IMPORTANT: If you cite this message, OPE-L policy requires you not to reveal the identity of the author.
You may cite this message only if you do not disclose who wrote it.
Rakesh asked today whether an invasion of Cuba is immanent.
It's unclear (to me) whether the US really has plans to invade Cuba
at this time. However, let's remember some of the things that happened
in recent memory:
1) 9-11
2) US government said Iraq supports terrorism (and kept saying that
without the slightest scrap of evidence);
3) US invades Iraq.
Just a few days ago, Cuba was again listed by the US State
Dept. as a country which supports terrorism ... without (can you
see a pattern?) the slightest scrap of evidence.
Let us also recall how Castro is demonized by the US government
and the mass media ....
Let us also recall that the US government has wanted -- and tried
repeatedly -- to overthrow the Cuban government (and assassinate
Castro) since the 1960's. And let us note that just last year the
CIA attempted to overthrow (unsuccessfully) another popular
government in Latin America -- the Chavez government in
Venezuela. And let us also take note of developments in
Brazil and other countries in Latin America where the Left is
on the ascendancy -- if the Cuban government was overthrown
the US would be sending a chilling message to them.
Let us also recall that, unlike the anti-Saddam forces in the US,
the anti-Castro forces in the US are far more significant politically,
better financed, and better organized.
Under these circumstances, _when_ there is another terrorist
attack in the US, I can see the US government and mass media
creating another hysteria and placing the blame on Cuba ... and
then saying that it is time for another 'regime change'.
So I don't think that the possibility of a US overt or heightened
covert war against Cuba should be taken lightly.
In solidarity, Jerry
- (OPE-L) Re: value, labour and conservation laws, (continued)
- (OPE-L) Re: value, labour and conservation laws, glevy Thu 22 May 2003, 18:11 GMT
- Re: (OPE-L) Re: value, labour and conservation laws, Rakesh Bhandari Thu 22 May 2003, 19:34 GMT
- Re: value, labour and conservation laws, Andrew Brown Fri 23 May 2003, 11:39 GMT
- Re: value, labour and conservation laws, Ian Wright Thu 22 May 2003, 19:58 GMT
- (OPE-L) Re: dreams and nightmares, gerald_a_levy Tue 20 May 2003, 22:57 GMT
- Re: (OPE-L) Re: dreams and nightmares, Nicola Taylor Wed 21 May 2003, 01:53 GMT
- Re: (OPE-L) Re: dreams and nightmares, michael a. lebowitz Wed 21 May 2003, 02:30 GMT
- Re: (OPE-L) Re: dreams and nightmares, Nicola Taylor Wed 21 May 2003, 07:02 GMT
- Re: (OPE-L) Re: dreams and nightmares, Fred B. Moseley Thu 22 May 2003, 01:55 GMT