Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
1,026 bytes added ,  21:51, March 19, 2007
→‎Suicide or KIA?: Socialist human rights violations are preferable to US allies, I suppose
Line 14: Line 14:  
Nothing like that happened under Allende but then, to borrow a phrase, "who cares?" Allende embraced socialism and Pinochet the free market, so  Pinochet must be perceived as preferable in spite of the piles of dead bodies he left in his wake.
 
Nothing like that happened under Allende but then, to borrow a phrase, "who cares?" Allende embraced socialism and Pinochet the free market, so  Pinochet must be perceived as preferable in spite of the piles of dead bodies he left in his wake.
 
--[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 17:26, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
 
--[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 17:26, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
:"Who cares" if the will of 64% is ignored or "who cares" about human rights violations?
 +
 +
:The actions you speak refer to a US ally, not the US Admin & CIA.  Let me restate the question: we have the simple matter of checking to see if he agreed to abide by Chile's pledges within the Pan American Union and mutual defense obligations.  Now, if Allende was seaking to become allies with the Soviet block who shortly after the Santiago Sports Stadium incidents set up re-education camps in Vietnam and Laos, we can argue the moot point about who's allies are are more barbarous butchers, if you please.
 +
 +
:Then we have another factor, Richard Nixon took an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.  So if your claim that Allende & the Socialist Party bolting mutual cooperation alliances to side with Soviet & Cuban butchers and set up his own Chilean Gulags for politcal dissidents is preferable to Pinochet, let's keep in mind who ultimatley did win the Cold War.  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:51, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
296,237

edits

Navigation menu