5 ms·

>The U.S. didn't get involved in, say, Chile, until 1973 This isn't even remotely correct. The US began expanding its influence in South America (Chile include

>The U.S. didn't get involved in, say, Chile, until 1973 This isn't even remotely correct. The US began expanding its influence in South America (Chile included) around the early 1800s. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_intervention_in_Chile https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_intervention_i... South America has been getting plundered by empires for centuries, the US is just the most recently successful one to do so.

cryptonector 9y ago
Most of that seems like not much of anything. I made a very specific claim: that political violence was endemic in Latin America before 1973, and that the U.S. did not cause that violence. You did nothing to refute it.
- jackpirate 9y ago
  The book Inside the Company is the diary of a CIA officer in Uruguay and El Salvador during the late 60s and early 70s. He specifically recounts times where he allowed/encouraged the local police to torture dissidents, and how he helped fund the anti-Allende campaigns before 1973. This primary source shows that the CIA was encouraging political violence before 1973.
  - cryptonector 9y ago
    The example I'm most familiar with (because I grew up there), Argentina, was violent through and through for many many decades, long before 1976. The U.S. absolutely had nothing to do with violence in Argentina prior to 1976. Carter did not support the military in Argentina either, nor did they need his support. They would have killed 30,000 people with or without external support because it's what they wanted and had the means to do (it doesn't take much!). But more than that, the violence stopped in the 80s. As horrible as the dirty war was, one thing changed in its aftermath: there was no further appetite for political violence afterwards. It's certainly NOT the case that all who liked violence met a violent end during the dirty war. What happened was that there was a noticeable -impossible to miss!- "enough!" feeling throughout Argentine society in 1983. How do you square that with "the U.S. what done it"?! I don't think you can.
- wu-ikkyu 9y ago
  >violence was endemic in Latin America before 1973, and that the U.S. did not cause that violence I must still be misunderstanding; you're saying US interests have had no involvement with the violence in South America before 1973? If so that is assuredly false. "I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents." -Major General Smedley Butler, War is a Racket (1935)
  - cryptonector 9y ago
    Americans had zero to do with political violence in Argentina prior to 1976, and going back decades.
    - wu-ikkyu 9y ago
      It was mostly the Spanish, French, and British empires instigating violence in Argentina up until then, when the US joined the party with the Dirty War.

cryptonector 9y ago

Most of that seems like not much of anything. I made a very specific claim: that political violence was endemic in Latin America before 1973, and that the U.S. did not cause that violence. You did nothing to refute it.

jackpirate 9y ago
The book Inside the Company is the diary of a CIA officer in Uruguay and El Salvador during the late 60s and early 70s. He specifically recounts times where he allowed/encouraged the local police to torture dissidents, and how he helped fund the anti-Allende campaigns before 1973. This primary source shows that the CIA was encouraging political violence before 1973.
- cryptonector 9y ago
  The example I'm most familiar with (because I grew up there), Argentina, was violent through and through for many many decades, long before 1976. The U.S. absolutely had nothing to do with violence in Argentina prior to 1976. Carter did not support the military in Argentina either, nor did they need his support. They would have killed 30,000 people with or without external support because it's what they wanted and had the means to do (it doesn't take much!). But more than that, the violence stopped in the 80s. As horrible as the dirty war was, one thing changed in its aftermath: there was no further appetite for political violence afterwards. It's certainly NOT the case that all who liked violence met a violent end during the dirty war. What happened was that there was a noticeable -impossible to miss!- "enough!" feeling throughout Argentine society in 1983. How do you square that with "the U.S. what done it"?! I don't think you can.
wu-ikkyu 9y ago
>violence was endemic in Latin America before 1973, and that the U.S. did not cause that violence I must still be misunderstanding; you're saying US interests have had no involvement with the violence in South America before 1973? If so that is assuredly false. "I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents." -Major General Smedley Butler, War is a Racket (1935)
- cryptonector 9y ago
  Americans had zero to do with political violence in Argentina prior to 1976, and going back decades.
  - wu-ikkyu 9y ago
    It was mostly the Spanish, French, and British empires instigating violence in Argentina up until then, when the US joined the party with the Dirty War.