The CIA is a development wing of the American corporate state.
I have to admit that some of my information about the CIAs development is based on the fact that my grandfather was part of WWII counterintelligence and joined the CIA when it began. That said, the CIA was the development of a shift from isolationist policies thanks to two world wars, the first of which was "the war to end all wars", and the continuation of the nationalist policies and imperialism (in particular in Russia and farther East) that had resulted in both world wars. It was also central to why, unlike the millions upon millions who died in WWI and WWII, the "war" between the US and the USSR was a "cold war" not a nuclear disaster. Before the CIA, overseas US intelligence was limited to various units in the military, and these couldn't operate during peacetime.
In the 60s, President Kennedy created to special operations forces that are among the most famous: the SEALs and the Special Forces (commonly referred to as the Green Berets). The latter was designed from the outset to go behind enemy lines and train indigenous troops. They did this in Vietnam, during the drug wars for decades, and in Afghanistan. The military's rivalry with the CIA also meant the creation of groups like the oh-so-nebulous, ever-shifting ISA, delta force, and other military units that were designed for HUMINT, "black ops", etc. SFOD-D ("delta force") was and remains an anti-terrorism special operations unit. Dick Marcinko later created an equivalent unit with the SEALs, formerly Seal Team 6, dedicated to anti-terrorism. Even the marines came up with FAST (fleet antiterrorism security team) and other units (and, last time I checked, a special unit because they refused to let Force Recon Marines and similar groups to be under SOCOM control).
The US didn't declare war in Vietnam or since until after 9/11. Yet units such as these were in operations in South America and across the Middle East. The vast majority of CIA personnel overseas, on the other hand, were attached to embassies. A tiny minority of CIA resources consists of units capable of direct action or even readily providing support to military action that isn't already carried out by military SOF.
On the other hand, while the FBI is limited in the ways in which it can engage in international operations, the NSA is huge, vastly more secretive, and assuredly more powerful than the CIA.
Traditionally it's job has been to secure and protect markets for US Corporations.
Traditionally CIA personnel not in the US are attached to (and use as cover) US State Department/Foreign Service embassies and similar offices. They have largely collected, sorted, analyzed, and past on data. Of course, this is boring. No movie on an undercover operative in Europe whose job is translating and sifting through reports and who is less equipped for combat than locally recruited rent-a-cops (still less Marine embassy guards) and whose connection to any kind of Jack Ryan
Clear & Present Danger consists of handing on information which is eventually passed to the Department of Defense.
It overthrows democratic regimes and installs puppets who will play ball with us.
For example?
A fairly recent gig I had was looking over who was granted contracts for operations overseas. These included many, many pages of individuals (who were often LLCs) whose "companies" were all located in a building among those known to be CIA owned and operated. The primary responsibility of the CIA in this regard was to vet and cover the US State Department hiring of independent contractors for High Risk Security, Close Personal Protection, more general security, and whatever operations that we don't hear about unless they result in the deaths of Americans or civilians (like those that Blackwater was involved in). Despite classified information and other protections, it is impossible to really hide where most of tax payer money goes to. The CIA simply lacks the resources to be the shadowy, man-behind-the-curtain power toppling governments left and right. It has been involved, of course, but generally it taps SOF units and relies on D.O.D. resources and intelligence (not to mention State Department and NSA).
Resentment of it creates the very terrorists that threaten us.
Hundreds of Marines didn't die in an embassy bombing because of CIA presence. Al-Qaeda didn't blow a hole in the USS Cole because they thought it was a CIA destroyer. It was Special Forces, not CIA operatives, behind US training of indigenous Afghanistan troops during the Cold War, and Special Forces (along with ISA) behind countless operations in South America for decades. Upper-level CIA personnel have, more than once, tried to increase their power over international operations and resources in the ever-present battle between Federal and military units with competing goals. Many of the results of this feuding came out in the 9/11 commission report, but many were declassified earlier and have been since. The thing is, nobody tends to asks for declassified files that aren't relating to some scandal, highly political situation, etc.
Chile, Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina, Honduras, Nicaragua, Guatamala, El Salvador, Angola, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, & al.
Don't have to. I've known some of the operatives from SF and other SOF units who were there. What I've seen and read about CIA operations in such places either describes or makes apparent their dependency upon D.O.D. and State Department infrastructure/resources. It is, however, less exciting than the Bourne series or best-selling novels.
They don't "hate us for our freedom."
True.
They hate us 'cause we're exploiting them; we're killing them, stealing their resources and impoverishing them.
In the South American countries you mentioned, the resource we're
BUYING is drugs. Not legally, mind you. As for Afghanistan, what resources? Al-Qaeda was around while Saddam Hussein exploited the people of Irag and invaded Kuwait. Our exploitation of Saudi Arabia is made possible by the princes and other elites of Saudi Arabia.
Eg: Why do you think AlQueda exists?
Among other reasons, because those like Osama bin Laden were from rich families funded by US oil deals with Saudi Arabia and because of the number of impoverished peoples in Saudi Arabia who starve while the 1% thrive on (primarily, but not solely) US funds.
Want to make it disappear? -- go home. Stop 'intervening'.
Solutions are never this easy. The CIA was built on the backs of two wars in which we entered late because we didn't want to intervene. Had we not, though, what might have happened?
If you stop poking a hornet's nest the hornets will stop stinging you and go back to their own affairs.
Which has been primarily turmoil since Ancient Babylon and Persia, Shiite and Sunni conflict, Western Europe and Middle Eastern Asian war, etc.
From an
al-Qaeda training manual:
Islamic governments have never and will never be established through peaceful solutions and cooperative councils. They are established as they [always] have been
by pen and gun
by word and bullet
by tongue and teeth
Blame is never accurately laid at one door nor is it generally divided as it should be. We have blood on are hands, but "we" aren't the CIA, and "we" aren't the only ones whose hands are stained with blood. As for who started it...well, that just depends upon where one starts the story.
