679
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 191:
Line 191: + + +
→Khomeini
:Here's the black & white: (1) in the 1973 Chilean coup, the US fulfilled treaty obligations to (a) the people of Chile, and (b) other members of collective security agreements when it removed a threat to the stability of the region; (2) in the 1979 Iranian revolution, the US failed to comply with treaty obligations which had disasterous consequences for stability in the region, i.e. two major wars, (a) [[Iran-Iraq War]] with circa 700,000 casualties; (b) the Soviet-Afghan War with circa 1,400,000 casualties. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:13, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
:Here's the black & white: (1) in the 1973 Chilean coup, the US fulfilled treaty obligations to (a) the people of Chile, and (b) other members of collective security agreements when it removed a threat to the stability of the region; (2) in the 1979 Iranian revolution, the US failed to comply with treaty obligations which had disasterous consequences for stability in the region, i.e. two major wars, (a) [[Iran-Iraq War]] with circa 700,000 casualties; (b) the Soviet-Afghan War with circa 1,400,000 casualties. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:13, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
Overthrowing Chile's legally elected leader and plunging that country into years of political repression was not fulfilling an obligation to any treaty with Chile or its people. I'd be interested in seeing you explaining this nonsense to a Chilean who is still wondering what happened to his or her son or daughter the night Pinochet took over, what mass grave their child's maimed body was finally interred in, or to someone still coping with the nightmares and the physical scars of her torture, rape and incarceration in one of Pinochet's prisons for committing the heinous crime of being a liberal. Your definition of fuflilling treaty obligations is right out of Lewis Carroll.
--[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 18:31, 31 March 2007 (EDT)