Posted on 12/10/2006 9:46:26 AM PST by My Favorite Headache
The truth, in short, is this:
• Salvador Allende and his Marxist-Communist coalition party Unidad Popular, employing massive electoral fraud and with financial backing from the Soviet Union, barely squeaked out a plurality of 36 percent in Chile’s 1970 presidential elections.
• With an army of some 14,000 foreign Communists, Allende began to transform Chile into a totalitarian dictatorship.
• Allende’s administration was thoroughly packed with Cubans, Soviets, and other international Communists.
• In short order, the Allende forces had looted the treasury, destroyed the economy, illegally expropriated thousands of private farms, homes, and businesses, and unleashed a wave of terror.
• Chile’s judiciary and legislature, as well as prominent leaders of all sectors of Chilean society, repeatedly condemned Allende’s actions and called upon the military to intervene.
• The Pinochet-led coup was supported overwhelmingly by the Chilean people, who also voted to approve the new constitution offered by the junta.
• Documents and arms captured when Allende was overthrown on September 1l, 1973, proved that Allende was planning to stage his own coup on September 19th, and to slaughter his opposition.
• The international Communist apparatus has continued an unceasing war of terrorism, subversion, and propaganda against Pinochet’s Chile ever since.
• The Pinochet junta reacted with remarkable restraint toward its violent opponents.
• The Pinochet junta has never received credit for the peace and freedom it delivered to the Chilean people, or for the marvelous economic and social reforms it accomplished.
• President Pinochet, as he promised, voluntarily stepped down from power, returning the reins of government to civilian control, after establishing stability, security, and constitutional reform.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1999/09-13-99/vo15no19_pinochet.htm
Don't get logical with us. :)
Why don't we use some hypotheticals and see where it goes?
Let's say Hillary wins the presidential election in 2008, she immediately starts punishing her rivals and violating the constitution. She takes over private property, nationalize companies and ignores the U.S. Supreme Court. ON TOP of that, she takes marching orders from the United Nations. Her policies plunge our nation's economy into a deep depression. Hyperinflation happens... 500% annual inflation. Hillary wants to suspend our constitutional rights and shut down Rush Limbaugh, and Free Republic. She wants to imprison anyone who doesn't like her policies.
Wouldn't you agree we are heading to a very dangerous place? What exactly would you suggest we do knowing we don't have much time before Hillary consolidates her power and becomes a brutal tyrant like Stalin?
That's what a lot of the people who supported the Nazi party thought so, as well. You can't excuse EVERYTHING as a move against communism.
Try the Rettig Report: http://www.usip.org/library/tc/doc/reports/chile/chile_1993_toc.html
No, not as long as they didn't resort to having death squads and causing disappearances of people, and they only kept the casualties to the high echelons of the Venezuelan brass.
RIP
Pinochet restored political freedom and brought prosperity to the Chilean people by restoring economic freedom and turning back Marxism.
That said, he was not a nice man.
Chile's economy was shattered by hyperinflation and social unrest. Allende already violated the constitution by taking over private property, imprisoning people and ignoring the Supreme Court and congress.
The next obvious step for Allende was to consolidate power and to do this, you are going to have to kill A LOT of people. What makes you think Allende wouldn't take this step? And what part of communism don't you understand?
No offense, but I am not going to read that whole report. What does the United States Institute for Peace have to say? My guess is they were against deploying minuteman missiles, etc.
Proverbs 25:21 "If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink."
Proverbs 24:17 "Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth."
Romans 12:17 Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.
Romans 12:19-21 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.
This does NOT mean that I would have supported the communists, that I disagree with taking out Allende, etc. However, to deny that any human being is a human being is sheer un-Scriptural.
He also showed social security could be successfully reformed through privatization, a lesson that the leftists of the world are even slower to learn.
These are the real reasons the left vilifies him, not for making 3000 people or so disappear. Even if he were guilty as charged, the toll is considerably less than the toll of making and keeping any country Communist.
I'm not God, but I suspect he will be welcomed in heaven because the good he did so outweighs the bad. And while he goes on to his eternal reward, whatever it may be, the left will continue to snipe and lament the fact that they were unable to have their show trial for a sick old man whose worst of deeds was still better than the average Communist dictator's best of deeds.
Well, he certainly hated communism, not to mention Western-styled capitalism.
Then why was he a U.S. ally during the Iran-Iraq War?
LOL, like he would have had any choice.
After he destroyed Chile's economy through his "economic reforms," after he he pumped up the "counter-revolutionary threats against the people," to whom do you think he would have gone crawling for help?
It's common as dirt.
The Moslems do it as a religious item, and the Commies did it as a consequence of an ideology that was creating "the new soviet man".
A little tit for tat with the Commies would seem to me to be quite acceptable, particularly since it is essentially self-defense ~ and if you don't believe that look at the number of people the Commies killed over their years in power.
Again, until a Jesus quote can be found that says specifically that "Commies" are OK, they aren't.
I'm not saying that killing Commies out of self-defense is wrong. I'm saying that it's wrong to kill ALL Commies, I'm talking about the non-violent ones, just because they are Commies. Furthermore, I'm saying that it would seem that Christianity does not proscribe the killing of people on the basis that they're supposedly "subhuman" for their beliefs. Kill in self-defense, not for the sake of killing.
I must have missed how Saddam had passed off his country to an elected governement, over time. Did that happen right before our invasion?
Ignorance follows ignorance on this thread, thanks to ... the MSM. Pinochet was a hero, no two buts about it, for saving his country from the horrors that so many countries have experienced in the past century. Unfortunately, people had to die, some innocent, most naive idealists. Post-WWII civilization has lost its bearings, its definitions of good and evil, and the Left and now Islamists are using our confusion to defeat us. Sorry, comrades, but in these wars, heads have to roll.
That has nothing to do with the fact that Saddam was anti-Islamofacist and thus was a U.S. all for some time at the expense of Iran.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.