went from being a pauper, to a king, to a penniless laugingstock. I couldn’t even get my American money back that I had paid for the złotys. Ziltch! (My best option, he told me in somewhat of a confidence, was to go back to Krakow and live it up till it was all gone,) But just then the whistle blew to announce the train would be leaving the station in 5 minutes, and I jumped back on board. I don’t think, some 30 years later, I have any złotys left, but I hung onto them for years in memory of the time I was a very rich man in the land of absolute poverty, all for $100US.
        That experience confirmed every belief I had about the ephemerality of gold. It has no intrinsic value except that which the receiver of it places upon it. Its holder, me in this instance, had no say on what its value might be.
        And thus, I know inside me, gold is a negative concept.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.