• A reminder that Forum Moderator applications are currently still open! If you're interested in joining an active team of moderators for one of the biggest Pokémon forums on the internet, click here for info.
  • Due to the recent changes with Twitter's API, it is no longer possible for Bulbagarden forum users to login via their Twitter account. If you signed up to Bulbagarden via Twitter and do not have another way to login, please contact us here with your Twitter username so that we can get you sorted.

Another one for the circles of hell

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can't remember...was he a Nixon/Ford appointee? Or was he a DIY-er? Or is that still "classified"?
 
Almost all the cold war military coups in the western hemisphere had some kind of help from the US. We let some of real animals become the rulers of nations but at least that killed the Godless commies for us. And the sickest part is now we're doing it all over again except replace commies with terrorists.
 
Yeah, that's why I'm not patriotic any more.
Anyway, Huzzah!
Sometimes I wish there was hell, just so people like that could burn in it.
 
The Big Al said:
Almost all the cold war military coups in the western hemisphere had some kind of help from the US. We let some of real animals become the rulers of nations but at least that killed the Godless commies for us. And the sickest part is now we're doing it all over again except replace commies with terrorists.
Click to expand...

Lol, I was waiting to see how many posts it'd take before someone mentioned "teh 3vil CIA." I'm surprised you didn't throw Reagan out there.

It's too bad they couldn't nail some charges on him, so that he'd die in jail rather than in some palace. I will say that as bad as these near-fascist dictatorships were, Communist takeover and rule was no better. It was likely that most of those nations would undergo some kind of brutal takeover; it was just in our interests that capitalists did it.
 
Captialists? These were fascists, the kind we vowed to destroy in Europe during World War II. We removed legally elected governments by the most violent means. How can you justify this blatent disregaurd for human rights.

And not one of these countries were a threat to us as long as we didn't threaten them. It was our fault that Cuba allied itself with the USSR and made Castro dictator until recently. The real problem is that they wanted out of the United State's shadow and it was our imperalism and not our mission to destroy communism that created these monsters.
 
The Big Al said:
Captialists? These were fascists, the kind we vowed to destroy in Europe during World War II. We removed legally elected governments by the most violent means. How can you justify this blatent disregaurd for human rights.

I'm not justifying it, I'm just pointing out that Communist countries were just as bad.

And not one of these countries were a threat to us as long as we didn't threaten them. It was our fault that Cuba allied itself with the USSR and made Castro dictator until recently. The real problem is that they wanted out of the United State's shadow and it was our imperalism and not our mission to destroy communism that created these monsters.
Click to expand...

This is the same idealistic "if we leave them alone they'll never attack us" crap that pervaded the US before WWII and now has given birth to the ideas of abandoning the Middle East. Communism was just as expansionist as capitalism. And as I said before, the Communists were often restrictive, oppressive, and murdersome like Pinochet.

But this is off-topic. Pinochet on his own was obviously a ruthless dictator.
 
Of course. *rolls eyes*

Chile attacking the United States. RIIIIIIGHT.

(PS : Do not even think to compare with Al Qaeda. Entirely different groups, strategies, and situations. And Socialist is not the same as Communist, not that I expect a right-wing American to be able to tell the difference.
 
There are times I don't think GM can tell the differece betwee communists and Democrats.
 
Evil Figment said:
Of course. *rolls eyes*

Chile attacking the United States. RIIIIIIGHT.

(PS : Do not even think to compare with Al Qaeda. Entirely different groups, strategies, and situations. And Socialist is not the same as Communist, not that I expect a right-wing American to be able to tell the difference.
Click to expand...

There was this thing in Cuba with some Communists, some missiles, or something like that, but I just can't remember the name of it. Darn. :rolleyes:

The Soviets had already wet themselves over the idea of having a missile base or airfield so close to the US in Cuba and Grenada, and a foothold in South America would have been too good for them to pass up.
 
As I recall, you had missiles in Turkey, which has a common land border with the Soviet Union, long before they deployed missiles in Cuba.

As far as "having missiles right next door to the other country" goes in the threatening gestures scale, the United States have no ground to stand on to blame anyone.

Also, I HOPE you realize that as far as Chile goes, its northern border is - as the missile fly - an EXTRA thousand mile from a southern USA city like San Diego, when compared to the USSR Kamchatka peninsula? I'm sure the Soviet would have loved the thought of basing their missiles further away from the states.

As far as a base in South America, first off Chile was - at the time - Socialist, which is not the same as out and out Communist. Second off, so what? The whole "EFIL COMMIE VIRUS SPREAD!" theory is someone's idea of a poor joke. (If anything - and yes, this is hindsight, a communist base in South America would have only hastened the Soviet Union's demise by draining yet more resources from the State.)
 
Last edited:
Evil Figment said:
As I recall, you had missiles in Turkey, which has a common land border with the Soviet Union, long before they deployed missiles in Cuba.

So it was hypocritical. Big deal. Obviously if we're sane we'll promote our interests while demoting our enemies' interests. The USSR did the same, and it's just about who pushes more. Sure, we had to compromise them away, but it was to make sure that any Communists near us were toothless. Since it'd be easier if the Communists didn't come to power at all, it's a logical move to keep pro-Americans in power. The choices may not have exactly been upright, moral fellows, but it still made sense for the US to support anti-Communist governments.

As far as "having missiles right next door to the other country" goes in the threatening gestures scale, the United States have no ground to stand on to blame anyone.

Also, I HOPE you realize that as far as Chile goes, its northern border is - as the missile fly - an EXTRA thousand mile from a southern USA city like San Diego, when compared to the USSR Kamchatka peninsula? I'm sure the Soviet would have loved the thought of basing their missiles further away from the states.

I never specifically mentioned missiles from Chile, so thanks for the obvious statement. Chile would have been a more effective base as to spread Communism to other nations.

As far as a base in South America, first off Chile was - at the time - Socialist, which is not the same as out and out Communist. Second off, so what? The whole "EFIL COMMIE VIRUS SPREAD!" theory is someone's idea of a poor joke.
Click to expand...

Chile and Cuba were also quite friendly, and Chile's economic policies were strongly leftist even for Socialists.

As for the whole domino theory, the wilder claims of the entire third world falling to Communism were of course unsubstantiated, but the idea of one bad apple spoiling the rest still held (i.e. Indochina).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom