riddle@ut-sally.UUCP (Prentiss Riddle) (11/02/84)
One of the medical students who was "rescued" in Grenada a year ago was on our
campus last week, too. I heard him speak and wasn't much impressed. If you
ask me, the Republicans have put on much more exciting rallies.
The student who came to our campus to talk gave a decidedly unconvincing
account of the danger he was supposedly in, a danger that apparently
intensified only after the start of the invasion that was supposed to
"liberate" him. He seemed to have a few canned details ready to tell us, the
same details mentioned by other students from the "Liberation Day" tour in
news interviews the day before, but he wasn't very good at answering questions
or showing that he had much understanding of the events in Grenada beyond what
he'd been coached to say. One of my friends went up to him after his speech
to find out his opinion of the illegality of the invasion under the OAS
charter; he'd never heard of such a thing and didn't know what my friend was
talking about!
Here's what one of his fellow students had to say [reprinted from our campus
newspaper, "The Daily Texan," 10/26/84]:
As one of the medical students in Grenada at this time last year, I am
deeply concerned about the so-called "Student Liberation Days" being
organized on college campuses by right-wing groups, purportedly to
celebrate the United States invasion of Grenada.
Whether my life and those of my fellow medical students were endangered by
the coup that overthrew Maurice Bishop is very much open to question. It
is clear, however, that our "liberation" by the Reagan administration came
at a terrible cost: dozens of young American, Cuban and Grenadian lives.
That is a fact that the people organizing the "Student Liberation Day" may
not want you to know. Nor may they want you to know the course they'd like
to see our nation follow in other parts of Latin America, namely such
places as Nicaragua, El Salvador and Honduras....
Instead of celebrating the liberation of students, their actions only
encourage the decimation of students. The publicity from their rallies, if
not countered immediately, encourages the worst tendencies of our
government to believe it will be politically acceptable to send us off to
war...
Morty Weissfelner
St. George's University
The fact is, these Grenadian invasion celebrations were nothing but another
campaign effort by our friends of the far right. Though supposedly non-
partisan, they were funded by various conservative foundations with decidedly
partisan ties (the principal backer shares its offices with the Heritage
Foundation) and the local hosts on campus were student Republican groups.
Fortunately the rally at UT, at least, backfired -- three fourths of the crowd
that turned out were there to condemn the invasion, not celebrate it. When
the Young Republicans started handing out flags, they were enthusiastically
hoisted into the air atop signs saying "No More Grenadas" and "U.S. Out of
Central America."
--- Prentiss Riddle ("Aprendiz de todo, maestro de nada.")
--- {ihnp4,harvard,seismo,gatech,ctvax}!ut-sally!riddlemyers@uwvax.UUCP (Jeff Myers) (11/02/84)
> One of the medical students who was "rescued" in Grenada a year ago was on our > campus last week, too. I heard him speak and wasn't much impressed. If you > ask me, the Republicans have put on much more exciting rallies. > > The fact is, these Grenadian invasion celebrations were nothing but another > campaign effort by our friends of the far right. Though supposedly non- > partisan, they were funded by various conservative foundations with decidedly > partisan ties (the principal backer shares its offices with the Heritage > Foundation) and the local hosts on campus were student Republican groups. > Fortunately the rally at UT, at least, backfired -- three fourths of the crowd > that turned out were there to condemn the invasion, not celebrate it. When > the Young Republicans started handing out flags, they were enthusiastically > hoisted into the air atop signs saying "No More Grenadas" and "U.S. Out of > Central America." > > --- Prentiss Riddle ("Aprendiz de todo, maestro de nada.") > --- {ihnp4,harvard,seismo,gatech,ctvax}!ut-sally!riddle The "celebration" turned out much the same way here at UWisc. Though touted as a non-partisan event, the head of the national organization sponsoring it is the national head of the College Republicans, and the local organizing team was led by the local president of the College Republicans (Nick Furman). Grenadian medical students, like folks anywhere, all have their own political agendas. I recall seeing reports in the New York Times last year from students who felt more danger from the invasion. We should also remember that the airport was reopened the day of the invasion, an American ex-diplomat left the island by plane that day, and that it was the surrounding islands which were refusing to send planes on to Grenada. Jeff Myers
wall@ucbvax.ARPA (Steve Wall) (11/03/84)
Now that Grenada is a little over a year behind us, here is what I have concluded from the information I've seen: 1) The students - I really don't know if the students were in danger, but I was somewhat skeptical of the stories that were told after seeing the president of the American Univ. switch his story from "we weren't in danger" to "our lives were in danger". He switched his story after he had been back in the U.S. for a few days. 2) Grenadians - At first I thought that the Grenadians would be against the invasion. I thought that they would see the big U.S. government killing their revolution. On the 1 year anniversary of the invasion, I saw two TV reports on "Grenada Today". The first was a report by Charlene Hunter- Gault of the McNiel-Leherer News Hour. She was one of the first reporters on Grenada following the invasion, and she seemed to cast a dark shadow on the invasion. BUT, a year later, she went back, and she was very surprised to find that the Grenadians supported the invasion. She was clearly uneasy reporting this (perhaps she was expecting something else). She said, "Whenever I referred to the invasion as an 'invasion', the local people were very quick to tell me that they saw it as a 'rescue mission'". Now clearly many of the people who would see the U.S. mission as an "invasion" are in jail, were killed during the invasion, or are staying out of sight, but most Grenadians were very scared when the people who killed Bishop also started to kill several hundred people. The other report was by a TIME correspondent who reported pretty much the same thing, although he noted that there is some uncertainty in the minds of most Grenadians about the outcome and ramifications of the upcoming elections. 3) U.S. Military- If the U.S. feels great about their "military success" in Grenada, I would have to point out that the military operation itself was a cakewalk; the opposition was totally outarmed by the U.S.. I don't think the U.S. could have the same "easy" success against a country like Nicaragua (that's why we have someone else fighting our war there!). Also, the troops who participated in the Grenada operation were supposed to be on their way to Beirut; no doubt that the success of the Grenada operation raised moral in the military. Since Beirut, this was needed very badly. 4) The future - No doubt the U.S. used Grenada as an example to Nicaragua about what they might face if they piss the U.S. off too much. The U.S. won't send their own troops to Nicaragua until the Contras run out of steam. If the U.S. does invade Nicaragua, there will be a helluva lot more heat from other countries (Contradora countries, European countries), and the fight will be MUCH more bloody. The U.S. will lose many men, and the same goes for Nicaragua. Plus, there will be plenty of people who will regroup and fight back against the U.S./New Nicaraguan Gov. It won't be as easy as Grenada! To sum up, I feel pretty much like Charlene Hunter-Gault felt; I opposed the invasion of Grenada (and still do on some issues), but hearing the local people speak positively about the "rescue mission" made me stop and think. If the U.S. invades Nicaragua, I will be extremely upset; there are ways to avoid a war in Central America, but the Reagan Ad. seems set on avoiding diplomatic channels and pursuing military channels. The U.S. will not settle for anything less than the overthrow of the Nicaraguan government. I don't think you'll find too many Nicaraguans saying that the U.S. invasion is a "rescue mission"..... Steve Wall wall@ucbarpa ..!ucbvax!wall
hollis@ucf-cs.UUCP (William ) (11/03/84)
I for one think that these references mainly belong in net.politics since that
is obviously what it is all about. I also (since we are on the subject)
remember something about a pact that the US has with ALL the Caribbean islands
that if the surrounding islands feel fear of invasion from a certain island,
then the US has the responsibility to invade. I am not sure of the exact
wording of the pact, but I am sure all you outstanding scholars in
international politics can look it up.
Ken Hollisasente@Cascade.ARPA (11/06/84)
In the words of the immortal Ian Shoals: "If the president wanted to rescue a bunch of medical students, why didn't he invade Harvard?" -paul asente I am better now. Quack quack quack quack quack.