Conspiracy nuts

[jirisys]

Post

Here's a paragraph from the same article.

Despite these actions, the existence of the death squads remained a controversial issue in the United States in the mid 1980s . In congressional testimony in February 1984, former United States ambassador to El Salvador Robert E. White identified six wealthy Salvadoran landowners, then living in exile in Miami, as the principal financiers of the death squads. Critics of the Reagan administration's Salvadoran policy also alleged that the United States had indirectly supported the death squads. After a six-month investigation, however, the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence reported in October 1984 that there was no evidence to support such allegations.

And again.

Defenders of President Reagan's Latin American foreign policy say that defending U.S. national security necessitated supporting such a military government, and that the FMLN's military efforts, including terrorism, seriously threatened the Salvadorean Government, and — by implication — the United States, itself. In a televised national address on May 9, 1984, President Reagan stated: San Salvador is closer to Houston, Texas, than Houston is to Washington, D.C. Central America is America; it's at our doorstep, and it has become a stage for a bold attempt, by the Soviet Union, Cuba, and Nicaragua, to install Communism by force throughout the hemisphere.[31]

The U.S. State Department supported the President's contentions, detailing the international Communist conspiracy connections among the Salvadorean FMLN, Sandinista Nicaragua, Communist Cuba, and the Soviet Union, in the White Paper: Communist Interference in El Salvador explaining that — in the Russo-American Cold War context — the U.S. sided as it did, because that was its viable middle-path in the Right-wing vs. Left-wing Salvadoran Civil War. Publicly, Reagan supported President Duarte's Government, because it worked with some success, to deal with the serious political and economic problems that most concern the people of El Salvador.[32]

In 2002, a BBC article about President George W. Bush's visit to El Salvador, on the 22nd anniversary of Archbishop Romero's assassination, reported that U.S. officials say that President [George H.W.] Bush's policies set the stage for peace, turning El Salvador into a democratic success story, but challenged his claim's validity, because of the thousands killed by a U.S.-sponsored military government directly aided by U.S. military advisors in training and supporting the death squad leaders.[33]

Negligence is still a crime.

Does that really matter? Not supporting death squads on one country yet training them on others is really meaningless.

~Jirisys ()

~Jirisys ()

[Banquo's Ghost]

jirisys, as PJ noted, your arguments would be better served if you actually posted the links to your source material instead of just copying the text with no attribution.

In addition to weakening your argument (you could have written the quotes yourself) you are also playing fast and loose with copyright law (and the rules of this forum) by not attributing the material to its author. It's only fair to the originator to have their work recognised.

Thank you kindly.

[PanzerJaeger]

Here's a paragraph from the same article.



And again.

And again.... what, exactly?

You've again posted wiki quotes that do nothing to support the notion that the US supported 'death squads' in El Salvador. On the other hand, I quoted the same wiki page which details some rather definitive evidence that the US was not only unsupportive of the 'death squads' but made serious efforts to stop them.

Negligence is still a crime.

That's quite a departure from your initial wiki snow job. Considering the fact that US pressure largely ended government backing of 'death squad' activity, I don't even think you could call it negligence.

Does that really matter? Not supporting death squads on one country yet training them on others is really meaningless.

~Jirisys ()

~Jirisys ()

So we've gone from 'yes they did!' to 'well, they were negligent' and settled with 'they might not have in El Salvador, but they did in other places'.

That would be fine, I suppose, if Populus Romanus had made a broader claim. However, he mentioned the specific and widely disseminated belief that the US supported 'death squads' in El Salvador, which is demonstrably false. (Technically, I don't think such a belief constitutes a conspiracy theory, more like propaganda.)

[Fragony]

I thought the US-backed deathsquads were pretty much an undisputed fact. Where there is smoke there is fire, things are are always shady I wouldn't simply disregard US influence (or better western) so easily

[Crazed Rabbit]

I think there's a chance Sasquatch exists.

CR

[Gregoshi]

I think there's a chance Sasquatch exists.

I don't know about Sasquatch, but Big Foot does.

[jirisys]

I don't know about Sasquatch, but Big Foot does.

I don't know about Big Foot, but Yeti does.

Wait... You don't mean this Foot. Do you?

~Jirisys ()

[jirisys]

jirisys, as PJ noted, your arguments would be better served if you actually posted the links to your source material instead of just copying the text with no attribution.

In addition to weakening your argument (you could have written the quotes yourself) you are also playing fast and loose with copyright law (and the rules of this forum) by not attributing the material to its author. It's only fair to the originator to have their work recognised.

Thank you kindly.

Wikipedia and it's authors.

And again.... what, exactly?

You've again posted wiki quotes that do nothing to support the notion that the US supported 'death squads' in El Salvador. On the other hand, I quoted the same wiki page which details some rather definitive evidence that the US was not only unsupportive of the 'death squads' but made serious efforts to stop them.

That's quite a departure from your initial wiki snow job. Considering the fact that US pressure largely ended government backing of 'death squad' activity, I don't even think you could call it negligence.

So we've gone from 'yes they did!' to 'well, they were negligent' and settled with 'they might not have in El Salvador, but they did in other places'.

That would be fine, I suppose, if Populus Romanus had made a broader claim. However, he mentioned the specific and widely disseminated belief that the US supported 'death squads' in El Salvador, which is demonstrably false. (Technically, I don't think such a belief constitutes a conspiracy theory, more like propaganda.)

Wait. So the govt of the US paid the salvadoran army to destroy communism, and then; when the death squads got out of hand, they did not simply cut the aid. But offered MORE money so they would be disbanded? Isn't that a bit proposterous.

I doubt you having much knowledge of that subject after reading a few wikipedia pages. I have studied this subject for around 4 or 5 years now.

And I admit, directly, they did not support the death squads. But did they cut off the money supply to those that did? Or did anything against the leaders living in the US? D'Abbouison actually appeared on US television, he who was one of the leaders of ARENA, a party which incited the rise of the late death squads.

Let's not forget that the US supplied the government with firearms and income, and these death squads were based upon the US strategy at the time, a civilian branch separated from government with the aid of businessmen and government ordnance.

In fact, Batallon Atlacatl, the responsible of the El Mozote Massacre was trained by the US and was actually part of the salvadoran military.

http://www.icrc.org/themissi.nsf/0/d...ocument&Click=

But really, if I wanted to get rid of a criminal, I wouldn't keep giving money to his gang, I would stop, not say "oh yeah, here's 5 million dollars, just stop with the killing and whatnot."

~Jirisys ()