Isaac Mangena
Isaac Mangena

Licensed to kill: US soldiers in Afghanistan

My colleague Sokhu Sibiya recently said to me that American children are always taught from a young age in their living rooms that they are superior to any other nation in the world. She was responding to the discussion we were having about the recent killing of 16 civilians in Kandahar, Afghanistan.

“They watch movies, which are made in the US. Every movie shows them that they kill one American and we kill twenty terrorists, mostly un-American and Muslim-like,” she added.

This caught me off-guard, but I believe she is right.

The actions of the US soldiers in Afghanistan, Iraq, or even in Libya, suggest they are a law unto themselves. The recent madness, for those who don’t know, involved a 38-year-old US soldier who was formerly deployed to Iraq. Last Sunday night, he walked out of his base to the nearby village of Panjwai where he gunned down 16 people, mostly women and children, in their sleep. As if that was not enough, he set some of them alight. The soldier is in custody, not of the Afghans on whose land the crimes were committed, but in US military custody. US investigators are trying to “learn more about what happened – and what may have precipitated the incident”. And, as expected, some don’t think a sane US soldier could go out of his way to kill. A U.S. official is already pleading mental instability (on the soldier’s behalf), saying “the accused soldier had suffered a traumatic brain injury while on a previous deployment in Iraq”. Not surprising at all.

If that’s the case, why had they not picked up that something was wrong with this soldier before making him the shephard of Afghan citizens? Were the US authorities not putting these citizens in the firing line? How many of these “mentally unstable” US soldiers are still in Afghanistan, with guns, and could possibly carry out similar attacks?

And why do we rule out hatred, which I suspect was the case here? If the unnamed soldier was mentally unstable and felt like dropping a few people with his gun, why didn’t he shoot his own colleagues at the base instead of killing defenseless Afghan civilians?

Even US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton claimed after the incident, “This is not who we are…” Really, Mrs Clinton?

How many times have your soldiers gone out on a rampage, either shooting point-blank at civilians, or sending pilot-less drones to drop bombs on villagers? The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (Unama), puts the number of civilians killed in the conflict in 2011 alone at more than 3000, and it says most of these civilians were killed and injured in airstrikes and night raids by your men, Madame Clinton. Who can forget the “Kill Team” of 2010? (They were a group of five soldiers who were members of the platoon based at Maiwand in the southern Kandahar province. They were charged with the murder of three Afghan civilians whose body parts they collected as trophies.)

And how many of these soldiers are actually doing time for such atrocities? How many “faked” combat missions, Madame Clinton, that were used to kill Afghan civilians, as revealed by US army medico Jeremy Morlock in his plea last year, were undertaken?

I think this is barbaric. I think by allowing those who killed before to literally get away with murder, the US has effectively given its soldiers the licence to kill. I wouldn’t be surprised if this lunatic walks – it’s happened before. As the war heightened, most of these soldiers were made to, as one analyst put it, simply see all of Afghanistan as “enemy territory” and every Afghan as a “potential terrorist”.

It’s a pity that laws were designed (with this kind of situation in mind) to allow foreign soldiers (Nato) in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other places, not to be put on trial in those countries where the crimes are committed, but in their countries of residence. As Sam Zarifi, Asia-Pacific director at Amnesty International points out, “The current lack of accountability fuels and fosters a perception in the country that international forces do not care enough about the well-being of Afghans and are above the law and unaccountable for their actions.” This will in turn make it difficult for the locals to trust the forces; it makes the Taliban heroes and it will complicate US efforts to reach an agreement with the Afghan government on post-2014 security arrangements.

It would seem that for the US, life is cheap when it’s not American.

Tags: , , , , ,

  • On politicians without humour
  • The decline of the American Empire
  • Trump’s America: No country for old women
  • Why one should NOT vote for Trump in America this Tuesday
    • Lennon

      American soldiers have been abusing civilians since the Second Word War. Evidence for this can be found in the series “The World at War”. There is also plenty of footage floating around the ‘Net of Americans taking pot shots at civvies and even enjoying it and the only piece of “mainstream” media which condemns this is Oliver Stone’s movie “Platoon”.

      This particular trooper will be let off as a Section 8 because a court martial will simply be admission of wrongdoing.

      Life is cheap to them which is why “bringing democracy” to a country invariably means bombing the crap out of them. Odd then that the Chinese never resort to these tactics when they’re after resources (which they, quite openly, admit to).

    • Conrad

      Afghanistan is a tragedy. Its people have experienced incredible suffering, and they will continue to do so long after the US has left.

    • http://none Lyndall Beddy

      EVERY Empire regards its culture as superior and every other culture as inferior.

      This includes the post war American Empire, the pre war British Empire, the Communist Chinese Empire (eg their actions in both Burma and Tibet), the Communist Russian Empire, the original Arab Empire, and the old Roman Empire.

      The author and psychiatrist Scott M Peck analyses this “we-they” phenonomen in his books like “People of the Lie: an analysis of human evil”, “The Road Less Travelled” and “Further along the Road Less Travelled”.

    • Ms Ann Thrope

      OT: @Lyndall Beddy Have you googled yourself lately?

      Good to know its not just me..

    • Sterling Ferguson

      @Lennon, the Chinese,Japan, England, US,Germany and Russia have all one time another committed murder by their military. In SA there mass murder committed by the people in the Zulu province and twenty thousandth people died. This case was isolated and not the practice of the US military to go out and kill innocent civilians. The reason why this soldier can’t be tried by Afghan laws is because the government signed a treaty to allow the US soldiers to be tried by the US government.

      Moreover, the author states that the children in the US are trained from a early age to think of themselves as being superior to others. This is a big myth and many people in the US don’t want the government to get involve in these countries. In SA the ANC led government let thousandth of people die from AIDS when there was treatment to treat these people. It was the US government that pushed to setup an AIDS treatment program and paid for by the US. Therefore, before you point your finger at the US, you should take a look at yourself.

    • Sterling Ferguson

      @Beddy, you are up already? You are right about all empires have thought of themselves as superior.

    • Benzo

      @Lyndall: “EVERY Empire regards its culture as superior and every other culture as inferior.”
      Closer to home, the “bob” empire next door and a similar trend growing within todays SA.
      The real cause of these kind of incidents is the army training (or indoctrination) followed by the real war experience. Again…the local equivalent found within the behaviour of gang members and farm murderers.
      Your first killing is memorable, after that it becomes easier.
      The US has been at war with various parts of the world since 1942-45 (Germany), Korea, Vietnam, Iracq (2x), Afghanistan and working towards Iran.
      Mr Romney (the new Republican candidate) has recently told the world that the US is the nation called by God to protect the world and make it a safer place.
      The need these brainwashed characters in their mental shape to do their job in this “god given task”.
      Could there be a link between the warehouses of the US arms industry overflowing every 10 years and the new start of an armed conflict to make place for the next production lines?

    • http://none Lyndall Beddy

      Ann Thorpe

      That is an old comment – and I have not Googled myself for a long time – there is too much to read to find anything.


      Have you actually spoken to and communicated with the Taliban, or are all the journalists just doing the normal of chatting to each other?

      The Taliban would not exist at all if it had not been for the Cold War that Russia and America fought in Afghanistan when they armed rival tribes to the hilt and set one against another.

    • Rich

      War is a normal for humans, it seems. However, the world can not apply normal rules to individuals involved in war. I am afraid the veneer of civilization shows itself to be all too thin and what we would term horrific, violent, crass etc become the norm. To apply criticism of individual rogue behavior from the safety of our living rooms and to use that to justify the condemnation of a nation is wrong. Granted, this act should not have happened, this soldier should not have been sent into a conflict zone never mind his suitability as a soldier, he has to be court marshaled and his mental state determined…yes to all this and the debate as to whether the USA should actually be there – but he is an individual and was not acting on sanctioned orders. He is obviously a bit cooked. People often cannot comprehend the effect of violence on the psyche…or they are unwilling to acknowledge this ugly side that lurks in all to many of us.

    • http://none Lyndall Beddy


      My apologies – I got your post confused with the post of Conrad Steenkamp!

    • Lennon

      @ Sterling: I’ll take a shot at whomever I choose. Today it’s the US. They portray themselves as the beacon of hope; the light at the end of the tunnel and the bringer of democracy to the world. A country that opposes human rights abuses. The so-called “leader” of the “free world”. Pffft!

      The Soviets, Chinese and others didn’t offer any such pretence. They killed and that was it, just as the Romans, Crusaders, Mongols and Conquistadors did.

      And yes, the SA Government’s AIDS policy was disgusting to say the least, but at least we’re not arming the Boy Scouts to off military veterans at the first sign of trouble.

    • David Hurst

      This dude went off, and will not likely see the light of day again. Give a couple of hundred thousand guys ‘n gals guns, don’t expect anything pretty.

      The war is over, the Taliban will be back taking taking heads, administering justice to women on the Russian provided football fields, as we have seen, and that will be that. Their fairness governed by Mullahs, Karzai corruption and puppet like imposition, traded for perhaps a radical extreme religious totalitarianism, as we see in Iran – military control of the economy, of any free expression of thought, of media, it is not our business.

      To put a moral tone to what is essentially insanity is overkill, let the Afghani’s find their own reason without interference. Moral justification is local. It must be seen, that in the era of difference born by the weapon, that in peacetime, in times not knowing total war, that total war ingrained in the minds of warring factions must be eradicated.

      The United States must respect the sovereignty of not just a country, a region of not only nationality, but of village, tribe, clan, way of life; pride of community. And it must step back. If civil war is to ensue, perhaps it is best without imposition of foreign moral authority.

    • Sterling Ferguson

      @Lennon, you have a right to take a shot at whomever you chose and I have right to rebuttal you. You are trying to take an isolated incident and say this is the norm in the US military which isn’t true. If the US withdraws from the world stage almost all of black Africa would be vulnerable because many of these countries are failed states. Both Russia and China support the US role in the world because WW2 was caused by little countries being eaten up big countries. However, the US policy is working because it’s better to put out small fires then to have a major firers that takes a lot of resources to put out. This is why a military buildup in that area of the world is a threat to world peace in the India ocean which includes Africa.

    • Albert

      I must agree with you that third world lives are just not seen as importantr compared ti first world lives. It’s a tragedy – and you state it simply, and with dignity. Let’s all hope one day in future people from third world countries will be regarded as equally human.

    • Sterling Ferguson

      @Benzo,the US got directly involved in WWI2 when the Japanese attacked the US at Pearl Harbor. However, the US was indirectly involved in the war by aiding England because this country was on the verge of falling to the Germans. The US was aiding China to fight off the Japanese to keep them from taking over China. When the Germans attacked Russia the US gave $18 billions in aid to Russia to help them stand up to the Germans. The Russians were using horses and wagons for transportation and the US gave them fifty thousandth trucks. The big question you should be asking if Africa would have been better off if Hitler’s NAZIS Germans had taken over Africa from the English and French?

    • Peter Joffe

      The Americans never chose to go to Afghanistan! Afghanistan chose to export terror to the USA and the USA had to stop it as best they could. Is there any solution to this?
      Yes there is if we listen to Benjamin Netanyahu who said, with regards to Israeli – “If the terrorists will lay down their weapons there will be no more war . If Israel lays down their weapons there will be no more Israel”.
      My late brother in law had to fight in Korea and would never talk about what happened to him there. His life was never the same and he was deeply troubled. His son, my nephew worked in the World Trade Centre and watched as defenseless people jumped to their deaths whilst the world of Islam cheered and celebrated! There will be no peace in this world until all our peoples realize that we are all different and that we are entitled to be different. As long as one sect decide that they are right and have to force their beliefs or point of view on others there will be war. Was the US Soldier right to do what he did? Of course not. More tragedy is perpetrated in the name of God than for any other reason, and so it has been for centuries. Even in South Africa we have people who murdered their parents because God told them to do it?? More savagery will not bring the murdered Afghans back and yes it was deeply wrong? Toleration and understanding will end human conflict. Religious hatred will prolong it.

    • Rich

      @Sterling America was also very opportunistic in ww2.I think the UK eventually settled their bill two years ago. Also, one of their strong bargaining points was that colonialism had to go. Their justification was that it was a system which invited instability and conflict. The argument on that is open for debate but their motivation I do not think was moral but more economic. On the point of Africa under the Nazis – no argument there.

    • Paleface

      The Americans are the champions of war mongering. It is hard to find a period in the modern history where the Americans were not involved in some war or fighting, in countries outside of the US where they had no business to be. They have always been a violent gun toting nation and their aggression goes right to the top – their presidents.
      Apart from always involved in war, they are also the first nation to have ever employed biological weapons and are the only nation to have ever used nuclear weapons as a weapon of mass destruction.
      For his part in the war in the middle east, attacking sovereign countries unlawfully and on bogus manufactured intelligence and the subsequent deaths of hundreds of thousand people, George W Bush should be in the Haig answering to charges of crimes against humanity.
      If your president gets away with murder, how can you charge the Staff Sergeant on the frontline.

    • Benzo

      @Sterling: ” When the Germans attacked Russia the US gave $18 billions in aid to Russia to help them stand up to the Germans”.
      And after 1945 the US gave Marshall help to Germany to stop the Communist Russia from taking over Western Europe in their anti-com paranoia. The nuked Japan and help it back on its hinds against the com threat from China. Flattened Vietnam….must I go on?
      End result?
      Maybe Germans in Africa would not have been such a bad idea.They seemingly have a more organised approach to governing than many African countries seem to show. :-))

    • Benzo

      Coming back to my comments on the effect of war on the avarage field soldier…they are the ones who get damaged for life if not killed.
      The war bosses sit in their ivory tower playing “chess” with the enemy. They push buttons and “select targets”. Execution of their orders will always create human victims which they never see eye to eye.
      German generals during WW1, visited the front lines on quiet days and were referred to as “front touristen” and the soldiers went back into their muddy graves.
      The pilot who dropped the nuke on Japan was never the same after.I have seen people lined up, coming from their office job and shot on the spot after the Dutch underground had sabotaged some German target. Never to forget the sight.

      The US has not had a war on their own soil ever since their civil war. The majority do not know what war feels like. They are just being fed with the paranoia thinking that they can win “the war”. Noone has ever won a war. Even if they belief that God, Allah, Jehova or any other “spiritual being” is on their side.

    • Policat

      The massacre and genocide of civilian populations has been a tactic of warfare by protagonists since time immemorial. Good recent examples, well documented, were the deliberate bombings of cities during World War 11 (the ultimate the nuking of the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki) which were calculated and intentional by both opposing sides.
      Weren’t it for the media binge (shows democracy at work) that an American stands accused killing innocent civilians and had this attack occurred in some obscure village tucked away in some third world country by an individual or individuals, you would probably not have written this article.
      I think this article is just a vehicle for you to spread anti American propaganda.
      Btw I do not condone this terrible incident in Afghanistan.

    • The Creator

      Soldiers pretty much everywhere in war zones are inclined to commit atrocities — it was the Italians who were particularly brutal in the Somalian invasion in 1991, at least before the Americans sent gunships into the streets of Mogadiscio.

      Granted, Americans think they’re God’s country, the shining city on the hill, and blah blah blah. But American soldiers, remember, often come from the wrong side of the tracks and have a pretty good idea of what their country is really like.

      I think the American government is a lot more vicious and brutal than the grunts on the ground.

    • Mack Nyati

      @ Peter Joffe – “The Americans never chose to go to Afghanistan! Afghanistan chose to export terror to the USA and the USA had to stop it as best they could.”

      I sincerely hope you don’t really believe this statement! What proof do you have that Afghanistan exported terror to the USA?

      “Yes there is if we listen to Benjamin Netanyahu who said, with regards to Israeli – “If the terrorists will lay down their weapons there will be no more war . If Israel lays down their weapons there will be no more Israel”.

      Please?!?!? Everybody who is not brainwashed knows that Israel was imposed as a state in that region thru terrorist acts. Indeginous people were uprooted, displaced and robbed of their villages, farmland and homes. For Israel to claim victimhood is the biggets ruse of the last and present century. If Isreal, as a state, was established legally, there would be no reason at all for them to keep defending their borders… or perpetrating terror on the Palestinians.

      Nobody in their right mind supports what the USA and Israel stand for today.

    • Lennon

      @ Sterling: I have not stated anywhere that this is the norm. I have merely pointed out that is happened before. If the US wants to save face over matters like this, then they need to deal with troopers who get out of hand decisively and not attempt to cover it up. You don’t boost your credibility by denying things that everyone can see did happen. Just ask the ANC how well that strategy works. 😉

      As the for the US in Africa. There is already evidence showing that the CIA has been backing both the LRA and the Ugandan Government. Oddly enough, Kony has been out of the country for at least six years and any attrocities committed (and again, there is evidence for foreign involvement) were done so years ago.

      So why is Kony only an issue NOW? And why does this coincide with the discovery of an estimated 1 billion barrels of oil (never mind the gold) in Uganda?

      Also: Why was Gaddafi only considered a dictator last year? Blair, Sarkozy and plenty of others seemed quite content to make lucrative deals with him prior to that.

      And Mubarak? The US loved him because he took a pro-Israeli stance and yet now he’s been left in the lurch.

      Then, of course, there was Hussein. The US funded him and gave him plenty of toys to deal with Iran. Suddenly he’s a madman with “WMD’s” (which were never found).

      Taylor is up for war crimes and yet he was also linked to CIA backing.

      The pattern is repeated like clockwork here, so what gives?

    • http://none Lyndall Beddy

      Do any of you ask WHY the American main fleet was in Pearl Harbour in Hawaii during World War 2 with chaos operating in Europe?

      My take is that they were after extending their colonising of the Pacific, including Japan.

      They could not have given a rat’s arse about Europe!

      So Japan issued a defensive strike, before they were attacked.

      America only got concerned, reluctantly, when it looked like Britain might lose and they would be facing a victorious Germany themsleves.

      And WHEN will America give back its half of colonised Samoa?

    • Lennon

      @ Sterling: Of course Russia and China supported US action in WW2. China wasn’t exactly having a party while dealing with Japanese aggression and Russia was almost on its knees having to hold the line on Eastern Front single-handedly. And yes, Britain was quite happy with the lend-lease deal and American pilots who volunteered for the RAF.

      The US has done a lot of good, but it seems that they (the government and its backers) are simply pushing for resources regardless of the cost to those countries which have them.

      Just the other day, several staff from Al-Jazeera resigned because of biased coverage of Syria and the lack of coverage in Bahrain. This incident tickled me because I remember switching to Al-Jazeera due to CNN, BBC and the like reminding me more and more of Fox News.

    • Lennon

      @ Lyndall: I’ve heard that Roosevelt himself knew that the Japanese were coming, but deliberately ignored the warning as the attack would be the excuse he needed to get the US involved in the war.

      As I recall, there was some serious anti-war sentiment in the States after WW1.

      What puzzles me about the attack is why Japan didn’t do it properly. Had I planned it, I would have bombed the fleet and then invaded Hawaii to consolidate my position in the Pacific.

    • peter

      You are correct, just as any person who considers themselves to be civilized is, in asking so many questions about this horrendous attack. You do need to remember that violence is a characteristic of mankind and has been since the beginning and there does not seem any way to counter that. Unfortunately there are those who find it necessary to throw morals out of the window when others disagree with them, for whatever reason. I think that we all have to accept that war is simply a means of dealing with either real or imagined threat and it is then realistic to understand that those who declare war do not care about the lives of others anyway, just as murderers and rapists do not care. Why they do not care is a yet unsolved mystery but remains a fact. The reasons are quite clear in that they desire that which belongs to another, defined as greed and are motivated by fear, but the understanding of why they do not care is another matter all together and will remain an inherent flaw in the make up of humans until they destroy themselves and evertything else in the process.
      Keep asking the questions, but do not expect credible answers from those who are trained to be devious in the first instance. We remain horrified and indignant but the perpetrators do not care and we need to remember that it is not just the USA that is inhabited by these maniacs but other lands as well. The worst thought is that some of these undesirables are actually leaders. Where to turn? Who knows!…

    • Jean Wright

      The situation and background to the attack on Pearl Harbour is very complex. The USA had a lease agreement in 1887 with the then Hawaiaan Kingdom to use Pearl Harbour as a naval base (for obvious strategic reasons). The Japanese were aware of pressure upon the USA to enter the war, and the Japanese were not only short of oil (always oil!) and had expansionist plans to capture the Dutch East Indies who had oil, and Burma, before continuing with their conquest of China. That is it smplistically, although there were other problems between the two countries. The Japanese had a contempt for the Americans, whom they considered a debased mongrel race who would not have the capacity to organise strong opposition. Also Pearl Harbour was closer to Japan (fast get-away and less detection of invasion). Pearl Harbour was unfortified. The Americans actually thought other of their naval bases would be more vulnerable.

      The refusal of the Afghan Government to ‘hand over’ Osama Bin Laden after 9/11
      finally seems to have triggered the USA’s activities there, as they saw the activities of the Taliban & its supporters as a threat…. And so the madness continues with the current gunning down of innocent people in Afghanistan, and the American refusal (curently) to hand the perpetrator over. Of course the Taliban have been responsible for the deaths of dozens of civillians in Pakistan,etc.

      Lennon – agree also watch Al-Jazeera. Didn’t know they’d had resignations though.

    • http://none Lyndall Beddy

      Jean Wright

      Did you know that President Cleveland, an ancestor of mine by the way, did his best to try and stop America stealing Hawaii from their Queen?

      Unfortunately the Queen of Hawaii did not have a “green card” system so Americans could flood in foreigners and insist on their “democratic” right to vote!

    • MLH

      Can’t believe that no one’s mentioned Post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The incident bemoaned in the post points directly to the possibilitiy of that as its cause.

      @Jean Wright: ‘Also Pearl Harbour was closer to Japan (fast get-away…’. I thought the Japanese use Kamakazi pilots because they didn’t have enough fuel to get the planes home. ‘No getaway’ would thus be more correct.

    • Sterling Ferguson

      @Lennon, The thinking in Japan at that time was the US was pleasure society and only interested in having a good time. I think that they had been watching too many of Mae West movies when she sung the song the pleasure man. However, the Japanese thought the US would do nothing to them if they bloody their nose for interfering with their conquest of Asia. However, there was a Japanese General that was against the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and had live in the US, he thought this attack would wake up the sleeping giant. Tojo and his boys didn’t listen to this general they proceeded to plan this attack on pearl Harbor. The Japanese government sent their diplomatic to Washington to discuss better relationship between the two countries and the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. However, the day before the attack the US had moved all of their aircraft carriers out of Pearl Harbor and sent them north toward Alaska.

      However, when the Japanese discovered that they had not achieved their objectives at Pearl Harbor they tried to correct their mistake at Midway. The US navy and air force were able to destroy the Japanese fleet at Midway which hurt the Japanese war effort. This battle proves Billy Mitchel was right that the future of wars would be air power and not naval power that England had depended on for three hundred years.

    • Sterling Ferguson

      @Beddy, the US went to Hawaii because they didn’t want other countries to take over the Islands and stage attacks on the US. If you are trying to look at history from a moral point of view please don’t because, there is nothing moral about history. When discussing relationship between two countries, might has always been right. The big question are the people in Hawaii better off today by being part of the US?

    • Lennon


      Moving just the carriers seems rather suspicious.

      Mitchell was right about air power, something which the US Navy was not exactly pleased about.

    • Jean Wright

      @MLH Well, there is a debate about this They certainly did use Kamakazi pilots to devastating affect in other theatres of the war, and Japanese Pilots of hit/damaged planes with no hope of getaway guided them in a ‘death & glory’ dive into strategic targets. Perhaps that could be termed ‘Kamakazi’ Midget submarines together with bombs and torpedos were also used. Perhaps they were speculating their oil reserves in the hope of accumulating later? As Sterling Ferguson also says, the Americans were duped as the Japanese & Americans were having diplomatic talks at the time.

      Re PTSD of the soldier in Afghanistan quite believe this is possible, but it will be entirely irrelevant to the Afghanis. Their population are no doubt suffering from it too, and for decades no doubt. No doubt the unfortunate soldiers during the war who were shot for desertion also suffered from it, but who cared? Violence/War has apalling repercussions on so many.

    • Bovril24

      “How many of these “mentally unstable” US soldiers are still in Afghanistan, with guns, and could possibly carry out similar attacks?”

      A great many fewer than the Moslem inhabitants I would suggest

    • Jean Wright

      Lyndall Beddy.

      No I didn’t know that.

      The annextion of Hawaii by greedy business interests, with help from the US Army. Yes, disgusting.

    • Sterling Ferguson

      @Lennon, the US had broken the Japanese codes and they had early warning radar so, come they didn’t see this attack coming is a debate among historians.

    • http://none Lyndall Beddy


      What “People of Hawaii”? I think the aborigines are less than 10 percent of the population!

      And the “People of Samoa” DO want their land back – but the USA has a military base there and ignores them!

    • Rich

      Post traumatic stress disorder makes the perfect ‘beserker’ – a prized asset in days gone by. How times have changed!

    • Oldfox


      Read Noam Chomsky’s “Imperial ambitions” and you’ll get a much better insight into US foreign policy.

    • Policat

      Lennon #

      “What puzzles me about the attack is why Japan didn’t do it properly. Had I planned it, I would have bombed the fleet and then invaded Hawaii to consolidate my position in the Pacific”

      It appears that unfortunately for Japan the American aircraft carriers were not in port at the time of the attack. Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto after Pearl Harbour was reported to have said “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.”
      The result was the battle of Midway where the Americans attained superiority as the dominant naval force in pacific for the rest of WW11.

    • David Hurst

      all Beddy#, I have never heard such an insane thought as the US in the 20th century wishing to colonize Japan. It is clear that history is taking a twist in this column, not thought, but knee-jerk third world defensive paranoia, as though Communism and totalitarianism did not exist, and now neo-democratic authoritarianism under an economic umbrella of imperialism for local cash is not its brain child. The literal rape and genocide in China, the Korean Penensula, and indeed all east asia started well before world war two. And apparently, the modern ‘historians’ wished that to go unchecked, with stories of poor Hawaiian and Samoan colonization. Worse than non-sense. Check out the systematic (beyond syphylis) medical experiments done by the Japanese, mass use of slave and sex labor as a system, and the example they set for Mao, Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler, Pot, all of your favorites, no doubt. Brainwashed is all one can say, hardly history.

    • Sterling Ferguson

      @David Hurst, a lot of these young people don’t know anything about Imperial Japan and how aggressive they were prior to WW2. The Japanese killed million of Chinese and still don’t admit that they did this to the people in China.

      @Policat, the battle of Midway it was Admiral Fletcher that save the day and nobody talks about his leadership in this battle.

    • Lesego

      Sterling Ferguson #

      The Aids myth is just a population control strategy and what pisses Mbeki off is the fact that its concentrated on the African continent. I mean if you wanna control the population it should be compulsory.

      Author Isaac Mangena, It was stated by the witnesses who were there that the soldier wasnt acting alone. Dont you also wonder how they instantly came to the conclusion that he was depressed without even waiting for an expert analysis?

    • Jean Wright

      Back to the horror that is currently Afghanistan there is an article by Alexander Cockburn ‘Afghan Rampage it will only stop after the troops come home’

      [email protected].

    • http://none Lyndall Beddy

      David Hurst

      The reason the American fleet was in the Pacific in Pearl Harbour was because they were colonising the Pacific and wanted dominance in Asia. They did’t give a damn about the war in Europe against Nazi Germany, until they were reluctantly called in at the very end.

    • Lennon

      @Policat: Be that as it may, perhaps Yamamoto should have pushed for the Japanese fleet to hunt the US carriers down although I suppose he wasn’t aware that they’d moved.

      I still think that he should’ve taken Hawaii as a matter of course. It might have given the Japanese time to bolster their naval strength.

    • Lesego

      “Just the other day, several staff from Al-Jazeera resigned because of biased coverage of Syria and the lack of coverage in Bahrain. This incident tickled me because I remember switching to Al-Jazeera due to CNN, BBC and the like reminding me more and more of Fox News.”

      Lenon, Im glad you have now realised that Al-Jazeera and all these media you have mentioned are just the same as Fox News and hope you realise that the lamestream media is not for information purposes but for disinformation. Now every time you hear anything from these news companies you must know instantly that there must be something evil they are up to, like covering up something or lying.

    • Yaj

      Bush, Blair, Camoron, Obama , Hilary Clinton et al are cold-blooded war criminals who will go down in history as some of the most callous , cruel and evil leaders known to mankind whose deeds were covered up by the mainstream media of the time.