The Americas The - "Why Should I have to State Pinochet was terrible?" - Thread

[Realm]

Given what we know in hindsight no it wouldn't, since he would have then proceeded to destroy the country. Meanwhile Pinochet actually stepped down.

And we know for a fact allende wouldn't have? Sure bruv.

A question for you: Do you believe that democratically elected officials should abide by the checks of their political authority, or do you think being elected into office is a statement that no rules or laws apply?

Oh yeah, they should follow them. Also, the solution that that isn't having a military dictatorship come in and murder people. Because saying checks and balances should be followed, and if not we should institute right wing death squads is quite a silly statement, unless your concern is more with justifying right wing death squads than rule of law

 

[commanderkai]

Oh yeah, they should follow them.

Good, but when said individual refuses to comply with those checks on his or her power, and begins putting forth measures to seize more power, including creating a personal army, what should be done then?

Also, the solution that that isn't having a military dictatorship come in and murder people. Because saying checks and balances should be followed, and if not we should institute right wing death squads is quite a silly statement, unless your concern is more with justifying right wing death squads than rule of law

Strangely enough, I don't see myself defending "right wing death squads". So far, I see that there was cause for the coup d'etat against Allende for his overstep of power.

Pinochet's however did not step down from power and allowed the Chilean Congress form a government after the coup d'etat, but instead seized power for himself, and stayed in power for 16 years. His actions in while in control were terrible. If circumstances happened in the United States, I'd hope for a Cincinnatus, but power has a tendency to corrupt.

I also find it amusing that people think he's worse than regimes like the Cuban communist government.

 

[GoldRanger]

And we know for a fact allende wouldn't have? Sure bruv.



Oh yeah, they should follow them. Also, the solution that that isn't having a military dictatorship come in and murder people. Because saying checks and balances should be followed, and if not we should institute right wing death squads is quite a silly statement, unless your concern is more with justifying right wing death squads than rule of law

Answer the question. Is Pinochet worse than the Iranian regime?

 

[almostinsane]

Allende definitely deserved to be removed. Per their Constitution, he broke the law. I'm not going to whitewash Pinochet's actions after the coup. Killing people for speech is never okay.

But, I'm not going to both-same him and Allende. We know what Allended intended. And the death toll that would have eclipsed Pinochet's. If you say he didn't deserve to be removed for the illegality of his actions, then no leader can ever be removed.

The best case scenario would have been to return power to the Chilean government after Allende was removed. Unfortunately, Pinochet was garbage. Not a disease-infested carcasses, but garbage.

 

[Realm]

Answer the question. Is Pinochet worse than the Iranian regime?

Sure, now go off on whatever stupid tangent you're leading up to, and perhaps answer my 2 on topic questions you ignored to go off on a weak set up.

But, I'm not going to both-same him and Allende. We know what Allended intended. And the death toll that would have eclipsed Pinochet's. If you say he didn't deserve to be removed for the illegality of his actions, then no leader can ever be removed.

So cool, all I need to do to justify overthrowing the state and murder of political opponents is saying "we all know, our opposition would have been worse"

Seems pretty easy, thanks for the tip

 

[commanderkai]

Sure, now go off on whatever stupid tangent you're leading up to, and perhaps answer my 2 on topic questions you ignored to go off on a weak set up.

I'm waiting for you to answer my question. Here, let me ask again.

Good, but when said individual refuses to comply with those checks on his or her power, and begins putting forth measures to seize more power, including creating a personal army, what should be done then?

 

[Realm]

I'm waiting for you to answer my question. Here, let me ask again.

"Good, but when said individual refuses to comply with those checks on his or her power, and begins putting forth measures to seize more power, including creating a personal army, what should be done then?"

I definitely think the right action in response is violently seizing power, putting forth measures to cease more power, including creating secret police, a stronger military and violently murdering political opponents

 

[commanderkai]

I definitely think the right action in response is violently seizing power, putting forth measures to cease more power, including creating secret police, a stronger military and violently murdering political opponents

I know you're likely being sarcastic, but no matter. I'll take it one of two days.

1. You are being sarcastic, but your sarcasm, and notably, a lack of an answer to my initial question states that you don't have a solution to the situation that Allende created.

2. You are not being sarcastic, and you're just outraged that Pinochet was not aligned to your ideology.

 

[Husky_Khan]

I definitely think the right action in response is violently seizing power, putting forth measures to cease more power, including creating secret police, a stronger military and violently murdering political opponents

Are you engaging in the low effort sarcasm, strawmanning, whataboutism and red herrings because your lazy, trying some sort of quantity over quality style argumentation via tireless 'rebuttals' or you just don't know enough about the subject matter and aren't inclined in engaging the material beyond a superficial level and thus have to string out the same peddling posts over and over again?

Also I'm curious if your cognizant of how effective your presentation of arguments in this thread have been so far? Like have you actually gone back to re-read the thread and I'm curious if your like... "Oh yeah... those were some solid counterpoints I made. I'm doing a good job discussing things in this thread, it doesn't look half assed at all."

 

[GoldRanger]

Sure, now go off on whatever stupid tangent you're leading up to, and perhaps answer my 2 on topic questions you ignored to go off on a weak set up.

I've made my positions as clear as I'm going to make him.

I think Pinochet was shit, and if I could change the timeline to prevent the rise of Communism in Chile without him I would, but between him and the threat of Communism he was with 100% complete certainty the lesser evil, and he was generally a lesser degree of shit than many anonymous dictators of the 20th century. Any possible answer to my questions will basically stem from that stance.

Now don't dismiss my question with a contemptuous "sure". Which one is better or worse than the other, and why?

So cool, all I need to do to justify overthrowing the state and murder of political opponents is saying "we all know, our opposition would have been worse"

Seems pretty easy, thanks for the tip

If the state is barely managing to conceal that it's working toward concentration camps on the behalf of a known malevolent foreign power, you have my Seal of Approval to go ahead.

 

[Realm]

You are being sarcastic, but your sarcasm, and notably, a lack of an answer to my initial question states that you don't have a solution to the situation that Allende created.

Generally speaking you can solve the issue of someone overstepping the power offered by their elected office without a murderous, military dictatorship

Also I'm curious if your cognizant of how effective your presentation of arguments in this thread have been so far? Like have you actually gone back to re-read the thread and I'm curious if your like... "Oh yeah... those were some solid counterpoints I made. I'm doing a good job discussing things in this thread, it doesn't look half assed at all."

Wait, are you saying that the right wing echo chamber forum isn't being convinced that military dictatorships running right wing death squads is bad? My word!

I know everything I say is falling on deaf ears.

Now don't dismiss my question with a contemptuous "sure". Which one is better or worse than the other, and why?

Dude just go off with whatever point you want to make, this is getting embarrassing.

If the state is barely managing to conceal that it's working toward concentration camps on the behalf of a known malevolent foreign power, you have my Seal of Approval to go ahead.

The liberal overthrow of Trump, known russian agent and enactor of Concentration Camps begins today comrade! Join us in glorious battle!

 

[commanderkai]

Generally speaking you can solve the issue of someone overstepping the power offered by their elected office without a murderous, military dictatorship

I'm not talking in generalities here. We're talking about the specific circumstances of Allende and Chile in 1973. The Chilean Congress passed a resolution telling Allende to stop or face the consequences, and Allende responded that he will not stop his unconstitutional actions.

What is the next step to remove Allende from power or to curtail his unconstitutional behavior?

 

[LordSunhawk]

The Boot is checking out its soles to prepare for possibly stompings. Stay on topic and do not play troll-bait gotcha games. The Boot prefers not to have to exert itself, after all, stepping on posters is hard, dirty work... I hope you all realize how long it takes to maintain this lovely shine! So behave yourselves!

 

[almostinsane]

So cool, all I need to do to justify overthrowing the state and murder of political opponents is saying "we all know, our opposition would have been worse"

Seems pretty easy, thanks for the tip

No, I am saying that it was valid to arrest him for illegal activity against the constitution. Now, just to be clear, do you think the Chilean Congress had the right to call for his removal? If you don't disagree, then we agree 90% on this issue. If you do disagree, then you concede that once in power, the head of state may not be removed.

 

[Realm]

I'm not talking in generalities here. We're talking about the specific circumstances of Allende and Chile in 1973. The Chilean Congress passed a resolution telling Allende to stop or face the consequences, and Allende responded that he will not stop his unconstitutional actions.

What is the next step to remove Allende from power or to curtail his unconstitutional behavior?

No, I am saying that it was valid to arrest him for illegal activity against the constitution. Now, just to be clear, do you think the Chilean Congress had the right to call for his removal?

Perhaps accepting Allendes idea of resolving the crisis with a referendum, rather than military overthrow and dictatorship?

 

[Deleted member 1]

This Thread is Being Locked Until We can Figure Out What to Do with an Open Report on It.

 

[LTR]

Thread Reopened Momentarily

Keep in mind the Civility Rules. If you are incapable of engaging in civil, productive discussion and instead rely on low effort trolling, sarcasm, and strawmanning, you will be removed from the discussion.

 

[almostinsane]

Perhaps accepting Allendes idea of resolving the crisis with a referendum, rather than military overthrow and dictatorship?

He had violated the constitution in many blatant ways as detailed previously in the forum. He was worthy of removal. As I stated previously, the optimal solution was to remove him and cede power back to the Chilean Congress. Do not mistake me. I am on the side of the democratically elected congress whose constitutional power Allende had been subverting, not their subordinate who did a Napoleon and made himself dictator.

 

[Vargas Fan]

This was part of a large documentary on the Cold War, there is mention of Central and South America but some parts on Chile if its of any interest.

 

[GoldRanger]

Wait, are you saying that the right wing echo chamber forum isn't being convinced that military dictatorships running right wing death squads is bad? My word!

I know everything I say is falling on deaf ears.

Except nobody in this thread said that Pinochet or right wing death squads are not bad? Mostly we agree that Pinochet was evil, but nowhere near the level of, say, Hitler or Stalin like leftists portray him, hell, not even on the level of Saddam or Che Guevara.

It is you who are incapable of admitting that Communism is evil, even though it killed and imprisoned millions in every single country it was attempted, and was going to be attempted in Chile under the watchful eye of the Cold War's equivalent to Mordor.

And if this is a "right wing echo chamber", how were you allowed in?

Dude just go off with whatever point you want to make, this is getting embarrassing.

I have no point to make, I genuinely want to see your viewpoint. Leftists often excuse Iranian atrocities. I want to know how you honestly think Iran measures up against Pinochet and why.

The liberal overthrow of Trump, known russian agent and enactor of Concentration Camps begins today comrade! Join us in glorious battle!

Except the investigation concluded there are no ties between Trump and Russia, and Trump didn't build the detention facilities for illegal immigrants (not actually concentration camps and not used to imprison citizens). He's also acting fully within his democratic mandate. But it was an amusing try.