Told you so??

[Andy]

I admit, Chavez is far from perfect, as is socialism. I admit, I cannot truely support what he is funding, but I believe his intentions on socialism and funding this group are good - but he is aware of the negatives of each.

Just like America, whos government is far from a perfect democracy and nowhere near the 'land of the free' image they give off. America has supported, and continues to support some very bad people in some very bad governments and groups e.g. Bin Laden, various African and South American dictatorships who regardless of whether they are left or right wing, commit massive human rights abuses. America supports them not even for their ideologies, but for their oil or other valuable goods.

So, we can assume that both are hypocritical and bad things - Chavez and the US. So I'd like to draw a point out of your view on voting out of three piles of crap in the election race.

America, bad. Chavez, bad. Which one is better? I say on some issues chavez, on some the US - and in this instance I've decided I like Chavez because hes sticking it to the US and other evil governments around him.

If you don't admit both are equally bad in the respect of support evil groups, governments and people, I venture to say that your rational is clouded by your bias towards America.

I accept that is your view. Of course I disagree. I see little in support of your view that America is just as bad as Chavez. I do see that America has supported people whom they thought would do good things, but then I also see that when they do bad things, we try to reason with them, try to pressure them and persuade them to change. I do see that we choose sometimes questionable people to support when the only alternatives are far worse. But when those alternatives are no longer an issue, we again pursue better options.

So, I have investigated your evidence and clearly I see little support for your views, and I will not be joining you in them. Chavez is an evil murderous monster, and the US is far better by any scale. He funds with public money, a group that kills publicly. There is no excuse for this what so ever. He is destroying his own country while supporting the meaningless slaughter of civilians of another country. This is absolutely unsupportable by anyone with morals. This is not a personal attack, your likely a decent guy. I am just stating a fact.

FYI, the US is not, nor ever was supposed to be, a Democracy. It is a representative republic.

FYI, the US is the land of the free. The fact you can post on this forum against the US government and fear no retribution for doing so, the fact you can worship what (god) you choose, the fact you can open a business, and earn money by your own choice, is proof we are the land of the free. (granted we are selling out to communists on a daily basis, proven by our current lineup of politicos, so we might not be the land of the free for long)

 

[Jarlaxle]

I still say: go, Hillary, go. This time, I want the greater of evils.

 

[9sublime]

I accept that is your view. Of course I disagree. I see little in support of your view that America is just as bad as Chavez. I do see that America has supported people whom they thought would do good things, but then I also see that when they do bad things, we try to reason with them, try to pressure them and persuade them to change. I do see that we choose sometimes questionable people to support when the only alternatives are far worse. But when those alternatives are no longer an issue, we again pursue better options.

America has knowingly put bad people in governments I'm sure, because they don't really care who they put in, as long as they get discount minerals and oil off him.

So, I have investigated your evidence and clearly I see little support for your views, and I will not be joining you in them. Chavez is an evil murderous monster, and the US is far better by any scale. He funds with public money, a group that kills publicly. There is no excuse for this what so ever. He is destroying his own country while supporting the meaningless slaughter of civilians of another country. This is absolutely unsupportable by anyone with morals. This is not a personal attack, your likely a decent guy. I am just stating a fact.

America has also supported, with public money, political coups run by people who commit horrific murders.

 

[Andy]

America has knowingly put bad people in governments I'm sure, because they don't really care who they put in, as long as they get discount minerals and oil off him.

America has also supported, with public money, political coups run by people who commit horrific murders.

List.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Saddam Hussein.

 

[PLC1]

Agusto Pinochet

 

[9sublime]

http://wais.stanford.edu/USA/us_supportforladictators8303.html

 

[Andy]

Agusto Pinochet

I'll start with this one. Prior to Pinochet, a member of the Communist party named Salvador Allende, and loyal to Fidel Castro and Stallin, gained power in Chile. During his short stay as president, he forced through policies favorable to Cuba and Soviets. In the process of passing communistic laws, he raised the minimum wage and put in price controls that had devastating effects, as socialism always does, resulting in millions of basic products became unavailable due to no business being able to make money on production. By the end of merely 2 years in office, one of the largest black-market products was, of all things, plain rice. The inflation rate in one single month was 120%. This would be like going to Wendy's just under 4 weeks from now and finding a basic value meal being $15 instead of $6.

With that as a backdrop, did the US support anyone other than Salvador Allende, who was supporting and/or being supported by our mortal enemies the Soviets, being president? Absolutely. I would too.

Did the US directly support Pinochet? Actually no, although they likely would have. It was the Nationalist and Democratic parties of Chile that joined forces together and convinced Pinochet to do a coup. Nixon's CIA informed him after the fact that they had done nothing, the people of Chile supported the coup themselves.

Was Pinochet a horrible dictator? Clearly the caravan of death was wrong. The reason he did this was likely because he knew what he was up against. The Communists had transported illegal AK-47s from east germany, rockets grenades and more ammunitions. Allende himself, prior to his removal, was being pressured by Cuba and the Soviets to use force to insure his rule (because no one submits to Communism by choice), and Pinochet knew this. Further Pinochet himself was attacked directly by the Communist party. The attacked killed many of his personal guards and a rocket was fired into Pinochet's personal armored car, yet didn't explode.

Was Pinochet a mass-murder? Well clearly from the perspective of Communists he was, since those are the people that directly or subversively were trying to hand Chile over to Stalin and Castro on a silver platter, and thus, those were the people Pinochet waged war on. But to most of Chile, he is still regarded as a hero for saving Chile from the hands of Communism.

I am ok with this.

 

[Andy]

Saddam Hussein.

Saddam was not installed as leader by the US, as far as I have researched. He was given some amount of support during the time in which the Soviets had communist interests in Iraq. But after Saddam, and many others, overthrew the communist supporting government in Iraq, he was not made leader.

His rise to power occurred over many years and without US intervention of any kind. Further, Saddam was a decent leader in his early years with many good things happening under his watch. There was no way to know he would become an insane tyrant after the Iran-Iraq war.

Yes, the US did support him during the Iran-Iraq wars, and rightfully so because up till then Saddam was fairly sane, and Iran, due to completely ignorant Democrat policies, was over-thrown by a very dangerous sect of Islamic fundamentalists that had expansion and submission, primary Islamic beliefs, as their main goals.

 

[PLC1]

I am ok with this.

This kind of thing is OK with you?

Pinochet implemented a series of military operations in which (according to the 1993 Rettig Report) approximately 3,000 people were killed [2], while (according to the 2004 Valech Report) 27,000 were incarcerated without trials and subjected to torture [3]. Thousands more fled in exile, in particular to Argentina, as well as Peru and applied as political refugees; however, they were followed in their exile by the DINA secret police, in the frame of Operation Condor which linked South American dictatorships together against political opponents.

Even when the CIA finally admits to having a part in the Pinochet regime?

After twenty-seven years of withholding details about covert activities following the 1973 military coup in Chile, the CIA released a report yesterday acknowledging its close relations with General Augusto Pinochet’s violent regime. The report, “CIA Activities in Chile,” revealed for the first time that the head of the Chile’s feared secret police, DINA, was a paid CIA asset in 1975, and that CIA contacts continued with him long after he dispatched his agents to Washington D.C. to assassinate former Chilean Ambassador Orlando Letelier and his 25-year old American associate, Ronni Karpen Moffitt.

 

[Andy]

This kind of thing is OK with you?

I've read it. Although I don't support human rights abuses, I understand that the alternative would be fair worse. The Communists would have slaughtered millions, and used Chile as a staging ground to take over all of south America. Remember it was the Chilean government that asked Pinochet to take over, and Pinochet stepped down as soon as the Communist threat to his country was gone. The people of Chile still view Pinochet as a hero. The people who don't, are the communists.

Even when the CIA finally admits to having a part in the Pinochet regime?

Of course we had contact. He was an ally against our national enemy, the Soviets. So yeah we had contact, no question.

 

[PLC1]

I've read it. Although I don't support human rights abuses, I understand that the alternative would be fair worse. The Communists would have slaughtered millions, and used Chile as a staging ground to take over all of south America. Remember it was the Chilean government that asked Pinochet to take over, and Pinochet stepped down as soon as the Communist threat to his country was gone. The people of Chile still view Pinochet as a hero. The people who don't, are the communists.



Of course we had contact. He was an ally against our national enemy, the Soviets. So yeah we had contact, no question.

What Allende might have done is, of course, a matter of speculation. It's hard to see how he would have slaughtered millions as the president of a rather small and peaceful nation such as Chile, but, of course, there is no way to prove he wouldn't have.

As for Pinochet as a hero to the people of Chile, I really wonder where you got that one:

Chile's former dictator Augusto Pinochet has had all charges against him dropped.

Well, they did drop human rights charges against him, but why?

The Supreme Court upheld a controversial verdict that found him mentally unfit to stand trial for human rights crimes during his 17-year rule.

Oh, that's why.

Kind of a funny way to treat a national hero, don't you think?

This doesn't look too much like a demonstration of adulation, either. The sign reads, "Where are they?"

The rest of the story is here.

 

[Andy]

What Allende might have done is, of course, a matter of speculation. It's hard to see how he would have slaughtered millions as the president of a rather small and peaceful nation such as Chile, but, of course, there is no way to prove he wouldn't have.

Which is actually my point... that being there is no way we would have known what Pinochet would do either. We just knew it was better than someone who supported our direct enemy.

As for Pinochet as a hero to the people of Chile, I really wonder where you got that one:

Your own link on Wiki. Pinochet receives hero welcome that was listed as a reference.

Well, they did drop human rights charges against him, but why?
Kind of a funny way to treat a national hero, don't you think? This doesn't look too much like a demonstration of adulation, either. The sign reads, "Where are they?"

Of course not. Communists were killed by Pinochet. You don't think they are going to let it go if they can somehow retaliate? I stated that myself. The Communists despise Pinochet, and logically so. He stopped them.