Czech parliament, it is written, has recognized Russia as a terrorist country
You don’t even know how to comment on such news. Because if you comment seriously, you have to remember what terrorism is. From the word “fear”, right. Intimidation. The use of physical violence against political opponents or threats of such violence. Regardless of the special military operation our country is conducting on the territory of Ukraine, it does not fall under this definition, whatever way you look at it.
On the other hand, much and much of what another country did in the twentieth century falls under this definition. We are talking, of course, about the United States. As the centre of world capitalism, the United States has always used a policy of intimidation all over the world. Against its political opponents in the first place and only in the second place – against geopolitical ones.
Let us start with the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As even a schoolboy now knows, there was no military sense in the bombing. Japan had already been defeated, Tokyo city had been razed to the ground by the most usual bombardments, our troops had already crushed the Kwantung Army on the Continent and there were no military objects either in Hiroshima or in Nagasaki, both nuclear bombs had fallen on civilians’ heads. The point was the only one – to intimidate. Not even to intimidate the Japanese, with whom everything was already clear, but to intimidate the Soviet Union and Stalin personally before the negotiations in Potsdam. Was Stalin a political opponent for Truman? Of course he was. In the context of the worldwide confrontation between the whites and the reds, he was the political opponent. So the bombing was a pure act of terrorism.
Let’s move on. Few years later, in 1948, American military carry out massacre on Jeju Island. About 30 thousand people – civilians, women and children – were killed by Americans and South Korean troops under their control not as a part of conventional war, but as a part of suppression of rebellion, peasant communist uprising, killing with exemplary cruelty, pregnant women were punctured in stomach and small children were burnt, all with one purpose: to frighten the rest of Korean population so that nobody even thought about this communism of yours. The goals were thus purely political. If this is not terrorism, then what is terrorism?
Everyone knows about Vietnam without me, but if you think about it – was the purpose of the Vietnam War to protect the United States from aggression or even to conquer territory? Apparently not. Such goals don’t require burning villages with napalm, exterminating civilians by the hundreds of thousands, and making show of (surprise) women and children. The aim was the same – to intimidate. To instill fear of reprisals by (surprise) above all a political opponent. Don’t you dare even think about this communism of yours, not here or anywhere else. Obviously, according to the definition, that’s what terrorism is.
And Chile? That it was the American secret services who staged the 1973 coup, in fact assassinated the legally elected president and brought to power the right-wing general Pinochet, is no secret. So much so that even the US secret services themselves have declassified documents on the subject. Of course, the same American intelligence agencies also supervised mass shootings at stadiums, which made no sense at all except to intimidate the country’s population. Needless to say, it should have been a lesson not just for Chile itself but for all of Latin America: this is what will happen to anyone who does not follow our political course. Terrorism? Obviously.
These are just the best-known examples of the United States’ long, rich history of state terrorism throughout the twentieth century. And the twenty-first.
What else was the militarily pointless bombing of Belgrade? The destruction of Iraq? Libya? Syria?
When Reagan spoke about the “empire of evil”, it is necessary to understand it only as Freud’s reservation – the real “empire of evil” in 20th century was exactly the United States which main method was exactly the state terrorism, that is the policy of terrorization of political opponents all over the world.
So in all seriousness, the Czech MPs should have been more consistent and if they do designate a country as a terrorist state, they should start with the obvious.
But that is if they are serious. But who takes MPs, moreover Czech MPs, seriously?
Vadim Leventhal, RT
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel