 |
| |
|
|
notyoueither
|
 |
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
If we lay every Israeli civilian killed by terrorism (3600) at the feet of Arafat (which would be unfair), it amounts to not a drop in the bucket of what Reagan did. In fact, Reagan is the far more horrible. He murdered many times the number of people in 1/5th the time. Reagan killed ten times that in Nicaragua, a country with 3/5s the population of Israel.
Reagan did not "**** up" with Nicaragua. He intentionally destroyed a country. Just like he intentionally destroyed Angola and Mozambique. Just like he intentionally destroyed El Salvador and Guatemala. He had more blood on his hands than even Pol Pot. |
You're cute when you get worked up. Worse than Pol Pot? Haha!
quote:
Arafat doesn't compare to Reagan, you're right. He doesn't even come close to the monster that Reagan was. But since you don't consider the crimes of Reagan to be significant, or you mitigate them because you support Reagan's other goals, and you demonize Arafat because his targets were Jews, regardless of what they had done to his people, you won't care.
As for the Mufti of Jerusalem, that's Britain's fault. They appointed him. |
Didn't say I didn't think them significant. btw, would you be interested to know that the anti-Sandinista policy was started under Carter? I would have thought you'd have known that, but that doesn't serve your arguement very well, does it?
Oh, and I'm not blaming the Mufti on anyone. I'm illustrating why Mein Kampf might be a best seller among Palestinians.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
|
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
You're cute when you get worked up. Worse than Pol Pot? Haha! |
Pol Pot shares responsibility for the deaths of two million Cambodians. Reagan shares responsibility for the deaths of more than two million Africans, over two hundred thousand Central Americans, etc. In total numbers of murders, Reagan was worse than Pol Pot. |
Is this the part where I call bullshit?
quote:
quote:
btw, would you be interested to know that the anti-Sandinista policy was started under Carter? |
Not really, since all Carter managed to do was gather together a small amount of money to keep Somoza's Naitional Guard alive. It was Reagan who armed and supplied them and turned them from a small group of bandits into a ten thousands strong army of paid terrorists.
quote:
Oh, and I'm not blaming the Mufti on anyone. I'm illustrating why Mein Kampf might be a best seller among Palestinians. |
It surely has nothing to do with having their country stolen by a group of Jews. I'm not saying the Palestinians are perfect, but I don't act like they don't have a valid reason to wage war either. |
Ah yes, Nazism is understandable and valid now,under certain circumstances. I see. carry on.
Oh, should I point out that the vein of thought predates the Nazis, the Partition, and the 6 Day War where the West Bank fell under Israeli control?
Do you really think Arafat and his ilk want to coexist? Are you interested in some prime swampland?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
Is this the part where I call bullshit? |
I don't care what you do.
2 million Cambodeans
vs
1 million Angolans
1 million Mozambiquans
40 thousand Nicaraguans
70 thousand Salvadorans
100 thousand Guatemalans
and there's plenty more.
On a pure numbers game, Regan is the bigger butcher. But you support Reagan, so his numbers are either suspect or okay anyway because the world's better for him having been president.
quote:
Ah yes, Nazism is understandable and valid now,under certain circumstances. I see. carry on. |
Did I say it was okay? Reagan supported people who were Nazis in both El Salvador and Guatemala, and even helped put a real Nazi (Klaus Barbi) in power in Bolivia, IIRC.
quote:
Oh, should I point out that the vein of thought predates the Nazis, the Partition, and the 6 Day War where the West Bank fell under Israeli control? |
And you conveniently ignore that both of the Arab rulers (Faisal, before the French and Brits invaded and threw him out, and his bother Abdullah later) of Palestine courted the Jews. The fact is, the UK deliberately selected an anti-Semite to be Mufti of Jerusalem to try and buy off the al-Husseini family and get them to accept the British Mandate. Had they instead selected someone from the Nashashibi family, the al-Husseini's anti-Semitism would be an unfortunate fotenote in history.
quote:
Do you really think Arafat and his ilk want to coexist? |
He proposed a two state solution in 1974, so yes, I do think so. I think he also had some pride and refused to legitimize Israel stealing even more from the Palestinian people.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
|
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
Is this the part where I call bullshit? |
I don't care what you do.
2 million Cambodeans
vs
1 million Angolans
1 million Mozambiquans
40 thousand Nicaraguans
70 thousand Salvadorans
100 thousand Guatemalans
and there's plenty more. |
Then get them, because you are full of pooh if you want to blame Reagan for conflicts that started before him and ran long after his time on stage, like Angola and Mozambique.
quote:
On a pure numbers game, Regan is the bigger butcher. But you support Reagan, so his numbers are either suspect or okay anyway because the world's better for him having been president. |
Che, what happened to the 10 times Palestinians killed claim?
Why do you want to blame South African policy on Reagan?
Grab some perspective and maybe an once of credibility, dude.
quote:
quote:
Ah yes, Nazism is understandable and valid now,under certain circumstances. I see. carry on. |
Did I say it was okay? Reagan supported people who were Nazis in both El Salvador and Guatemala, and even helped put a real Nazi (Klaus Barbi) in power in Bolivia, IIRC.
quote:
Oh, should I point out that the vein of thought predates the Nazis, the Partition, and the 6 Day War where the West Bank fell under Israeli control? |
And you conveniently ignore that both of the Arab rulers (Faisal, before the French and Brits invaded and threw him out, and his bother Abdullah later) of Palestine courted the Jews. The fact is, the UK deliberately selected an anti-Semite to be Mufti of Jerusalem to try and buy off the al-Husseini family and get them to accept the British Mandate. Had they instead selected someone from the Nashashibi family, the al-Husseini's anti-Semitism would be an unfortunate fotenote in history.
quote:
Do you really think Arafat and his ilk want to coexist? |
He proposed a two state solution in 1974, so yes, I do think so. I think he also had some pride and refused to legitimize Israel stealing even more from the Palestinian people. |
I think you are deluded.I am sure you think the same of me. So where does that leave us?
I'll tell you where it leaves me. I do not feel that civies carrying bombs to kill other civies is ever justified, whether it's Reagan backed, Soviet backed, or Arafat backed. Can you agree with that?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MrFun
|
 |
of Iowa
Nov 2000
time: 23:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
I can see how various leaders of the US, the UK, France, China, and the USSR made a whole lot of situations even worse in terms of gross human rights violations.
I can't however, blame Castro for 1,000,000 Angolans dead simply because he backed one side in Angola. However, that seems to be what Che wishes to do and lay it all at the feet of one, single president of the US. That is bullshit and I'll call it. |
Yes, I would agree with you there, as well. Reagan is not the sole blame for any of the human rights violations during his two terms as president -- even at the same time that he contributed to those gross violations.
Just as Reagan does not deserve full blame for the way the AIDS crisis worsened in the 1980s when there were some people who already saw what was happening, and knew as early as 1984 that something had to be done.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
|
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
Yep. It's a matter of whether you can stack up South African policy on Reagan's door step. I have to admit, I hadn't heard that brand of crap before. |
South African policy paid for with U.S. money and using US arms. The CIA was heavily involved in these policies, and South Africa provided a convenient cover to dupe people like you.
Would SA have pursued the policy anyway? Probably. Does that reduce U.S. culpability? Not at all. If you and your buddies steal something, you're responsible, even if they would have done it if you weren't along.
quote:
I can't however, blame Castro for 1,000,000 Angolans dead simply because he backed one side in Angola. That seems to be what Che wishes to do and lay it all at the feet of one, single president of the US. |
Well, considering that Cuba was defending the Angolan government from a genocidal terrorist group, that would be close to reality. Did they help prop up the Angolan government and thus perpetuate a war that might have gone to UNITA had they not done so? Possibly. Does that mean that Castro shares in the responsibility? Yes. Of course, seeing what UNITA did with the territory it controled, it is rather probable that a Savimbi run Angola would have been a complete disaster.
Nor did I lay it entirely at the feet of Reagan. I said he shared in the responsibility. He didn't have to get us involved again, but he did. Might peace have come sooner to Angola had he not done so? Possibly. Does he then share in the responsibility for those million dead Angolans? Absolutely.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
|
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
South African policy paid for with U.S. money and using US arms. The CIA was heavily involved in these policies, and South Africa provided a convenient cover to dupe people like you.
Would SA have pursued the policy anyway? Probably. Does that reduce U.S. culpability? Not at all. If you and your buddies steal something, you're responsible, even if they would have done it if you weren't along.
quote:
I can't however, blame Castro for 1,000,000 Angolans dead simply because he backed one side in Angola. That seems to be what Che wishes to do and lay it all at the feet of one, single president of the US. |
Well, considering that Cuba was defending the Angolan government from a genocidal terrorist group, that would be close to reality. Did they help prop up the Angolan government and thus perpetuate a war that might have gone to UNITA had they not done so? Possibly. Does that mean that Castro shares in the responsibility? Yes. Of course, seeing what UNITA did with the territory it controled, it is rather probable that a Savimbi run Angola would have been a complete disaster.
Nor did I lay it entirely at the feet of Reagan. I said he shared in the responsibility. He didn't have to get us involved again, but he did. Might peace have come sooner to Angola had he not done so? Possibly. Does he then share in the responsibility for those million dead Angolans? Absolutely. |
You and your numbers. Where do you get them?
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/massacre.html
quote:
Wars and Genocides of the 20th Century
by Piero Scaruffi
160 million people died in wars during the 20th century
(See also 1900: A century of genocides)
...
1975-2002: Angolan civil war (500,000) |
and
http://web.mit.edu/cascon/cases/case_acw.html
quote:
Cascon Case ACW: Angola Civil War 1974-
Status Quo Side: Angolan government
Non-Status Quo Side: UNITA
Region: Africa
Conflict Type: External Intervention
Issues in Dispute: Governance, Resources, Strategic
Maps: [UTexas Angola maps]
Phase 1: 7/1974
Portugal's 400 year rule ended in 1974 [see ANG]. The opposition had comprised 3 tribally and ideologically distinct groups: the Kimbundu-centered Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA), founded in 1956 by exiled intellectuals who soon became Marxist; the non-Marxist Kongo-centered National Front for the Liberation of Angola (FLNA) with support from Zaire; and the Ovimbundu-centered (Angola's largest tribe) National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA), Jonas Savimbi's 1966 offshoot of FLNA. In the Portuguese-brokered Alvor Agreement of January 15 1975, the 3 agreed to an all-Angolan army and an interim coalition government prior to elections for a constituent assembly.
Phase 2: 1/15/1975
Each party maneuvered for sole control, their armies poised to attack. The coalition government took office on 31 January 1975.
Phase 3: 2/1975
The coalition collapsed, leaving Luanda under MPLA control. In the fall, with aid from Zaire to FLNA and South Africa to UNITA, these forces attacked the MPLA, which prevailed with Soviet aid and Cuban troops. FLNA ceased operations and UNITA lost Zairian and Tanzanian support. UNITA's US aid ceased in December. A costly stalemate ensued until 1988 despite S. African and US support (renewed under President Reagan) to UNITA. With improved US-Soviet relations in the late 1980's, multilateral efforts achieved an August 5 1988 agreement between South Africa, Cuba and Angola (MPLA) ending S. African and Cuban intervention (supplementing UN resolution 435 on Namibia). The level of conflict lessened.
Phase 4: 5/31/1991
Savimbi and Angolan President Jose Eduardo dos Santos signed a cease-fire on May 311991 providing for elections monitored by 600 UN peacekeepers. UNITA-US relations soured amid charges of human rights abuses and counter charges of a CIA plot. Elections on September 29 and 30 were upheld as fair by international monitors, with dos Santos the narrow winner. Savimbi's protests were denied by UN monitors, who sought a runoff election. Heavy street fighting continued.
Phase 3-2: 12/1992
Renewed, prolonged violence devastated the country. Despite a UNITA declared formal ceasefire in November 1993 and UN mediation begun in Zambia, destruction continued. The Lusaka agreement signed by representatives of both sides called for a cease-fire, rebel disarmament, run-off elections and creation of an inclusive national army. As minor skirmishes continued, the UNSC in February 1995 unanimously approved 7,000 peacekeepers to monitor the accord. The first contingent arrived in late May after Savimbi formally acknowledged dos Santos as the undisputed President. The peace process remained extremely fragile with cease-fire violations on both sides, and the demobilization of UNITA forces barely begun. On February 8, 1996, the UNSC extended its largest peacekeeping mission for three months. In December, 1996 the sides agreed to form a government of national reconciliation, and in April, 1997 a unified government was sworn in, But Savimbi, who controlled vast diamond resources, once again kept Africa's longest running war going by remobilizing UNITA forces. A disillusioned US began supplying the Angolan army, and in August 1997 the UNSC unanimously imposed air and travel restrictions on UNITA and suspended the withdrawal of peacekeepers.
Phase 3-3: 6/1998
The cease-fire began breaking down as government forces retook rebel areas and local police brutalized UNITA supporters. UN special envoy Alioune Blondin Beye was killed in a place crash and was not replaced for months. Government forces became diverted by interventions in the Congo civil war, while rebel forces retook more than half the countryside, displacing an estimated 200,000 people. Despite huge oil revenues, the government did little to relieve domestic misery, while UNITA continued to acquire huge revenues by diamond smuggling. In January, 1999, the government abandoned the Lusaka Agreement, which UN Secretary General Kofi Annan reported had no hope of implementation. On February 26 the Security Council voted to withdraw the peacekeeping mission, which had already cost $4 billion.
Copyright © 2000 Lincoln P. Bloomfield and Allen Moulton |
Yep. That looks like it's all Reagan's fault.
btw, when did the election happen that made the MPLA the legitimate government of Angola? Before or after the Cubans arrived to ensure free and fair elections?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19.
Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-11-2004 11:12
|