From: mcgredo@bluto.ie.orst.edu (Don McGregor)
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d
Subject: Re: Ralph McGehee on Grenada
Date: 16 Apr 92 08:11:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: talon.1992Apr16.081137.22262
Reply-To: mcgredo@bluto.ie.orst.edu
Organization: Oregon State University - Univ. Computing Services

Brian writes
>	If Time, which is usually considered the mouth-organ of the US
>government was willing to voice a dissenting vote on the matter, I suspect
>that there was indeed, "something fishy in Denmark"  WRT to the claims made
>about those weapons.
>
Huh?  Time says they're not a collection of high-tech weapons, and this is  
proof that 1) they weren't Soviet, or 2) they were planted by the CIA?

>[original poster]
>Later we came to find out that Cuba 
>had about fifty airport workers on the island, one or two military 
>advisors, but that was after all the information had had its 
>effect. 

>[me]
>The actual numbers were ~ 650 Cuban army reservists there to work on the 
>airport, and a dozen or two military advisors.  

>[Brian]
>Of the 784 mentioned, only 25 could be said to have a specific
>military function (the advisors from MINFAR).

Therefore my original point was correct, and the poster's was incorrect.   
There were not "about 50" airport workers on the island, but more on the  
order of 650.  There were not "one or two" military advisors, but at least  
25 by your account. Thank you for supporting my assertion. 
>
>>Most of the airport workers (650 or so) were also cuban army reservists.   
>>Are you going to argue that none of those fought the invasion?  I notice  
>>that you didn't quite say that in this post.
>
>No, just that they were not there as members of the Cuban army.
>They were there as construction workers. Just because they had their  
military
>equipment with them is meaningless IMO.
>
Again, the original poster was claiming that only 50 or so Cubans opposed  
the invasion.  In light of the information you provided, and your belief  
that they had their military equipment with them and fought US troops, you  
apparently agree with me that this was incorrect information.

>
>I note that you deleted the mention of the fact that the prime
>contractors for the construction of the new airport was a British  
construction
>company and that they had sub-contracted to the Cuban government, not the
>Grenadans.  Can't you answer that particular fact very well Don?

The policies of the British contractor are unknown to me.  However, any  
number of reasons could have been used as a pretext by the Grenadan  
government to ensure that Cubans would be used.  A simple request, a low bid  
by the Cuban government, etc.  It does seem rather odd that 650 peaceful  
subcontractors decided to man AAA batteries and grab their AKs when the  
helos flew in.  I'll remember to obey the speed limits in construction areas  
the next time I drive by some road work.

The main reasons given for the US invasion were 1) to protect US citizens in  
the area, and 2) restore order in the wake of a bloody coup.  There was no  
particular love lost between the US and the Grenadan government anyway, so  
we went ahead and took them off the board.  Why not, the Marines were  
already in the neighborhood.

We can argue back and forth about whether the US was justified in invading  
with the knowledge it had at the time.  It might even be mildly interesting,  
in an academic sense.  However, it is absolutely clear that the *Grenadan  
people* welcomed the US invasion.  This is clear from independent press  
reports, video clips, interviews, and polling.  One simply cannot honestly  
dispute this fact.  I think we got into this argument a year or so ago, and  
I dug up some polling data that showed a majority of Grenadans prefered to  
be _annexed_ by the United States, and something like 15% of the population  
wanted Ronald Reagan to be their next PM.  Not exactly the profile of an  
oppressed imperial outpost.

Seeing as how the Grendan people welcomed the US invasion, and that what  
passed for the Grendan government at the time was a murderous bunch of  
thugs, and that it advanced US geopolitical interests, I just can't feel too  
guilty about the whole episode.  In fact, I think I'll go home and have a  
beer.

--
Don McGregor             | California danger signs: you own more pairs of 
mcgredo@bluto.ie.orst.edu| shorts than you do long pants.