I am probably more leftist than Mephisto and I have argued with Music_Man. But he is no fascist. At least not as far as I can tell
Anekdote is more facist-like, I can't imagine he really is one but 'at least' he is a a lot closer.
Well, it is not that hard to finda democratic country that committed a lot of atrocities. The question is how far back in time we are allowed. Of course Europe was partly democratic during WWI. Democracies elected fascists and we had WWII too. Democracy didn't prevent them.
Then during the war the sides with democratic governments committed war crimies by firebombing and later nuking whole cities.
After WWII we have Israel, one can debate if the country can be called a democracy, that committed atricities. Sure, they were in brutal wars and most of the wars were forced on them after the decision made to make a country in that place in the world. This act requires responsibility to be taken for.
Then we have the US committing terrorism against the state of Nicuragua. This case is very strong, it has been ruled by the world court. The US ignored it and continued killing civilians. The UN SC even tried to take on a resolution calling on states to adhere international law regarding terrorism. This was actually aimed at trying to force the US to pay the fines they were condemned to by the World Court.
And this kind of support of right wing people, including fascists, neo-nazi's, paramilitary gangs, is seen all through South America. Niceragua, El Salvador, Guatamala, Panama, Grenada(this one is totally silly), and of course Cuba itself as well. And Chile as pointed out before. But also Argentina. Some of these countries had democracies. Some of these countries were doing well. But they were just too leftist. Remember, there was total communist paranoia.
I mean people like Chaves, Morales, would be deposed by the US. Not I am not concerned about if these people to their job well. At least not when talking about deposing a democratically elected leader. Those people want these leaders. It's like the rest of the world funding people that oppose G.W.Bush in the US. Trying to get them to attempt a coup. Helping them kill 'soft targets', etc. It is state terrorism.
Actually, there was a coup in 2002 against Chaves, so times have not changed that much. Now the US did not condemn this coup. Maybe their were even behind it after all.
This is just like calling for democracy in Palastine and when you don't like the result call off the support anyway. The US does nothing to promote democracy in the world. I mean, the countries they condemn sometimes have more democractic elections that they themselves have. I mean, in Bolivia they had a real election, not a marketing campain run by the PR industry where people do not even know the position of the candidates on important points.
But back to supporting terrorists and para-military forces. That's what they did with Bin Laden. The US just has to stop this. I mean this is one of the reasons why there is so much terrorism in the world. Because the US keeps supporting the terrorism they like.
Then they support dictatorships as well. Most democratic countries do this when they think they can gain from this. Iraq was supported by the west through and after the usage of nerve gass against Kurdish towns and Iranian soldiers.
They also supported countries like South America, Turkey and Israel through immoral acts.
The UN recently published their failed states list. Haiti, Iraq and Afghanistan were on the top. Three countries that have suffered a lot of US influence. Haiti is a good example. They suffered the most interventions of any country in the Mexican guld, they are also the poorest country in the Mexican guild.
This is not because the people in the US are bad people, at least not worse than other people. It is just because the US is a superpower. The amount of violence is equal to their power. They do so many bad things because they have so much power.
As for Vietnam. The people of South Vietnam weren't supported by the US. The government of South Vietnam was supported. Actually there was a lot of disagreement between the S-Vietnam military and the president. There was a military coup and the S-Vietnamese president was assassinated. The S-Vietnamese military leaders claimed they did this with "at least the knowledge and approval of the White House and the American ambassador in Saigon".
Then there was a civil war. The US wasn't helping the people of S-Vietnam. They were using S-Vietnam in a fight against communism. They first had to conquer S-Vietnam.
About Cuba. I stronly dislike communism. But from an economic point of view it doesn't seem that bad. Cuba does ok, they almost have first world social services. Look at the literacy, the number of doctors per capita, infancy rate, etc. It is not that bad. And this while suffering boycots from their closest neigbour, who also is the single superpower in the world. Actually, it would be more correct to call it an economic war. Some people have calculated how much this would have cost them. Some economists have called 'Cuba' a miracle.
Now this has nothing to do with Fidel Casto's killing of the opposition. I would be a dissident in Cuba, obviously. But one cannot claim that communism doesn't work.
I find it also very bad that those democratically elected leftist leaders in South America assosiate with Casto. Well, they are kind of forced to do it by the US. But in the end they have their own responsibility. You see, in the end they apply the same nasty machiavellian policies as the US, only with a lot less power.
Topic: Anti-American Sentiments