> If you could find meaningful examples of USAID doing such, you would have shared them. Thus it's safe to conclude that cannot find such, and so are now here trying to claim that nonsense is pertinent when you know it is not. That's not arguing in good faith…
A bit rich. Reminder... This was you:
"For instance one project was USAID/CIA starting a fake social media site in Cuba specifically with the goal of trying to create an insurrection, which would undoubtedly be very bloody had they succeeded."
Is it, thus, safe to assume you can't actually demonstrate USAID having done harm of this nature, and that it was raised in bad faith?
Your argument here doesn't make any sense. Do you disagree they were trying to foment an insurrection, or that it would have been bloody if successful? I assume not, because both are rather self evident. So it's not even clear what you're arguing - that USAID always fails? Again, you get weird things when you argue in bad faith.
But whatever, if you want clear examples then there's plenty to be had in the Office of Public Safety. [1] It's as Orwellian as it sounds and was directly under USAID. Modern examples are classified, though have been regularly referenced without detail by government officials speaking on record. Cuba's is the exception in classification, and clearly demonstrates their character as an organization.
A bit rich. Reminder... This was you:
"For instance one project was USAID/CIA starting a fake social media site in Cuba specifically with the goal of trying to create an insurrection, which would undoubtedly be very bloody had they succeeded."
Is it, thus, safe to assume you can't actually demonstrate USAID having done harm of this nature, and that it was raised in bad faith?