Powell's Comments Re: Chile '73 - Page 2

OneFootInTheGrave · April 17, 2003, 21:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned

As to the aftermath, Pinochet appears to have gone a little too far. I remember that he allegedly had communists step out of helocopters over the ocean. I doubt that the US "supported," such actions in the sense that we participated in them or approved of them.

Oh come on Ned... like when US gave the list of commies to Saddam when US first propelled him to power - wander why were 800+ people from that list dead? probably for the similar reasons chilean commies were feeding fish in the Pacific... elimination of competition is most effective... it wasn't the idea confined to Stalin only.

Ned · April 17, 2003, 22:00

Quote:

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
Oh come on Ned... like when US gave the list of commies to Saddam when US first propelled him to power - wander why were 800+ people from that list dead? probably for the similar reasons chilean commies were feeding fish in the Pacific... elimination of competition is most effective... it wasn't the idea confined to Stalin only.

Why is giving a list of communists to a new government the same thing as ordering their deaths? I think you first must establish that we knew Pinochet was going to murder them.

OneFootInTheGrave · April 17, 2003, 22:03

well what do you think the instructions were, or were the perpertrators spanked or awarded when they executed their acts?

Chilean President™ · April 17, 2003, 22:06

Quote:

This does not mean that the US instigated anything. However, I believe we could have stopped it if we said no.

No, Allende's time was over long time ago. Even the Congress ask for his removal, but didn't have the constitutional power to comply.

Quote:

But I think the left contends that we support a dictator if we provide the dictator military aid.

The only 'aid' we received from the US was money to iniciate propaganda actions in the medias.

OneFootInTheGrave · April 17, 2003, 22:11

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/...8/nsaebb8i.htm

just a little that has been declassified so far, however could indicate that the US involvment was more than "propaganda money" only...

Quote:

Cables written by U.S. Ambassador Edward Korry after Allende's election, detailing conversations with President Eduardo Frei on how to block the president-elect from being inaugurated. The cables contain detailed descriptions and opinions on the various political forces in Chile, including the Chilean military, the Christian Democrat Party, and the U.S. business community.

and a few more...

Chilean President™ · April 17, 2003, 22:20

It only proovs that the U.S. had information about the coup, nothing else.

Anyway another 'aid' that I didn't count before, and I saw it on the site provided by you, is the economical destabilization factor.

OneFootInTheGrave · April 17, 2003, 22:26

and supporting assasinations, providing weapons or money for the groups (which would in other circumstances be called terrorists) etc... and that is just the beginning of declassification...

Do you need a memo where Kissinger orders - Kill Allende and communist collaboratiors! I'll pay you 10 mill USD to do it.

academia · April 17, 2003, 22:27

Ok. When I say "support" and X government, it could means different things. Money, miltary aid, give the green light.

It´s obvious that both the commies and the americans supported many revolutions, coup d´etats, guerrillas, etc. all over latinamerica.

It´s so hard to recognize that? They were two superpowers struggling for dominance of the world.
Those were the times of the cold war!! espionage!! everything was legal in order to achieve your objective

OneFootInTheGrave · April 17, 2003, 22:32

Academia - actually nothing has changed today, apart that there is only 1 superpower today, and if you step on it's fingers - everything is legal still... well we are talking only about a few hundred or thousands of people killed by Pinochet... not on the scale as the communists when they got the power (trough coups or revolutions) but still saying " we are so good" - is stretching it a lot.

Chilean President™ · April 17, 2003, 22:33

Quote:

Do you need a memo where Kissinger orders - Kill Allende and communist collaboratiors! I'll pay you 10 mill USD to do it.

Then Kissinger should pay Allende's family cause he kill himself, after receiveng a call from the militars asking him to surrender and gaving him the opportunity to fly to Cuba.

academia · April 17, 2003, 22:39

Quote:

Academia - actually nothing has changed today, apart that there is only 1 superpower today, and if you step on it's fingers - everything is legal still...

Yep. It´s always been that way.
Powerful people / states operate outside the law in order to protect / defend / expand their interests.
Like diplomats in civ2 say: "our words are backed with Nuclear Weapons"

Who has the balls to defy them?
Ah! In case you dare to defy them... prepare for the consequences...

academia · April 17, 2003, 22:39

Hola Chilean!
Es al pedo seguir discutiendo, no?

Chilean President™ · April 17, 2003, 22:41

Hola academia.. pues si, en especial cuando estas hasta el cogote de trabajo

eso pasa por abrir threads en las cuales no me puedo quedar callao

PD: toy con la Coty

academia · April 17, 2003, 22:46

Quote:

toy con la Coty

CONGRATULATIONS!!!
YOU FOUND TRUE LOVE

chequita guevara · April 17, 2003, 23:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Joseph

In 1938, the USA was 13th in world Power. That right 12 other countries had more power than we did. The US did very little in Central and South America until after W.W.II. We did help Panama gain freedom from Colombia and we sent the Marines to Guatemala in 1923? That is about it. Your anti-American attitude is showing.

That's BS. The Caribbean was an American lake and we occupied nearly every country in Central American and the Antillies. We've invaded Nicaragua more times than any other country. Hell, we invaded Latin America almost 100 times before WWII. If that's your idea od did very little, I'd hate to see what you think an active role in LA would be like.

Hey, Chilean President, present some evidence of Allende planing to turn Chile into a Commie dicatoratorship. Since he was a Social democrat, I highly doubt it.

Chilean President™ · April 17, 2003, 23:31

He wasn't a social democrat, he was a communist. The party alliance that bring him to power was the UP (communist party + socialist party).

Let me search some info on english to give you

chequita guevara · April 17, 2003, 23:40

I've studied Chile plenty. First off, you lied when you said Chile had been a democracy since 1810. Maybe it was a democracy in 1810, but it wasn't like there were 160 years of uninteruppted democratic rule. Chile was the oldest democracy in Latin America, with fifty years of democracy since the last coup and dictatorship.

Second, Allende was not a member of the Communist Party. He was a member of the Socialist Party. So the two parties ran a united ticket. Izquierda Unida didn't control the parliament, and whatever Allende wanted to do had to get support from either Liberals or Conservatives, in addition to IU members.

It's true that many saw his election as the promise of revolution, and many workers took matters into their own hands. Allende himself, however, was a committed socialist and democrat, and tried to resist the workers. That was his downfall. When the workers marched in the streets demanding guns to protect the republic from the military, he should have listened and given them guns. He should have allowed them to seize the work places. A real communist would have done both. He wasn't a communist. That's why he died.

Chilean President™ · April 18, 2003, 00:16

I didn't lie, and when you said that you've studied Chilean history well...

1- Chile had a democratic regime since 1810. You're refering to some 'military coup' fifty years before 1973 and I don't know what you're talking about, but I believe that you're refering to the Nazi unrest of 1931-32. That was indeed the start of a coup lead by the nacionalsocialistas but they were killed in a state building near the Presidencial Palace (President Alessandri resign after that) and asume the power the VP who resign later. Then a early election took place and was elected president with 60% of the votes (don't know the exact percent) Gen. of Carabineros Carlos Ibañez del Campo (this may be you confusion cause he was a general, but he was free elected).

2- Izquierda Unida is the name of the parties of the left that supported Allende after he was elected (MAPU and Izquierda Cristiana) and they came from a dissident sector of the Democracia Cristiana party (cristiandemocrats) that didn't keep supporting Allende (I believe that happen in 1972..but I'm not so sure).
The group of parties that supported Allende was the Unidad Popular or UP (popular union) that was compossed by the Communist Party and the Socialist Party.
Allende was a militant of the Communist Party when he won the election (with 34% of the votes.. in those years we didn't have a law for a second round, so that's why he get the office). anyway, the socialist party also registered him. I don't know if in other countries one can do this but you can be part of two parties when they're on alliance. (the same thing with the current Chilean president, Ricardo Lagos... he is socialist but also is registred on the PPD).

If Allende didn't act as a communist that was his choice but he was in fact a communist.

So if you think I'm liying you rather read a real book of history.

Az · April 18, 2003, 05:18

OMG ALLENDE WAS A COMMUNIST?!!!!!

Well, NOW IT ALL MAKES SENSE! I SURELY UNDERSTAND WHY YOU HATE HIM NOW!

jolair · April 18, 2003, 11:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Chilean President
Allende was a militant of the Communist Party when he won the election (with 34% of the votes.. in those years we didn't have a law for a second round, so that's why he get the office). anyway, the socialist party also registered him. .

Hola. Sin animo de molestar, sólo para informarme directamente de un chileno...

Are you really sure?

Perhaps he was a militant of the Communist Party but it is quite strange for somebody who:

- founded the Chilean Socialist Party (1933)

- had been the Secretary General of the Chilean Socialist Party (1943)

Btw he won the election with the 36.6%.

Ned · April 18, 2003, 11:21

Chilean President, You will find that Che is very knowledgeable about so-called revisionist history. As I learn more about this history by reading Che's posts, revisionist history appears to contain a lot of erasures of uncomfortable facts for the communisty party, and "codification" of capitalist conspiracy theories.

If you have ever read the book 1984, the protagonist was a history re-writer. The communist party appears to have a lot of these scattered across the globe.

South killer · April 18, 2003, 11:28

Sorry but i also think allende was socialist. His actions as president fit more in a socialist profile than in a communist one.Also acording to ''Encarta Atlas'' (not a very reliable source) his party is called ''Izquierda Democratica de Allende'' or ''Allende's Democratic Leftism'' and according to my point of view:
Democratic Leftism= Socialism

Anyway i think you chileans have to be proud of having a president like him; He refused to resign, knowing that if he did that the militars were going to kill him, so he gave his life for his beliefs.

Ned · April 18, 2003, 12:01

Quote:

Originally posted by South killer
Sorry but i also think allende was socialist. His actions as president fit more in a socialist profile than in a communist one.Also acording to ''Encarta Atlas'' (not a very reliable source) his party is called ''Izquierda Democratica de Allende'' or ''Allende's Democratic Leftism'' and according to my point of view:
Democratic Leftism= Socialism

Anyway i think you chileans have to be proud of having a president like him; He refused to resign, knowing that if he did that the militars were going to kill him, so he gave his life for his beliefs.

Personally, I don't think it makes much of a difference whether he was a Socialist or a Communist if Allende was trying to erase democracy by imposing one party rule. Earlier in this thread, someone made a statement to that effect.

What was Allende doing to cause such alarm?

Chilean President™ · April 18, 2003, 12:22

Quote:

Originally posted by jolair
Hola. Sin animo de molestar, sólo para informarme directamente de un chileno...

eres chileno??

Quote:

- founded the Chilean Socialist Party (1933)

I didn't know that, but it really don't mean nothing. My point is, he maybe act as a 'socialist' (obviously to get elected) but he was registred on the communist party. He also was a leader of the Com. Party in Valparaíso, long time before he tried to get to the presidency (in 5 elections).

I said before he was a j@cl@$$ and I regret that. Maybe he did wanted a peaceful nation and create a modern socialist state, but the people that he work with was clearly non-democratic and tried to iniciate a armed revolution (in the Armada [navy] happen a sort of revolution that was stopped in early 1973).

Quote:

his party is called ''Izquierda Democratica de Allende''

That's not a party, is a movement as I said before support him after he become president, I'm not sure of the exact date but it was in the year 1972.
The 'izquierda democratica' movement wasn't on alliance with the parties that bring him to power. The alliance in power was the Popular Union that only had two parties, the Communist and the Socialist.

But again, I'm not saying Allende act as a communist or socialist, I'm saying that it was a in fact registred in the Communist party and was a long time member of that party.
Again, in Chile parties with alliance can hold people with multple registrations, that's why Allende was also in the registration of the Socialist Party.

Quote:

What was Allende doing to cause such alarm?

The main problem was that the state took over several private industries from Chile and others from the US and Europe. In the first year it help to the state to gain more money, but later the huge 'industry sector' was unable to be under control of the same 'head' (the state). Also the government print to many money paper without having the gold, that's why we get a huge inflation.
But for the people the main problem was that supporters of the MAPU (from the left) and the Communist Party, iniciate a 'take over' action on the rural houses. They kill a lot of people (not the same amount under the Pinochet administration) but they sure kill people.
I'm not saying that Allende support this, but it was actions taked by members of movements that support him in power, that's why people started to hate is government.

On the other hand, let me tell you that in the huge protest that tooked place in the cities, the people went to the military HQ to protest with corn and screaming to the militaries 'You are chikens!" because they didn't do nothing to remove him from power (if they knew what came later they wouldn't be screaming that

).

Besides, the congress pass a resolution in 1972 that said that president Allende should resign, but as I said before, it wasn't a constitutional law so it become only a 'opinion' of the congress.

Chilean President™ · April 18, 2003, 12:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Chilean President

eres chileno??

Bah..recien entendí ...

es que leí muy rapido Jolair

chequita guevara · April 18, 2003, 12:56

Like American neo-cons, Chilean neo-cons are perfectly happy to make up facts. Since Allende's murder, he's been a member of the Communist Party, at least if you ask the neo-cons.

BTW, Neddie, if Allende was a communist, I'd be fine with that. Allende was a great democrat and if he was bringing communism to Chile democratically and peacefuly, that would have been great. But he wasn't. All he managed to prove was Marx's point that socialism cannot be brought about peacefully, since the state will overthrow them.

Oerdin · April 18, 2003, 13:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Quote:

in Irak (Guess who placed saddam in power???)

I know it wasn't the United States.

Drake: Any one who reads a history book knows the US had nothing to do with Saddam's coupe but, unfortunately, there are a number of misinformed persons who wish to blame the US for everything bad in the world.

chequita guevara · April 18, 2003, 13:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin

Drake: Any one who reads a history book knows the US had nothing to do with Saddam's coupe but, unfortunately, there are a number of misinformed persons who wish to blame the US for everything bad in the world.

Not in 1979, but yes sixteen years earlier in 1963. We were the ones who got him to be an important person in the Ba'athist party. He did some of CIA's dirty work during that coup. He was so effective in that work that when they took power again in 1968, Saddam was second in command.

Chilean President™ · April 18, 2003, 13:10

Quote:

Since Allende's murder

He kill himsefl with Fidel Castro's gift... AK-47, thats a fact, why you keep saying he was murdered?
Away from any ideological point of view the facts I gave you is what happened and it is sad.
Allende's government and the Pinochet Administration are, thanks God, in the past and nothing would make such kind of people back in power. We now have great governments... Ricardo Lagos is a socialist, but he is surrounded with social democrats not the same kind of people that surrounded Allende.

chequita guevara · April 18, 2003, 13:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Chilean President
He kill himsefl with Fidel Castro's gift... AK-47, thats a fact, why you keep saying he was murdered?

Maybe it was the tank shells pouring into the presidential palace. Maybe it was the fact that the building was burned out when the seige was over. Maybe it was the fact that he was killed by the military when they were illegally overthrowing the deocratically elected government. It was murder, not suicide.

It's like listening to the Pinochet government talking with you.