schneider@2littl.DEC (DANIEL SCHNEIDER) (12/17/85)
>In article <1658@decwrl.UUCP> schneider@2littl.DEC (DANIEL SCHNEIDER) writes: >> >>A few days ago I was flipping through the cable channels and I came >>upon similar footage, where a pitiful, elderly, toothless man was >>sitting in his hut talking softly. The captions went similarly: >>the soldiers had been doing all the harm. When this segment finished >>a narrator continued the story of how "good" the contras are and likewise >>how "evil" the Sandinistas. When the narrator finished the scene was back >>to a TV studio where who was requesting money? Why good ol' Jerry Falwell. >>You're keeping fine company Eduardo. >This is typical of those who don't have any good arguments against >opposing views: they then try to discredit one by drawing bad analogies. I was not furnishing an argument and thus it wasn't a "good" argument, nor a "bad" analogy. I think its quite informative to juxtapose the sources of two pieces of strikingly similar information. [Incidentally, instead of being a bad analogy, using the definition in my dictionary, the above piece is probably too similar to be an analogy.] I'm not sure why such a juxtaposition should upset you. I would assume your views of the Sandinistas and Rev. Falwell's are in harmony. If you dislike the association with a political bedfellow it is your problem, not mine for pointing it out. >I have no reason to believe that news report [on Mexican television news -DS] >any more or less than I >believe news reports about the contras killing innocent people. Do you? The contradictory information comes from two distinct camps. Ex-Somozans, anti-communists and the like seem to have caught your ear. Meanwhile my sympathies tend to lay with the citizens of the country and the lifestyles they attempt to lead. To this end, much information is flowing from groups of similar interests. Unfortunately humanist-inspired information regularly contradicts that of yours, Eduardo, Jerry Falwell and Ronald Reagan. I have no idea what your vested interests are if they do exist, but I am well aware of those of your compatriots. To summarize I believe whom I believe after considering the vested interests of the sources of information. From this method, I have determined those seeking to overthrow the Nicaraguan government have indirectly condoned atrocities against other people. If I were to accept the political arguments against the Sandinistas, I would still be against the methods currently being used by the Contras and funded publicly by the American government and privately by many conservative organizations. >Trying to believe in only one side of the story and just discredit >any facts supporting the other side is like lying to yourself. > Eduardo Krell UCLA Computer Science Department This is true. Alas it is unfortunate that you merely type these words and show no sign of heeding them. I do not believe I have provoked you in any way to think the same of me. Daniel Schneider {decvax}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-2littl!schneider
ekrell@ucla-cs.UUCP (12/17/85)
> Unfortunately humanist-inspired > information regularly contradicts that of yours, Eduardo, Jerry Falwell and > Ronald Reagan. I have no idea what your vested interests are if they do > exist, but I am well aware of those of your compatriots. I hope you read my posting about what the Head of the UN Permanent Commision on Human Rights in Nicaragua had to say about the human rights situation over there. Maybe thay will change your mind (or at least bring you second thoughts). Also, you are probably mistaken by being well aware of the "vasted interests of my compatriots" since I doubt you know what my nationality is. Certainly not Nicaraguan. -- Eduardo Krell UCLA Computer Science Department ekrell@ucla-locus.arpa ..!{sdcrdcf,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!ekrell
franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) (12/19/85)
In article <36@decwrl.UUCP> schneider@2littl.DEC (DANIEL SCHNEIDER) writes: >>I have no reason to believe that news report [on Mexican television news -DS] >>any more or less than I >>believe news reports about the contras killing innocent people. Do you? > >To summarize I believe whom I believe after considering the vested interests >of the sources of information. From this method, I have determined those >seeking to overthrow the Nicaraguan government have indirectly condoned >atrocities against other people. If I were to accept the political arguments >against the Sandinistas, I would still be against the methods currently >being used by the Contras and funded publicly by the American government and >privately by many conservative organizations. Your arguments about vested interests are appropriate concerning the Falwell group. They are not appropriate concerning Mexican television. Mexico has generally supported the Sandinistas and opposed the Contras. Since the issue is the creditability of the source, mentioning that the same thing is being stated by a non-credible source is at best disingenious. The fact that Falwell says it in no way makes it less likely; he would certainly pass on these things if they were true. So let's ignore the irrelevancy; the subject is the reliability of the Mexican television report. Do you have any real reason to think it unreliable? By the way, the Contras are by no means monolithic. The sources I have seen (mostly newspapers) indicate that some groups of them do engage in atrocities, and some do not. Likewise, it is quite believable to me that an isolated group of soldiers might engage in some raping, looting, and killing, without that being the policy of the Nicarauguan government. After all, those are time-honored military traditions. Frank Adams ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka Multimate International 52 Oakland Ave North E. Hartford, CT 06108
myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Latitudinarian Lobster) (12/21/85)
> Also, you are probably mistaken by being well aware of the "vasted interests > of my compatriots" since I doubt you know what my nationality is. Certainly > not Nicaraguan. > > Eduardo Krell UCLA Computer Science Department I don't think he was talking about nationality. Sounds like you would be ashamed if you were Nicaraguan. Hm. Perhaps you are Salvadoran? I think that Ed Asner recently pointed out during his visit to Madison that LA has more Salvadorans than San Salvador. And speaking of El Salvador, sen~or Krell, what are you feelings about the conflict in that country? Is white phosphorus pleasant to have under your skin if you're only a peasant? Is the fact that Farabundo Marti knew Augusto Caldero'n Sandino evidence of the monolithic communist conspiracy? Seriously, do you feel that the country is becoming more democratic? Are the daily lives of the people their likely to improve? Why or why not? Jeff Myers
ekrell@ucla-cs.UUCP (12/23/85)
In article <1843@uwmacc.UUCP> myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Latitudinarian Lobster) writes: > >I don't think he was talking about nationality. Yes, I know. Mr. Schneider and I exchanged private e-mail, proving once more that people with different viewpoint can talk to and respect each other. >Hm. Perhaps you are Salvadoran? I think that Ed Asner recently pointed out >during his visit to Madison that LA has more Salvadorans than San Salvador. Nope, LA is also the city with more Mexicans after Mexico City, but that doesn't make me a Mexican either. >And speaking of El Salvador, sen~or Krell, what are you feelings about the >conflict in that country? This is an interesting problem. Lets remember that the first time Mr. Duarte was in power, the military removed him from office acussing him from being a communist. Now, people in the left say he is a fascist. Since Mr. Duarte himself nor the Christian Democratic Party have changed, this goes to show us how the same person can be thought of being in one extreme or the other, depending on who is the observer. Intriguing ... Anyway, for those of us who know some latin american political history not from reading books or newspaper articles or taking a 2 week trip but from having lived there for most of our lives, it should be clear that the christian democrats are in the center-left portion of the spectrum. That deosn't make them communists nor fascists. They have brought social and economic changes. For instance, President Frei in Chile who was in power 1964-1970 started the agrarian reforms that where continued by Allende. There are more examples if anyone is interested. Of curse, Mr. Duarte has some serious trouble with the war against the rebels to solve before he can effectively bring changes. Duarte has asked the rebels to sit down and negotiate with the government. They did so a couple of times but the rebels broke up the negotiations. At least they can sit down and talk. The Sandinistas won't even do that. -- Eduardo Krell UCLA Computer Science Department ekrell@ucla-locus.arpa ..!{sdcrdcf,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!ekrell
myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Latitudinarian Lobster) (12/26/85)
> >Hm. Perhaps you are Salvadoran? I think that Ed Asner recently pointed out > >during his visit to Madison that LA has more Salvadorans than San Salvador. > > Nope, LA is also the city with more Mexicans after Mexico City, but that > doesn't make me a Mexican either. > We give up. Now that you have our interest up, Eduardo, will you identify your patria? > >And speaking of El Salvador, sen~or Krell, what are you feelings about the > >conflict in that country? > > This is an interesting problem. Lets remember that the first time Mr. Duarte > was in power, the military removed him from office acussing him from being > a communist. Now, people in the left say he is a fascist. > > Since Mr. Duarte himself nor the Christian Democratic Party have changed, > this goes to show us how the same person can be thought of being in one > extreme or the other, depending on who is the observer. Intriguing ... Neither have changed? That would be very intriguing indeed. I was under the impression that the left faction of the party went over to the support of the rebels by joining the FDR six or seven years ago. Being President also has a habit of changing one dramatically. An ``interesting problem''? I'd say that it is a good deal more serious than that. However interesting our banter (and those of our compan~ero netters) may be, it's not just an intellectual game that we are playing. > > Anyway, for those of us who know some latin american political history > not from reading books or newspaper articles or taking a 2 week trip but > from having lived there for most of our lives,... Thank you for pointing out my whipper-snapper-ness with respect to Latin history and culture. Might we also ask what brought you from your native land to our golden shores? (Visions of Ar-Pharazon, last king of Numenor, sailing off to the Undying Lands.) You might be surprised at how little most Americans know about their own history. > ...it should be clear that > the christian democrats are in the center-left portion of the spectrum. > That deosn't make them communists nor fascists. And it doesn't put them in control of the military, either. Center-right, Center-center, or Center-left is also a matter of perspective, ?no? > > They have brought social and economic changes. For instance, President > Frei in Chile who was in power 1964-1970 started the agrarian reforms > that where continued by Allende. There are more examples if anyone is > interested. This is true. He also worked for the military coup which killed and overthrew Allende and thousands of Chileans on the hope that he and/or his party could return to power in post-coup elections -- but Pinochet had other plans. > > Of curse, Mr. Duarte has some serious trouble with the war against > the rebels to solve before he can effectively bring changes. Duarte > has asked the rebels to sit down and negotiate with the government. > They did so a couple of times but the rebels broke up the negotiations. > At least they can sit down and talk. The Sandinistas won't even do that. > -- > Eduardo Krell UCLA Computer Science Department Sources? Talk is cheap -- the rebels say the reverse. -- Jeff Myers The views above may or may not University of Wisconsin-Madison reflect the views of any other Madison Academic Computing Center person or group at UW-Madison. ARPA: uwmacc!myers@rsch.wisc.edu UUCP: ..!{harvard,ucbvax,allegra,topaz,akgua,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!myers BitNet: MYERS at WISCMACC
ekrell@ucla-cs.UUCP (12/30/85)
In article <1857@uwmacc.UUCP> myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Latitudinarian Lobster) writes: >We give up. Now that you have our interest up, Eduardo, will you >identify your patria? Ok, Jeff. The mistery is over. I am from Chile. >Might we also ask what brought you from your native land >to our golden shores? I am trying to get my Ph.D. in CS. That's the main reason. Pinochet's government helped me to make my mind and leave the country ASAP and is now keeping me from going back (not that I can't go back, I don't want to). >You might be surprised at how little most Americans know about their >own history. By Americans you mean U.S. citizens or people born in the americas? (We latin americans still view ourselves as americans, you know). I have noticed that U.S. citizens know very little about their own history (and even less about world history). I was also astonished by the lack of knowledge and interest in world events (unless they have to do with US interests). Can someone explain this phenomena? > ... (in reference to the christian democrats) ... >And it doesn't put them in control of the military, either. Right, that is why Duarte has to be very cautious with the military. I don't think the military trusts him 100%. If they view his policies as "too revolutionary", a coup is always possible. >Center-right, Center-center, or Center-left is also a matter >of perspective, ?no? Yes, of course it is, but christian democrats have always fought for social justice, human rights, etc. I have never seem them labelled other than as center-left (that is, by some objective observer. Pinochet views them as being allies with the communist ...). > ... (in reference to President Frei in Chile) ... >... He also worked for the military coup which killed >and overthrew Allende and thousands of Chileans on the hope that >he and/or his party could return to power in post-coup elections >-- but Pinochet had other plans. This is questionable. The christian democrats hold majority in the congress in 1970 when they had to choose a president between Allende and Alessandri (the first and second place in the elections). Since neither candidate got over 50% of the votes, the congress could pick one of the first two places. The national party (conservative right, Alessandri's) pressed the christian democrats to vote for Alessandri (so did the US government as we learned later), yet they voted for Allende to everyone's surprise. >> (me) >> Duarte has asked the rebels to sit down and negotiate with >> the government. They did so a couple of times but the rebels >> broke up the negotiations. >Sources? Talk is cheap I am not making this up, believe me. I think it was about a year ago whem the catholic church sponsored a meeting between Duarte and the rebel leaders in some remote wooden house in the countryside. I recall seeing TV footage of the meetings. There were great expectations from the meetings but the rebels' demands were unrealistic. -- Eduardo Krell UCLA Computer Science Department ekrell@ucla-locus.arpa ..!{sdcrdcf,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!ekrell
mahoney@bach.DEC (12/31/85)
---------------------Reply to mail dated 29-DEC-1985 22:03--------------------- >By Americans you mean U.S. citizens or people born in the americas? >(We latin americans still view ourselves as americans, you know). >I have noticed that U.S. citizens know very little about their own >history (and even less about world history). I was also astonished by >the lack of knowledge and interest in world events (unless they have to >do with US interests). Can someone explain this phenomena? > It comes from the fact that the Americans (I mean US citizens) have never felt that they need outside help. If you look at our History (or perception of our History) we have always gone to save the other guy. The Spanish-American War we went to save Cuba from the nasty Spanish. WWI we went to save Europe from the Imperialist anti-deomcratic doggish Germans. WWII we supplied England and the Soviet Union and thus without us they would have lost. The tremendous amount of aid we have given out to the world since the end of WWII have helped millions. Americans see this as the most blessed nation in the world so it doesn't matter what is going on the rest of the world. The bigger problem though I feel is that the US is so isolated. The US only really has two neighbors of any significance who have never really bothered us. Look at the numerous wars in Central and South America in Asia and Europe and Africa these have forced the people to look at what is happening in the Other Countries. (There is really only one War the US has been forced into and that is WWII and that is even semi-doubtful) You say well what about Canada Canadians have been under the domination of another country for along time and only since WWII has had total control of its actions. The US has never been invaded or bombed really (I don't need a discussion on the balloon bombs I am talking about the bombings as in the Battle of Britian) The US also has never had the huge Empire that Britian and France and nations such as that had. These Empires brought there people to other parts of the world and the other parts of the world to there nations. The US also has not been dominated by any country since the Revolution like the rest of the world. The reason this occured is that most countries felt we would fall apart eventually or the balance of powers within Europe dictated it. We simply were never seen as a threat. It is these quirks in history that have made Americans so indifferent to the rest of the World. Our Size and distance and for awhile lack of need of getting involved. The US had a continent to conquer we didn't need to look else where. Remember also that George Washington said that two things would be a bane to this country involvement with Europe and political parties. (So far he has been right on both scores) It is our very history and now the power that the US has that makes people not look beyond our own shores. Brian Mahoney
foy@aero.ARPA (Richard Foy) (01/02/86)
In article <203@decwrl.DEC.COM> mahoney@bach.DEC writes: > > It is these quirks in history that have made Americans so indifferent to the > rest of the World. Our Size and distance and for awhile lack of need of > getting involved. The US had a continent to conquer we didn't need to look > else where. Remember also that George Washington said that two things would > be a bane to this country involvement with Europe and political parties. > (So far he has been right on both scores) It is our very history and now > the power that the US has that makes people not look beyond our own shores. > > Brian Mahoney I agree with what you say. And after seeing the Peoples Summit on NBC last night I would add; it is this very lack of knowledge of other peoples cultures, institutions, people, and history that is a big factor in the various messes we are in now.