This Malochi is a prime example of how you make unwarranted generalizations and exagerate the truth. Yes the CIA gave the Indonesian government a list of communist leaders to the Indonesian army in 1965. Not like the Soviets or Chinese would have done any different had there been any pro-american/capitalist forces in any country they could influence.
However lets go into what this means, how it is relevant and what it does not mean/how it is irrelevant:
What it does mean:
1) The US government used immoral or questionable tactics to fight a political foe in another land. The US in a sense played dirty.
2) The CIA may have been involved in a coup. That was succesful in the sense of weeding out communists.
What it does not mean:
1) That Globalization is bad. This has nothing to do with globalization actually and you know it. This article has literally nothing to do with Globalization.
2) That Indonesia is and has been a US puppet state: the CIA gave a list to their governments. Maybe helped with a coup. That's it. Hardly proof that Indonesia is a puppet state.
3) The articles claim at most 200,000 communists were killed. Hardly the millions you claimed. And they were not by US hands or orders.
4) The so-called coup accusation is controversial and you know it. Even your third article admits this:
Official statements on the coup and its aftermath are practically nonexistent.
There is no reference to this in standard or mainstream literature on this subject.
Such talk is actually mainly confined to socialist articles like the "World Workers Web".
5) That the change in government is repsponsible for any problems Indonesia has today.
6) That your conjecture in reference to american investments has any basis in fact.
The so-called CIA coup and listing happened during the Cold War. The primary aim, even supposing the articles are true was to remove communists from power, not turn Indonesia into a puppet state, or help American traders exploit the region.
Proving one does not automatically prove the other.
That's no better then saying that since the Soviets helped Castro in some ways, that Cuba was a Soviet puppet state made to benefit the Soviet economy.
And I also fail to see what relevance a suspected 1960s coup and a list, have to do with modern globalization. The entire thing was a Cold War operation, if it is true.
But such is typical of you.
You oppose some sort of established practice or US policy and how you oppose it is not with a deep criticism of the policy itself but by spitting out buzzwords:
"Indonesia, Iraq,Iran,Vietnam,"Guatomala".
No matter how different the events are from eachother or the issue at hand. You then may also bring in a credible article and mix it with an incredible one, make a statement "American's exploit countries" and then put out an irrelevant "CIA gave a list of communist leaders" to somehow "prove it."
In short you are using irrelevant and sensational articles as sort of "magic bullets". Reagardless of how red herring or non sequitur such a practice is.
And you do this to back up fantastic claims, colonialism is still going, most of third world is US puppet states, US interventionaism turns nations into fundamentalists or communists etc. Very sweeping historical generalizations that Jared Diamond isn't bold enough to make.
All of which are supposedly backed by so-called Cold War operations, which prove absolutely nothing other then the US sabotaged communist movements.
So the evidence is basically: US had some covert operations influencing countries during the Cold War=
The US is still practicing imperialism, exploiting nations economically via the government, helping fundamentalist and communist causes and using Globalization as a means to promote imperialism.
Which just does not follow.
Digging up stories from the Cold War does not in any way harm the case for glablization or prove any of your sweeping historical conjectures.
