text: directly threatens the national security interests of the United States. Mine is a developing country. It is a poor, small country, a country that is 21 miles long and 13 miles across, a country that is open, a country whose adult population could be comfortably accommodated in Yankee Stadium. It is a small, weak country, a country which has no intention ever to invade the United States, Why, therefore, are the President of the United States, Secretary of State Shultz and Vice-President Bush attack- ing Grenada? 78. We have empirical informatioa berore us that cer- tain attitudes, certain types of behaviour, precede the invasion of countries, and so propaganda, terrorism and economic sabotage laid the basis for military aggression and the ultimate overthrow of Governments in our region. It was the propaganda attacks, the economic sab- otage that laid the basis for the overthrow of Salvador Allende in Chile; it was those same attacks that led, to the overthrow of Arbenz in Guatemala, of Jagan in Guyana, of Sukarno in Indonesia, of Kwame Nkrumah in Ghana, and the list goes on. 79. And so the statement by President Reagan causes grave concern and disquiet to the people of my country and to the Government. We are told that the President’s statement was in the context of an attack on Central America and the Caribbean and therefore our mention, the mention of Grenada, is a by-product. We are not so nafve as to believe that. In the first instance, that action is irresponsible, provocative and dangerous. It serves to inspire mercenaries and dogs of war, who are bent on attacking and overthrowing the Government of my coun- try. We believe that the United States is a powerful coun- try, a country of a great people, and that the statement by President Reagan can only separate him further from 
analysis: The text appears to be a speech or statement by a government official from Grenada, a small island nation, criticizing the United States for threatening its national security. The speech highlights the country's vulnerability and the potential consequences of US aggression, referencing historical examples of US intervention in other countries. The tone is defensive and accusatory, suggesting that the speaker is concerned about the potential threat to Grenada's sovereignty and stability.