[annatar1914]

That's not quite what was going on. The Soviet Union was interested in installing its own satellite and using Nicaragua as a base for long-range bombers to be able to hit Southern US cities like San Diego, Houston or Pensacola--home of the Pacific Fleet, major oil port and major Naval Air Station respectively. Is it so difficult to understand that allying with a hostile power to the United States would likely arouse unfriendly moves from the United States?

Cold War geopolitics; the Soviet Union was encircled with a ring of such nations, with nukes and long range American bombers in places like Turkey, somewhat closer to them than Nicaragua is to America. The USSR attempt to bring pressure to bear on the US with a similar ally in Nicaragua makes sense from that perspective.

[Pants-of-dog]

If Nicaragua had had the capability of making air strikes against US cities, I bet Reagan would never have supported the Contras.

And since Nicaragua has the right to protect its own sovereignty against foreign aggression, Nicaragua was correct in accepting Soviet aid.

[blackjack21]

Cold War geopolitics; the Soviet Union was encircled with a ring of such nations, with nukes and long range American bombers in places like Turkey, somewhat closer to them than Nicaragua is to America. The USSR attempt to bring pressure to bear on the US with a similar ally in Nicaragua makes sense from that perspective.

I'm not trying to delegitimize Russian geopolitics. As Napolean once said, you can tell a country's foreign policy by its borders. Russia as a land mass is not defensible, except for the use of the Ural mountains as a defensive bulwark against either the East or West side of its land mass. So Russian military strategists will always be excessively paranoid. Fear of the US was somewhat overblown, since the US cannot project sufficient power into Russia to be a significant military threat. Like most powers, the US could "invade" Russia, but it could never hold it.

Russian fear in view of Hitler, Napolean, Enver Pasha and the Japanese is understandable. However, so is a US response to Russian aggression.

This is why both Tainari88 and Pants-of-dog make absurd points. You have the right to walk across the street at a crosswalk in the face of an oncoming speeding drunk driver, too. I do not suggest exercising that right. In such cases, discretion is the better part of valor.

If Nicaragua had had the capability of making air strikes against US cities, I bet Reagan would never have supported the Contras.

We're talking about the range of Soviet bombers. Nicaragua can't even build an airplane today. Take a quick tour of Managua--Nicaragua's biggest city. No chance.

Just ask that Chinse billionaire how his trans-Nicaragua canal is going.

Anyway, it just goes to show that the IQ of Nicaragua's leaders has more to do with why they ended up screwed.

[Libertarian353]

And there's that dogwhistle comments from the racist again.

[One Degree]

And there's that dogwhistle comments from the racist again.

Yes, you can imagine it anywhere whether it exists or not. You are simply showing your racist contempt for whites when you imagine that is always the intent. There is no connection between race and saying the leaders were stupid except in your race obsessed mind.

[Drlee]

Is it so difficult to admit that the USA acted badly in many ways regarding its false belief that they had a right to determine other nations political choices? Why is that so hard for you to admit?

Read what Blackjack posted. He is absolutely correct.

The US did not act in a vacuum. Russia and its proxy Cuba were all over the place attempting to degrade US security. Unstable regimes were key to their machinations.

Did the US make mistakes in the light of a few decades backward analysis? Probably. There is no reason for those mistakes to drive current US foreign policy. Nor do they alibi others who would act against our laws and our interest today.

The US is quick to forgive. Take a look at Japan and Germany. Italy too for that matter. US policies change with time as do US interests. Any government should act as it sees its current best interest. A modicum of restraint is warranted as is a dose of compassion but at the end of the day US foreign policy is to benefit the US. If the interests of another country happen to coincide with these interests, well all fine and good. If not....watch out for squalls.

[QatzelOk]

quote="blackjack21"]That's not quite what was going on.[/quote]
Oh good. Someone has decided to tell us what "really" was going on.

The Soviet Union was interested in installing its own satellite and using Nicaragua as a base for long-range bombers to be able to hit Southern US cities like San Diego, Houston or Pensacola--home of the Pacific Fleet, major oil port and major Naval Air Station respectively. Is it so difficult to understand that allying with a hostile power to the United States would likely arouse unfriendly moves from the United States?

Bombing Houston?!! Dead people!!! Oh my god!

Is this why the 110 First Nations were genocided and ethnic-cleansed? To avoid any future partners for the Soviet Union?

I guess today, the Arapaho and Apache would be (in "reality") making deals with Al Qaeda and ISIS. But "evil foreigners with a weird religion" still applies, right?

[Tainari88]

That's not quite what was going on. The Soviet Union was interested in installing its own satellite and using Nicaragua as a base for long-range bombers to be able to hit Southern US cities like San Diego, Houston or Pensacola--home of the Pacific Fleet, major oil port and major Naval Air Station respectively. Is it so difficult to understand that allying with a hostile power to the United States would likely arouse unfriendly moves from the United States?

I am going to make this short and sweet. The Cold War is over. If one starts counting how many nukes, missiles and spending on possible war scenarios the USA had pointed in Alaska, etc at Russia etc? And that means the USA has a right to intervene in all nations? It is unsustainable. You are losing wars consistently, because nation building requires sustainability, and cooperation, and commitment, from local governments and people. If the USA government has paternalistic policies and lack of equality in their 'superiority syndrome' policies and are huge hypocritical examples of their so-called 3 million less popular vote loser President 45? What are the ones you are using as pawns in some abusive moves going to think?

You really underestimate the leaders not only in Latin American nations but also other nations around the world, if you think they can't get what kind of paternalistic, exploitative, manipulating moves the USA government is up to.
Then you don't understand when the history of the nations enduring these horrible selfish shit policies, don't adopt the 'yes' men you keep insisting on. Would you if you were a leader of a small place like Nicaragua? I would not. You don't put yourself in their shoes do you? That is a huge mistake--always underestimating the enemy because after all they are just little inferiors...that happened with Mandela, Che, Gandhi, Juarez, and many more in history. All categorized as The inferior ones because they weren't from the supposedly powerful group. I will never understand that crap of the lack of ability to place oneself as an equal in someone else's position.

You don't have a right to impose. Rotten values will give you rotten results in the end. There is no mystery to that.

[Pants-of-dog]

Read what Blackjack posted. He is absolutely correct.

The US did not act in a vacuum. Russia and its proxy Cuba were all over the place attempting to degrade US security. Unstable regimes were key to their machinations.

In terms of Nicaragua, bj is not correct.

The Sandinistas only got into bed with the USSR becuase of ongoing isolation and aggression from the USA. Like Cuba, Nicaragua initially wanted good relations with the USA but were unable to do so because of US policy towards them.

Also, his Societ bombers comment is not supported by any evidence.

Did the US make mistakes in the light of a few decades backward analysis? Probably. There is no reason for those mistakes to drive current US foreign policy. Nor do they alibi others who would act against our laws and our interest today.

Actually, there is one good reason for those mistakes to be taken into account when formulating new policies: not making the same mistake again.

The US is quick to forgive. Take a look at Japan and Germany. Italy too for that matter. US policies change with time as do US interests. Any government should act as it sees its current best interest. A modicum of restraint is warranted as is a dose of compassion but at the end of the day US foreign policy is to benefit the US. If the interests of another country happen to coincide with these interests, well all fine and good. If not....watch out for squalls.

And other countries should also act in their own interests.

Which is why Nicaragua was right to accept Soviet military aid: it would have helped then defend their interests when the USA came meddling.

Also, do those US interests also include profits by US companies in Central America? And is it fine and dandy for the US to support human rughts abuses in defending these profits?

[Tainari88]

In terms of Nicaragua, bj is not correct.

The Sandinistas only got into bed with the USSR becuase of ongoing isolation and aggression from the USA. Like Cuba, Nicaragua initially wanted good relations with the USA but were unable to do so because of US policy towards them.

Also, his Societ bombers comment is not supported by any evidence.



Actually, there is one good reason for those mistakes to be taken into account when formulating new policies: not making the same mistake again.



And other countries should also act in their own interests.

Which is why Nicaragua was right to accept Soviet military aid: it would have helped then defend their interests when the USA came meddling.

Also, do those US interests also include profits by US companies in Central America? And is it fine and dandy for the US to support human rughts abuses in defending these profits?

They keep making the same mistakes again and again hoping they can desperately hold on to power. They can't Pants. Human governments and politicians not from the USA learn through experience. It is like I said. Adapt and learn. The USA is into selfish crap? You prepare on how to avoid, circumvent and look for alternatives to their selfish threats of squall and death. They don't realize no one respects selfish egocentric political moves because if you fail to respond to your own national interests as a small place trying to mind your own business and become a sellout of the USA? You won't solve critical problems and the natives are going to make sure you know it.

It is appalling how arrogant these people think Pants! Go in there kill and September 11,1973 won't have any consequences for them through some bad karma on another September 11.

Ave Maria Purisima!

[blackjack21]

Oh good. Someone has decided to tell us what "really" was going on.

It's your lucky day!

Bombing Houston?!! Dead people!!! Oh my god!

Texas oil was central to the success of the allies in WWII. It would still be considered essential if external supplies were cut off.

Is this why the 110 First Nations were genocided and ethnic-cleansed? To avoid any future partners for the Soviet Union?

No. I think the reasons were much more practical. It was a clash-of-civilizations situation where a proto-capitalist sea-faring agrarian culture came into contact with hunter-gather civilizations who just happened to be on the largest slab of arable land on the planet.

I guess today, the Arapaho and Apache would be (in "reality") making deals with Al Qaeda and ISIS.

They're making deals with the US and the several states.

And that means the USA has a right to intervene in all nations?

It's not about "right", it is about "power".

It is unsustainable.

I'm guessing US military strategists don't think much of your assessment.

You are losing wars consistently, because nation building requires sustainability, and cooperation, and commitment, from local governments and people.

We aren't losing wars. We are simply not winning the peace that we are looking to achieve. That's not military failure, it's political failure and has more to do with the fact that our politicians are hopeless dreamers much like you are.

If the USA government has paternalistic policies and lack of equality in their 'superiority syndrome' policies and are huge hypocritical examples of their so-called 3 million less popular vote loser President 45?

Hypocritical in view of Daniel Ortega? The communists have not been too concerned about popular will throughout history, in case you haven't noticed.

that happened with Mandela, Che, Gandhi, Juarez, and many more in history.

You are lumping in far different situations. South Africa developed under Rhoads. Mandela exploited the post-WWII anti-racism campaigns in the wake of Auschwitz, and enemy propaganda aimed at black Americans facing segregation. The British Empire collapsed, and the minority white government became politically untenable with the West adopting moralistic foreign policies to fight the Soviet Union who was using the same tactic of moral arguments against the West. The establishment lost their way and ultimately abandoned realpolitik and actually believe in a moralistic basis for foreign policy--why we have the problems we have today. Gandhi was able to exploit a similar vein by using non-violence. Martin Luther King did the same thing.

Che Guevara was a terroristic mass murderer.

Juarez? Well, Mexico did default on its debt and in the 19th Century that was a legitimate basis for invading a country under international law. I do love Eduard Manet's painting The Execution of Emperor Maximilian. Juarez was a Freemason, so guess which country was covertly supporting him while enforcing its Monroe Doctrine? Yes, Juarez supported Mexico against the United States during the U.S.-Mexican War, but when Santa Ana decided to exact revenge on Juarez for Juarez refusing to grant him asylum after his government collapsed, Juarez fled to... New Orleans, Louisiana (a.k.a., the United States). Two years later, he returned to Mexico and became its president.

In terms of Nicaragua, bj is not correct.

The Sandinistas only got into bed with the USSR becuase{sic} of ongoing isolation and aggression from the USA. Like Cuba, Nicaragua initially wanted good relations with the USA but were unable to do so because of US policy towards them.

Again, this is just spinning a bunch of fairy tales. Nicaragua under Jose Santos Zelaya allied with Germany and Japan, proposing an Axis controlled canal across Nicaragua--the same one the Chinese are scoping now. This was a violation of the Bryan-Chamorro treaty that Nicaragua signed with the US. The so-called Liberals led by Sandino were affiliated with communists and anarchists. That is why after he was killed by Samozas forces, the US wasn't keen on trying to restore democracy in Nicaragua immediately since previous efforts by Henry Stimson had failed.

Also, his Societ{sic} bombers comment is not supported by any evidence.

Russia's Strategic Bomber Fleet on Global Intimidation Drive
Russian bomber patrols to reach Gulf of Mexico
Colombian Kfirs intercept Russian bombers enrout to Venezuela
Moscow strengthens presence in U.S.' backyard
Rice Says Russia Has Taken a 'Dark Turn'
Russia Says It's Building Naval Bases in Asia, Latin America

It's still going on now. Many in the US establishment don't take Russia as seriously, since Russia does not have the economic might to bullshit its way militarily as it did in the past. Yet, they are still up to the same tricks.

[skinster]

[Tainari88]

@blackjack21 I am getting to a point. What is It? You keep on with the justifications for abuses of power and thinking the only thing that keeps war at bay is some greed filled pig gov't people and that is the remedy for achieving world peace. I don't think so.

I think a piece from a famous Israeli historian liberal author is apropos for you,@blackjack21 . I am a cultural anthropologist.
The following quote is taken from Yuval Harari' s book "21 Lessons for the 21st Century."
"Human stupidity is one of the most important forces in history, yet we often tend to discount it. Politicians, generals and scholars treat the world as a great chess game, where every move follows careful rational calculation. This is correct up to a point. Few leaders in history have been mad in the narrow sense of the word, moving pawns and knights at random. Hideki Tojo, Saddam Hussein, and Kim Jong-Il had rational reasons for every move they played. The problem is that the world is far more complicated than a chess board, and human rationality is not up to the task of really understanding it. For that reason even rational leaders wind up doing very stupid things. "

He goes on to say that war is neither inevitable or an impossibility. Both possibilities exist. But the beginning of stopping the stupidity is one word. Humility.
I agree with him on his last paragraph on page 183, "National,religious,and cultural tensions are made worse by the grandiose feeling that my nation, my religion, and my culture are the most important in the world--and therefore my interests should come before the interests of anyone else, or of humankind as a whole. How can we make nations,religions, and cultures a bit more realistic and modest about their true place in the world?"
Humility. You are not the center of the world.
That is what the solution is. Stop the false idea that absolute ego, absolute control and absolute domination is possible and even desirable. It is not.

And the list of claims of superiority continue among many cultures. All convinced they are the greatest. It is false in its total egotism.
Your attitude is very common @blackjack21 . It doesn't make it right, or correct. Many think their reality is the only one. It is not.
Never underestimate the power of myth and stories exalting the superiority of any one group. The truth? Be humble. Nature called the shots before any human thought of the possibilities of nukes to destroy the world with.

If abusing power and lording it over others and other nations is 'real politiks'? The human stupidity factor is still in play. Buenas noches @blackjack21

[One Degree]

@blackjack21 I am getting to a point. What is It? You keep on with the justifications for abuses of power and thinking the only thing that keeps war at bay is some greed filled pig gov't people and that is the remedy for achieving world peace. I don't think so.

I think a piece from a famous Israeli historian liberal author is apropos for you,@blackjack21 . I am a cultural anthropologist.
The following quote is taken from Yuval Harari' s book "21 Lessons for the 21st Century."
"Human stupidity is one of the most important forces in history, yet we often tend to discount it. Politicians, generals and scholars treat the world as a great chess game, where every move follows careful rational calculation. This is correct up to a point. Few leaders in history have been mad in the narrow sense of the word, moving pawns and knights at random. Hideki Tojo, Saddam Hussein, and Kim Jong-Il had rational reasons for every move they played. The problem is that the world is far more complicated than a chess board, and human rationality is not up to the task of really understanding it. For that reason even rational leaders wind up doing very stupid things. "

He goes on to say that war is neither inevitable or an impossibility. Both possibilities exist. But the beginning of stopping the stupidity is one word. Humility.
I agree with him on his last paragraph on page 183, "National,religious,and cultural tensions are made worse by the grandiose feeling that my nation, my religion, and my culture are the most important in the world--and therefore my interests should come before the interests of anyone else, or of humankind as a whole. How can we make nations,religions, and cultures a bit more realistic and modest about their true place in the world?"
Humility. You are not the center of the world.
That is what the solution is. Stop the false idea that absolute ego, absolute control and absolute domination is possible and even desirable. It is not.

And the list of claims of superiority continue among many cultures. All convinced they are the greatest. It is false in its total egotism.
Your attitude is very common @blackjack21 . It doesn't make it right, or correct. Many think their reality is the only one. It is not.
Never underestimate the power of myth and stories exalting the superiority of any one group. The truth? Be humble. Nature called the shots before any human thought of the possibilities of nukes to destroy the world with.

If abusing power and lording it over others and other nations is 'real politiks'? The human stupidity factor is still in play. Buenas noches @blackjack21

Everyone conveniently leaves ‘political ideology’ out of this scenario. It is the major cause of conflict and major excuse for imperialism. Of course, they could not use the others to promote their own world ideology as a solution if they did that. They are basically giving you scapegoats. Legitimate targets, but scapegoats all the same when your ideology is the solution.

[Patrickov]

Humans are great learners and adapters and through the process of experience they reach wisdom. Trust that and not some false ideas of superiority.

I don't see that in Chinese Commies. They are now disqualifying Hong Kong dissident legislators one by one.

[blackjack21]

You keep on with the justifications for abuses of power and thinking the only thing that keeps war at bay is some greed filled pig gov't people and that is the remedy for achieving world peace. I don't think so.

Greed filled pig government people? Are you talking about Daniel Ortega? His first political crime was bank robbery after all. He made his wife Vice President recently. He's also accused by his own daughter of sexual abuse. Daniel Ortega is a classic example of a kleptocrat.

Humility. You are not the center of the world.

The US controls the largest slab of arable land on the planet. It is a pretty significant fact.

Everyone conveniently leaves ‘political ideology’ out of this scenario.

They seem to think that poverty = virtue; wealth = vice.

[Tainari88]

Greed filled pig government people? Are you talking about Daniel Ortega? His first political crime was bank robbery after all. He made his wife Vice President recently. He's also accused by his own daughter of sexual abuse. Daniel Ortega is a classic example of a kleptocrat.

Oh Somoza was the USA chosen and the Great dictator. You should learn to leave the interferences aside. Trump loves Rocket man! He 'fell in love' end quote. Where is the moral superiority argument ? That pig sty of a Revoltingly corrupt Republican party is not doing well in the moral superiority arguments! Ortega is suspicious I agree. Violeta Chamorro Barrios who got her term. She had the opportunity to do some bullshit moderate agenda. The Nicaraguans weren't convinced. Are you pro imposing your nation's dirty diaper ways in the rest of the nations? Just pray Ivana Trump daughter doesn't admit her father molested her in some tweet if she loses her brand in all this dirtball drama. It might make your opinions full of hot air--won't it?

The US controls the largest slab of arable land on the planet. It is a pretty significant fact.

The USA is not doing a good job of keeping it pristine. It is actively breaking down laws protecting it from total exploitation and pollution. Does Third World shit like Hookworm in Alabama ring a bell? Or Michigan Flint lead polluted water? Or crumbling bridges and roads? Aging airports versus Chinese airports that are super new in comparison. Monsanto with GMO food products. People paying more in the USA for organic fruit and veggies because the American consumer fully believes all the lies that corporate agro-business says about its fine products. Arable land? IF you can even keep what is left from becoming another victim of rapacious greed and capitalistic pollution. You better start thinking about changing your defective pro-exploitation-is-good-thinking or the big slab of wealth greatness will be pissed away with the arrogant mentality that pisses it away.

They seem to think that poverty = virtue; wealth = vice.

Haven't you read that biblical proverb Blackjack? It is easier for a camel to fit through an eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.
Or are you one of those people who want wealth to be proof of God's favor?
I wonder about that Irish priest who had that great line in that movie based on the book by Frank McCourt entitled "Angela's Ashes"? I paraphrase, 'You see our suffering Lord Jesus on the cross? Is he sportin' shoes and silk robes eh?". Maybe you think the most spiritual of the Christian tradition is all about Gucci and Armani Roman clothing, and Versace or Prada shoes?

Such hypocrisy with the Rich and elitist, arrogant and full of that Greek flaw of the old classics like the Iliad, or the Odyssey. Hubris.
These Rotten Empires seem to fall very hard in human history.

Buenas noches Blackjack21.

[Sivad]

delete

[Libertarian353]

@Tainari88 Don't try to debate with racists like him. He is very well aware of his absurdities and gaslighting you.

[QatzelOk]

They seem to think that poverty = virtue; wealth = vice.

"They" probably think it's important to share resources fairly evenly and to not waste any.

This is due to their believing all those foreign lies about climate change, islands of plastic in the Pacific, and the recent civilization-destroying droughts in Syria and other places. These things are, of course, all just a ruse to prevent winners like you and me from buying that third speedboat they've been pining after.

How can we make America great again if people keep listening to non-Americans and non-MBAs? Wealth accumulation is the highest level of holiness according to the Church of American media.