Forty years ago the joint chiefs of staff prepared plans for how to create a pretext for war against Castro's government in Cuba. Among the plans discussed: Instigating conflict between Cuba and another Latin American nation, Baiting Cuba to attack American troops or planes, Fabricating evidence that Castro was behind a US tragedy, such as a failed NASA mission (the death of John Glenn was discussed), and even the possibility of sinking a naval vessel or staging terrorist attacks in the US which could be blamed on Castro. The Kennedy administration rejected the plans and the documents were buried, only to come to light when records were opened up to defuse alarmists after the release of Oliver Stone's "JFK" conspiracy tale. (Here's the ABC story)

Well, now we know that the military considered those proposals to be critical, even if they were treasonous and homocidal. We also know that they held the Kennedy administration in contempt for its "gutless" approach to national security. So now that we do have a right-leaning executive and we do have a war that is convenient to American interests no less so than Castro ever was, and we do have a pretext... What are we to think? That it is NOW unthinkable that that type of planning could be considered?

We have to ask, and we have to be wary of the increasing secrecy surrounding executive matters. This war is being waged in our name and with our overwhelming support - but if it is not a just war - if it is the result of pretext meant to win support for otherwise unsupportable goals... Well, then we've lost our country already; perhaps decades ago.

No comments: