[net.politics] Degradation and Death in Nicaragua

gil@cornell.UUCP (Gil Neiger) (12/11/85)

In article <7927@ucla-cs.ARPA> ekrell@ucla-cs.UUCP (Eduardo Krell) writes:

> The TELEVISA Mexican evening news had
>a story a couple of weeks ago on cold blood murders by members of the
>sandinista army. Their journalist interviewed several campesinos in
>a remote area in Nicaragua and they described how members of the army
>would storm their towns and kill their families without any reason.
>The journalist first thought they were describing the contras but the
>campesinos told him the contras didn't harm them, "son los soldados...",
>it's the soldiers.

I don't know about this particular case, but I should point out that has
been known for quite some time that a commonly used tactic of the contras
is to dress as Sandinista soldiers before tearing apart a town.  They're
trying to undermine popular support for the government, and this is a good
way to do it.  I would try to find reports from creditable human rights
organizations (such as Amnesty International, Americas Watch, &c.) if I
were you.
-- 
        Gil Neiger 
        Computer Science Department 
        Cornell University 
        Ithaca NY  14853 

{uw-beaver,ihnp4,decvax,vax135}!cornell!gil (UUCP)
gil@Cornell.ARPA (ARPAnet) ; gil@CRNLCS (BITNET)

bnapl@burdvax.UUCP (Tom Albrecht) (12/12/85)

In article <uwmacc.1775> myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Latitudinarian Lobster) writes:
>
>Considering the history of the Nicaraguan Revolution, it makes no sense for
>the EPS to be committing such atrocities, so at this point I will discard it
>as untrue propaganda.  ...
>
>Seems to be alot of pressure to produce stories painting the Sandinistas as
>evil rather than just politically misguided.
> ...
>Jeff Myers

Sounds like the same arguments that were running around the US while Hitler
was in power.  "What possible reason could he have for killing innocent
people?"  "It must be propoganda from people who want to get us into a
war."

The Freedom Fighters in Nicaragua need our help.  The Sandinistas have
betrayed their own country to the Cubans and Soviets.

--
        /
      / /       Tom Albrecht    Burroughs Corp.
 ===/ / /===                    ...{presby|psuvax1|sdcrdcf}!burdvax!bnapl
 ===/ / /===
 ===/ / /===
    / /
    /

"We apologize for the inconvenience"

myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Latitudinarian Lobster) (12/15/85)

> >Considering the history of the Nicaraguan Revolution, it makes no sense for
> >the EPS to be committing such atrocities, so at this point I will discard it
> >as untrue propaganda.  ...
> 
> Sounds like the same arguments that were running around the US while Hitler
> was in power.  "What possible reason could he have for killing innocent
> people?"  "It must be propoganda from people who want to get us into a
> war."
> 
> The Freedom Fighters in Nicaragua need our help.  The Sandinistas have
> betrayed their own country to the Cubans and Soviets.
> 

This sounds like guilt by association by innuendo.  Considering the history
of the NSDAP in Germany, it made a great deal of sense for innocents to be
killed.  Many people in the US at the time realized this, but were largely
ignored.  Many of these same people went to fight facism in Spain for no pay
nor the promise of any.

If you think the ``freedom fighters'' [pah!] need your help, why don't you
go put your life on the line and go fight at their sides?  The only folks
from the US that I see doing this are mercenaries and CIA operatives.

The people of Nicaragua are coming to play a role in their own destinies
rather than only Washington's.  The US gives aid to various countries and
does not necessarily completely dominate their societies.  So do Cuba and
the USSR.

Jeff Myers

franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) (12/17/85)

In article 1803@uwmacc.UUCP myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Latitudinarian Lobster) writes:
>If you think the ``freedom fighters'' [pah!] need your help, why don't you
>go put your life on the line and go fight at their sides?  The only folks
>from the US that I see doing this are mercenaries and CIA operatives.

In my mind, one of the greatest problems in political conflicts is the
tendency of people to think that those who are on the other side of an issue
are dishonest.  There are some dishonest people in any movement, but the
majority on both sides is always sincere.

In this case, one should note that most contras are "freedom fighters":
they are fighting against what they see as an increasingly oppressive
regime, in favor of what they see as the best hope of democracy.  Most of
the Americans with them, even if they work for the CIA or are getting paid
(horrors!), honestly think that the contras hold the best hope for the
country.

Contrariwise, those who support the contras should recognize that most of
the Sandinistas are also "freedom fighters": they liberated their country
from a brutal dictatorship, and are now supporting what they see as the
best hope for their country against its enemies.

None of this implies that the Sandinistas provide or will provide good
government for Nicaraugua, nor that the contras would be any better if
they were in power.  On the evidence available to me, I would have to say
that neither prospect is very promising.  It is one of the paradoxes of
human nature that a group consisting mostly of good-hearted people can
produce perfectly awful group behavior.

Frank Adams                           ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka
Multimate International    52 Oakland Ave North    E. Hartford, CT 06108

bnapl@burdvax.UUCP (Tom Albrecht) (12/18/85)

In article <uwmacc.1803> myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Latitudinarian Lobster) writes:
>
>This sounds like guilt by association by innuendo.  

If the shoe fits, ...

>
>If you think the ``freedom fighters'' [pah!] need your help, why don't you
>go put your life on the line and go fight at their sides?  The only folks
>from the US that I see doing this are mercenaries and CIA operatives.
>

I'm not a soldier by profession, but I would be willing to support the use
of US troops in Nicaragua against the Sandinistas.  Maybe we should invite
the Cubans to leave as we did in Grenada.

>The people of Nicaragua are coming to play a role in their own destinies
>rather than only Washington's.  The US gives aid to various countries and
>does not necessarily completely dominate their societies.  So do Cuba and
>the USSR.
>
>Jeff Myers

The Ortegas are restricting the freedoms of the Nicaraguan people in
the same manner as the Soviets and Cubans.  They are Marxist/Leninists of
the same ilk as Gorbachev and Castro.  On second thought, maybe Stalinist 
would be a better term.

-- 
        /
      / /	Tom Albrecht	Burroughs Corp.
 ===/ / /===			...{presby|psuvax1|sdcrdcf}!burdvax!bnapl
 ===/ / /===
 ===/ / /===
    / /
    /

"We apologize for the inconvenience"

mahoney@bach.DEC (12/20/85)

---------------------Reply to mail dated 18-DEC-1985 17:05---------------------

Thank you for changing your term to stalinist.  Marx as I stated before
had nothing but loathe for peasants and the agrian society.  The poor
man must be rolling in his grave over what people today laughingly call
Marxism or Communism.  I don't agree that the US should send in troops 
though that is what has caused most of the hard feelings against the US 
in South America.  Also our record down there for setting up governments
has not been that good.  It is time the US realized that a regime that
calls itself Communist is not going to always be bad.  

   Brian Mahoney

myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Latitudinarian Lobster) (12/21/85)

> >If you think the ``freedom fighters'' [pah!] need your help, why don't you
> >go put your life on the line and go fight at their sides?  The only folks
> >from the US that I see doing this are mercenaries and CIA operatives.
> >
> 
> I'm not a soldier by profession, but I would be willing to support the use
> of US troops in Nicaragua against the Sandinistas.  Maybe we should invite
> the Cubans to leave as we did in Grenada.

So?  What does professionalism have to do with fighting?
Members of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade were not soldiers by profession, but
half of them died just like they'd been soldiers all their lives.

US troops?  I fear you may get your wish -- I can still remember groups of
rowdys around campus marching around drunkenly shouting "We want war!" just
after the invasion of Grenada.  I'm not kidding.  If you don't want to go,
because you are not a "professional," you don't object to your son going, do
you?

There are many folks in America who would feel better about Screaming Eagles
dying killing in Nicaragua or El Salvador than in an airplane crash.  When I
see postings like this, a bitterness fills my soul that will not be dispersed
with the light of morning, or of a new year.

bnapl@burdvax.UUCP (Tom Albrecht) (12/31/85)

In article <decwrl.120> mahoney@bach.DEC writes:
>
>
>Thank you for changing your term to stalinist.  Marx as I stated before
>had nothing but loathe for peasants and the agrian society.  The poor
>man must be rolling in his grave over what people today laughingly call
>Marxism or Communism.  ...

Stalinism is merely pragmatic Marxism.

>I don't agree that the US should send in troops
>though that is what has caused most of the hard feelings against the US
>in South America.  Also our record down there for setting up governments
>has not been that good.  It is time the US realized that a regime that
>calls itself Communist is not going to always be bad.
>
>   Brian Mahoney

Show me one communist government that isn't bad and I'll eat my
copy of Das Kapital.  Communism is, by definition, bad government.

--
        /
      / /       Tom Albrecht    Burroughs Corp.
 ===/ / /===                    ...{presby|psuvax1|sdcrdcf}!burdvax!bnapl
 ===/ / /===                    (215)341-4656
 ===/ / /===                    CompuServe: 72626,2550
    / /
    /

"That's the news from Lake Wobegon ... "

mahoney@bach.DEC (01/01/86)

---------------------Reply to mail dated 31-DEC-1985 01:33---------------------


>Stalinism is merely pragmatic Marxism.
>

  If you belive this then you don't know anything about commiunism or
  Stalinism.  Stalinism is more facism nazism then anything else.

>Show me one communist government that isn't bad and I'll eat my
>copy of Das Kapital.  Communism is, by definition, bad government.

  How about Yugoslavia from what I have seen and read about this country
  things are pretty good.  You don't have mass migration (people can leave
  if they wish there are no travel restrictions.) .  The borders are open
  as tourism is there #1 industry.  This country is probably the closest
  country to Marxism there is but still it is not there either.

  I hope that you enjoy your book maybe medium rare would be good.
  One other thing the US has always supported Yugoslavia and Tito who
  never hid the fact that he was a communist.

  Brian Mahoney