|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Interested
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:30 pm Post subject: Ortega back in power, early poll results show |
 |
|
| Quote: |
Ortega back in power, early poll results show
� Sandinista head 'triumphs in Nicaraguan first round'
� Split opposition cries foul and US warns of sanctions
The Sandinista leader and former Marxist revolutionary Daniel Ortega appeared to have mounted a spectacular political comeback last night after preliminary results showed he had won Nicaragua's presidential election in the first round. |
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1941012,00.html
Personally I wish him well. I think what the Reagan administration did to that poor country in the 80s is one of the more spectacular crimes of the latter half of the 20th century. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| He will run the economy (further) into the ground. But it is their democratic right to choose (more) grinding poverty and left-wing dreams over real development. These fools should not be prevented, a-la Ronnie, from taking power. Let them do their damage and lead by example. Those places who had the "revolution" are running away from it (less the island prison) and those who were prevented from having it embracing it. Maybe, for these cultures, they are unable to learn from the Soviet/Chinese/Cambodian/Vietnamese/Nork etc etc mistakes and have to starve themselves to understand that there is no substitute for rule or law and free markets. None. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Interested wrote: |
| I think what the Reagan administration did to that poor country... |
Still hopelessly one-sided in your thinking, Interested. No surprises here.
I've got a new idea. Let's do this like poker, shall we?
I think you are holding some decent cards, showing this and that with regards the Reagan Administration and the Sandinista regime. In fact, I already know what all of your cards are.
But I've got some cards as well. What do you think they might be? Why not preempt me and tell us, thus making this a more balanced presentation of what happened in that "poor country" -- and who did it -- all on your own? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Interested
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Still hopelessly one-sided in your thinking, Interested. No surprises here. |
 Still hopelessly apologist for any of your nation's unscrupulous foreign policies, Gopher?
I have no time to write the history of Nicaragua - and I'm sure you'll soon give us an account more suited to your liking anyway.
Just to say, that in a few years that country began to blossom. It was run for the people rather than for the elite and Western business interests, and the level of education and health care rose dramatically. The future really seemed much rosier for the majority of ordinary Nicaraguans. However, things were looking too good, and the country was becoming a dangerously shining example of how well a latin American country could begin to prosper freed from the domination of US interests. It had to be smacked down. And it was. Horribly. The agents of its success were targetted, including teachers, health workers and clergy. Grisly torture and horrific murders by US trained death squads ensued.
Of course this is all anti-American claptrap eh Gopher?  I look forward to you putting us right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Who is apologizing? Who is whitewashing?
Let's ask leftist, Cornell historian Walter LaFeber on that score...
| Walter LaFeber wrote: |
...the Sandinistas made a near-fatal error of imposing military control over some 50,000 Miskito Indians who lived along the distant Atlantic coastline. Never hispanicized, the Miskitos had fought all attempts to assimilate them. The Sandinistas burned eighty-one villages, relocated Miskitos in resettlement camps, and murdered at least twenty-five while another 250 disappeared. Some 10,000 Indians fled to Honduras where their leaders obtained CIA weapons...They became prime targets for CIA recruiting...the Atlantic coast remained an Achilles heel of the revolution...
[In the mid-1980s,] [t]he key question became whether either the Sandinistas or the U.S. government would allow opposition candidates to participate fully in [a negotiated] election. The Sandinistas used both their popularity and strong-arm tactics to keep the opposition as weak as possible...the Sandinistas heavily censored the opposition newspapers... |
LaFeber, Inevitable Revolutions: The United States in Central America, 2d ed., 307-310, 315.
Carter tried to work with the Sandinistas in 1979-1980. But this failed.
Reagan/Casey -- anticommunist zealots, both of them -- tried to use the comical "Contras" -- fighting on two fronts, the ex-National Guardsmen on the northern front, and the ex-Sandinista, now Contra but not-willing-to-work-with-the-other-Contras southern front, based in Costa Rica -- to interdict the Soviet and Cuban arms and advisors flowing through Nicaragua into El Salvador, and to pressure and, at one time, even to overthrow them (although, as is well known, they never succeeded in taking so much as an unoccupied swamp).
This was an illegal covert war, as it ignored Congressional orders to cease funding it but the Reagan Administration did it anyway, and then misled the legislature. (The story is well known.) The Administration even mined Nicaragua's harbors, in obvious violation of international law.
I am not apologizing for or whitewashing these things. I, too, think they were a bad idea -- but mostly because they were an ineffective way to go about it. And I think it was not worth provoking a constitutional crisis over, either.
This notwithstanding, why would you start out by apologizing for and whitewashing the Sandinistas' own misdeeds, even presenting them as pure victims of an imperialist brutality? And what did the Sandinistas do upon assuming power?
Oh, yeah. That's right. Because you are on a propaganda mission here to bring as much discredit to the United States as you can while at the same time praising any and all of its enemies and opponents in the best light you can throw their way that, you desperately hope, will show them as wronged, guileless saints...
By the way, anyone interested in seeing more on the Sandinistas from the inside might be interested in checking out Arturo Cruz, Jr.'s memoirs. He and his father started out as democratic oppositionists to Somoza, became Sandinistas, became unhappy with the Sandinistas because of their behavior upon assuming power, then became Contras, that is, until they became unhappy with the Contras, and then they denounced them, too...Standard Caribbean-style exile politics. In any case, check out Cruz's memoirs, if you are interested in Daniel Ortega and Nicaraguan affairs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
All Things Considered, November 6, 2006 � Daniel Ortega appears to be headed for victory in Nicaragua's presidential elections, as partial election results show the former revolutionary holding a substantial lead over his rivals.
With returns in from nearly 50 percent of polling stations, the Sandinista Party candidate has just over 40 percent of the vote. If Ortega maintains that gap, he would win outright.
Ortega has said he is not the Marxist revolutionary that he was when he led the country in the 1980s... |
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6444204
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6434794 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Gopher,
I think the first thing that should be straightened out is ..................
Nicaragua should have been free of U.S. interference. Left to do its dreadful deeds without others trying to do more dreadful deeds. So let's start with the fact that the United States has never, nor continues to ever, respect the territorial sovereignty of any nation. This has been and continues to be the "moral" unforthcomingness of the United States and their major error when it comes to foreign policy.
Start there, respecting the sovereignty of nations, be they Iraq, Palestine or Mexico (yeah, like that fence).
DD --not apologizing for Ortega and his continued two facedness......power corrupts and did so in Nicaragua. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
| Nicaragua should have been free of U.S. interference... |
Ddeubel: I do not disagree with this -- even if what follows it is nonsense. I do not know what you are trying to straighten out, then -- that is, on this one specific point. I think the most respectable position that came out of this war was Costa Rica's Oscar Arias's, who, interestingly enough, is president of Costa Rica again today, too.
(Aside: Who says history does not repeat itself? -- we have a Bush in the White House, with a probably democratic Congress, Arias in power at San Jose, Ortega coming to power in Managua, and Castro still in Havana. Wierd time warp. If you had told me this would be so in 2006 from the perspective of 1986, I would not have believed it.)
But, this notwithstanding, let's clarify something else while we are stating such high principles:
Should El Salvador, too, have been free of U.S., Soviet, Cuban, and Nicaraguan interference? See anyone with pristine hands here -- well, perhaps anyone besides Arias? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 2:24 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
Bucheon Bum:
| Quote: |
[I think you're being]...too literal.
|
Gopher:
That is exactly the problem.
How about we just keep our feet on the ground and leave the hyperbole to others? |
| Quote: |
Gopher:
Oh, yeah. That's right. Because you are on a propaganda mission here to bring as much discredit to the United States as you can while at the same time praising any and all of its enemies and opponents in the best light you can throw their way that, you desperately hope, will show them as wronged, guileless saints... Laughing |
Hypocrisy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 3:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Speaking of banana republics... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cwemory
Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Location: Gunpo, Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 3:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
| DD --not apologizing for Ortega and his continued two facedness......power corrupts and did so in Nicaragua. |
It should be mentioned that, in the words of The Economist "he (Ortega) nowadays appears to value power over ideology." His Sandista Front is now more a party of personality than a part of ideas He long ago expelled the Marxist members of his party who were the main challenge to his leadership. His vice president and many others in his current inner circle are former contra leaders. His main political ally while running was Arnaldo Aleman, a (deeply) conservative former president currently "serving" a 20 year sentence for corruption. Additionally, Ortega now supports CAFTA. He may have many problems, but being a Marxist is not one of them.
I heard yesterday on BBC News that Jimmy Carter had endorsed him for president (as much as a foreign head of state can endorse a candidate anyway). It was under Catrer's presidency that many of actions against the Sandista were begun. Ones that were greatly increased under Reagan. It's doubtful Carter would have shown his support for Ortega if he thought Ortega was the unreformed Marxist that his detractors (and some supporters) claim he is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Good points about Ortega cwmemory. I really don't know what side of the fence he is on. Seemingly he's cleaned up his act but still drives around in a car worth a few thousands of his countrymen's annual income. I really don't know.......my bet is that he is getting old and just wants to be comfortable. Easy to be young and a revolutionary.
Thanks Interested for posting this. I'd been meaning to do so but these days don't get a lot of time to read and also post here in depth.
Gopher, I would also add to what I said about U.S. interference, the caution that the U.S. still has 3 of Central America's most infamous gangsters in its nest. Abrams, Reich and Negroponte. Disgusting how this Bush regime can get away with that. Just looking at one example, Abrams and how he lied to Congress, point blank. Got a slap on the wrist and now wields mighty power . and to think Republicans at the time, almost hung Clinton for lying about a blowjob.........
No, other nations should also not be involving themselves in the region, Venezuela, Cuba, Russia or Ruthenia. But the U.S. which is managed brilliantly by corporate interests, by far, does the most in this regard in the region. Namely cuz money talks. This has always been Guatemala's soft point of entry -- vested interests and the monied trying to keep their money. I think it was Amnesty which using uncharacteristically, embellished language, called Nicaragua a "mafia corporate state" or something such....
No, we will stay away from airing the U.S.'s dirty laundry or playing these cards. Still , I say pity that at the end of the day, even with Ortega (and I also read that North is "angered" by his election hahahaha), the small guy will still live out a meagre and mostly joyless life of misery and pain.
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 7:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Let's see if Ortega can do something positive with democracy.
He failed the first time having to resort to Stalinistic rule.
This time he is elected there is a healthy opposition.
Let him enact his policy and preserve democracy.
If he resorts again to stalinistic rule then a counter revolt in in order.
cbc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Should El Salvador, too, have been free of U.S., Soviet, Cuban, and Nicaraguan interference? See anyone with pristine hands here -- well, perhaps anyone besides Arias? |
Also, Ddeubel: I left out one key player/interventor in Central American affairs in the 1980s: Saudi Arabia. The Saudi government voluntarily, directly, and fully funded the Contras at one time, for about a year or a year-and-a-half or so, part of the quid pro quo they had going with the Reagan Administration on Afghanistan...
And as you know, the Iranians were demanding TOW antitank and other weapons in exchange for American hostages. These Iranian funds, too, went to the Contras. And their middle-man, Manucher Ghorbanifar, a very shady and unpredictable man, knew all about it.
In any case, should the Saudis, too, have eschewed interventionism in the Caribbean Basin?
By the way, Interested: is it time to bring the Argentine junta or Norriega and the Panamanian government into this yet? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Instead of rehashing the Contra Sandinista controversy.
Perhaps everyone should look at the nearer history.
Ortega stepped down after an election, congratulate him.
There have been many fair elections since.
He has one this election fairly.
Like him or not his fellow countrymen have faith.
cbc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
