What dose Veeky Forums think about Augusto Pinochet ?

What dose Veeky Forums think about Augusto Pinochet ?

I think he wasn't such a great guy. I think communism was a real threat in South America at the time, but I think there are better examples of rulers fighting communist threats, such as Alberto Fujimori. Violence is an accectable tool for fighting communism but he went a bit far, veering into despotism territory.

>Violence is an accectable tool for fighting capitalism

ftfy

>such as Alberto Fujimori
Yeah, because fighting communism after the death of the Soviet Union is exactly the same as fighting it at the height of the Cold War.

another marionette of the burgers

A fair point, but I would still say that he went too far. I mean, the Shining Path was way more dangerous than Unidad Popular, and yet Pinochet's state sponsored violence and terror cause way more collateral damage.

>cause way more collateral damage
You know what causes more collateral damage than white terror? U.S. intervention. Ask Cuba or Guatemala just how well that works out. Pinochet, contrary to popular belief, wasn't a U.S. puppet. The U.S. just kind of watched and waited and then went back to fucking up Central America after Pinochet got it under control.

>You know what causes more collateral damage than white terror? U.S. intervention.

So you're saying Pinochet being so ruthless prevented the US from stepping in because if he hadn't been so cruel, the US might have thought he was doing a crappy job. That's an interesting view and I think you have a point.

I still think he went a bit overboard, because I think he could have been considerably less bloodthirsty without the US deciding to step in.

Bloodthirsty asshole and opponent to democracy

Is violence an acceptable tool for fighting capitalism?

Kind of a sociopath, but also pretty retarded. Liked by some edgy posters on Veeky Forums that keep spamming threads about him.

>because if he hadn't been so cruel, the US might have thought he was doing a crappy job
The whole reason the U.S. didn't intervene was because of Pinochet's coup. He didn't ask for permission, they didn't tell him to do it, he just did it which prevented the CIA fuckery from occurring which would have been much, much worse. Look at Argentina during the Dirty War. All of that was CIA sponsored and controlled. They fucking killed U.S. citizens, teenaged U.S. citizens, because the CIA told them to. I'll take commies getting thrown out of helicopters over murdered and tortured children any day.

>The whole reason the U.S. didn't intervene was because of Pinochet's coup.

I'm also talking about the stuff Pinochet did while in power, though. Not just the stuff he did to gain power. I'm saying the US would have probably still left him alone even if he had been less authoritarian.

You're acting like there's any actual difference between the two. There isn't.

No that's just being an edgy faggot.

I don't understand what you're saying. Are you saying there's no difference between Pinochet's behavior before and after he gained power, did while in power, or are you saying that generally there's no difference between the things you do get in power and the stuff you do to stay in power. In any case, I am only saying that it is possible to be a little too paranoid and heavy handed as a ruler. I think Stalin was a good example of someone who was too concerned with maintaining power to the point that it was detrimental to his country. Pinochet is no Stalin, but I think he was excessive. That is the only point I'm trying to make. Do you disagree with that? Do you think that everything he did was necessary?

The latter. What Pinochet did to attain power was required to retain power. Moderates were not tolerated by the U.S., i.e. Guatemala in 1954. The only country that half-ass got away with it was Costa Rica (and the U.S. still bombed the fuck out of Costa Rica to root out Sandinistas). I absolutely think what he did was necessary for Chile. Chile may not be a great country, but it's better off than the rest of Latin America and FAR better off than any LatAm country that saw U.S. intervention. Had Pincohet not towed the line like he had, things would have been very, very bad either through Soviet ass kissing or American intervention. I'm not saying what he did was morally right or that he's a God among men, just that he did what he had to do for the betterment of his country and prevent an even worse situation. Chile, despite Pinochet's terror, got off easy during the Cold War.

>towed
toed

You have a point. I'll have to read more about this. Do you know any good books about Pinochet's Chile?

Off the top of my head, no, and I'm not at home to check my library. Check Worldcat, it'll be your best resource.

>The US wasn't involved in the Pinochet coup
That just goes against recorded facts.

Let me guess Mossadegh was also deposed without US backing?

>That just goes against recorded facts
It doesn't. Pinochet didn't have permission for the coup, though the CIA was already planning one. He only gained U.S. support once the coup was finished. I guess you could claim he had support since the U.S. didn't intervene against him, but non-intervention is hardly direct support.

Pinochet was a School of the Americas alum. You know the US Army's couping school

www.soaw.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=234

And the crowd goes mild. There's no evidence the U.S. staged the coup in Chile. In fact, every investigation into it has come up with the contrary conclusion: Pinochet acted independently. Even recorded phone conversations between Nixon and Kissinger show that there was no U.S. involvement until after the fact. You're grasping at straws.

Democracy is a bad thing

Imperialism isn't America explicitly ordering it. They just put all the tools into place for it to happen.

If you build a bomb, put it in a trashcan and trigger it to explode when someone throws something away you still blew up a trashcan

Chomsky pls

Why are you Pinochet fags So. GODDAMN. PERSISTENT!!!???

I HAVE LOST ALL PF MY COPYPASTA.

I AM TOO LAZY TO LOOK UP "PINOCHET" IN THE ARCHIVE FUCKITY FUCK I HAVE SPENT TEN TIMES MORE WRITING THIS THAN THINKING ABOUT WHAT I WOULD WRITE

FUCK EVERYONE

FUCK MOOT

FUCK YOU

Absolutely retarded, did no save Chile in anyway since Alliente was not proven to be a Soviet backed agent in any way, and his economic policies were not Soviet tier.

On the positive side he killed a lot of drug dealers, but then again he killed a whole lot of his own people.