How the Sandinistas wrecked the economy (Noam Chomsky)

Question:

] Harel, ] ] Err, is this post address to me? Or to Harel? John it would appear ]that like Mr.Mathon your losing your grip if you cannot even identify who ]the original poster was. Sorry, the content was similar to Harel’s, and I was in a hurry and didn’t check the header. ]of Nicaragua. The Sandinistas have never had a _policy_ which could be ]indentified as such, which was intended to terrorise or oppress the general ]population. If you John Moore, cannot identify the difference, your the one ]who’s living in the ivory tower. This is a nice statement, but I don’t believe it. ] Have you forgotten that Sandinistas are heavily armed (most government ] arms were given to the Sandinistas before Chamorro took "power."). That ] the Sandinistas have also been guilty of blocking roads and intimidating ] passers by (I’ve seen pictures of this)? Do you have a sense of balance? ] ] Have your forgetten that the Contras, despite supposedly being ]"disarmed" have in fact been turning up with the very arms and equipment which ]was supposedly take off of them? If you want to talk about a sense of balance, ]don’t fall into the trap of going even further in the opposite direction. Yes, some of the Contras ARE turning up armed. My point is that the Sandinistas are thugs, not that some contras are not. Most attacks on the US argue that the Sandinistas were "good" and the contras (and hence the US) "bad." A sense of balance shows that there are lots of nasty people in Nicaragua, and the Sandinistas have at least their fair share. ] ] And you are forgetting that the rest DID NOT! And the elected government ] is being illegally obstructed by a MINORITY. Have you forgotten that ] the Sandinistas still hold (as individuals now, not the government) ] all property that they seized during their revolution. Can you tell ] me what right individuals have to take seized property? Why does Daniel ] Ortega, a private citizen, live in a luxurious house that was the ] property of the Nicaraguan government and people? ] ] What right do individuals who were basically cronies of the Somozas ]to get back land which they didn’t farm, nor directly utilise? Land on which ]the peasants were forced to work as tenant farmers under a system which was ]designed to keep them in a servititude which was so close to slavery it might ]as well have been called that. Before you point the fighter, young fellow I suppose you have never heard of "private property rights?" A lot of the world is waking up to those – perhaps you should also. Besides, we are talking about a lot more than "land which they didn’t farm." We are talking about houses, businesses and all manner of private property stolen by the Sandinistas. Also, you are avoiding an important point: What right to private citizen Sandinistas have to property that was the property of the government up until the time the Sandinistas left power? When they were deposed by a popular election, they deeded huge amounts of government ("the people’s") property to themselves, and they are now enjoying the fruits of that. These sound worse than US Congressmen, and that’s pretty bad! ]m’lad, think about the sins of those who went before the Sandinistas. Those ]are the people who make the core of the Contras. ] ] If there are thugs and thieves around, the Sandinistas certainly ] fit the bill! ] ] So? No government by its very nature is without some for of thuggery ]and thievery. However the Sandinistas were much better than most IMO, whereas ]the Contras weren’t even a government, they were just thugs and terrorists. If you mean the Saninistas were much better thugs and thieves than most, I must agree. Not only did they enjoy the fruits of their thievery when in power, they also continued to enjoy the fruits after they were thrown out. ] ] Well, then why did the people change their minds? Could it be that they ] realized that they had been lied to by the Sandinistas? ] ] Could it have been the rather massive amount of military and economic ]pressure that they were placed under by that very big nation to the their ]north? Nah! Of course not. It wasn’t the US Congress which was paying the ]wages bill of the contras, now was it? Most of the time, it was not! Congress refused to fund the contras for much of their existence. If the US really wanted to put a massive amount of military pressure on Nicaragua, it would have been obvious – just ask Saddam. ] Any country which comes under that sort of pressure is going to ]"change" its mind if it desires to continue existing. Its just disgusting that ]your country decided that it was necessary to apply that sort of pressure to ]achieve its imperialist ends. Could it be, Brian, that Nicaragua was a battleground between the two great powers (US vs. USSR)? That the US was (in a very limited fashion) trying to prevent the creation of another Cuba close to our shores? Are you aware of the tremendous problems that Cuba has caused the US: the Cuban missile crisis, which almost caused nuclear war; destabilization of friendly governments in our hemisphere; support of terrorists; support of cocaine smuggling; building an unsafe nuclear power plant a few tens of miles from the US? It is not imperialist to try to prevent another one of these – especially when a large segment of the population of the subject company agrees with us. Are you aware that the aid to Sandinistas from the USSR was much greater than that to the Contras from the US? Are you aware that the revolution against Somoza included many groups that went over to the contras when the Sandinistas siezed power that these groups had helped to win? Are you familiar with the aid the Sandinistas gave (and probably still give) to the terrorists in El Salvador? Are you aware that they helped to train terrorists from the Middle East? Could it be that the reason so many of these conflicts around the world are winding down is not a reduction in US "imperialism," but a reduction in Soviet imperialism? When the US was in a state of de-facto war with the USSR, it took actions to defend itself – including (very limited) support of the Contras. Hopefully, the USSR will behave itself, in which case we will be less threatened. ] One hell of a lot less than the KGB, the DGI, Mohammar Khadaffy and ] other international terrorists were spending training and equipping the ] Sandinistas. ] ] Err, have you any proof, other than your own fantasies to back that ]assertion? And I’m not referring to your favourite magazine Soldier of Fortune ]either John. I don’t read Soldier of Fortune, and have NEVER read it (although I did, by sheer coincidence, have lunch with one of their editors). I have seen lots of evidence in the past. It has been presented here. It will NEVER meet your standards, Brian, and I don’t have time to put it out here. Suffice it to say, I believe I have reason to make those assertions, and you will NEVER believe it whatever I say. ] Yeah. Tell that to the Eastern Europeans! They are great fans of Reagan, ] after living under regimes that were clones of the Sandinista regime. They ] were clearly NOT under coercion to overthrow those regimes! ] ] Eastern Europe a "clone of the Sandinista regime"? Good god man they ]had absolutely no similarity beyond both claiming to be "socialist". Similarities: -"socialist" -heavily supported by the USSR -had economies collapse under these so-called "socialists" -had one-party systems -spent a very large amount of their GNP on military. In Nicaragua, this was true even before the Contras represented a threat. -supported "wars of liberation" in other countries friendly to the US -supported the USSR in propaganda and in the UN against the US -used Soviet military hardware and advisors -supported international terrorists -had secret police Nope, no similarities at all, Brian. — John Moore HAM:NJ7E/CAP:T-Bird 381 {ames!ncar!noao!asuvax,mcdphx}!anasaz!john Voice: (602) 951-9326 Wishful Thinking: Long palladium, Short Petroleum Opinion: Support ALL of the bill of rights, INCLUDING the 2nd amendment!

Response:

Are you aware of the tremendous problems that Cuba has caused the US Oh my goodness yes, the poor U.S. has been so put upon by Cuba! It’s a wonder the poor little U.S. has survived all the tribulations that Cuba has inflicted on it. The U.S. has been held virtually hostage

… [20 lines of similar sarcastic material deleted] Cuba supplies arms and people to fight wars for dictators around the world including, but not limited to: Angola Ethiopia the FMLN Nicaragua Peruvian Communists Castro is a dictator and he has caused an enormous number of problems for the US. His ability to project these problems is primarily caused by his connections to the USSR which has ggiven him billions in weapons and supplies in exchange for his efforts at revolution around the world. As Russia diminishes its investment in Cuba, the threat of Cuba diminishes. The US is not in imminent danger of being overthrown by Cuba or any other coutry for that matter. The threat that Cuba represents is to the countries that he attacks some of which are countries which the US has relations with and with which we are interested in having relations. For instance, Peru, El Salvador and other central American nations. The US wished to forestall another listening post and place to locate ground based ICBM’s directed at the US. The US has for a long time protected central and south America from domination of European or Asian powers. While the threat from Europe has diminished in the last 40 years new threats from Russia have appeared. This long- standing policy of the US to protect all of the Americas from domination by foreign powers is meant to preserve US security and forestall large-scale superpower conflict on the same continent and to protect these areas from such domination by countries who were primarily undemocratic and until recently had colonialistic ambitions. Cuba is a conduit for military aid to all parts of this world and to Africa. With Nicargua – Cuba would have had a geographically close ally, another conduit to funnel aid to other revolutionary terrorists in the region and another point to base weapons for striking the US or its allies and extending colonial influence from Russia into the Americas beyond Cuba. When Nicaragua accepted aid and weapons from the USSR they positioned themselves as a new base of operations for Cuba and the USSR in direct threat to the US and its neighbors. This threat was not of the type that could overthrow the US directly, but, a supporting threat. In a similar way, France could not defeat Russia directly, but they support the US. I could point out that Denmark is not a direct threat to the Soviets, so why should the Soviets have nuclear weapons pointing at Denmark, why should the Soviets have KGB in Denmark, and why should the USSR have trade restrictions with Denmark? Denmark does not dominate nor in any way represent a credible threat to the Soviet Union and yet it does support NATO. The same argument can be made for Cuba. Cuba does not in and of itself represent a credible direct threat to the US, however, through its dealings and support of Soviet mischief in this hemisphere and throughout the world it is an extension of Soviet threats and Nicaragua was playing the same game, a very dangerous game needless to say. Also, a pointless game if you ask me.

Response:

Why does Daniel Ortega, a private citizen, live in a luxurious house that was the property of the Nicaraguan government and people? What right do individuals who were basically cronies of the Somozas to get back land which they didn’t farm, nor directly utilise? Land on which the peasants were forced to work as tenant farmers under a system which was designed to keep them in a servititude which was so close to slavery it might as well have been called that. Before you point the fighter, young fellow m’lad, think about the sins of those who went before the Sandinistas. Those are the people who make the core of the Contras.

Why do you leftists keep bringing up this ridiculous point? Do the Contras who are on the whole poor people who live in the mountains and can’t find boots sound like the kind of people who used to live in mansions with fur coats and drink french wine all day? There were over TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND contras at its weak point. Many contras participated in the fight with their LIVES to overthrow Somoza. Your statements are disgusting. Well, then why did the people change their minds? Could it be that they realized that they had been lied to by the Sandinistas? Could it have been the rather massive amount of military and economic pressure that they were placed under by that very big nation to the their north? Nah! Of course not. It wasn’t the US Congress which was paying the wages bill of the contras, now was it? Any country which comes under that sort of pressure is going to "change" its mind if it desires to continue existing. Its just disgusting that your country decided that it was necessary to apply that sort of pressure to achieve its imperialist ends.

What is disgusting is that the Sandinistas would care so little for their people that they would thrust a small poor country into a superpower struggle against their will. The Nicaraguans do not want to fight the holy war against the US and the Sandinistas sacrificed 70,000 Nicaraguans to the holy grail of socialist revolution. For what? To see their people impoverished and misled. What an irresponsible act! One hell of a lot less than the KGB, the DGI, Mohammar Khadaffy and other international terrorists were spending training and equipping the Sandinistas. Err, have you any proof, other than your own fantasies to back that assertion? And I’m not referring to your favourite magazine Soldier of Fortune either John.

The Contras recieved money measured in 10 and 20 million increments each year for a small number of years. The Sandinistas imported over 1 BILLION dollars in military aid in one year. Estimates from the Pentagon and the CIA range up to 10 billion dollars. ] I wonder, I just wonder what the world would be like if Reagan hadn’t ]been elected. I think it would be a much nicer one myself. We wouldn’t have ]had a second cold war I know that for sure as Ronnie lived in his fantasy world ]of the 1950’s. Yeah. Tell that to the Eastern Europeans! They are great fans of Reagan, after living under regimes that were clones of the Sandinista regime. They were clearly NOT under coercion to overthrow those regimes! Eastern Europe a "clone of the Sandinista regime"? Good god man they had absolutely no similarity beyond both claiming to be "socialist".

Reagan was a capitalism preacher and when he went to the USSR and he talked to the east Europeans they listened and they heard. People want to characterize Reagan as an idiot, but, 8 years after Reagan was in office and the US is as free as ever, as rich as ever and more respected in the world than any time since 1963. When Baker went to Albania recently, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WENT TO THE STREETS AND CHANTED "U S A U S A Baker Baker U S A U S A …". They did not chant "Dukakis" "Dukakis" or "Gorbachev" or "Castro" or even "Kohl". They shouted "Baker". When Bush went to Hungary last year, the people cried in the streets, tears down their cheeks. People said they had waited their whole lifetimes to see an American president on their soil. When Americans wanted to leave Iraq, the Iraqi people begged, staged demonstrations and pleaded that Americans should stay on their soil. They did not want a UN team. They wanted Americans. The people of the world want freedom and hope. They don’t cheer in the streets for socialism. They cheer in the streets for the hope of a better life and the hope of freedom. It is the true hero who advocates individuals over state control. It is the bureaucrat who argues for bureaucracy and regulation and state control. It is the hero who says – you have a right to liberty and the right to dictate the terms of your own life, the job you’ll do, the pay you’ll accept, the people you’ll work for and the things you’ll buy. It is a right to the liberty of your own faith, your own ideology and your own identity and to speak freely. This is the dream of America enshrined 200 years ago and alive today.

Response:

Are you aware of the tremendous problems that Cuba has caused the US

Oh my goodness yes, the poor U.S. has been so put upon by Cuba! It’s a wonder the poor little U.S. has survived all the tribulations that Cuba has inflicted on it. The U.S. has been held virtually hostage to Cuba’s wicked agenda. Every time the U.S. has tried to make itself prosperous, there Cuba has been, thwarting it! Every time the U.S. has attempted to pull itself out of poverty, the colossus of Cuba has been right there, grinding the U.S. down into the dirt. Why the community of nations doesn’t rise up as one, to put an end to this cruel domination of the U.S. by powerful Cuban interests is beyond me. How can such a state of affairs be tolerated? A poor little defenceless country like the U.S. on the one hand; a giant superpower like Cuba on the other. Aspirations for peace, freedom, and prosperity on the side of the feisty little U.S. on the one hand; cold determination on the part of Cuba, on the other, that U.S. aspirations shall count for nothing. It’s a wonder that the very stones do not cry out against this intolerable injustice. But someday, I have faith, the U.S. will dig itself out from under the savage domination of Cuba. As I hope for mercy, someday the people of the U.S. will have the same power, and wealth, and comforts as those Cuban oligarchs who have dominated life in the U.S. for so long. I believe that soon this unjust state of affairs will be rectified. FREEDOM FOR THE USA! DOWN WITH THE CUBAN OPPRESSORS!! H.

Response:

#It’s amazing that in the early 80’s life was so good for the Nicarguans #and yet by 1990 the following was also true: # # 1) the economy was 1/10th of 1980 Hmm, a country decimated by 10 years of civil war and an embargo by its traditionally number one trading partner is sufferring economic problems? What a surprise. Yet, the average person seems to be better off. Gee, I wonder where all the income went before 1980?

Possibly to building the GNP? Every economic system needs capital. The Russians and other socialists simply withhold it from people by lowering their wages. Lenin once called socialism, state capitalism. The money invested in capital (if it used efficiently) can be used to improve the future efficiency and capital production of the country. If the capital is used inefficiently it can be totally wasted. Most south American countries and most socialist countries grossly waste their withheld capital which leads to lower incomes and lower growth or even negative growth as in the case of Nicaragua which spent a large part of its capital on military and government workers (i.e. Sandinista) wages. # 2) 500,000 Nicarguans had left Nicaragua As economic refugees – an important distinction from the political refugees which flood out form American backed countries in the region. Political refugees fear torture and death at the hands of their own government, Nicaraguans did not fear this. I wonder how many El Salvadorans would leave for the US if they were given such an open-door policy.

You need to talk to some Nicaraguans in the US. They did fear for their lives. 70,000 people died in Nicargua, not all of them at the hands of the Contras. # 3) Nicaragua was the poorest country in Latin America Hey, economic boycott by the regional superpower, combined with American blocking of all aid from traditional sources (i.e., World Bank) will have that effect on a country.

Nicaragua was a socialist state. What do they need with capitalist goods and money? Also, the Sandinistas chose to fight the US, what do they expect? Do they expect to buy billions in weapons from the USSR and have a nice trading relationship with the US? What kind of drugs do they take anyways? Stupidity is a terrible thing for a country to have to endure, especially when the stupid control everything. If the Sandinistas thought that they were going to have a terrific trading relationship with the US as they imported Russian weapons and sent arms to the FMLN, etc… they were stupid. Extremely stupid. # 4) The Sandinistas lost the only legitimate election in # 10 years. Absolutely false. Official government observers from scores of neutral countries (including Canada) declared the 1985 elections free and fair. The Canadian official even went so far to say that the Sandinistas were so popular that it was inconcievable that they could lose. Only the US observer declared the election biased, hardly a neutral observer being a representative of a government which had bribed certain opposition parties to boycott the election.

Sure. # 5) it was proved that that the Sandinistas had been # funneling aid to the FMLN in ElSalvador. Where, when? It has been proved that certain individuals within the Sandinista movement were selling weapons to the FMLN, but not that it was in any way a government policy.

The Sandinistas have admitted giving aid even AFTER they left office. Are you playing dumb or do you really believe everything the fairy godmother (leftists) tell you? # 6) it is proved by the election of Chomorro that the # Sandinista military was unnecessary and the war # was unnecessary. You’ve been saying this for a year now, and I still can’t figure out what it means. Are you trying to say that the democratically elected government of Nicaragua should have simply laid down its weapons when confronted by a band of armed men seeking control of the government by force rather than ballot?

It is really simple. Let’s take it slowly. The Nicarguans had an election and the Contras put down their weapons and joined the populace. The war was unnecessary, because the simple act of HAVING an election terminated the need for weapons. All the Sandinistas needed to do to stop the war and the death of 70,000 Nicaraguans and the economic destruction of Nicargua was to have an election. They did not need to put down their weapons, they needed to have an election. Exactly what everyone in the region, the Contras and the US asked of them and to which they finally agreed to. 70,000 people did not need to die. 500,000 people did not need to leave Nicaragua and the country did not need to be taken into an economic hellhole and emotional hellhole. All the Sandinistas needed to do was to have what everybody in the world was asking of them, i.e. have an election. May I also remind you that UNO is a coalition of parties (including the communist party of Nicaragua), many of which oppose the contras and everything they stand for.

Exactly. The contras simply wanted an election. When the election occurred they put their weapons down. The Sandinistas on the other hand want to take the people of Nicaragua through another hell to protect the booty of their last act in government, i.e. the giving away of all state assets to the Sandinistas as they left power. # 7) that Nicargua was hated by all its neighbors Ah gee, hated by the regimes of El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala and Panama – countries consistly singled out by Amnesty International as massive violators of human rights. Personally, I think that says something good about the Sandinistas.

Costa Rica has been a democracy for 100 years. You may hate these other governments, but that is not a constructive tact. Do you advocate war and hatred towards these governments? When does your killing stop? When can the nations of central America sit down and work together rather than kill each other? When can peace reign in central America? When can the people of central America look forward to a constructive relationship with their neighbors, rather than destructive? # 8) that Nicaragua was spending 25% of its economy # importing weapons to kill its own people. And gee John, how much did the US spend on its civil war? The government of Nicarauga not only had to defend itself against a gorilla force based outside its borders and supplied by a superpower, it also had to deal with an unstable American president who was constantly threatening to invade them with American troops and used exercises in neighbouring countries to intimidate them.

that Nicaragua was spending 25% of its economy importing weapons to kill its own people. If they spent 25% of their GNP killing Americans is one thing, but spending 25% of your GNP killing your own people? That is criminal. Plain criminal in my opinion. Especially, since an election is all that was needed to prevent it. Having an election is not exactly sacrificing your sovereignty or interfering in internal affairs. Having an election when you are having a civil war such as Nicaragua was having is not an onerous request. All that the US, Costa Rica, El Salvador, the Contras, etc… wanted was an election. # 12) that the Sandinistas distributed arms and ammunition # and distributed vast resources to themselves upon their # loss of the elections in 1990. Yup, to counter the arms and resources that the contras held at this time (I suppose). I’m not saying it was right, but the weapons I can understand.

The contras gave up their weapons. The Sandinistas armed themselves even as they demanded that they retain control of the military. # 13) that the Sandinistas intend armed rebellion to kill more # Nicaraguans until they get their way. I havn’t seen this report you keep harping about – perhaps you could provide a (gasp!) reference.

Have you listened to any speeches by Ortega recently?

Response:

Err, is this post address to me? Or to Harel? John it would appear that like Mr.Mathon your losing your grip if you cannot even identify who the original poster was. if the contras murdered the entire country, why are there still Sandanistas in power in Managua? Why do they still run the army? Also, let’s not forget that Amnesty International documented that the Contras were not the only ones doing the torturing and killing of innocents – the Sandinistas were also guilty. Have you EVER heard of a civil war that does not involve atrocities? What ivory tower do you live in?

I (Brian Ross, not Harel) have never denied that some Sandinistas might not have been guilty of atrocities or murder. However the Contras, as a group appear to have been practicing it, with the sanction of their leadership (and their advisors) as a _policy_ of terrorising the population of Nicaragua. The Sandinistas have never had a _policy_ which could be indentified as such, which was intended to terrorise or oppress the general population. If you John Moore, cannot identify the difference, your the one who’s living in the ivory tower. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – ] ] ] They fought to allow the PEOPLE to make a choice. This is ] demonstrated by the FACT that the Contras laid down their arms ] at the end of the election. ] ] And have since taken them up. Or are you forgetting the reports of ]the intimidation being suffered by people who were living on expropriated land ]after the Contras came home? Or that they were blocking roads and intimidating ]passers by? The Contras are a bunch of thugs who cannot do anything with a gun ]in their hands. The core of the Contras was, and still is, the Somozist ]National Guard, and we all remember what nice boys they all were, don’t we ]Mr.Mathon? Have you forgotten that Sandinistas are heavily armed (most government arms were given to the Sandinistas before Chamorro took "power."). That the Sandinistas have also been guilty of blocking roads and intimidating passers by (I’ve seen pictures of this)? Do you have a sense of balance?

Have your forgetten that the Contras, despite supposedly being "disarmed" have in fact been turning up with the very arms and equipment which was supposedly take off of them? If you want to talk about a sense of balance, don’t fall into the trap of going even further in the opposite direction. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – ] ] The Sandinistas fight to achieve ] political ends, not to empower the people. This is demonstrated ] by the FACT of their latest threats. ] ] Really? I would have thought they were more in line with the largest ]opposition party indicating its opposition to what it percieves as things it ]disagrees with what the government is doing. Your forgetting Mr.Mathon that ]45% of the electorate voted for the Sandinistas. And you are forgetting that the rest DID NOT! And the elected government is being illegally obstructed by a MINORITY. Have you forgotten that the Sandinistas still hold (as individuals now, not the government) all property that they seized during their revolution. Can you tell me what right individuals have to take seized property? Why does Daniel Ortega, a private citizen, live in a luxurious house that was the property of the Nicaraguan government and people?

What right do individuals who were basically cronies of the Somozas to get back land which they didn’t farm, nor directly utilise? Land on which the peasants were forced to work as tenant farmers under a system which was designed to keep them in a servititude which was so close to slavery it might as well have been called that. Before you point the fighter, young fellow m’lad, think about the sins of those who went before the Sandinistas. Those are the people who make the core of the Contras. If there are thugs and thieves around, the Sandinistas certainly fit the bill!

So? No government by its very nature is without some for of thuggery and thievery. However the Sandinistas were much better than most IMO, whereas the Contras weren’t even a government, they were just thugs and terrorists. ] The policy worked. The Sandinistas finally faced their people in ] an open election and were defeated. ] ] Err, what about the 1985 election? I thought that it was open and fair ]going by all the reports I read. Well, then why did the people change their minds? Could it be that they realized that they had been lied to by the Sandinistas?

Could it have been the rather massive amount of military and economic pressure that they were placed under by that very big nation to the their north? Nah! Of course not. It wasn’t the US Congress which was paying the wages bill of the contras, now was it? Any country which comes under that sort of pressure is going to "change" its mind if it desires to continue existing. Its just disgusting that your country decided that it was necessary to apply that sort of pressure to achieve its imperialist ends. ] Yeah. I wonder how much the US was spending on arming the Contras? ]I wonder how much it was spending on teaching the Contras to murder, maim, ]torture, kill, burn and pillage the countryside? I wonder how much the CIA ]spent on supplying training in torture techniques for the Contras? I wonder if ]one of the bean counters in Langley Park has worked out the cost of each life ]lost in Nicaragua yet. Your pride is disgusting Mr.Mathon. One hell of a lot less than the KGB, the DGI, Mohammar Khadaffy and other international terrorists were spending training and equipping the Sandinistas.

Err, have you any proof, other than your own fantasies to back that assertion? And I’m not referring to your favourite magazine Soldier of Fortune either John. ] I wonder, I just wonder what the world would be like if Reagan hadn’t ]been elected. I think it would be a much nicer one myself. We wouldn’t have ]had a second cold war I know that for sure as Ronnie lived in his fantasy world ]of the 1950’s. Yeah. Tell that to the Eastern Europeans! They are great fans of Reagan, after living under regimes that were clones of the Sandinista regime. They were clearly NOT under coercion to overthrow those regimes!

Eastern Europe a "clone of the Sandinista regime"? Good god man they had absolutely no similarity beyond both claiming to be "socialist". — Brian Ross "If we got it so wrong in the Middle East yesterday, what makes you think we are going to get it right this time?" Arthur Schlesinger

Response:

…once again – Nicaragua and the saintly communists vs the horrible contras… ] Really? Is that why they murdered and terrorised the entire country? ]Why they tortured and killed innocent people? Just because they, "simply ]wanted an election"? Come on Mr.Mathon your grip on reality is becoming even ]more tenious. Harel, if the contras murdered the entire country, why are there still Sandanistas in power in Managua? Why do they still run the army? Also, let’s not forget that Amnesty International documented that the Contras were not the only ones doing the torturing and killing of innocents – the Sandinistas were also guilty. Have you EVER heard of a civil war that does not involve atrocities? What ivory tower do you live in? ] ] ] They fought to allow the PEOPLE to make a choice. This is ] demonstrated by the FACT that the Contras laid down their arms ] at the end of the election. ] ] And have since taken them up. Or are you forgetting the reports of ]the intimidation being suffered by people who were living on expropriated land ]after the Contras came home? Or that they were blocking roads and intimidating ]passers by? The Contras are a bunch of thugs who cannot do anything with a gun ]in their hands. The core of the Contras was, and still is, the Somozist ]National Guard, and we all remember what nice boys they all were, don’t we ]Mr.Mathon? Have you forgotten that Sandinistas are heavily armed (most government arms were given to the Sandinistas before Chamorro took "power."). That the Sandinistas have also been guilty of blocking roads and intimidating passers by (I’ve seen pictures of this)? Do you have a sense of balance? ] ] The Sandinistas fight to achieve ] political ends, not to empower the people. This is demonstrated ] by the FACT of their latest threats. ] ] Really? I would have thought they were more in line with the largest ]opposition party indicating its opposition to what it percieves as things it ]disagrees with what the government is doing. Your forgetting Mr.Mathon that ]45% of the electorate voted for the Sandinistas. And you are forgetting that the rest DID NOT! And the elected government is being illegally obstructed by a MINORITY. Have you forgotten that the Sandinistas still hold (as individuals now, not the government) all property that they seized during their revolution. Can you tell me what right individuals have to take seized property? Why does Daniel Ortega, a private citizen, live in a luxurious house that was the property of the Nicaraguan government and people? As far as I can tell, the Sandinistas were happy to espouse all sorts of elgalitarian ideas, while at the same time living in luxury in CONFISCATED property. They had the unmitigated cojones to grant to themselves millions of dollars of confiscated property and weapons after just LOSING a free election. If there are thugs and thieves around, the Sandinistas certainly fit the bill! ] The policy worked. The Sandinistas finally faced their people in ] an open election and were defeated. ] ] Err, what about the 1985 election? I thought that it was open and fair ]going by all the reports I read. Well, then why did the people change their minds? Could it be that they realized that they had been lied to by the Sandinistas? ] Yeah. I wonder how much the US was spending on arming the Contras? ]I wonder how much it was spending on teaching the Contras to murder, maim, ]torture, kill, burn and pillage the countryside? I wonder how much the CIA ]spent on supplying training in torture techniques for the Contras? I wonder if ]one of the bean counters in Langley Park has worked out the cost of each life ]lost in Nicaragua yet. Your pride is disgusting Mr.Mathon. One hell of a lot less than the KGB, the DGI, Mohammar Khadaffy and other international terrorists were spending training and equipping the Sandinistas. ] I wonder, I just wonder what the world would be like if Reagan hadn’t ]been elected. I think it would be a much nicer one myself. We wouldn’t have ]had a second cold war I know that for sure as Ronnie lived in his fantasy world ]of the 1950’s. Yeah. Tell that to the Eastern Europeans! They are great fans of Reagan, after living under regimes that were clones of the Sandinista regime. They were clearly NOT under coercion to overthrow those regimes! — John Moore HAM:NJ7E/CAP:T-Bird 381 {ames!ncar!noao!asuvax,mcdphx}!anasaz!john Voice: (602) 951-9326 Wishful Thinking: Long palladium, Short Petroleum Opinion: Support ALL of the bill of rights, INCLUDING the 2nd amendment!

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Despite the horrendous circumstances, Nicaragua’s economic progress through the early 1980s was surprisingly good, with the highest growth rate in Central America by a large margin, an improvement in standard of living in contrast to a substantial fall for the rest of Central America and a somewhat lesser fall for Latin America as a whole, and significant redistribution of income and expansion of social services. In 1983, the Yeah. Nicaragua was great. After all, they had the highest growth rate as Chomsky says (:-) and yet 500,000 people left Nicaragua and by 1990 the Nicaraguan economy was one-temth that of 1980 and Nicaragua was the poorest country on the entire continent. It’s amazing that in the early 80’s life was so good for the Nicarguans and yet by 1990 the following was also true: 1) the economy was 1/10th of 1980 2) 500,000 Nicarguans had left Nicaragua 3) Nicaragua was the poorest country in Latin America 4) The Sandinistas lost the only legitimate election in 10 years. 5) it was proved that that the Sandinistas had been funneling aid to the FMLN in ElSalvador. 6) it is proved by the election of Chomorro that the Sandinista military was unnecessary and the war was unnecessary. 7) that Nicargua was hated by all its neighbors 8) that Nicaragua was spending 25% of its economy importing weapons to kill its own people. 9) that the Sandinistas had no popular mandate 10) that the Mesquito indians were nearly wiped out by the Sandinistas 11) that there were extrajudicial murders by the Sandinistas documented by Amnesty International. 12) that the Sandinistas distributed arms and ammunition and distributed vast resources to themselves upon their loss of the elections in 1990. 13) that the Sandinistas intend armed rebellion to kill more Nicaraguans until they get their way. What purpose do these thugs serve? When they don’t get their way they resort to violence. Ortega just declared war to achieve certain political aims. The Contras simply wanted an election.

Really? Is that why they murdered and terrorised the entire country? Why they tortured and killed innocent people? Just because they, "simply wanted an election"? Come on Mr.Mathon your grip on reality is becoming even more tenious. They fought to allow the PEOPLE to make a choice. This is demonstrated by the FACT that the Contras laid down their arms at the end of the election.

And have since taken them up. Or are you forgetting the reports of the intimidation being suffered by people who were living on expropriated land after the Contras came home? Or that they were blocking roads and intimidating passers by? The Contras are a bunch of thugs who cannot do anything with a gun in their hands. The core of the Contras was, and still is, the Somozist National Guard, and we all remember what nice boys they all were, don’t we Mr.Mathon? The Sandinistas fight to achieve political ends, not to empower the people. This is demonstrated by the FACT of their latest threats.

Really? I would have thought they were more in line with the largest opposition party indicating its opposition to what it percieves as things it disagrees with what the government is doing. Your forgetting Mr.Mathon that 45% of the electorate voted for the Sandinistas. Their purpose is to kill opposition. They do not believe in democracy.

Really? Is that why Ortega stood down after the election? The Sandinistas had the election because they thought they couldn’t lose. They didn’t realize how smart the people of Nicaragua are and they do not want to give the Nicaraguan people another election.

Well apart from the fact the Sandinistas are the single largest party in Parliament in Nicaragua. They did after all win 45% of the total vote in the election (gee, now if they were really unpopular I wonder how well they would have done?). You are also forgetting that the people of Nicaragua were under incredible pressure from both direct armed military attack: the Contras and economic and diplomatic pressure from your imperialist country Mr.Mathon. Doesn’t the rather high vote (nearly 50%) seem to indicate to you Mr.Mathon that the Sandinistas just might be quite popular in Nicaragua? No, of course not as that would challenge your blinkered eyed view of the world which requires everybody to hate the very idea of socialism. The Sandinistas are not asking for another election, because they know they would lose even more seats.

Really? Could be that they would more than likely actually win more seats with the current popularity rating of Chomorro and her austerity measures. I think any party with 45% of the vote has little to fear about an election. They have a very big following in anybodies’ book. The Nicaraguans are disgusted by Sandinistas. Rather, the Sandinistas threaten violence to achieve their political ends which is to retain power over their resources.

And the Contras haven’t been doing exactly the same? Come on Mr.Mathon stop reading your one sided Wall Street journal articles. The Contras have been tearing up the countryside "demanding" their just returns for fighting against the Sandinistas. Naturally, the idea that the U.S. might pay reparations for what it has done can be relegated to the same category as the notion that it might observe international law generally: Too ludicrous to merit a word of comment. I agree here. The US is not going to obey laws written and decided by people like Saddam Hussein. I am proud to say that Saddam Hussein and others have no legal right over the US. Wheh. I am glad of that. Aren’t you?

Err, I know I’ve asked this of you before Mr.Mathon but I’m going to give it another go. How does Saddam Hussein have anything to do with a decision which was handed down by the International Court in the Hague, the judges of which are selected to sit on the bench from the nations which are represented in the Security Council of the United Nations? In addition if the United States has declared that it is now doing its "utmost" to uphold international law, why won’t it pay the reparations which were awarded against it by the International Court in the matter over the mining of Nicaragua’s harbours? Applying these principles to Nicaragua, Viron Vaky outlined "the principal arguments" for supporting the contras: "a longer war of attrition will so weaken the regime, provoke such a radical hardening of repression, and win sufficient support from Nicaragua’s discontented population that sooner or later the regime will be overthrown by popular revolt, self-destruct by means of internal coups or leadership splits, or simply capitulate to salvage what it can"; Exactly. The US did not think that the Contras could actually win the war with the USSR and Cuba supplying billions in military supplies. The policy was to force the Sandinistas to eventually have an election and face the decision of the people.

So, then the murder of thousands of innocent people in Nicaragua by the Contra mercenaries (after all they were in the pay of the US Government) was simply designed to "force the Sandinistas to eventually have an election and face the decision of the people"? Surely the results of the 1985 election which were declared fair and valid by all observers (except the US ones) should have counted as a valid decision of the people? Obviously not. I wonder what would have happened if UNO had been defeated at the polls by the Sandinistas? I somehow doubt that your imperialist nation would have accepted the decision of the Nicaraguan people going by its past performance. The policy worked. The Sandinistas finally faced their people in an open election and were defeated.

Err, what about the 1985 election? I thought that it was open and fair going by all the reports I read. US policy of helping democracy in Nicaragua eventually worked.

Makes me wonder if the prices is worth it myself. I somehow don’t think a lot of Nicaraguans would agree. Particularly all those who suffered at the hands of your mercenaries Mr.Mathon. We should all be proud.

What of? Killing and murdering? Torture and maiming thousands of innocents? Sure, walk tall Mr.Mathon as you stalk over the bodies of your country’s victims. You look and sound just like John Wayne. Who knows? Perhaps his fate will eventually be yours. I do hope you smoke. The era of Nicaragua as a terrorist state hated by its neighbors and forcing hundreds of thousands of its own citizens to flee and a civil war in which Nicaragua was spending 25% of its GNP on weapons to kill its own people was over and a legitimate and peaceful government took over.

Yeah. I wonder how much the US was spending on arming the Contras? I wonder how much it was spending on teaching the Contras to murder, maim, torture, kill, burn and pillage the countryside? I wonder how much the CIA spent on supplying training in torture techniques for the Contras? I wonder if one of the bean counters in Langley Park has worked out the cost of each life lost in Nicaragua yet. Your pride is disgusting Mr.Mathon. The billions in military weapons are stopped and peace and prosperity through mutual cooperation and mutual interests can finally happen.

I wonder, I just wonder what the world would be like if Reagan hadn’t been elected. I think it would be a much nicer one myself. We wouldn’t have had a second cold war I know that for sure as Ronnie lived in his fantasy world of the 1950’s. — Brian Ross

Response:

Oh boy! It’s another list of ‘facts’ from John Mathon. John really seems to be into lists these days, perhaps because such a format (simple sentences which are not related) is ideal for his mental abilities. But whatever the case, I’m sure we all look forward to yet another ennumeration of the half- truths and downrightright lies we’ve all come to expect from John. #It’s amazing that in the early 80’s life was so good for the Nicarguans #and yet by 1990 the following was also true: # # 1) the economy was 1/10th of 1980 Hmm, a country decimated by 10 years of civil war and an embargo by its traditionally number one trading partner is sufferring economic problems? What a surprise. Yet, the average person seems to be better off. Gee, I wonder where all the income went before 1980? # 2) 500,000 Nicarguans had left Nicaragua As economic refugees – an important distinction from the political refugees which flood out form American backed countries in the region. Political refugees fear torture and death at the hands of their own government, Nicaraguans did not fear this. I wonder how many El Salvadorans would leave for the US if they were given such an open-door policy. # 3) Nicaragua was the poorest country in Latin America Hey, economic boycott by the regional superpower, combined with American blocking of all aid from traditional sources (i.e., World Bank) will have that effect on a country. # 4) The Sandinistas lost the only legitimate election in # 10 years. Absolutely false. Official government observers from scores of neutral countries (including Canada) declared the 1985 elections free and fair. The Canadian official even went so far to say that the Sandinistas were so popular that it was inconcievable that they could lose. Only the US observer declared the election biased, hardly a neutral observer being a representative of a government which had bribed certain opposition parties to boycott the election. # 5) it was proved that that the Sandinistas had been # funneling aid to the FMLN in ElSalvador. Where, when? It has been proved that certain individuals within the Sandinista movement were selling weapons to the FMLN, but not that it was in any way a government policy. # 6) it is proved by the election of Chomorro that the # Sandinista military was unnecessary and the war # was unnecessary. You’ve been saying this for a year now, and I still can’t figure out what it means. Are you trying to say that the democratically elected government of Nicaragua should have simply laid down its weapons when confronted by a band of armed men seeking control of the government by force rather than ballot? May I also remind you that UNO is a coalition of parties (including the communist party of Nicaragua), many of which oppose the contras and everything they stand for. # 7) that Nicargua was hated by all its neighbors Ah gee, hated by the regimes of El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala and Panama – countries consistly singled out by Amnesty International as massive violators of human rights. Personally, I think that says something good about the Sandinistas. # that Nicaragua was spending 25% of its economy # importing weapons to kill its own people. And gee John, how much did the US spend on its civil war? The government of Nicarauga not only had to defend itself against a gorilla force based outside its borders and supplied by a superpower, it also had to deal with an unstable American president who was constantly threatening to invade them with American troops and used exercises in neighbouring countries to intimidate them. # 9) that the Sandinistas had no popular mandate As stated before, the Sandinistas received a mandate in 1985. They also remained popular at the time of the election, garnering far more votes than any other party and almost as many votes as all other parties combined (over 40% of the votes cast). # 10) that the Mesquito indians were nearly wiped out by # the Sandinistas Nearly wiped out? Where does this little factoid come from. Yes, the Sandinistas battled the Mesuito Indians for awhile over the misguided policy of forced relocation. The government then realized their error and not only gave up trying to relocate the Mesuitos, but gave them autonomy unheard of in the area. Tell you what John, if you’re really concerned about native Indian tribes in Central America, let’s talk about the situation in Guatemala shall we. This US supported government is systematically massacring its native population in order to eliminate any possible native land claim. Hundreds of thousands of Gualtemalans have fled their own government to live in squalid refugee camps in Mexico. But this mere crossing of a national boundry doesn’t bother the Guatemalan government, as they send helicopter gunships into Mexico to attack the refugee camps. # 11) that there were extrajudicial murders by the # Sandinistas documented by Amnesty International. Yup, it’s true. Amnesty International also said that the Nicaraguan government was making an effort to identify and bring to trial those responsible (which they did in many cases). Their report on Nicaragua talks about isolated killings by individual government forces. It also talks about far more widespread and brutal attacks by contra forces including evidence of systematic rape and torture of innocent civilians. Now, in contrast to the report on Nicaraguan government killings (which, again, were described as isolated events in which the government was trying to punish the offenders) the report on the US-supported Salvadoran government describes a government-directed policy of death-squad activity. It says that the Salvadoran government regularly makes use of torture and extra-judicial killing as a means to suppress opposition and that the government actively works to suppress any investigation of such activities. Yet what government did the US decide to take on? # 12) that the Sandinistas distributed arms and ammunition # and distributed vast resources to themselves upon their # loss of the elections in 1990. Yup, to counter the arms and resources that the contras held at this time (I suppose). I’m not saying it was right, but the weapons I can understand. # 13) that the Sandinistas intend armed rebellion to kill more # Nicaraguans until they get their way. I havn’t seen this report you keep harping about – perhaps you could provide a (gasp!) reference. David LeBlanc

Response:

I agree with Brian Ross. The US has no business commiting acts of war against nicaragua… * Don Baldwin "Between the idea and the reality, * * Software Engineer Between the motion and the act, falls the shadow. * * Between the conception and the creation, *

Response:

Despite the horrendous circumstances, Nicaragua’s economic progress through the early 1980s was surprisingly good, with the highest growth rate in Central America by a large margin, an improvement in standard of living in contrast to a substantial fall for the rest of Central America and a somewhat lesser fall for Latin America as a whole, and significant redistribution of income and expansion of social services. In 1983, the

Yeah. Nicaragua was great. After all, they had the highest growth rate as Chomsky says (:-) and yet 500,000 people left Nicaragua and by 1990 the Nicaraguan economy was one-temth that of 1980 and Nicaragua was the poorest country on the entire continent. It’s amazing that in the early 80’s life was so good for the Nicarguans and yet by 1990 the following was also true: 1) the economy was 1/10th of 1980 2) 500,000 Nicarguans had left Nicaragua 3) Nicaragua was the poorest country in Latin America 4) The Sandinistas lost the only legitimate election in 10 years. 5) it was proved that that the Sandinistas had been funneling aid to the FMLN in ElSalvador. 6) it is proved by the election of Chomorro that the Sandinista military was unnecessary and the war was unnecessary. 7) that Nicargua was hated by all its neighbors that Nicaragua was spending 25% of its economy importing weapons to kill its own people. 9) that the Sandinistas had no popular mandate 10) that the Mesquito indians were nearly wiped out by the Sandinistas 11) that there were extrajudicial murders by the Sandinistas documented by Amnesty International. 12) that the Sandinistas distributed arms and ammunition and distributed vast resources to themselves upon their loss of the elections in 1990. 13) that the Sandinistas intend armed rebellion to kill more Nicaraguans until they get their way. What purpose do these thugs serve? When they don’t get their way they resort to violence. Ortega just declared war to achieve certain political aims. The Contras simply wanted an election. They fought to allow the PEOPLE to make a choice. This is demonstrated by the FACT that the Contras laid down their arms at the end of the election. The Sandinistas fight to achieve political ends, not to empower the people. This is demonstrated by the FACT of their latest threats. Their purpose is to kill opposition. They do not believe in democracy. The Sandinistas had the election because they thought they couldn’t lose. They didn’t realize how smart the people of Nicaragua are and they do not want to give the Nicaraguan people another election. The Sandinistas are not asking for another election, because they know they would lose even more seats. The Nicaraguans are disgusted by Sandinistas. Rather, the Sandinistas threaten violence to achieve their political ends which is to retain power over their resources. They threaten violence to retain assets they lavished on themselves in the days after they knew they had lost power and the day power was turned over to Chomorro. That is what they threaten Nicaragua with another civil war for. Naturally, the idea that the U.S. might pay reparations for what it has done can be relegated to the same category as the notion that it might observe international law generally: Too ludicrous to merit a word of comment.

I agree here. The US is not going to obey laws written and decided by people like Saddam Hussein. I am proud to say that Saddam Hussein and others have no legal right over the US. Wheh. I am glad of that. Aren’t you? Applying these principles to Nicaragua, Viron Vaky outlined "the principal arguments" for supporting the contras: "a longer war of attrition will so weaken the regime, provoke such a radical hardening of repression, and win sufficient support from Nicaragua’s discontented population that sooner or later the regime will be overthrown by popular revolt, self-destruct by means of internal coups or leadership splits, or simply capitulate to salvage what it can";

Exactly. The US did not think that the Contras could actually win the war with the USSR and Cuba supplying billions in military supplies. The policy was to force the Sandinistas to eventually have an election and face the decision of the people. The policy worked. The Sandinistas finally faced their people in an open election and were defeated. US policy of helping democracy in Nicaragua eventually worked. We should all be proud. The era of Nicaragua as a terrorist state hated by its neighbors and forcing hundreds of thousands of its own citizens to flee and a civil war in which Nicaragua was spending 25% of its GNP on weapons to kill its own people was over and a legitimate and peaceful government took over. The billions in military weapons are stopped and peace and prosperity through mutual cooperation and mutual interests can finally happen. The Nicaraguans could look forward to peace, however, Ortega continues to threaten war. He does not ask for new elections. He says that he wants his money OR he will go to war. So, the Hitler still has some flames. We’ll see how much terror and horror the Sandinistas can still wreak on Nicargua. We can all watch in amazement as the beasts flame continues to sputter.

Response:

So enormous was the devastation left as Somoza’s final legacy that a World Bank Mission concluded in October 1981 that "per capita income levels of 1977 will not be attained, in the best of circumstances, until the late 1980s" and that "any untoward event could lead to a financial trauma." There were, of course, untoward events… - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - This article as the other is excerpted from Chomksy’s _Decline of the Democratic Ideal_ ; use the GET command with DEMOCRAT DECLINE. See bottom on how to use the GET command. Nicaragua also attempted to maintain its trade links with the U.S. and the West, and succeeded in doing so through the mid-1980s despite U.S. efforts. But Washington naturally preferred that they rely on the East bloc, to ensure maximal inefficiency and to justify the attack on these "Soviet clients." The U.S. also blocked aid from international development organizations, and, after failing to displace the FSLN, sought to destroy private business in Nicaragua to increase domestic discontent and undermine the mixed economy (a major and predicted effect of the Reagan embargo, and the reason why it was bitterly opposed by the Nicaraguan opposition that the U.S. claimed to support). {note: Walker, _Nicaragua: The Land of Sandino_ (Westview, 1986), 67f.; Michael Conroy, in Walker, ed., _op. cit._; _La Prensa_ (Managua), April 20, 1988, and Stephen Kinzer, "Anti-Sandinistas Say U.S. Should End Embargo," _NYT_, Jan. 12, 1989.} So enormous was the devastation left as Somoza’s final legacy that a World Bank Mission concluded in October 1981 that "per capita income levels of 1977 will not be attained, in the best of circumstances, until the late 1980s" and that "any untoward event could lead to a financial trauma." There were, of course, "untoward events," but such facts do not trouble the ideologues who deduce Sandinista responsibility for the subsequent economic debacle from the doctrinal necessity of this conclusion. A standard rhetorical trick, pioneered by the Kissinger Commission, is to "demonstrate" Sandinista economic mismanagement by comparing living standards of 1977 to those of the eighties, thus attributing the effects of the U.S.-backed Somoza terror to the Marxist-Leninist totalitarians. {note: Conroy, _op. cit._} Despite the horrendous circumstances, Nicaragua’s economic progress through the early 1980s was surprisingly good, with the highest growth rate in Central America by a large margin, an improvement in standard of living in contrast to a substantial fall for the rest of Central America and a somewhat lesser fall for Latin America as a whole, and significant redistribution of income and expansion of social services. In 1983, the [Use the GET command on the file FSLN ACHIEVE for a good deal more documentation of the achievements of the Nicaraguan revolution. --HB] Inter-American Development Bank reported that Nicaragua’s "noteworthy progress in the social sector" was "laying a solid foundation for long-term socio-economic development." The World Bank and other international development organizations lauded the "remarkable" Nicaraguan record and outstanding success, in some respects "better than anywhere in the world" (World Bank). But U.S. pressures succeeded in terminating these dangerous developments. By early 1987, business leader Enrique Bolanos, well to the right of the UNO directorate, attributed the economic crisis in Nicaragua to the war (60%, presumably including the economic war), the international economic crisis (10%), the contraction of the Central American Common Market (10%), and decapitalization by the business sector and government errors (20%). The London _Financial Times_ estimates the costs of the contra war at $12 billion; UNO economist Francisco Mayorga adds $3 billion as the costs of the embargo. Actual totals are unknown, but plainly fall within the range of the "untoward events" which, the World Bank predicted, would lead to catastrophe. {note: _Ibid._, 232-3, 223, 239; Diana Melrose, _Nicaragua: the Threat of a Good Example?_ (Oxfam, 1985); Sylvia Maxfield & Richard Stahler-Sholk, in Walker, ed., _op. cit._; Kornbluh, _op. cit._, 105f.; _Culture of Terrorism_, 52; Andrew Marshall, _Financial Times_, Feb. 27; Christopher Marquis, _Miami Herald_, Feb. 21, 1990.} Naturally, the idea that the U.S. might pay reparations for what it has done can be relegated to the same category as the notion that it might observe international law generally: Too ludicrous to merit a word of comment. Underlying their various tactical moves, the Carter doves had a strategic conception. Robert Pastor comments that "The United States did not want to control Nicaragua or the other nations in the region, but it also did not want to allow developments to get out of control. It wanted Nicaraguans to act independently, _except_ when doing so would affect U.S. interests adversely." Nicaraguans, in short, should have complete freedom to do what we want them to do, and need not be controlled unless they are out of control. {note: Pastor, _op. cit._, 32 (his emphasis).} Applying these principles to Nicaragua, Viron Vaky outlined "the principal arguments" for supporting the contras: "a longer war of attrition will so weaken the regime, provoke such a radical hardening of repression, and win sufficient support from Nicaragua’s discontented population that sooner or later the regime will be overthrown by popular revolt, self-destruct by means of internal coups or leadership splits, or simply capitulate to salvage what it can"; another one of those cases of "the tragic self-destruction of Central America" lamented by Theodore Sorenson. The sole aim of Reagan policy, Vaky continues, was "a negotiation on the terms and schedule under which the Sandinistas would turn over power," a goal that he sees as "reasonable" and "idealistic," while acknowledging that the U.S. proxy forces to which power is to be turned over "have been unable to elicit significant political support." {note: Vaky, _Foreign Policy_, Fall 1987.} To get a file named FILE NAME from the archiver (files are two words separa- ted by a space), send the 1-line message GET FILE NAME ACTIV-L Use GET with the file ACTIV-L ARCHIVE for a listing of files available with the GET command.

Response:

Filed under: Human Rights

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.

Activism Change

Learn, read, react :: Activism