Hello, Bowser

It really shouldn't be all that confusing. Keep in mind that there is a historical consistency in the US manipulatilng foreign policy--both of this country and any other country---in order to attempt to make that country "safe" or stable for business interests.

In the past I quoted William Howard Taft as he justified the use of the US military to "protect American property and interests."

In the history of the US, war has been declared on only five ocasions. During this period the US has invaded or intervened in other countries over 150 times; there are 81 instances in Latin America alone. In these interventions the US has managed to overthrow democratically elected governments and replace them with right-wing military regimes that could provide stability for US business.

US arrogance in foreign affair reached a nadir with Teddy Roosevelt when he said it is "inevitable that the US will REGULATE LIFE in the republics of the Caribbean."

That dumb old Castro is not presently allowing this. No wonder this administration is pissed. After all, Lefty Clark no longer is allowed the capitalistic ability to bribe local authorities and run his Tropicana club in the good old American fasion of any way he wants.

Cuba has been an iritant since we were force to invade in 1822 to burn a pirate village by US Marines.

Of course we were obligated to repeat this in 1823, 1824, and join with the British to jointly invade Sagua La Grande in 1825.

Then the lack of order in Cuba compelled us to restore order and protect foreigners between 1906-1909. In 1912 we were forced to protect American interests in both Havana and Oriente Province.

Unsettled conditions required US Marines to occupy and protect Camaguey from 1917 to 1922. US Sugar felt threatened and it was the duty of the US to protect capitalism.

In 1933 the US Navy demonstrated in Havana harbor in support of Presidente Machado when he was threatened by a possible popular revolution.

You see Bowser, capitilism is happy to use the force of the government's military might to pursue its objectives. It seems capitalism sees the free hand in the market place works best if it is inside the steel glove of government.

I know it seems confusing. Capitalist claim to want laissez-faire while we are looking, but want to carry the guns when the American citizens have their gaze truned the other way.

If you just keep in mind the phrase, "self-serving" and repeat it over and over it will help you understand. After all you have previously noted that Tom repeats his mantras as a regular feature of these boards.

Hope this brings some clarity. Publius