Quote:
Originally Posted by Sommerset
This is a pretty pathetic reach, even for you. The operation calls for what it calls for.
The operation calls for war. Here is another quote for you, from the introductory paragraphs in which the document calls itself a "description of pretexts which could provide justification for US military intervention into Cuba".
As I have directly quoted from the document, a skimming of the document saw that the plans involved the possible intentional killing of a boatload of cubans (anti-castro US friendly cubans) seeking asylum here. What do you call that? I call it murder. Maybe you call it an introduction to the virtues of capitalism.
The Bamford and other critical reviews of operation northwoods are more insightful than reading the document itself because they look into the momentum behind it and the thoughts and orientation of the planners. You have been shown to be flat wrong in your interpretation on every level, including the literal level. But the literal level doesn't even matter that much. In all their communications regarding the attempted extermination of an entire race, the nazis never directly said they were killing people. Good thing we had people at Nuremberg capable of greater than your grade school level analysis.
Apologists are often despicable in their attempts to mitigate the stench of inhuman atrocities. You are below that. Apologists say yeah, it was bad but blah blah blah. You, on the other hand, are actually defending the virtue of an attempted atrocity by denial. Do you see the difference? Do you see that you are being scum?