trc (04/15/83)
Response to Jeff Myers: There is no such thing as economic coercion. It is possible to use money to arrange for fraud or direct use of physical force, but that is not the same thing. Governments dont have to accept our aid, and would probably be wiser if they chose to remain free of any outside influence. Removal of aid is not an aggressive action, nor is it coercion. The US certainly has a right to decide which types of governments it will support. If a government can't run its country without long term financial assistance, it is doing something wrong. There is a big difference between what the US did in the Phillipines and what the USSR did in Afganistan. First, the US did not conquer the Phillipines, it went in there during WWII. I seem to recall that this was done to drive out the Japanese invaders. Secondly, the government set up there is at least partially based on principles of individual rights. So the means of gaining influence was not imperialistic, and the result was not imperialistic. Yes, the US does have influence with that country, but not control, as would be the case if it were part of an "empire". I cant address the Chilean question, because I dont have enough facts. Perhaps you could summarize the proof that shows how the US brought down Allende. Or the "strong evidence". I dont want to argue that the US has never done anything wrong, but simply that the tradition of respecting people's rights has done far more to restrain the US than the USSR's power has. The US's power has only partially restrained the USSR, and the USSR's respect for individual rights has restrained them not at all, since it doesnt exist. Thus I believe that the "balance of power" theory is faulted. (Unfortunately, the tradition of respect for individual rights is on the wane in the US. Our government no longer sees the Constitution as something to be obeyed, but as an annoyance to be gotten around.) Tom Craver houti!trc
tony (04/25/83)
con't. of reply(cut off previously, oops!)
The 'high ideal' is touted around as necessary baggage, but it is plain to any- one, especially in the Third World, that the U.S. is a hypocritical expansion- ist power (via multi-nationals).
that was incited by the "yellow-press" of Pulitzer' newspaper. Sorry, but it appears a lack of his-torical awareness has created a lacuna in your logic. After all, what was Mac- Arthur doing at Corrigador in 1942?
4) To believe that President Marcos and his wife rule democratically is a gross error of judgement. Do you read newspapers?
5) Concerning Chile; it is common knowledge that Allende was overthrown notby a spontaneous military coup, but by a CIA-ITT plot in collusion with the mili-tary. Again, it was for U.S. economic interests.
n people on the domestic plain.
neither one of us would here, and this planet wouldbe nothing but charred rock floating in space.
A.J. Waterman