4 ms·

> Bolivia — A CIA-organized military operation captures legendary guerilla Che Guevara. The CIA wants to keep him alive for interrogation, but the Bolivian gove

> Bolivia — A CIA-organized military operation captures legendary guerilla Che Guevara. The CIA wants to keep him alive for interrogation, but the Bolivian government executes him to prevent worldwide calls for clemency. This was actually a good thing. Che Guevara was a psychopathic murderer and war criminal. Looking through this list, it is interesting how it minimizes the atrocities of communists. Lest there be an accusation of “both sides”, you really have to consider the contexts in which things occurred. For example during WWII, you could easily do a huge article about Allied atrocities in fighting the Nazis and how civilian and industrial areas were targeted and often included as collateral damage during night time bombing. But it is also true that the bombing of cities and destruction of German industrial capacity contributed to the collapse of the Nazis. The truth is that Communists have killed more people and been responsible for more human misery than any corresponding movement or ideology in the 20th century. In addition, for the most part, the countries that joined the US Bloc ended up doing well for their citizens in the long term, even when they started out as authoritarian (see for example South Korea and Singapore) while countries that embraced Communism screwed over their people (See East Germany and North Korea).

bayesian_horse 5y ago
I think it is useless to group atrocities by ideology. Not the least because the distinctions are somewhat arbitrary. What the writeup is missing is a contemporary context. It also tries to fault the current CIA, and by association the current US government, for mistakes or even crimes committed by different human beings decades ago. In order to make an ideological point.
- cholantesh 5y ago
  I mean, there isn't any indication that they've changed course since 1993, so what's the issue?
  - bayesian_horse 5y ago
    Can you point to any CIA coup or assassination since then? Please don't say Libya. That wasn't the CIA and there was a UN resolution. Please don't bring up the Iraq WMD story... the CIA didn't actually lie, it was the White House that massively overstated the evidence for the beliefs it actually had. And much later they actually found WMDs in Iraq.
    - cholantesh 5y ago
      Coups and assassinations don't form the totality of what the OP regards as an atrocity, but anyway, as far as coups go, Saddam in '96 and arming and training opposition in Syria and Iraq strike me as only semantically distinct. The CIA also still conducts assassinations through its drone program, though they use weasel words ('''targeted killings''') to dodge the accusation.
      - bayesian_horse 5y ago
        "Coups and assassinations" would be the majority of kinetic options the CIA has at its disposal. How is the CIA involved with Saddam Hussein in 1996? Training "opposition" forces in Syria is hardly an "atrocity" and at worst it is ethically questionably, not an outright mistake or crime. Assad isn't exactly a benign, democratically elected and popular leader. How does the drone program connect to OP's claim of assassinating democratically elected popular leaders for American business interests? It may be questionable on grounds of international law, or on strategy, or on ethical grounds (with the collateral damage), but they did target terrorist/insurgent leaders who are committing and planning violence against US forces, Afghan forces and civilians all the time. The CIA is acting more like a conventional military force in that instance. The reason it is the CIA doing this, and not the Airforce, is not so much the "covert" or "secret" part of its capabilities, but the "intelligence" part, i.e. knowing who to hit. An alternative would be to tell Afghan (and on occasion Pakistani) forces to conduct heavily armed raids in these areas with many more casualties. Another, even worse alternative is what the US tried in Vietnam and neighboring countries, just burning and bombing everything and everyone. Not mentioning all that context strikes me as a bit one-sided.
whydoibother 5y ago
> This was actually a good thing. Che Guevara was a psychopathic murderer and war criminal. No, he wasn't. >The truth is that Communists have killed more people and been responsible for more human misery than any corresponding movement or ideology in the 20th century. No, it hasn't. Stop spreading worthless VoC propaganda.

bayesian_horse 5y ago

I think it is useless to group atrocities by ideology. Not the least because the distinctions are somewhat arbitrary. What the writeup is missing is a contemporary context. It also tries to fault the current CIA, and by association the current US government, for mistakes or even crimes committed by different human beings decades ago. In order to make an ideological point.

cholantesh 5y ago
I mean, there isn't any indication that they've changed course since 1993, so what's the issue?
- bayesian_horse 5y ago
  Can you point to any CIA coup or assassination since then? Please don't say Libya. That wasn't the CIA and there was a UN resolution. Please don't bring up the Iraq WMD story... the CIA didn't actually lie, it was the White House that massively overstated the evidence for the beliefs it actually had. And much later they actually found WMDs in Iraq.
  - cholantesh 5y ago
    Coups and assassinations don't form the totality of what the OP regards as an atrocity, but anyway, as far as coups go, Saddam in '96 and arming and training opposition in Syria and Iraq strike me as only semantically distinct. The CIA also still conducts assassinations through its drone program, though they use weasel words ('''targeted killings''') to dodge the accusation.
    - bayesian_horse 5y ago
      "Coups and assassinations" would be the majority of kinetic options the CIA has at its disposal. How is the CIA involved with Saddam Hussein in 1996? Training "opposition" forces in Syria is hardly an "atrocity" and at worst it is ethically questionably, not an outright mistake or crime. Assad isn't exactly a benign, democratically elected and popular leader. How does the drone program connect to OP's claim of assassinating democratically elected popular leaders for American business interests? It may be questionable on grounds of international law, or on strategy, or on ethical grounds (with the collateral damage), but they did target terrorist/insurgent leaders who are committing and planning violence against US forces, Afghan forces and civilians all the time. The CIA is acting more like a conventional military force in that instance. The reason it is the CIA doing this, and not the Airforce, is not so much the "covert" or "secret" part of its capabilities, but the "intelligence" part, i.e. knowing who to hit. An alternative would be to tell Afghan (and on occasion Pakistani) forces to conduct heavily armed raids in these areas with many more casualties. Another, even worse alternative is what the US tried in Vietnam and neighboring countries, just burning and bombing everything and everyone. Not mentioning all that context strikes me as a bit one-sided.

whydoibother 5y ago

> This was actually a good thing. Che Guevara was a psychopathic murderer and war criminal. No, he wasn't. >The truth is that Communists have killed more people and been responsible for more human misery than any corresponding movement or ideology in the 20th century. No, it hasn't. Stop spreading worthless VoC propaganda.