Talk:Special Activities Division

Needs expanding before inclusion

This all just came rushing out; each one of these sentences would probably require a chapter in a book to treat properly. I have worked at WP so I know how loaded and emotive language is no substitute for reasoned arguments, and that is the primary reason I did not include it even in its unfinished state. Every one of those emotive phrases is based on the real philosophical and moral grounds that are the basis for law and international law, however, so I stand by it all.

It is no coincidence that the US development of thermonuclear weapons of mass destruction, over 50 years with no one having declared war on the US (while in the same time a war has been started by the US against other countries almost once for every presidency), and the ascendance of a secret agency that murders, corrupts, and spreads puppet states all over the world, all began at the same time. No country has dared do anything directly to stop the US, no matter how much they may hate or have once hated them.

Secret operations were once the 'gentleman's war' when they exclusively involved intelligence; they were an unspoken pact between nations, all of whom wanted intelligence on each other and so accepted a situation where the only consequence was getting caught. It is for this reason that special provisions for spies and spying were inserted into the Geneva Conventions. When they were first formulated, no one could foresee the US combining secrecy with warfare, and since then, the US' power has prevented any from challenging this. The US balance of powers, only theoretically balanced in any case, completely gave way with only the US president, if that, in control of secret warfare, spreading a disease of violence against people and their autonomy with coups, assassinations, secret wars, corrupting influence and puppet regimes around the globe. Anarchangel 12:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)