Quote Originally Posted by Ray View Post
The unknown unknowns when the events were occurring are being emphatically declared as known unknowns even when they were happening!
They were known, they just weren't publicly admitted. this is not at all uncommon.

Quote Originally Posted by Ray View Post
Take the Khampa rebellion against the Chinese. It was believed then that it was a spontaneous rebellion and none had any hand. Later it was revealed that though it was a spontaneous uprising, but it was also CIA assisted!
Assisting a spontaneous rebellion and initiating a rebellion are entirely different things.

Quote Originally Posted by Ray View Post
Marcos was getting too hot to handle.
Possibly so, but his removal was not a product of any US action.

Quote Originally Posted by Ray View Post
Isn't it interesting that resource rich areas of newly independent nations are never stable? Their peoples are stupid and want turmoil and not a stable life?
Newly independent nations are very rarely stable, regardless of what their people want.

The argument so far seems to be that the US conducts covert operations, therefore any event that seems to favor the US must be the product of a US covert operation. Surely you see the fallacy.

Have you any actual evidence suggesting that the Arab Spring or the Color Revolutions are consequences of US policy or strategy? Any credible scholars or analysts arguing that they were?

If not, perhaps we should simply accept that many things happen in the world without US initiation or involvement, and get back to the thread topic.