NationStates Jolt Archive

From CNN:

Military hospital in Chile says former dictator Augusto Pinochet has died, The Associated Press reports.

Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6167237.stm)

Was going to post this myself. I hope they try his corpse.

Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6167237.stm)

Was going to post this myself. I hope they try his corpse.

I doubt they will try his corpse.

Didn't Congo-Kinshasa predict this?

Anyway, wow, thats Botha, Milosevic, and now Pinochet, I wonder when they're going to hang Saddam?

I doubt they will try his corpse.
Probably not, but there should be some sort of justice.

Good riddance.

let me be the first to say


HAHAHAHA. I hope it hurt.

I have no response to this so:

http://memepedia.info/images/d/dd/Kungfucat.JPG

From CNN:

Military hospital in Chile says former dictator Augusto Pinochet has died, The Associated Press reports.

Good.End of an era.

Worse deaths have happened...

As a member of Amnesty International I regret the loss of any human. However, the man has caused destruction to thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, and thus this is the ultimate price he must pay. The only thing Chile should regret is that he was never tried. The rest must be forgotten if Chile is to move on.

Worse deaths have happened...

...like the ones he caused. Ah well. He's gone to a worse place.

Worse deaths have happened...

...I'm confused.Do you mean Pinochet's death is a bad thing?Or am I reading this wrong?

At last he died i jut want to see what Michelle will do

Good riddance.

QFT

From CNN:

Military hospital in Chile says former dictator Augusto Pinochet has died, The Associated Press reports.

Everybody dies....just that the people he slaughtered died quicker.

Only sad thing is that he never got brought to justice. Ho hum.

...I'm confused.Do you mean Pinochet's death is a bad thing?Or am I reading this wrong?

He's saying that deaths worse than this have occured.

...I'm confused.Do you mean Pinochet's death is a bad thing?Or am I reading this wrong?

Well, it IS a bad thing in that it ends his suffering, but it's a good thing if there's a Hell, for instance.

At last he died i jut want to see what Michelle will do

If I were her:

"Pablo, order us thirty pizzas! Extra cheese! Come on, everyone, 'Para bailar La Bamba!'" :D

He's saying that deaths worse than this have occured.

Ok.
That cleared nothing up.You just reworded it.

Well, it IS a bad thing in that it ends his suffering, but it's a good thing if there's a Hell, for instance.

True,it's sad he never got tried for his crimes.Let's hope there's a special little place in Hell reserved just for him-right next to Hitler and Stalin.

Ok.
That cleared nothing up.You just reworded it.

People have died grusemer (sp?) deaths than what Pinochet suffered. Is that better for you?

People have died grusemer (sp?) deaths than what Pinochet suffered. Is that better for you?

Wait...now I get it.Ta.
And there's no such word as "grusemer," you have to say "more gruesome."

I really shouldn't.

But...


:::HAPPY DANCE!:::

I really shouldn't.

But...


:::HAPPY DANCE!:::

Oh no,you really should.
In fact,I'll join you.
*Dances with Daistallia*

Good riddance

Oh no,you really should.
In fact,I'll join you.
*Dances with Daistallia*

*Starts DJing for the dancers* Techno hits! :D

One down, *loses count*... many many to go.

He shan't be missed over on this end.

I'm sure my favourite genius Communist teacher is having a good day. I once mentioned Pinochet in class and he screamed out "that man should be shot!"

I'm sure my favourite genius Communist teacher is having a good day. I once mentioned Pinochet in class and he screamed out "that man should be shot!"
Is that as in he taught Communism, or he was a teacher who was also Communist?

I really shouldn't.

But...


:::HAPPY DANCE!:::
I'll save that for Thatcher, but I know how you feel. I just wish Means was still here to share it with us...

I'm sure my favourite genius Communist teacher is having a good day. I once mentioned Pinochet in class and he screamed out "that man should be shot!"

Well, that's because, regardless of communist or capitalist, Pinochet was a repulsive human being.

Is that as in he taught Communism, or he was a teacher who was also Communist?
He's an economics teacher (hilarious because he teaches us the wonders of capitalism) and a history teacher. He's also a Communist and never ceases to remind us. He's the leader of like four teachers unions. I absolutely love the guy. He's brilliant.

*Starts DJing for the dancers* Techno hits! :D

(Put on some decent music at least...)

He's an economics teacher (hilarious because he teaches us the wonders of capitalism) and a history teacher. He's also a Communist and never ceases to remind us. He's the leader of like four teachers unions. I absolutely love the guy. He's brilliant.
I can just see Ann Coulter's head exploding with "liberal professors!" insanity.

(Put on some decent music at least...)

I was afraid of putting up some Paul McCartney and people not liking. May I? :)

Good riddance. He was a horrible man who was supported by that b**** Thatcher. If thier is a buddhist hell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naraka_%28Buddhism%29) he's in it and that he'll be reincarnated as a poor Chilean who's family was a victim of his attrocities.


I'm gonna post Imagine (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEOkxRLzBf0)

Hurrah. But really, they should display his body in the centre of town for all to see and insult, and then have some kind of astonishingly bloody game of pinata with it. Oh yes.

Hurrah. But really, they should display his body in the centre of town for all to see and insult, and then have some kind of astonishingly bloody game of pinata with it. Oh yes.

*Pictures a scene*

Child: Mommy, I wanted the liver, Pablito got the liver, it's not fair!
Mom: Pablito, share the liver with your brother!
Pablito: Okay, mommy, but only if I get some spleen too!
Mom, to the child, which, we learn, is called Juanito: Fine, Juanito, give him some spleen!
Juanito: Okay, mommy!

:D

Probably not, but there should be some sort of justice.

Yeah, they should sentence him to death! ...oh wait...

I'll save that for Thatcher, but I know how you feel. I just wish Means was still here to share it with us...

Speak of the devil:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6167351.stm

Bitch.

Speak of the devil:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6167351.stm

Bitch.

God I hope people will finally realize that she wanted to be a dictator. If her own party hadn't got rid of her she still be running the UK. Too bad her son messed up so she couldn't get him as the PM.

My god, my husband probably hasn't heard this news yet. I'm not sure how he'll react...with relief, or a sense that Pinochet escaped...I'm not sure how I feel about it either.

He had it easy.

My husband's uncle took three days to die after he was disappeared.

Ha...in-laws have organised a party, "Una peña para celebrar la muerte de un monstruo"

God I hope people will finally realize that she wanted to be a dictator. If her own party hadn't got rid of her she still be running the UK. Too bad her son messed up so she couldn't get him as the PM.
That story sounds familiar. I wish Poppy Bush would have done us the same favor.

What a coincidence, I was just talking about Pinochet to a Chilean girl I met at a party last night.

At least he accepted full responsibility for his atrocities, that should shut up his apologists for a while.

Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6167237.stm)

Was going to post this myself. I hope they try his corpse.
Why bother? I would imagine that he received express tickets to Hell.

What a coincidence, I was just talking about Pinochet to a Chilean girl I met at a party last night.

At least he accepted full responsibility for his atrocities, that should shut up his apologists for a while.
Don't count on it. I'm surprised no one's jumped out to defend him in this thread.

Don't count on it. I'm surprised no one's jumped out to defend him in this thread.

He prevented Chile from falling to the communist scum and should be lauded for that. Only a shame he wasn't in power long enough to eradicate Chavez's red hind.

Do I win :p

What a coincidence, I was just talking about Pinochet to a Chilean girl I met at a party last night.

At least he accepted full responsibility for his atrocities, that should shut up his apologists for a while.

He didn't accept responsibility for atrocities, he accepted 'full political responsibility' without once saying it was wrong, what happened.

Atlantian Islands will do all the Pinochet-ass kissing we'll need.

Atlantian Islands will do all the Pinochet-ass kissing we'll need.
Like I said, if only MeansToAnEnd aka Citizen_Patriot were here. He'd be brilliant.

Atlantian Islands will do all the Pinochet-ass kissing we'll need.
Right you are.


.....

Guerrero Contra Marxismo!

I stand amongst those by the names of Reagan and Thatcher, supporters of Pinochet and his work saving Chile.

Pinochet, you will be missed, and I'm glad you never had to stand "trial" for your liberation.

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/4913/pinochetqc9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Snip.

Actually, he isn't missed at all, he's probably suffering the greatest tortures the lower planes have to offer, which is far worse than any trial, and you can do nothing about that. He died with his body rotten, he died with his mind dulled, he died suffering, in pain, as he has been the last 5 years, decaying, while his body he so trusted fell apart right before his eyes, unable to do anything about it, a lonely, miserable, hated, undead man. His name will be in the mud for posterity.

Deal.

He prevented Chile from falling to the communist scum and should be lauded for that. Only a shame he wasn't in power long enough to eradicate Chavez's red hind.

Do I win :p

Depends, do you actually believe that piece of fiction you wrote?

Right you are.


.....

Guerrero Contra Marxismo!

I stand amongst those by the names of Reagan and Thatcher, supporters of Pinochet and his work saving Chile.

Pinochet, you will be missed, and I'm glad you never had to stand "trial" for your liberation.
Someday, I hope you find yourself at the tender mercies of people like your heroes. I just hope it isn't here.

let me be the first to say


HAHAHAHA. I hope it hurt.


I AGREE!!!! I hope he rots in hell with the rest of the murdering assholes! I hope the devil makes his afterlife miserable! The people who like him should be ashamed of themselves!



http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/party/party0049.gif

Right you are.


.....

Guerrero Contra Marxismo!

I stand amongst those by the names of Reagan and Thatcher, supporters of Pinochet and his work saving Chile.

Pinochet, you will be missed, and I'm glad you never had to stand "trial" for your liberation.

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/4913/pinochetqc9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)



Please say you are leaving america, I don't want to be in the same universe as you.:mad:

Someday, I hope you find yourself at the tender mercies of people like your heroes. I just hope it isn't here.
I would never try to destroy my country's economy, thereby reducing the money to worthless paper, thereby starving my country men.
Actually, he isn't missed at all, he's probably suffering the greatest tortures the lower planes have to offer and you can do nothing about that.
Prove it. He is missed. I miss him, Thatcher misses him, and I'm sure many other right-wingers miss him.

Prove it. He is missed. I miss him, Thatcher misses him, and I'm sure many other right-wingers miss him.

Vituperari a bonis et laudari a malis unum atque idem est.

Thatcher is a derelict. Most people in Chile despise Pinochet, and rightly. And to claim that "some" will miss him is to claim that "some" support the Unabomber or will miss Bin Laden when he dies - it's true, but it doesn't matter, because "some" people do have this liking for psychopaths and will try to rationalize their behavior.

I would never try to destroy my country's economy, thereby reducing the money to worthless paper, thereby starving my country men.

Prove it. He is missed. I miss him, Thatcher misses him, and I'm sure many other right-wingers miss him.



Don't you ever connect Pinochet to the right again! Liberals on this board, I apologize for his comment and assure you most right wingers are not murdering dictators and would NEVER support or do what Pinochet did!

Please say you are leaving america, I don't want to be in the same universe as you.:mad:
America is the Universe, eh?:confused: :D

And anyway, though I'm not going anywhere, even if I did leave, there are tons of Americans who supported Pinochet, just look at the Reagan administration, which....if I am correct, was approved upon by all these guys:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b9/ElectoralCollege1980-Large.png/800px-ElectoralCollege1980-Large.png
And again AFTER 4 years of the Reagan Administration (who backed Pinochet)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/43/ElectoralCollege1984-Large.png/800px-ElectoralCollege1984-Large.png

America is the Universe, eh?:confused: :D

And anyway, though I'm not going anywhere, even if I did leave, there are tons of Americans who supported Pinochet, just look at the Reagan administration, which....if I am correct, was approved upon by all these guys:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b9/ElectoralCollege1980-Large.png/800px-ElectoralCollege1980-Large.png
And again AFTER 4 years of the Reagan Administration (who backed Pinochet)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/43/ElectoralCollege1984-Large.png/800px-ElectoralCollege1984-Large.png


:rolleyes:


Again, I apologize for his stupidity. Regan backed Pinochet(as you claim) and the people backed Regan....so the people MUST have backed pinochet...Priceless!:D

Don't you ever connect Pinochet to the right again! Liberals on this board, I apologize for his comment and assure you most right wingers are not murdering dictators and would NEVER support or do what Pinochet did!
Dont you ever post again!....:rolleyes:
Pinochet was a right-wing, Free-Market-Authortarian dictator. You are wrong.

"By mid 1975, Pinochet set about making economic reforms variously called "neoliberal" or sometimes "free market" by its supporters. He declared that he wanted "to make Chile not a nation of proletarians, but a nation of proprietors." To formulate his economic policy, Pinochet relied on the so-called Chicago Boys, who were economists trained at the University of Chicago and heavily influenced by the ideas of Milton Friedman.

The government launched an era of deregulation of business and privatization. To accomplish his objectives, the Chicago Boys privatized the pension system, state industries, and banks, and lowered taxes on income. Supporters of these policies (most notably Milton Friedman himself) have dubbed them "The Miracle of Chile", due to the country's sustained economic growth since the late 1980s."

Vituperari a bonis et laudari a malis unum atque idem est.

Thatcher is a derelict. Most people in Chile despise Pinochet, and rightly. And to claim that "some" will miss him is to claim that "some" support the Unabomber or will miss Bin Laden when he dies - it's true, but it doesn't matter.
False.

"Chileans remain divided on his legacy. Many see him as a brutal dictator who ended democracy and led a regime characterized by torture and favoritism towards the rich, while others believe that he defeated communism and brought economic growth to Chile. In between these extremes, Chileans will condemn the oppression of the dictatorship, but perhaps also apportion at least a small part of the blame on the UP Government, and recognise merit in the economic reforms implemented on Pinochet's guard."


....any other takers?

Whatever.

Could it not be that people supported Reagan IN SPITE OF his shameless fellation of Pinochet, simply for his charisma for instance?

Regan backed Pinochet(as you claim) and the people backed Regan....so the people MUST have backed pinochet...Priceless!:D
Exactly, and dont be a fool. Everyone knows Reagan and Thatcher backed Pinochet, its not "as I claim", thats what it is. The people backed Reagan (spell his name right, fool), due to their liking of his policies, thus, REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY!

Go play somewhere.

False. "Chileans remain divided on his legacy. Many see him as a brutal dictator who ended democracy and led a regime characterized by torture and favoritism towards the rich, while others believe that he defeated communism and brought economic growth to Chile. In between these extremes, Chileans will condemn the oppression of the dictatorship, but perhaps also apportion at least a small part of the blame on the UP Government, and recognise merit in the economic reforms implemented on Pinochet's guard."


....any other takers?

Now ask those same Chileans if they'd be willing to give up their civil rights and turn their country into a dystopia for the so-called growth and you might have something not entirely unlike a point.

Exactly, and dont be a fool. Everyone knows Reagan and Thatcher backed Pinochet, its not "as I claim", thats what it is. The people backed Reagan (spell his name right, fool), due to their liking of his policies, thus, REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY!

Go play somewhere.


Gotta love Neo-Cons, keep posting I need a good laugh. Keep saying Americans liked Pinochet, keep talking Neo-Con, Keep talking. Votes Democrat.

Could it not be that people supported Reagan IN SPITE OF his shameless fellation of Pinochet, simply for his charisma for instance?
Of course, I was not summing the entire US into "PINOCHET LOVERS", but simply showing that we backed (for 8 years) someone who supported Pinochet publicly, and in all of the American voters that voted for Reagan, some probably liked Pinochet, since many voted for Reagan since they liked his views/policies.

Of course, I was not summing the entire US into "PINOCHET LOVERS", but simply showing that we backed (for 8 years) someone who supported Pinochet publicly, and in all of the American voters that voted for Reagan, some probably liked Pinochet, since many voted for Reagan since they liked his views/policies.

So you managed to prove that some Americans that voted for Reagan are derelicts. Your point? Minding that the average American does not really care about foreign policy.

Dont you ever post again!....:rolleyes:
Pinochet was a right-wing, Free-Market-Authortarian dictator. You are wrong.

"By mid 1975, Pinochet set about making economic reforms variously called "neoliberal" or sometimes "free market" by its supporters. He declared that he wanted "to make Chile not a nation of proletarians, but a nation of proprietors." To formulate his economic policy, Pinochet relied on the so-called Chicago Boys, who were economists trained at the University of Chicago and heavily influenced by the ideas of Milton Friedman.

The government launched an era of deregulation of business and privatization. To accomplish his objectives, the Chicago Boys privatized the pension system, state industries, and banks, and lowered taxes on income. Supporters of these policies (most notably Milton Friedman himself) have dubbed them "The Miracle of Chile", due to the country's sustained economic growth since the late 1980s."


Selling meat to a vegetarian.:rolleyes:

Gotta love Neo-Cons, keep posting I need a good laugh. Keep saying Americans liked Pinochet, keep talking Neo-Con, Keep talking. Votes Democrat.
Ignoring this post http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12066200&postcount=65 I see. :rolleyes:
Now ask those same Chileans if they'd be willing to give up their civil rights and turn their country into a dystopia for the so-called growth and you might have something not entirely unlike a point.
No, that doesnt work, because Chile is zillions of times better (right now) than it was when the Socialist government was in power, driving the economy into the ground, and people were starving due to socialist policies which left them with no money for food.

Selling meat to a vegetarian.:rolleyes:
Shut you up did I? Meh, I didnt expect much more out of you anyway.
So you managed to prove that some Americans that voted for Reagan are derelicts. Your point? Minding that the average American does not really care about foreign policy.
Just that there are some supporters of Pinochet out there.:)

Of course, I was not summing the entire US into "PINOCHET LOVERS", but simply showing that we backed (for 8 years) someone who supported Pinochet publicly, and in all of the American voters that voted for Reagan, some probably liked Pinochet, since many voted for Reagan since they liked his views/policies.

So basically you were making a baseless statement supported by irrelevent statistics? oh right.

So you managed to prove that some Americans that voted for Reagan are derelicts. Your point?



American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source der·e·lict (děr'ə-lĭkt') Pronunciation Key
adj.
Deserted by an owner or keeper; abandoned.
Run-down; dilapidated.
Neglectful of duty or obligation; remiss. See Synonyms at negligent.

n.
Abandoned property, especially a ship abandoned at sea.
A homeless or jobless person; a vagrant.
Law Land left dry by a permanent recession of the water line.

No, that doesnt work, because Chile is zillions of times better (right now) than it was when the Socialist government was in power, driving the economy into the ground, and people were starving due to socialist policies which left them with no money for food.

If that were true, we'd see overwhelming support for the genocidal maniac among the older population. Show me statistics or lose.

Just that there are some supporters of Pinochet out there.:)

Just like there are supporters of the Unabomber, Bin Laden and other evil people. Your point?

Shut you up did I? Meh, I didnt expect much more out of you anyway.

Just that there are some supporters of Pinochet out there.:)



Not that smart are you? I expect that from a stoneage Neo-Con. His economic polices are FAR different from mine, you just proved more why I hate him.

A homeless or jobless person; a vagrant.

I'm focusing more on the idea of "despicable" here that I figured might come out of this "vagrant" concept, but I can change.

If that were true, we'd see overwhelming support for the genocidal maniac among the older population. Show me statistics or lose.


Don't waste your breath dear.

let me be the first to say

HAHAHAHA. I hope it hurt.
Let's just leave Pinochet for a vengeful God to deal with.

:D

Don't waste your breath dear.

I don't argue to enlighten him - I argue to enlighten others about his (wrong) view.

I'm focusing more on the idea of "despicable" here that I figured might come out of this "vagrant" concept, but I can change.


I figured that much, just posting what the word for those who may not know.


BTW, Americans also voted for Bush Jr.........I think you know where to go with that!

I don't argue to enlighten him - I argue to enlighten others about his (wrong) view.



Then I follow you my leader.:D

Oh lookie. TAI disappeared right after I asked him to provide statistics with a speck of meaning.

Oh lookie. TAI disappeared right after I asked him to provide statistics with a speck of meaning.



Maybe he is trying to google them? :D

Maybe he is trying to google them? :D

Or rather: Maybe he's trying to google ANY one that does ANYTHING not entirely unlike supporting his ideas.

As a member of Amnesty International I regret the loss of any human.
I am also a member of Amnesty, and a Christian to boot, but why 'regret' a death that was entirely natural?

Atlantian Islands will do all the Pinochet-ass kissing we'll need.
He's kissed Nazi ass. There's no low he won't sink to.

Guerrero Contra Marxismo!

I stand amongst those by the names of Reagan and Thatcher, supporters of Pinochet and his work saving Chile.
I miss the way you were once just conservative. Now you're an outright fascist.

I hope you never have to live under the regimes you glorify.


And anyway, though I'm not going anywhere, even if I did leave, there are tons of Americans who supported Pinochet, just look at the Reagan administration, which....if I am correct, was approved upon by all these guys:

Americans were sick to re-elect a man who hired people to hunt and kill priests and nuns and civilians.

I doubt they will try his corpse.

"Mr. Pinochet, how do you plead?"

"Mwaaaaah! Brains!!"

"Mr. Pinochet, how do you plead?"

"Mwaaaaah! Brains!!"

:D

Didn't Congo-Kinshasa predict this?

Anyway, wow, thats Botha, Milosevic, and now Pinochet, I wonder when they're going to hang Saddam?

Yes, I did.

And don't forget Stroessner.

Don't count on it. I'm surprised no one's jumped out to defend him in this thread.

What I meant was that the people who claim that he knew nothing of the tortures that were taking place and that they were committed by army and secret police officials without Pinochet's consent have had their arguments refuted by the man himself.

I stand amongst those by the names of Reagan and Thatcher, supporters of Pinochet and his work saving Chile.

If you call increased unemployment, malnutrition, infant mortality and bankruptcy of small business, along with drops in wages and wealth dirtibution to be saving the country, I'd hate to see what you consider bad for the country. Oh wait, that's right, GDP went up and inflation stabilised. That makes it all better.

Good riddance.

Agreed

From CNN:

Military hospital in Chile says former dictator Augusto Pinochet has died, The Associated Press reports.

Too bad he died in a comfortable bed and as a free man, unlike a lot of Chilean citizens he's killed.
And too bad, he will never be tried for high treason like he should have been.

In piazzale Loreto c'è ancora tanto posto.
(Still plenty of room in piazzale Loreto - the square in Milan where Mussolini's corpse was hanged.)

In piazzale Loreto c'è ancora tanto posto.

Okay, if you're female, that would sound SO HOT! :D

And stylish, and I agree with you.

"Despite his human rights record, many Chileans loved him and said he saved the country from Marxism."

Marxism probably would have been the better alternative.

CNN says all hell has broken lose over Pinochet's passing:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/12/10/pinochet/index.html

"Despite his human rights record, many Chileans loved him and said he saved the country from Marxism."

Marxism probably would have been the better alternative.

Let's see... A democratically-elected society that cares for the less affortunate or a dystopia installed by the CIA... *Weighs on hands* ;)

"Despite his human rights record, many Chileans loved him and said he saved the country from Marxism."

Marxism probably would have been the better alternative.

was Allende even Marxist?

was Allende even Marxist?

Yes.

Yes, a right wing dictator who committed so many crimes has died,
who overthrew a democratically elected socialist President, who make no
mistake about it, would have tried to turn Chile into another
communist dictatorship like Fidel Castro's Cuba, who has
committed so many crimes.

I will be checking my old threads and polls on Cuba,
to see who here talks bad about dictator Augusto Pinochet
and who talks good about dictator Fidel Castro, who
seems to be finally dying without facing the justice
he also deserves.

I hope this many people don't celebrate when i die :eek:

Sic semper tyrannis.

Yes, a right wing dictator who committed so many crimes has died,
who overthrew a democratically elected socialist President, who make no
mistake about it, would have tried to turn Chile into another
communist dictatorship like Fidel Castro's Cuba, who has
committed so many crimes.

I will be checking my old threads and polls on Cuba,
to see who here talks bad about dictator Augusto Pinochet
and who talks good about dictator Fidel Castro, who
seems to be finally dying without facing the justice
he also deserves.

Fidel Castro isn't nearly as bad as Pinochet.Not even close.

Fidel Castro isn't nearly as bad as Pinochet.Not even close.

...you do realize that Castro killed far more people?

Castro is frequently described by opponents as a dictator[5][6] and accused of gross human rights violations, including the execution of thousands of political opponents

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_Castro

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Cuba

Dont you ever post again!....:rolleyes:
Pinochet was a right-wing, Free-Market-Authortarian dictator. You are wrong.

"By mid 1975, Pinochet set about making economic reforms variously called "neoliberal" or sometimes "free market" by its supporters. He declared that he wanted "to make Chile not a nation of proletarians, but a nation of proprietors." To formulate his economic policy, Pinochet relied on the so-called Chicago Boys, who were economists trained at the University of Chicago and heavily influenced by the ideas of Milton Friedman.

The government launched an era of deregulation of business and privatization. To accomplish his objectives, the Chicago Boys privatized the pension system, state industries, and banks, and lowered taxes on income. Supporters of these policies (most notably Milton Friedman himself) have dubbed them "The Miracle of Chile", due to the country's sustained economic growth since the late 1980s."


False.

"Chileans remain divided on his legacy. Many see him as a brutal dictator who ended democracy and led a regime characterized by torture and favoritism towards the rich, while others believe that he defeated communism and brought economic growth to Chile. In between these extremes, Chileans will condemn the oppression of the dictatorship, but perhaps also apportion at least a small part of the blame on the UP Government, and recognise merit in the economic reforms implemented on Pinochet's guard."


....any other takers?
didn't we have this exact same argument just a couple of weeks ago, where TAI posted the exact same shite, and was then refuted completely by Neesika?

Or am I just having a weird De javu-ish premonition-type thingy where Neesika's about to post an article that shows that during that wonderful 'boom' time for Chile's economy, there was 30% unemployment, rampant inflation. That the economy all but collapsed in the 70's under Pinochet, and the 'incredible' economic growth during the 1980's was because it was rebounding from an absolute cesspit.

Not to mention the living in continual fear of having the authorities decide you're a 'communist' and torturing you to death.

Edit:
It wasn't a premonition, here's Neesika's rebuttal in a previous thread to the exact same crap TAI has trotted out in this thread:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12000590&postcount=22

I admired that guy, he had the facial hair and a hair cut.

I admired that guy, he had the facial hair and a hair cut.
Nah, if you wannabe a dictator you need facial hair.

Nah, if you wannabe a dictator you need facial hair.
Mao didn't have any.

except for a hairy mole, iirc. Does that count?

Mao didn't have any.

except for a hairy mole, iirc. Does that count?

Nah, mole hair is in a class of it's own.

Mao didn't have any.

except for a hairy mole, iirc. Does that count?
But he broke swimming records.

so the old bastard has kicked the bucket? happy trails through styx you wormridden corpse.

He was a good allie to the British when Britain had to defend the Falkland Islands. It's a shame not more nut job twats that crave power don't die sooner :upyours:

But he broke swimming records.
Only cause no-one dared challenge them!

Okay, if you're female, that would sound SO HOT! :D

And stylish, and I agree with you.

Sorry, I'm male. Marco I, Grand Duke of Risottia.

Anyway, "in piazzale Loreto c'è ancora tanto posto" is what we italian leftists usually say to fascists...

I hope this many people don't celebrate when i die :eek:

I hope you don't become a psychotic dictator, haven't been and aren't one. :D

Sorry, I'm male. Marco I, Grand Duke of Risottia.

Anyway, "in piazzale Loreto c'è ancora tanto posto" is what we italian leftists usually say to fascists...

Too bad you're male... :p

I did some research, I know how it's used, stylish!. :D

And trust me, you may not know due to being FROM the country, but a female would sound pretty damn sexy if she said this, especially if she had a weapon... and skintight uniforms, Cammy-style... and... *Drools*

:D

...you do realize that Castro killed far more people?


I believe Pinochet to be far worse than Castro, because Castro replaced another dictator, while Pinochet replaced an elected President.

Down there it is summer, and we're running out of ice.

Is Pinochet still dead?

Yes.

how so? did he do anything remotley communist? or is this just the line to justify his overthrow in the west?

...you do realize that Castro killed far more people?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_Castro

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Cuba

...you do realize Regan killed far more than Castro

...you do realize Regan killed far more than Castro

Proof?

Pity the poor libs the world over! Now they don't get to have their show trial. Guess they'll just have to riot or something to release their frustrations :p

Allende got what he deserved, and Pinochet did the world a favor.

Proof?

Well, Reagan is responsible for the training of Osama bin Laden, IIRC.

Pity the poor libs the world over! Now they don't get to have their show trial. Guess they'll just have to riot or something to release their frustrations :p

Allende got what he deserved, and Pinochet did the world a favor.

And here comes New Mitanni with his fanatical support of murderous psychopaths.

Pity the poor libs the world over! Now they don't get to have their show trial. Guess they'll just have to riot or something to release their frustrations :p

Allende got what he deserved, and Pinochet did the world a favor.

I wouldn't say that Allende "got what he deserved". Nor would I say the same of the thousands who were disappeared or shot by Pinochet's men.

On the positive side, I think Chile's current economy has everything to do with Pinochet, and the absence of Allende. In an alternate history, Chile would be as far in the economic toilet as Cuba.

Allende got what he deserved, and Pinochet did the world a favor.

says the jumped up little american middle class twit who has never wanted for anything in his life.

someday they will come for you....

Pity the poor libs the world over! Now they don't get to have their show trial. Guess they'll just have to riot or something to release their frustrations :p

Or we could just laugh at people like you who don't know what the fuck you're saying.

says the jumped up little american middle class twit who has never wanted for anything in his life.

someday they will come for you....

Yeah, right.

Or we could just laugh at people like you who don't know what the fuck you're saying.

Pinochet killed more innocents than died on 9-11.

you would think the average american idiot would have learnt something about the nature of political violence over the past 5 years, but alas....

Pinochet killed more innocents than died on 9-11.

you would think the average american idiot would have learnt something about the nature of political violence over the past 5 years, but alas....

Ummm... that by and large it works, and you can get away with it most of the time? Like we did with Chile?

Yeah, right.

do you not find anything distasteful about a smug US studenty type sitting there waxing lyrical about a man who systematically had 3,000 murdered and countless thousands more tortured?

some people need to get out and meet some peopleand learn a bit about the real world.

allende wasnt even a marxist. not even a chavez.

On the positive side, I think Chile's current economy has everything to do with Pinochet, and the absence of Allende. In an alternate history, Chile would be as far in the economic toilet as Cuba.

People say that, but they never seem to be able to prove it, except by parroting neoliberal truisms.

And since I don't feel nice, I am going to call bullshit on this. I am positive that Allende knew more about economics than you do, unless you can prove otherwise.

Meanwhile, please read Neesika's excellent post on the subject.
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12000590&postcount=22

do you not find anything distasteful about a smug US studenty type sitting there waxing lyrical about a man who systematically had 3,000 murdered and countless thousands more tortured?

some people need to get out and meet some peopleand learn a bit about the real world.

allende wasnt even a marxist. not even a chavez.

It's not distasteful, because everyone seems to do it when their side gets away with something.

Pinochet killed more innocents than died on 9-11.

you would think the average american idiot would have learnt something about the nature of political violence over the past 5 years, but alas....

New Mitanni may well be an idiot, but he pretty much hates america.

And he has never denied his love of political violence. He basically wants to kill all the Muslims. Or, well, have someone else do it for him, while he giggles girlishly and types happy-happy faces on an internet forum.

Ummm... that by and large it works, and you can get away with it most of the time? Like we did with Chile?

If the USA had needed Chile's help on Sept. 11th, I highly doubt the Chileans would have bothered to move themselves fast enough to save you.

It's not distasteful, because everyone seems to do it when their side gets away with something.

rounding people up and murdering them isn't 'getting away with something'

New Mitanni may well be an idiot, but he pretty much hates america.

And he has never denied his love of political violence. He basically wants to kill all the Muslims. Or, well, have someone else do it for him, while he giggles girlishly and types happy-happy faces on an internet forum.

my misake, but my broad point stands. nail on head. advocates murder and then has an asphxi-wank. real tough guy.

Is Pinochet still dead?

Why? Did you want him to come back to life?
Just get a T-virus from the Umbrella Corporation.
:)

rounding people up and murdering them isn't 'getting away with something'


Only if you're never prosecuted and jailed (or executed) for it.

Why? Did you want him to come back to life?
Just get a T-virus from the Umbrella Corporation.
:)

Just checking, is all. Remember, we had to check on Franco every Saturday night for a year.

Proof?

what you want to quote some link that will give biased report like the other poster did giving a wikipedia link which could have been edited by someone at Fox News or an anti Castro fanatic......links in debate are childish, and a waste of time, I only give links to be informative not to debate with.....

Regean- deaths in Nicaragua due to his Contra terrorist bands have been estimated at 60,000....American's can not claim any moral high ground when it comes to accusing dictators of murder....Robert McNamara(sp?) stated that every US president since WW2 could charged as a war Criminal (he included himself as well).

what you want to quote some link that will give biased report like the other poster did giving a wikipedia link which could have been edited by someone at Fox News or an anti Castro fanatic......links in debate are childish, and a waste of time, I only give links to be informative not to debate with.....

Regean- deaths in Nicaragua due to his Contra terrorist bands have been estimated at 60,000....American's can not claim any moral high ground when it comes to accusing dictators of murder....Robert McNamara(sp?) stated that every US president since WW2 could charged as a war Criminal (he included himself as well).

We use links because you can just pull numbers out of your ass.

Hey, if we use your standard, I can say Castro killed 40 billion babies...

We use links because you can just pull numbers out of your ass.

Hey, if we use your standard, I can say Castro killed 40 billion babies...

Perhaps you could show some link that bolstered your argument that Allende was screwing up the economy and Pinochet saved it. Because I am not convinced.

Perhaps you could show some link that bolstered your argument that Allende was screwing up the economy and Pinochet saved it. Because I am not convinced.

It was on NPR's Morning Edition this morning.

We use links because you can just pull numbers out of your ass.

Hey, if we use your standard, I can say Castro killed 40 billion babies...

to be fair, you put forward the propesition that the standard of living was better under tyranny than democracy.

you have to put forward something to support that.

It was on NPR's Morning Edition this morning.
Fine. I'm still unconvinced.


http://www.foei.org/trade/activistguide/chile.htm

Thanks for the link, Neesika.

We use links because you can just pull numbers out of your ass.

Hey, if we use your standard, I can say Castro killed 40 billion babies...

pulling facts out your ass is exactly what you are doing when you use links, no one uses a link that does not support their argument, so links are f**kin useless....if you use them which I assume you do, you must be up to your neck in crap that you've pulled out of your arse....

to be fair, you put forward the propesition that the standard of living was better under tyranny than democracy.

you have to put forward something to support that.

Already did.

says the jumped up little american middle class twit who has never wanted for anything in his life.

someday they will come for you....

"They" will never come for me. Second Amendment, baby :P

Already did.

something we can all see? this is a british forum after all

Looks like, because the AI is singing the same tune, that I need to repost this:

To counter the myth of the ‘salvation of Chile by Pinochet’.

Many people credit Agusto Pinochet Urgarte with the ‘Salvation of Chile’, from the horrors of socialism. That he had a confirmed 3000 plus civilians disappeared, tortured, and murdered, and tens of thousands more confirmed tortured, is brushed away with the claim that Salvador Allende’s Chile would have been worse.

Pinochet’s crimes against humanity are, so these supporters argue, tempered by the economic success of Chile during his dictatorship, creating a South American powerhouse.

Let me debunk these notions. I’ll break this down, piece by piece.

Pinochet took power in a bloody coup on September 11, 1973. Between 1973 and 1989, Chile was the absolute model of a decentralised economy. Industries nationalized by Salvador Allende were privatised, and this privitisation continued on into the social sector. The Chicago School of Economics (http://cepa.newschool.edu/het/schools/chicago.htm) (free market libertarianism) was given free reign for 16 years in Chile in order to prove its economic model.

During those 16 years, economic growth was actually slower in Chile than in any other Latin American country. This lack of growth was by no means uniform. The GDP in Chile was average in the 60s, plummeted in the 70s (remember, Salvador Allende was only in power from 1971 – 1973, so this can not be blamed solely on him), and jumped substantially in the 80s and 90s.(1) The economy experienced major highs and major lows, and it is important to understand what was happening during those swings.

Overall, from 1960 – 2002, Chile experienced a 2.5% annual per capital GDP growth. This has outperformed all other Latin American countries. However, in the period from 1960 – 1980, 9 years of which were led by Pinochet, 3 by Allende, there was growth of only 1.6%, matched only be Venezuela, while most other nations were seeing record increases, Ecuador among the highest with 5.4%. From 1981 – 2002, Chile by far surpassed its peers with a rate of 3.2% compared to negative numbers in the neighbouring nations of Argentina, Bolivia and Peru. (2)


Chile’s main export to the world is copper. US companies owned almost all of Chile’s copper mines by the 60s. Eduardo Frei, president of Chile prior to Allende, attempted to nationalize these mines, but was blocked by the business community and failed. Allende succeeded where Frei had failed, nationalizing not only the copper industry, but also the banking industry, and other foreign-owned assets, sparking the resentment among Chile’s elites and US businessmen that eventually led to the coup.

Pinochet took the reins, but without an economic plan of his own. In 1975, inflation rose as high as 341%. He turned to a group of ‘Chicago Boys’ to extricate himself from his economic woes. From thereon in, they controlled the economy completely. The economic ‘shock treatment’ began.

Between 1974 and 1975, they managed to get inflation under control. However, at the same time, unemployment rose from 9.1% to 18.7%. Chile suffered the worst recession they’d had since the 30s. This was also a period of extreme political repression, matched only later when similar economic troubles hit the country in the ‘82.. The economic changes being wrought were not optional.

The ‘economic miracle’ often referred to when discussing Chile supposedly happened between 1978 and 1981. Chile’s economy grew at an average of 6.6% a year, a truly staggering amount. Foreign investment was a huge part of this as nearly all restrictions were lifted during this period. All but 25 of 507 state-owned enterprises were privitised during these years.

However, what is often not taken into account is the impact of the depression. Astounding economic growth did not mean that Chile was actually in a fantastic economic state…it was in essence regaining lost ground. A parallel the Great Depression suffered by the US in the 30s can be drawn. From growth rates (US) in the negatives from 1930 – 1934, to a positive growth rate of 14.1% in 1936, and yet it took many more years to get the economy back to pre-Depression levels.(3) The same was true in Chile.

So what powered this growth in Chile during the period between 1978 and 1981? Very simply, unemployed workers cut during the deep depression returned to work. ‘Growth’ in this sense was simply returning the economy to the state it had been in previous to the crash experienced directly following the coup.

“And even then, much of Chile's growth was artificial or fictitious. Between 1977 and 1981, 80 percent of Chile's growth was in the unproductive sectors of the economy, like marketing and financial services. Much of this was speculation attracted to Chile's phenomenally high interest rates, which, at 51 percent in 1977, were the highest in the world.

Chile's integration into the world market would leave it vulnerable to world market forces. The international recession that struck in 1982 hit Chile especially hard, harder than any other Latin American country. Not only did foreign capital and markets dry up, but Chile had to pay out stratospheric interest rates on its orgy of loans. Most analysts attribute the disaster both to external shocks and Chile's own deeply flawed economic policies. By 1983, Chile's economy was devastated, with unemployment soaring at one point to 34.6 percent — far worse than the U.S. Great Depression. Manufacturing production plunged 28 percent. (8) The country's biggest financial groups were in free fall, and would have collapsed completely without a massive bail-out by the state. (9) The Chicago boys resisted this measure until the situation became so critical they could not possibly avoid it.

The IMF offered loans to help Chile out of its desperate situation, but on strict conditions. Chile had to guarantee her entire foreign debt — an astounding sum of US$7.7 billion. The total bailout would cost 3 percent of Chile's GNP for each of three years. These costs were passed on to the taxpayers. It is interesting to note that when the economy was booming, profitable firms were privatized; when those firms failed, the costs of bailing them were socialized. In both cases, the rich were served. (10)

After the IMF loans came through, the Chilean economy began recovering in 1984. Again, it saw exceptionally high growth, averaging about 7.7 percent a year between 1986 and 1989. (11) But like the previous cycle, this was mostly due to actual growth, not potential growth. By 1989, the GDP per capita was still 6.1 percent below its 1981 level. (12)

So what was the record for the entire Pinochet regime? Between 1972 and 1987, the GNP per capita fell 6.4 percent. (13) In constant 1993 dollars, Chile's per capita GDP was over $3,600 in 1973. Even as late as 1993, however, this had recovered to only $3,170. (14) Only five Latin American countries did worse in per capita GDP during the Pinochet era (1974-1989). (4)

Read that again. Despite years of record growth, the recessions, the loans, the debt…Chile did not experience significant growth during the ‘miracle years’.

Chile’s poverty rate in 1989 was a staggering 41.2%. The rich however, profited mightily during Pinochet’s rule. No other Latin American country had such income inequality during these years. Widespread unemployment kept wages down, and with no real state-funded social systems to provide for the unemployed or the poor, there was no ‘loss’ to the economy, except in production. The unemployment rate, overall, was worse in Chile than in any other Latin American nation. This loss in productivity is a major reason for the inability of the economy to truly outperform it’s neighbours in total overall growth.

The free reign given to the Chicago boys was backed up by a concerted war against the civilian population. Disappearances, tortures and murders were the worst during the recession of 1975 and 1982. There was no political freedom whatsoever. (Allende allowed even his worst detractors to vilify him on the radio). Labour unions were outlawed and only reinstituted once strict controls were in place.

The free-market policies of Pinochet’s Chile had other effects, such as on the environment.(5) A lack of environmental controls is a key aspect of free-market liberalisation. Santiago, the capital of Chile, is the 5th most polluted city in the world. Chile has extremely high mortality and sickness rates, beating out many of it’s neighbours.

Chile’s economy is still growing, but nonetheless, it lags behind most other Latin American nations. Profits from Chile’s industries flow outward into foreign pockets. Chile has one of the highest foreign debts in the world. The “Economic Miracle of Chile’ is a myth.(6)

Some will say that Salvador Allende’s Chile could have been worse. We have no way to tell, no way to know. What we do know is that the economic miracle was anything but, and in return for this false miracle, Chile suffers from a legacy of brutality, repression, and horror.


(1) http://www.gdnet.org/pdf/draft_country_studies/LACSummary.pdf
(2) http://www.eclac.org/publicaciones/DesarrolloEconomico/5/LCG2255PI/lcg2255_i_V.pdf
(3) http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/Timeline.htm
(4) http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-chichile.htm
(5) http://www.foei.org/trade/activistguide/chile.htm
(6) http://www.allbusiness.com/periodicals/article/473159-1.html

anti-allende: http://www.fas.org/irp/world/chile/allende.htm
http://www.cyberussr.com/hcunn/for/chile-73.html#2D
hating them on both sides: http://www.lewrockwell.com/mcmaken/mcmaken89.html

"They" will never come for me. Second Amendment, baby :P

you would shit your pants at a group of soldiers barging your door at night and we all know it.

you are the worst kind of coward.

Perhaps you could show some link that bolstered your argument that Allende was screwing up the economy and Pinochet saved it. Because I am not convinced.-Allende wasn't in power very long, 3 years.....it's a bit unfair to accuse any government of messing things up or improving things in that short a period.....much of problem would have been caused by the government they replaced......

regardless of what Allende's performance in Government it was unacceptable for a Coup to overthrow him, if he was incompetent an election would have removed him from office democratically....

I see no proof that a Cuban style economy would have fared better.

http://www.foei.org/trade/activistguide/chile.htm

Thanks for the link, Neesika.

Always a pleasure.

I see no proof that a Cuban style economy would have fared better.

No two economies will ever be exactly the same. Whatever Chile would have had under Allende, it would not have been 'Cuban-style' anymore than what existed under Pinochet was 'US-style'. The differences in both cases are long, and varied.

I see no proof that a Cuban style economy would have fared better.

Okay. You have no proof for your claim.

You have resorted to the tactic of placing the burden of proof on us, even though no-one made the claim that a Cuban economy would have worked better.

You claimed that Allende was steering the Chilean economy towards a Cuban style economy. You have not backed this up.

I see no proof that a Cuban style economy would have fared better.

despite the fact that allende never set out to create any 'cuban' style economic projects?

let it go. you are all soundbite

despite the fact that allende never set out to create any 'cuban' style economic projects?

let it go. you are all soundbite

I just read in a paper that Chavez is trying to create a "cuban" style economy....just what does that mean?...I think right-wing types just say shit like that to frighten people.....Cuba and Venezuela are two vary different countries, one is democratic, rich and socialist..the other has a one party system, poor, and socialist, why would Chavez want his country to be like Cuba? it's just not logical....

People say that, but they never seem to be able to prove it, except by parroting neoliberal truisms.

And since I don't feel nice, I am going to call bullshit on this. I am positive that Allende knew more about economics than you do, unless you can prove otherwise.

Meanwhile, please read Neesika's excellent post on the subject.
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12000590&postcount=22
Neesika's post contains some blatant falsehoods. Chile's per capita GDP is the second highest in South America, and they rank first in economic freedom (freetheworld.com).

Plus, one of the reason's Pinochet and Friedman's economic reforms were called Shock Treatment was because they had an absolutely appalling correction period. As the economy changed from socialist to free market, of course thousands of jobs were lost. That was required, because they were inefficient jobs.

And I note there's a complete lack of information about when that debt was accrued.

And furthermore, I see no reason why anyone who supports Pinochet's economic reforms would necessarily have to support his mass killings. Just because we're saying he did some good things doesn't mean he was a good guy. Most evil dictators do some things well, and for Pinochet is was reforming the Chilean economy.

And furthermore, I see no reason why anyone who supports Pinochet's economic reforms would necessarily have to support his mass killings. Just because we're saying he did some good things doesn't mean he was a good guy. Most evil dictators do some things well, and for Pinochet is was reforming the Chilean economy.
Might have something to do with the likelihood that if Pinochet hadn't been brutal, he'd never have stayed in power through that "shock treatment" which is an interesting euphemism for "loot the country." If he'd done anything else, the people would have voted him out of power at the very least, and potentially strung him up by his ankles.

Neesika's post contains some blatant falsehoods. Chile's per capita GDP is the second highest in South America, and they rank first in economic freedom (freetheworld.com).

Plus, one of the reason's Pinochet and Friedman's economic reforms were called Shock Treatment was because they had an absolutely appalling correction period. As the economy changed from socialist to free market, of course thousands of jobs were lost. That was required, because they were inefficient jobs.

And I note there's a complete lack of information about when that debt was accrued.

And furthermore, I see no reason why anyone who supports Pinochet's economic reforms would necessarily have to support his mass killings. Just because we're saying he did some good things doesn't mean he was a good guy. Most evil dictators do some things well, and for Pinochet is was reforming the Chilean economy.

1) Economic freedom means only one thing: freedom to exploit others. Chile ranks dead last in standard of living and near last in politcal and civil freedoms.

2) Chile's economy was never more than a mixed economy. They never reached the central planning stage. I also find how great it is that this "Shock Treatment" had to come along with a military coup and the murder of 90,000 dissidents.

3) The economic reforms could not come without the mass killings. A majority of the people still supported Allende even after the coup.

Pinochet was primarily concerned with ridding Chile of the Communists. He obviously saw from the Soviet Union, Cuba, and China, that Communism is too dangerous of an ideology to be allowed to take root in Chile. The Communists deserved to get massacred.

Pinochet was primarily concerned with ridding Chile of the Communists. He obviously saw from the Soviet Union, Cuba, and China, that Communism is too dangerous of an ideology to be allowed to take root in Chile. The Communists deserved to get massacred.

will you ever fuck off.

is there something in the water today? all the wannabie hardmen are out

will you ever fuck off.

is there something in the water today? all the wannabie hardmen are out

It's Monday, they've all had a nice rest over the weekend.

I see no proof that a Cuban style economy would have fared better.Yes you do. People weren't rounded up and tortured.
What's worse? A bad economy with torture of the opposition or a hypothetical bad economy without it?

The dead tyrant has passed into the dustbin of history like all the other petty despots of the ages. Yes, he helped the Chilean economy but slaughtering dissidents is a poor way to go about it.

http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/8333/pinochetzc0.jpg

ahahaha.

And so passes a hero of our age. May you rest in peace, Pinochet.

And so passes a hero of our age. May you rest in peace, Pinochet.

He is not a hero, he is not of our age, and he won't rest in peace.

Rather, regardless of what you wish, he was a genocidal maniac, his time is past, and he will burn in Hell, and go through sufferings much like everything he did to the innocents his government murdered and tortured, for eternity.

And there's not a single thing you can do to change that. That must suck.

He is not a hero, he is not of our age, and he won't rest in peace.

Rather, regardless of what you wish, he was a genocidal maniac, his time is past, and he will burn in Hell, and go through sufferings much like everything he did to the innocents his government murdered and tortured, for eternity.

And there's not a single thing you can do to change that. That must suck.

I disagree, he fought communism and established one of the few stable economies in south America. To fight a radical ideology, in some cases, violence is the only option. He did what had to be done to ensure communism would not take root in the country he loved so dearly.

Pinochet was primarily concerned with ridding Chile of the Communists. He obviously saw from the Soviet Union, Cuba, and China, that Communism is too dangerous of an ideology to be allowed to take root in Chile. The Communists deserved to get massacred.

Let's massacre you and all of your friends and family, and see how you like it.

I'd like to advance the notion that upon performing one's toilet, that particularly stubborn, clinging feces be nicknamed "Pinochets". If only due to one's relief when they finally succumb to inevitability and make their long-overdue egress.

I disagree, he fought communism and established one of the few stable economies in south America. To fight a radical ideology, in some cases, violence is the only option. He did what had to be done to ensure communism would not take root in the country he loved so dearly.

No, he overthrew a democratically elected Marxian socialist who was trying desperately to help his people climb out of the post-colonial cess pool that was Chile ever since it broke out of Spanish rule. That's not fighting some radical ideology, and violence can never be justified in this case.

I'd like to advance the notion that upon performing one's toilet, that particularly stubborn, clinging feces be nicknamed "Pinochets". If only due to one's relief when they finally succumb to inevitability and make their long-overdue egress.

Motion seconded.

No, he overthrew a democratically elected Marxian socialist who was trying desperately to help his people climb out of the post-colonial cess pool that was Chile ever since it broke out of Spanish rule. That's not fighting some radical ideology, and violence can never be justified in this case.

well said.....I'd like to add what the hell is it with people and communism, thinking that it so evil that people must be killed to stop it?.....It's an economic system and nothing more, it's like killing workers at Wal-Mart because they want to unionize.......Communism is no more evil than capitalism, there are a fuck of a lot of evil capitalist dictators that deserved to die before a democratically elected leader like Allende.....the murderous (Capitalist)Juanta that ruled Argentina was well loved by Washington because they weren't evil like Allende?.....

I regret the loss of any human. However, the man has caused destruction to thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, and thus this is the ultimate price he must pay. The only thing Chile should regret is that he was never tried. The rest must be forgotten if Chile is to move on.
My feelings on the matter exactly.

how so? did he do anything remotley communist? or is this just the line to justify his overthrow in the west?

Not a Communist, but he did hold Marxist views and was pro-Communist. But he did nothing to warrant being overthrown.

1) Economic freedom means only one thing: freedom to exploit others. Chile ranks dead last in standard of living and near last in politcal and civil freedoms.

2) Chile's economy was never more than a mixed economy. They never reached the central planning stage. I also find how great it is that this "Shock Treatment" had to come along with a military coup and the murder of 90,000 dissidents.

3) The economic reforms could not come without the mass killings. A majority of the people still supported Allende even after the coup.

1) Source?

2) Your numbers are WAY off. By a factor of 30.

3) Source?

Only cause no-one dared challenge them!
Well the Yangtze(SP) River runs pretty quickly, of course Pelps nor Thope would ever dream of competing against his Record setting time.I know what you mean=P

1) Source?

2) Your numbers are WAY off. By a factor of 30.

3) Source?

Yeah, and Stalin's and Mao's estimates of the number of people they killed were way off too. Communists can't demonstrate success with the facts, so they tend to manipulate the facts a little.

Yeah, and Stalin's and Mao's estimates of the number of people they killed were way off too. Communists can't demonstrate success with the facts, so they tend to manipulate the facts a little.

Because you can? Let's take a look at the facts then.

Fact: Pinochet slaughtered thousands of his own people and submitted Chile to its darkest period.

Fact: The oh-so-democratic USA overthrew a democratically elected leader to put a murderer in its place.

Fact: The Chilean people had every right to elect a communist leader, if that's what they wished.

Fact: The statistics from the CAPITALIST dictatorships established in South America were manipulated to the same extent Stalin did.

Fact: Pinochet is just like your oh-so-hated communism-strawman Stalin, which I condemn, only he agreed with you on economics.

Question: Does that make everything Pinochet did okay in your eyes?

Question: What would that make you?

great article from Allende's daughter Isabelle

here (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article2067626.ece)

A little stroke in a man's body.

A great relief for the Latin Americas.

The witch is dead. If only she had been tried for his crimes.


Viva América Latina.

Sic semper tyranis.

Check it out: http://www.lanacion.com.ar/anexos/imagen/06/604850.JPG

Check it out: http://www.lanacion.com.ar/anexos/imagen/06/604850.JPG

Well, there goes any possibility of me ever having an erection again.

And it's unsurprising that those that praise Pinochet do it with the nazi salute.

Raptors did it. (http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b324/ninebucks/raptors.jpg)

Raptors did it. (http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b324/ninebucks/raptors.jpg)

These are deinonychus.

These are deinonychus.

And Pinochet is a turd (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12071430&postcount=175). C'est la vie.

These are deinonychus.

Well, Google said they were raptors. Unless you want to argue with Google?

Well, Google said they were raptors. Unless you want to argue with Google?

Actually, I think they're raptors, but I had nothing else to say. :p

And Pinochet is a turd (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12071430&postcount=175). C'est la vie.

I disagree with you there.

He was a turd.

Now he is a dead turd.

:D

Might have something to do with the likelihood that if Pinochet hadn't been brutal, he'd never have stayed in power through that "shock treatment" which is an interesting euphemism for "loot the country." If he'd done anything else, the people would have voted him out of power at the very least, and potentially strung him up by his ankles.
And if popular decisions and good decisions were necessarily equal, that might matter.

1) Economic freedom means only one thing: freedom to exploit others.
And the freedom to protect yourself from exploitation. Being exploited because you make bad decisions is no one's fault but yours. Allow people who make good decisions to succeed.
Chile ranks dead last in standard of living and near last in politcal and civil freedoms.
I'd need to see some stats on that. They're second behind only Argentina in per capita GDP.
2) Chile's economy was never more than a mixed economy. They never reached the central planning stage. I also find how great it is that this "Shock Treatment" had to come along with a military coup and the murder of 90,000 dissidents.

3) The economic reforms could not come without the mass killings. A majority of the people still supported Allende even after the coup.
See my response to The Nazz, above.

And if popular decisions and good decisions were necessarily equal, that might matter.

So you're saying that the "good"--and I use that term in the loosest possible sense--brought on by Pinochet's reforms (which resulted in one of the greatest divisions between the haves and have-nots in the western world) outweighs the brutal murder and torture of Chileans? Is that really what you're arguing here? Because I want to know for certain before I note how monstrous you are.

So you're saying that the "good"--and I use that term in the loosest possible sense--brought on by Pinochet's reforms (which resulted in one of the greatest divisions between the haves and have-nots in the western world) outweighs the brutal murder and torture of Chileans? Is that really what you're arguing here? Because I want to know for certain before I note how monstrous you are.

I second that.

I cannot fathom how people seem to think that Pinochet improved Chile in any way - the argument that an improved economy is worth dictatorship and social repression is besides the point - by no standard could anyone consider Chile's economy to have improved under Pinochet, unless you are an investor in an American multinational, and I should hope that there are none here are sociopathic enough to wish torture and poverty on people to improve their dividends, or a wealthy Chilean who doesn't mind starving people to death so they can own a bigger house.

I cannot fathom how people seem to think that Pinochet improved Chile in any way - the argument that an improved economy is worth dictatorship and social repression is besides the point - by no standard could anyone consider Chile's economy to have improved under Pinochet, unless you are an investor in an American multinational, and I should hope that there are none here are sociopathic enough to wish torture and poverty on people to improve their dividends, or a wealthy Chilean who doesn't mind starving people to death so they can own a bigger house.

Unfortunately there are lots of people like you just descruibed in the world, and by extension on this forum. Sadly it is how leaders like Pinochet gain power in the first place.

Unfortunately there are lots of people like you just descruibed in the world, and by extension on this forum. Sadly it is how leaders like Pinochet gain power in the first place.

Yup.

So you're saying that the "good"--and I use that term in the loosest possible sense--brought on by Pinochet's reforms (which resulted in one of the greatest divisions between the haves and have-nots in the western world) outweighs the brutal murder and torture of Chileans? Is that really what you're arguing here? Because I want to know for certain before I note how monstrous you are.
I'm making no claims about the relative value of Pinochet's good policies and bad policies. But I am insisting that the existence of the bad policies doesn't automatically mean that everything he did was bad. Pinochet did good things for Chile. He also killed a whole lot of people.

I'm making no claims about the relative value of Pinochet's good policies and bad policies. But I am insisting that the existence of the bad policies doesn't automatically mean that everything he did was bad. Pinochet did good things for Chile. He also killed a whole lot of people.Sort of like LBJ, but with the imprisonment and torture of his political enemies thrown in for good measure?

Sort of like LBJ, but with the imprisonment and torture of his political enemies thrown in for good measure?
Sure.

And the freedom to protect yourself from exploitation. Being exploited because you make bad decisions is no one's fault but yours. Allow people who make good decisions to succeed.

I agree with you that while Pinochet was a murderous dictator who should have been stripped of power, wealth, clothing, health, and life, it is possible he did good things. And many people, like yourself apparently, feel that the Chilean econmoy was one of those things.

Sure, it is logically possible, but Neesika has already made a very strong claim that that was not the case. And I have yet to see anyone defend your belief with anything more than free-market platitudes.

Economic freedom, like civil freedom, is a two-edged sword. In western culture, you are not free to murder anyone, but you are free from the threat of murder. In a free-market system, you have the freedom to exploit others and be exploited yourself. I do not see how a free market system can protect you from exploitation if the free market system makes it impossible to create legislation or unions that protect against economic exploitation.

And I agree that we should allow people who make good decisions to succeed. But tthat is not what happened in Chile. When Chileans elected Allende, they elected someone who implemented protectionist policies that would support the local econmoy at the expense of foreign investors. From a Chilean standpoint, this made economic sense. But Allende was not allowed to succeed.

The rest is history.

It is altogether too easy, for many of you discussing this topic, to distance yourself from it completely, and calculate gains and losses, as though human lives count for little more than a tick under the 'losses' column.

I doubt, were you faced with similar circumstances, the total lack of worker rights, midnight kidnappings of your neighbours, the disapperance of friends on the way to school, the brutal raping and torture of wives, sisters, mothers, the constant fear of being next....I doubt you would be able to make those ticks with a steady hand, making 'dollars earned by foreign investors' equal to 'lives lost to make this possible'.

It is altogether too easy, for many of you discussing this topic, to distance yourself from it completely, and calculate gains and losses, as though human lives count for little more than a tick under the 'losses' column.

I doubt, were you faced with similar circumstances, the total lack of worker rights, midnight kidnappings of your neighbours, the disapperance of friends on the way to school, the brutal raping and torture of wives, sisters, mothers, the constant fear of being next....I doubt you would be able to make those ticks with a steady hand, making 'dollars earned by foreign investors' equal to 'lives lost to make this possible'.

Check your telegrams. Something for you and your family.

Allende got what he deserved, and Pinochet did the world a favor.
I've hardly ever seen such open and shameless apologism for tyranny.

For most people it's not even because Pinochet was an ultra-capitalist. It's because he was so brutal about it.

Ummm... that by and large it works, and you can get away with it most of the time? Like we did with Chile?
Might doesn't make right.

"They" will never come for me. Second Amendment, baby :P
Because nobody with a gun has ever been apprehended. :rolleyes:

"They" will never come for me. Second Amendment, baby :P

I didn't know you could blow up a tank or kill actual soldiers with your... what? 38? Or some other ridiculous weapon (for most of the allowed material would be useless against well-armed soldiers)?