Communist candidate defeated in Colombia.

[Greoric]

Example of red tide gaining power against a legitimate government through the use of force in latin America.

None that I'm aware of thanks to Pinochet. @Jack V Savage

 

[sub_thug]

Any example where the communist party has gained power. I'm not sure of the source for your incredulity. How would you propose using a "legitimate" gov't, when the gov't is in control by communists? The recourse of arming the people (and training them if needed) to take back their country seems like the appropriate strategy...or?

I gave him legitimate examples. We supported the Colombian government against the FARC and lesser Communist groups back in the 80's and 90's, and we were assisting the government in the hunt for the narcos. We are largely believed to have supported the Bolivian government when Che and his group of misfit guerillas arrived in Bolivia, ultimately leading to their destruction. I think he's looking to simply make a case against the US, as per usual.

 

[Greoric]

I gave him legitimate examples. We supported the Colombian government against the FARC and lesser Communist groups back in the 80's and 90's, and we were assisting the government in the hunt for the narcos. We are largely believed to have supported the Bolivian government when Che and his group of misfit guerillas arrived in Bolivia, ultimately leading to their destruction. I think he's looking to simply make a case against the US, as per usual.

I appreciate the education. Here, I was looking to throw in the above response, hoping he'd specify S. America.

 

[sub_thug]

I appreciate the education. Here, I was looking to throw in the above response, hoping he'd specify S. America.

The US is far from perfect, but it's worth understanding the complex dynamics at play. The Soviets were truly a terrible group of people, and they were known for their subversive activities. I mean, look at them today. Putin is a KGB guy, and he's using the FSB the same way. They like to meddle, and they stuck their noses into virtually every country they could. We responded, and sometimes, it led to no one winning and a lot of people suffering. But to lay everything at the feet of the US just because the Soviet Union is gone is revisionist history, and it serves neither truth nor the people who hear it.

 

[Greoric]

The US is far from perfect, but it's worth understanding the complex dynamics at play. The Soviets were truly a terrible group of people, and they were known for their subversive activities. I mean, look at them today. Putin is a KGB guy, and he's using the FSB the same way. They like to meddle, and they stuck their noses into virtually every country they could. We responded, and sometimes, it led to no one winning and a lot of people suffering. But to lay everything at the feet of the US just because the Soviet Union is gone is revisionist history, and it serves neither truth nor the people who hear it.

I've posted this before, and I've seen it thrown around since. If you haven't seen this, its worth a watch and parallels what you're saying here.

 

[sub_thug]

I've posted this before, and I've seen it thrown around since. If you haven't seen this, its worth a watch and parallels what you're saying here.

The Soviets were truly on another level with psychological warfare and information operations. They did it in a whole way that mirrored how we did things in the physical world. Our Green Berets were so much better than their Spetsnaz at unconventional warfare/foreign internal defense, but the idea is that you get the people you're training to do the heavy lifting for you. The Soviets were able to get countries to destroy themselves, and more over, they bragged about it. Sometimes, I look around on these message boards and feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone...

 

[Greoric]

The Soviets were truly on another level with psychological warfare and information operations. They did it in a whole way that mirrored how we did things in the physical world. Our Green Berets were so much better than their Spetsnaz at unconventional warfare/foreign internal defense, but the idea is that you get the people you're training to do the heavy lifting for you. The Soviets were able to get countries to destroy themselves, and more over, they bragged about it. Sometimes, I look around on these message boards and feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone...

Couldn't have wrote it better. Elaborate on the last part though...

 

[Rod1]

None that I'm aware of thanks to Pinochet. @Jack V Savage

Pinochet only got support AFTER they had already took out the communists, he also failed to bring the much needed growth and reforms Chile needed.

 

[sub_thug]

Couldn't have wrote it better. Elaborate on the last part though...

We know that they do this, and yet, here we are, hearing people lament about how terrible the US is in regards to its foreign policy, talking about the virtues of socialism and Communism, attacking one another over minor disagreements, and praising the USSR. Do we not realize that this was something that they did to us? This was their exact message, as stated by defectors of their own intelligence services!

 

[Rod1]

I gave him legitimate examples. We supported the Colombian government against the FARC and lesser Communist groups back in the 80's and 90's, and we were assisting the government in the hunt for the narcos. We are largely believed to have supported the Bolivian government when Che and his group of misfit guerillas arrived in Bolivia, ultimately leading to their destruction. I think he's looking to simply make a case against the US, as per usual.

The FARCs were in no position to take down the Colombian government.

 

[Rod1]

We know that they do this, and yet, here we are, hearing people lament about how terrible the US is in regards to its foreign policy, talking about the virtues of socialism and Communism, attacking one another over minor disagreements, and praising the USSR. Do we not realize that this was something that they did to us? This was their exact message, as stated by defectors of their own intelligence services!

Because the US was (still is in a lot of cases) terrible when it comes to foreign policy.

Just because the USSR was also terrible doesnt justifies what the US did, and you are trying to minimize the mess that was US gunboat diplomacy and subversion through a false dichotomy.

Even Castro didnt wanted to become the USSR pet, he did so after the Bay of Pigs where it was clear the US would stop at nothing until another Batista was in power.

 

[sub_thug]

The FARCs were in no position to take down the Colombian government.

Huh? They launched violent campaign against the government and people of Colombia.

 

[sub_thug]

Because the US was (still is in a lot of cases) terrible when it comes to foreign policy.

Just because the USSR was also terrible doesnt justifies what the US did, and you are trying to minimize the mess that was US gunboat diplomacy and subversion through a false dichotomy.

Even Castro didnt wanted to become the USSR pet, he did so after the Bay of Pigs where it was clear the US would stop at nothing until another Batista was in power.

As I've said throughout this thread, the US wasn't perfect. But you seem to have a personal vendetta against the US, and it's very odd.

 

[Rod1]

Huh? They launched violent campaign against the government and people of Colombia.

They were a terrorist organization that operated in the rural areas where the government couldnt establish a proper presence. They were never really a threat to the government of Colombia.

 

[Rod1]

As I've said throughout this thread, the US wasn't perfect. But you seem to have a personal vendetta against the US, and it's very odd.

So calling out apologism is now having a personal vendetta?

Im ok with "vae victus" woe to the vanquished, the hispanic world lost the battle for supremacy during the age of exploration. What really irks me is the American exceptionalism, (its more like Anglo exceptionalism) where they reach such levels of dellusion that they actually think they are helping people when they actively fuck them in the ass.

And its nothing new though just a continuation of

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White_Man's_Burden

 

[sub_thug]

They were a terrorist organization that operated in the rural areas where the government couldnt establish a proper presence. They were never really a threat to the government of Colombia.

That’s literally how the Cuban revolution started. Actually, the communist revolution of China had similar starts. You’re rationalizing through hindsight to try and make your point.

 

[sub_thug]

So calling out apologism is now having a personal vendetta?

Im ok with "vae victus" woe to the vanquished, the hispanic world lost the battle for supremacy during the age of exploration. What really irks me is the American exceptionalism, (its more like Anglo exceptionalism) where they reach such levels of dellusion that they actually think they are helping people when they actively fuck them in the ass.

And its nothing new though just a continuation of

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White_Man's_Burden

No, you seem to have an actual vendetta. You talk about every American foreign policy decision like it’s a Nazi war crime. It’s weird.

As was laid out before, there were only bad options, so we acted. Given the options on the table, I’d say the right call was made to stop the Soviets. You’re going to disagree, and oh well.

 

[Rod1]

That’s literally how the Cuban revolution started. Actually, the communist revolution of China had similar starts. You’re rationalizing through hindsight to try and make your point.

Through hindsight? do you honestly think that right wing paramilitaries is what stopped FARC? no they didnt, they actually did exactly the same thing as FARC. Its almost as if you didnt even read the link i gave you.

Funny shit you mention the Cuban revolution, that wouldnt had happened if the US hadnt backed up Batista coup in the first place.

 

[Rod1]

No, you seem to have an actual vendetta. You talk about every American foreign policy decision like it’s a Nazi war crime. It’s weird.

So we are lying now? cool.

Im calling a spade a spade, supporting genocide is supporting genocide.

As was laid out before, there were only bad options, so we acted. Given the options on the table, I’d say the right call was made to stop the Soviets. You’re going to disagree, and oh well.

Again, false dichotomy, at least @Greoric had the decency to back out when he realized that he was ignorant of the topic, you decide to double down on the American exceptionalism and then get surprised people dont take it lightly at people talking about murder and chaos so non-chalantly?

You do realize that gunboat diplomacy and the banana wars preceded the cold war right? Soviets just saw an opportunity, its not like they didnt exploited real grievances in the first place.

 

[VivaRevolution]

I guess the Venezuelan effect is doing its work and scared people into continuity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colombian_presidential_election,_2018

Some things to ponder is.

1.- The communist candidate is extremely well-educated, so maybe the accusations of communist were the product of his younger days? but then again Trotsky and Lenin were also educated.

2.- Communism seems to be a symptom, not a disease, when income inequality, crony capitalism and the closing of doors to personal growth run rampant, it seems that people vote out of anger and they think things cant get worse.

3.- Venezuela may be the most visual example of the failure of communism, since there is a lot of openess in its society and we see exactly what its going on and how its spiraling towards failure.

I wouldn't call Venzuala communist. I would call it authoritarian socialist.

I would say the same of China though, and they call themselves communists.

I think the defining characteristic of communism, is state appointed professions. At least in a common use sort of way.