NationStates Jolt Archive

Top 10 Secret Armies of the CIA

1. Ukrainian Partisans

From 1945 to 1952 the CIA trained and aerially supplied Ukranian partisan units which had originally been organised by he Germans to fight the Soviets during WWII. For seven years, the partisans, operating in the Carpathian Mountains, made sporadic attacks. Finally in 1952, a massive Soviet military force wiped them out.

2. Chinese Brigade in Burma

After the Communist victory in China, Nationalist Chinese soldiers fled into northern Burma. During the early 1950s, the CIA used these soldiers to create a 12,000 man brigade which made raids into Red China. However, the Nationalist soldiers found it more profitable to monopolise the local opium trade.

3. Guatemalan Rebel Army

After Guatemalan president Jacobo Arbenz legalised that country’s communist party and expropriated 400,000 acres of United Fruit banana plantations, the CIA decided to overthrow his government. Guatemalan rebels were trained in Honduras and backed up with a CIA air contingent of bombers and fighter planes. This army invaded Guatemala in 1954, promptly toppling Arbenz’s regine.

4. Sumatran Rebels

In an attempt to overthrow Indonesian president Sukarno in 1958, the CIA sent paramilitary experts and radio operators to the island of Sumatra to organise a revolt. With CIA air support, the rebel army attacked but was quickly defeated. The American government denied involvement even after a CIA b-26 was shot down and its CIA pilot, Allen Pope, was captured.

5. Khamba Horsemen

After the 1950 Chinese invasion of Tibet, the CIA began recruiting Khamba horsemen - fierce warriors who supported Tibet’s religious leader, the Dalai Lama - as they escaped into India in 1959. These Khambas were trained in modern warfare at Camp Hale, high in the rocky mountains near Leadville, Colorado. Transported back to Tibet by the CIA operated Air American, the Khambas organised an army number at its peak some 14,000. By the mid-1960s the Khambas had been abandoned by the CIA but they fought on alone until 1970.

6. Bay of Pigs Invasion Force

In 1960, CIA operatives recruited 1,500 Cuban refugees living in Miami and staged a surprise attack on Fidel Castro’s Cuba. Trained at a base in Guatemala, this small army - complete with an air force consisting of B-26 bombers - landed at the Bay of Pigs on April 19, 1961. The ill-conceived, poorly planned operation ended in disaster, since all but 150 men of the force were either killed or captured within three days.

7. L’armee Clandestine

In 1962, CIA agents recruited Meo tribesmen living in the mountains of Laos to fight as guerrillas against Communist Pathet Lao forces. Called l’armee Clandestine, this unit - paid, trained, and supplied by the CIA - grew into a 30,000 man force. By 1975 the Meos - who had numbers a quarter million in 1962 - had been reduced to 10,000 refugees fleeing into Thailand.

8. Nung Mercenaries

A Chinese hill people living in Vietname, the Nungs were hired and organised by the CIA as a mercenary force, during the Vietnam war. Fearsome and brutal fighters, the Nungs were employed throughout Vietnam and along the Ho Chi Minh Trail. The Nungs proved costly since they refused to fight unless constantly supplied with beer and prostitutes.

9. Peruvian Regiment

Unable to quell guerrilla forces in its eastern Amazonian provinces, Peru called on the US for help in the mid-1960s. The CIA responded by establishing a fortified camp in the area and hiring local Peruvians who were trained by Green Beret personnel on loan from the US army. After crushing the guerrillas, the elite unit was disbanded because of fears it might stage a coup against the government.

10. Congo Mercenary Force

In 1964, during the Congolese Civil War, the CIA established an army in the Congo to back pro-Western leaders Cyril Adoula and Joseph Mobutu. The CIA imported European mercenaries and Cuban pilots - exiles from Cuba - to pilot the CIA air force, composed of transports and B-26 Bombers.

runner-ups
The Cambodian Coup
Angola Mercenary Force
Salvadoran Death Squads
Nigaraguan Contras
Haitian Coups

etc

http://listverse.com/politics/top-10-secret-armies-of-the-cia/
___________________________________

I think this list is missing some key entries

like AQ.

shouldn't AQ be at the top ?

And the point you're trying to make is......?

I would have though the bay of pigs would have been in the top 5.

Ocean's post: *fap fap fap fap fap*

And the point you're trying to make is......?

The day he makes a point is the day George Bush has a Brain spasm and does something smart.

Even if he didn't actually have a point, he indirectly set up a situation that someone wishing to make one could take advantage of.


Such as the idea that we can't trust our own government, and therefore consipracy theorists may not be as crazy as we think.

NO WAY!!! The CIA conducted secret military operations in 3rd world countries by employing mercenaries and proxy armies!!! Absolutely unthinkable...

You've opened my eyes Oceandrive....:rolleyes:

...but...to be fair...I had never about a few of those groups before...like the Tibetan Horsemen...


...What's the point of this thread...

Does anyone else see the irony in compiling a list of the top ten 'secret armies'? Shouldn't the real list read:

1. ???
2. ???
3. ???
4. ???
5. ???
6. ???
7. ???
8. ???
9. ???
10. ???

Does anyone else see the irony in compiling a list of the top ten 'secret armies'? Shouldn't the real list read:

1. ???
2. ???
3. ???
4. ???
5. ???
6. ???
7. ???
8. ???
9. ???
10. ???

I think it's like the "Secret" service - we know they exist, we see them all the time, but they do shit we don't know about. Hence, secret.

NO WAY!!! The CIA conducted secret military operations in 3rd world countries by employing mercenaries and proxy armies!!! Absolutely unthinkable...

You've opened my eyes Oceandrive....:rolleyes:

...but...to be fair...I had never about a few of those groups before...like the Tibetan Horsemen...


...What's the point of this thread...

I sort of liked the Tibetan horsemen. The Chinese were openly imperialist in their annexation of Tibet, and are very rarely supported by even the most ardent leftist. If the CIA wants to help the Tibetans, I think that's fine, even if the motive for such actions is American imperialism.

I also liked the way they continued fighting even after the CIA stopped funding them. To me that illustrates a huge difference between Tibet and Cuba. One reason the Bay of Pigs was such a fiasco was that the CIA had planned for the local community to rise up against Castro during the invasion. When they didn,t, it not only blew the plan to hell, but it showed popular support for the Cuban revolution. The fact that the horsemen were able to continue fighting even after the CIA withdrew their support must also mean some sort of popular support for the movement.

I know, I know. As a leftist, I should be denouncing every instance of CIA involvement in other countries, but if they happen to help a local revolutionary movement with popular local support, I won't complain.

I sort of liked the Tibetan horsemen. The Chinese were openly imperialist in their annexation of Tibet, and are very rarely supported by even the most ardent leftist. If the CIA wants to help the Tibetans, I think that's fine, even if the motive for such actions is American imperialism.

The Khamba Horsemen are the only army on the list I hadn't already heard about. Seems really interesting - I'll take it up as an independent research project.

Ocean's post: *fap fap fap fap fap*


Stop tugging at your forehead.

http://listverse.com/politics/top-10-secret-armies-of-the-cia/
___________________________________

I think this list is missing some key entries

like AQ.

shouldn't AQ be at the top ? Not really, we just threw money and weapons at them mostly.

8. Nung Mercenaries

A Chinese hill people living in Vietname, the Nungs were hired and organised by the CIA as a mercenary force, during the Vietnam war. Fearsome and brutal fighters, the Nungs were employed throughout Vietnam and along the Ho Chi Minh Trail. The Nungs proved costly since they refused to fight unless constantly supplied with beer and prostitutes. So were they actually the "Hung" Mercenaries? Okay that was bad.

First point made me very suspicious about that list.

Top 10 Secret Armies of the CIA

1. Ukrainian Partisans

From 1945 to 1952 the CIA trained and aerially supplied Ukranian partisan units which had originally been organised by he Germans to fight the Soviets during WWII. For seven years, the partisans, operating in the Carpathian Mountains, made sporadic attacks. Finally in 1952, a massive Soviet military force wiped them out.

What units? Main Ukrainian organization was Ukrainian Insurgent Army (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Insurgent_Army), but that fought aganist both Nazis and Soviets(and also fought aganist Poles). Btw, CIA was created in 1947 not in 1945.

AQ was supported by the US, though not necessarily the CIA. It was an alliance of convenience, and an example of both a lack of foresight and the Cold War "Anyone who fights commies=good guys" mentality.

Not really, we just threw money and weapons at them mostly.

So were they actually the "Hung" Mercenaries? Okay that was bad.

That wasn't that bad.

Olmedreca;12869374']First point made me very suspicious about that list.



What units? Main Ukrainian organization was Ukrainian Insurgent Army (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Insurgent_Army), but that fought aganist both Nazis and Soviets(and also fought aganist Poles). Btw, CIA was created in 1947 not in 1945.

Prior to the CIA, the OSS probably handled things.

Olmedreca;12869374']First point made me very suspicious about that list.



What units? Main Ukrainian organization was Ukrainian Insurgent Army (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Insurgent_Army), but that fought aganist both Nazis and Soviets(and also fought aganist Poles). Btw, CIA was created in 1947 not in 1945.

Yeah, a few of them sounded dubious.

The Cold War, though - interesting times. :p

Prior to the CIA, the OSS probably handled things.

The OSS was disbanded within a month following the Japanese surrender.





More than that, I question the relevance of this thread. What's your point OD? Are you trying to show that the CIA does secret stuff in different parts of the world?

Well, heck, anyone with a quarter of a brain could figure that one out. In fact, some of these instances would seem merely to show the CIA in a positive light.

Aiding the Ukrainians in resisting Soviet Occupation and Tibetans in resisting PRC occupation don't sound all that bad at all, dearest.

I think this list is missing some key entries

like AQ.

shouldn't AQ be at the top ?

Al-Q wasn't founded by the CIA, nor was it ever directly used by the CIA. It's predecessors may have received limited support from the US as part of the larger Mujahadeen movement, mainly out of our opposition to the Soviets, and their blatant imperialism in Afghanistan.

To say the US founded or used Al-Q at any point in time is entirely facetious.

Here's a bit to read up on their relationship. (]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_qaeda#Jihad_in_Afghanistan)

*Stands up*

I'm a Secret Army of the CIA!

Oh, and FYI, "Meo" is an extremely racist and offensive name, the equivalent of calling a black person a "n-----."

The proper name is "Hmong."

Can I have a pinup calendar made of the CIA girl operatives, classic 1950s and 1960s style? They have to have guns and bikinis.

Where are the current armies? I'd like to know. 90s and 00s

Ocean's post: *fap fap fap fap fap*
Stop tugging at your forehead.LOL.

he should stop tugging any *body parts* :D

The day he makes a point is the day George Bush has a Brain spasm and does something smart.

That is just a not-nice thing to say.

to be fair...I had never about a few of those groups before...like the Tibetan Horsemen...


...What's the point of this thread...I created this thread -specifically- so you (Manvir) can hear about the Tibetan horsemen ;)

Even if he didn't actually have a point, he indirectly set up a situation that someone wishing to make one could take advantage of.


Such as the idea that we can't trust our own government, and therefore consipracy theorists may not be as crazy as we think.close enough

I have only a fraction of the free time I used to have to post around..
I am not able to timely answer -my fellow posters multiple- legitimate questions like "WTF is your point OD???"

And yes -I agree- some of my threads are fuzzy.
But I do wish to generate debate.

I would have though the bay of pigs would have been in the top 5.I agree.

Where are the current armies? I'd like to know. 90s and 00sI dont know.. there is probably some groups "operating" inside Iran. Most likely Kurdish.

Al-Q wasn't founded by the CIA, nor was it ever directly used by the CIA. It's predecessors may have received limited support from the US as part of the larger Mujahadeen movement, mainly out of our opposition to the Soviets, and their blatant imperialism in Afghanistan.

To say the US founded or used Al-Q at any point in time is entirely facetious.

Here's a bit to read up on their relationship. (]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_qaeda#Jihad_in_Afghanistan)

Very true.

al-Qaieda was formed primarily with the personal fortune of bin Laden and his early supporters. The CIA had virtually no direct involvement with the mujahidden anyway, most funds or supplies were simply given to Pakistan who doled them out as they saw fit. Mostly to the Islamist Pashto militias of Gulbidden Hekmatayr and his allies. As early as the first Bush Administration, the US pressured Pakistan to stop funding radical leaders and seek a moderate solution. The US actually had plans in place to kill or capture bin Laden as early as the mid 90s, in fact CIA funded Afghan militiamen ambushed bin Laden's motorcade, but failed to hit him.

The idea that the US aided al-Qaieda is a complete fallacy usually touted by the same assclowns who believe the government was behind 9/11.

I recommend that anyone interested in this subject pick up Steve Coll's Ghost Wars, which is THE definitive work on US policy in Afgahnistan pre-9/11.

Al-Q wasn't founded by the CIA, nor was it ever directly used by the CIA. It's predecessors may have received limited support from the US as part of the larger Mujahadeen movement, mainly out of our opposition to the Soviets, and their blatant imperialism in Afghanistan.

To say the US founded or used Al-Q at any point in time is entirely facetious.

Here's a bit to read up on their relationship. (]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_qaeda#Jihad_in_Afghanistan)

Limited support!? Since when does the CIA sending billions in secret military aid to the Mujahadeen constitute limited support? Just read the memoirs (“In the Shadows”) of Robert Gates, CIA Director at the time, and you can pretty plainly see the CIA were up to their armpits in Soviet occupied Afghanistan. It’s not like the CIA really go out of their way to deny it, in fact they consider it some of their best work!

In the Cold War it looked great. Oh here mister Soviet, have a healthy helping of your very own Vietnam. Nowadays of course the idea of training and arming Islamic militants, to organize and go jihadi crazy as insurgents seems to have been a bit short sighted, but that’s hindsight for you. At the time it was considered giving the mortal enemy of NATO a big shove into the abyss and everyone in NATO were high fiving, as the Soviets war machine was being ground down. Back then they weren't considered evil terrorists. They were the freedom fighters against the Godless Communists.

Let’s also be brutally honest and remember that the US was forking $43 million in foreign aid to the Taliban in early 2001, to prevent anyone from getting any funny ideas about an oil pipeline between Russia and Iran. Let’s not be overly naive in looking at how money and guns are used to buy loyalties in that region, even when it looks to be against declared foreign policy.

If you know about it, then its not a secret. Nice try.

Limited support!? Since when does the CIA sending billions in secret military aid to the Mujahadeen constitute limited support? Just read the memoirs (“In the Shadows”) of Robert Gates, CIA Director at the time, and you can pretty plainly see the CIA were up to their armpits in Soviet occupied Afghanistan. It’s not like the CIA really go out of their way to deny it, in fact they consider it some of their best work!

In the Cold War it looked great. Oh here mister Soviet, have a healthy helping of your very own Vietnam. Nowadays of course the idea of training and arming Islamic militants, to organize and go jihadi crazy as insurgents seems to have been a bit short sighted, but that’s hindsight for you. At the time it was considered giving the mortal enemy of NATO a big shove into the abyss and everyone in NATO were high fiving, as the Soviets war machine was being ground down. Back then they weren't considered evil terrorists. They were the freedom fighters against the Godless Communists.

If you had actually bothered to read my comments, I said that the United States had limited involvement with Al-Q and it's the elements of the Mujahadeen that preceded it. Yes, we provided weapons stocks to the overall Mujahadeen movement, but our involvement with the predecessors of Al-Q was, by our and bin Laden's own admission, extremely limited.


Let’s also be brutally honest and remember that the US was forking $43 million in foreign aid to the Taliban in early 2001, to prevent anyone from getting any funny ideas about an oil pipeline between Russia and Iran. Let’s not be overly naive in looking at how money and guns are used to buy loyalties in that region, even when it looks to be against declared foreign policy.

And too because they were fairly effective in combating Afghan heroin that was being moved out of Afghanistan.

*Stands up*

I'm a Secret Army of the CIA!

Aha! I knew something was up with that secret decoder ring. :p

Olmedreca;12869374'] Btw, CIA was created in 1947 not in 1945.

That's what they WANT you to think!



And too because they were fairly effective in combating Afghan heroin that was being moved out of Afghanistan.

Except now, they're actually profiting very well from every opiate they can get their hands on. Swing and a miss.

Except now, they're actually profiting very well from every opiate they can get their hands on. Swing and a miss.

Linky.

Except now, they're actually profiting very well from every opiate they can get their hands on. Swing and a miss.

Looks like the Pakistani ISI is the one making the profits, not the CIA.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/3/28/95240.shtml

Several sources inside Capitol Hill noted that the CIA opposes the destruction of the Afghan opium supply because to do so might destabilize the Pakistani government of Gen. Pervez Musharraf. According to these sources, Pakistani intelligence had threatened to overthrow President Musharraf if the crops were destroyed.

The threat to overthrow Musharraf is motivated in part by Islamic radical groups linked to the Pakistani intelligence service, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). The radical groups reportedly obtain their primary funding through opium production and trade.

"Pakistan's intelligence service is corrupt, unreliable, and we don't owe them a damn thing. The CIA has a very checkered past as far as who they choose to get in the sack with. Maybe it's time to stop being clever and do the right thing," stated another source close to the Bush administration.

Ah, so if we did the moral thing, Musharraf would be overthrown by more radical Islamic forces within his country.

If you don't mind having to invade and occupy Pakistan (who has nuclear weapons), we can spray the opium poppies or give money to Afghan farmers to have them stop growing it.

we can spray the opium poppies or give money to Afghan farmers to have them stop growing it.

Has paying people not to grow drugs ever really worked as a policy? Sounds a bit like danegeld (maybe dopegeld) to me.

Has paying people not to grow drugs ever really worked as a policy? Sounds a bit like danegeld (maybe dopegeld) to me.

That's what was proposed in the news article.

Frankly, I think the farmers would take the money, and grow the poppies anyway, and make twice as much money.

That's what was proposed in the news article.

Frankly, I think the farmers would take the money, and grow the poppies anyway, and make twice as much money.

That is what I think would happen as well, it also seems likely to lead to blackmail of give us more money this year or we will return to growing opium.

Looks like the Pakistani ISI is the one making the profits, not the CIA.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/3/28/95240.shtml



Ah, so if we did the moral thing, Musharraf would be overthrown by more radical Islamic forces within his country.

If you don't mind having to invade and occupy Pakistan (who has nuclear weapons), we can spray the opium poppies or give money to Afghan farmers to have them stop growing it.

No, you misunderstood - I meant the Taliban was profiting from opiates, not the CIA.

Frankly, I think the farmers would take the money, and grow the poppies anyway, and make twice as much money.It has to be in the form of a monthly payment.. and only keep giving to the peasants who keep their word, we keep track with satellite cameras (or Google earth :) )

No, you misunderstood - I meant the Taliban was profiting from opiates, not the CIA.Has the CIA ever taken Drug money?

Has the CIA ever taken Drug money?

Maybe, maybe not. I imagine the evidence for that is hidden very deeply. Good money says it does though. Money that doesn't show on the books is money you can spend on any number of projects you don't want to be audited.

Has the CIA ever taken Drug money?

Nah, only taxpayer money.

Maybe, maybe not. I imagine the evidence for that is hidden very deeply. Good money says it does though. Money that doesn't show on the books is money you can spend on any number of projects you don't want to be audited.

The problem with off-the-books fundraising schemes is that they're notoriously hard to hide (see: Iran-Contra). While some of the less scrupulous CIA proxies have likely taken drug money, the CIA itself has likely not participated in such activities.

Has the CIA ever taken Drug money?

It is certainly alleged that they were involved with opium growing in Laos during the Vietnam war and also more recently as a way of funding the Contras in Nicaragua.

The problem with off-the-books fundraising schemes is that they're notoriously hard to hide (see: Iran-Contra). While some of the less scrupulous CIA proxies have likely taken drug money, the CIA itself has likely not participated in such activities.

Maybe not as official policy, but I wouldn't be surprised to see some of the CIA suddenly buying that bungalow they couldn't afford before. It's not like they're corruption free after all.

Maybe not as official policy, but I wouldn't be surprised to see some of the CIA suddenly buying that bungalow they couldn't afford before. It's not like they're corruption free after all.

Well, of course there's going to be corrupt officers, moles and incompetents within the agency. But as part of a general policy, the CIA tends to avoid under-the-table fundraising schemes. They're often dangerous, and if the Congress ever got ahold of some documents pertaining to such, even accidentally, it would be a Category V Shitstorm on the Hill.

It has to be in the form of a monthly payment.. and only keep giving to the peasants who keep their word, we keep track with satellite cameras (or Google earth :) )

Sounds like too much work to me, compared to spraying the shit out of the poppies.

..and if the Congress ever got ahold of some documents pertaining to such(use of Drugs money) , even accidentally, it would be a Category V Shitstorm on the Hill.Yeah like the Shitstorm over Olliwood North head.
Congress Shitstorm = Hero status + FoxNEWS TV job + Millions in book sales

thats the Shitstorm (http://www.olivernorth.com/) over Olliewood..

http://commentsfromleftfield.com/hello/865328/400/scan0029-2005.03.14-09.44.25.jpg

Yeah like the Shitstorm over Olliwood North head.
Congress Shitstorm = Hero status + FoxNEWS TV job + Millions in book sales

thats the Shitstorm (http://www.olivernorth.com/) over Olliewood..

http://commentsfromleftfield.com/hello/865328/400/scan0029-2005.03.14-09.44.25.jpg

They need to stop hiring people that aren't newscasters to be newscasters just because they're right-wing.

The problem with off-the-books fundraising schemes is that they're notoriously hard to hide (see: Iran-Contra). While some of the less scrupulous CIA proxies have likely taken drug money, the CIA itself has likely not participated in such activities.

I think a group of people who are trained in covert intelligence work could easily set up a fundraising scheme that is totally off the books. I don't see any reason why such an operation would be hard to hide from Congress.

My realpolitik sense tells me that the CIA, or certain factions within the CIA, would be foolish not to be involved in the drug trade.

They need to stop hiring people that aren't newscasters to be newscasters just because they're right-wing.

Oh, like Juan Williams and Mara Liasson...

I sort of liked the Tibetan horsemen. The Chinese were openly imperialist in their annexation of Tibet, and are very rarely supported by even the most ardent leftist. If the CIA wants to help the Tibetans, I think that's fine, even if the motive for such actions is American imperialism.

I also liked the way they continued fighting even after the CIA stopped funding them. To me that illustrates a huge difference between Tibet and Cuba. One reason the Bay of Pigs was such a fiasco was that the CIA had planned for the local community to rise up against Castro during the invasion. When they didn,t, it not only blew the plan to hell, but it showed popular support for the Cuban revolution. The fact that the horsemen were able to continue fighting even after the CIA withdrew their support must also mean some sort of popular support for the movement.

I know, I know. As a leftist, I should be denouncing every instance of CIA involvement in other countries, but if they happen to help a local revolutionary movement with popular local support, I won't complain.

Agreed, except about the being a leftist part.

Funny, the only decent group on the list and the CIA abandons them.

Oh, like Juan Williams and Mara Liasson...

Not to mean they've been doing it all the time, but even if this is the start of them doing that, they need to stop.

A bigger problem, however, is the white house hiring newscasters just because they're right-wing.

They need to stop hiring people that aren't newscasters to be newscasters just because they're right-wing.

Except that Oliver North is not and has never been presented as a newscaster. He hosts a military themed show called "War Stories" on Sunday nights, he often serves as a pundit on panel shows, and writes opinion blogs and reports from the field.

Like it or not all cable news, and most network news for that matter, are becoming more political, it's just that Fox News is more conservative than the rest that makes the left whine so much.

Ocean's post: *fap fap fap fap fap*

* Solo conservative circle-jerk *

Yeah like the Shitstorm over Olliwood North head.
Congress Shitstorm = Hero status + FoxNEWS TV job + Millions in book sales

thats the Shitstorm (http://www.olivernorth.com/) over Olliewood..

http://commentsfromleftfield.com/hello/865328/400/scan0029-2005.03.14-09.44.25.jpg

Most fucked up thing about it is the bastard actually stole $200,000 from Iran-Contra. WTF? Even to the people who think Iran-Contra was a good thing, surely the fact that he stole from it would disqualify him from being a hero.

Most fucked up thing about it is the bastard actually stole $200,000 from Iran-Contra. WTF? Even to the people who think Iran-Contra was a good thing, surely the fact that he stole from it would disqualify him from being a hero.

Source?

Source?

Google is your friend.

http://www.drugwar.com/castillonorthmay1104.shtm

http://www.conspiracydigest.com/doublecrossed.html

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_02.htm