Korean Job Discussion Forums

bucheon bum · Joined: 16 Jan 2003

I learned something on Friday in regards to Pinochet and the US.

From a letter to the economist in the latest issue:

Gopher · Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Amazing. I had never heard this before and this is the center of what I study. I am adding this article to my bibliographic database. First time I have done that with anything anyone has posted here. Thanks for that, Bucheon.

Newsreporting and the literature remain badly warped by the Vietnam era and Nixon/Watergate. People start out looking to expose wrongdoing and "cover-ups." It is a prosecutorial mindset.

There was much govt mendacity at that time. Nixon and his lawyers. Lawyers lying. Under oath. People of that generation never got over it. They continue to act as if nothing changed. That is why we hear more about "U.S. complicity" in Chilean affairs and hardly anything else. And that is when lawyers' reputations went so bad, by the way.

See Richard Immerman's CIA in Guatemala. He is a professional historian of this generation who openly discloses and admits what I outline above. In his introduction he explains how he approached his subject looking to unearth the Agency's evils against Arbenz. He wanted to prove the United Fruit Company conspiracy. This was what he was looking for and wanted to document when he approached the research phase.

Interesting, huh? The human mind simply cannot approach the social sciences inductively or objectively. Look at the evidence with an empty mind and see what the evidence projects like Bacon suggested so long ago. We have since learned that the questions we ask are everything. They lead us to examine the evidence only long enough to find what we need. So the real power lies in influencing and shaping the questions we ask. We need to ask the fairest possible questions.

In any case, Sy Hersh did most of the New York Times's reporting around and during the coup. I have read most of them (microforms). What kinds of questions do you think he was asking and answering in his articles...?

endo · Joined: 14 Mar 2004 Location: Seoul...my home

I'm sure the failed 1988 coup wouldn't of "failed" had Pinochet been trying to overthrow a left-leaning regime.

Are you seriously trying to make the USA the good guys in this issue?

......

And you cite the Economist article about how the Allende government was potentially going to create chaos and civil war. (and i'm sure the Americans did nothing to provike this situation)

Then what the hell did Pinochet's regime do? A government selectively taking people out of their homes and murdering then seems like chaos to me.

Now was the American government directly involved in the dissapearences of the late 70s and early 80s? No. At least I don't think so. Although it wouldn't surprise me to later find out that American intelligence was providing names to the Pinochet regime for them to take care of.

Besides that, the CIA helped install Pinochet into power. They also helped maintain his regime through military and economic assistance.

Were they aware of the dissapearences? Yes.

I realize it's a nasty world out there and unfortunately political realism is the name of the game. Tough decisions need to be made.

But, you appear bucheon bum to be trying to lessen the blood on the hands of members of the American intelligence agencies, the State Department, the Pentagon, and the Reagan administration.

All of these culprits deserved to be called out when Pinochet died.

And one last thing. Most governments in the world could give a flying hoot about a constitution. Money and geography is the name of the game.

America is the king. I understand this. And it's a nasty world out there. But the American government has made some horrible decisions and have lost any moral clarity.

When Americans preach democracy; what they're really trying to do is enable their MNCs to gain access to other markets.

Gopher · Joined: 04 Jun 2005

bucheon bum · Joined: 16 Jan 2003

W.T.Carl · Joined: 16 Jan 2003

Well, I do know this--- The US stopped Pak Chung Hee from killing Kim Dae Jung.

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

endo · Joined: 14 Mar 2004 Location: Seoul...my home

endo · Joined: 14 Mar 2004 Location: Seoul...my home

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

Adventurer · Joined: 28 Jan 2006

For Pete's sake, Salvador Allende was murdered. That is serious stuff.
What would you think if someone could prove someone working for French intelligence killed JFK? People would be outraged. As far as Pinochet and 1988, he was already in power for 15 years. He was not as useful as he was in the past in the eyes of the president. Noriega lost his usefulness and so did Saddam Hussein. I happen to generally like the State Department. It is full of educated intellectuals who often have good insight into different places, but they are too often ignored. Is it good that the U.S. government went against the coup. Yes, it is, but for what reason? The government was for the coup that installed Pinochet but not for the one that would have kept him around longer. Does motive no matter as an Immanuel Kant type would believe? Or do only the results matter? What are you saying exactly?

Adventurer · Joined: 28 Jan 2006

Salvador Allende was murdered. That is serious stuff. That happened in 9/11/1973 that a Chilean leader was taken out. What would you think if someone could prove someone working for French intelligence killed JFK? People would be outraged. As far as Pinochet and 1988, he was already in power for 15 years. He was not as useful as he was in the past in the eyes of the president. Noriega lost his usefulness and so did Saddam Hussein. I happen to generally like the State Department. It is full of educated intellectuals who often have good insight into different places, but they are too often ignored. Is it good that the U.S. government went against the coup. Yes, it is, but for what reason? The government was for the coup that installed Pinochet but not for the one that would have kept him around longer. Does motive no matter as an Immanuel Kant type would believe? Or do only the results matter? What are you saying exactly? I wouldn't simply brush off the overthrow and execution of an elected leader. What if you were on the receiving end?

Adventurer · Joined: 28 Jan 2006

Salvador Allende was murdered. That is serious stuff. That happened in 9/11/1973 that a Chilean leader was taken out. What would you think if someone could prove someone working for French intelligence killed JFK? People would be outraged. As far as Pinochet and 1988, he was already in power for 15 years. He was not as useful as he was in the past in the eyes of the president. Noriega lost his usefulness and so did Saddam Hussein. I happen to generally like the State Department. It is full of educated intellectuals who often have good insight into different places, but they are too often ignored. Is it good that the U.S. government went against the coup. Yes, it is, but for what reason? The government was for the coup that installed Pinochet but not for the one that would have kept him around longer. In this world, we haven't really come to agree on what is good or bad, and the U.N. can't agree on the definition of terrorism. The actions of governments are judged based on those
observing like beauty in the eye of the beholder.

endo · Joined: 14 Mar 2004 Location: Seoul...my home

Hans Blix · Joined: 31 Mar 2005

to bucheon bum, gopher and maybe yata boy,

if we could find in the history of a bad country - say iran or soviet russia - similar examples of positive soft power actions, and i'm sure they exist, would you be so quick to bring them to the board's attention? or is the purpose here to redress a perceived political imbalance on the forum?

this might sound like a typical left reply, but perhaps you could humour me.