Pinochet dead

[DroppinScience]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/12/11/pinochet.reut/index.html

Thank God.

[Pres Zount]

Now his reign of terror is over. If he hadn't died, well, I don't know what I would have done.

[DroppinScience]

It was all part of the plan, really. Set the forces of old age upon him.

[freetibet]

Sigh. What else could I have expected. At least some decent right wing tyrrant.

I hope Castro dies as fast as possible. In pain ;D

[DroppinScience]

What do you know? It's our favorite racist making his grand return.

[sam i am]

May he rot in the hell of his own making.:)

[mikizee]

You can thank the Nixon Administration for Pinochet. The US backed coup of 1973 planted the seed for anti-americanism and is a great example of why the US should stop forcing their hand in other country's affairs.

here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/chile/story/0,,1038615,00.html)

[Tone Capone]

Pinochet sounds too similar to panocha...:D

[D_Raay]

But Pinochet's demise doesn't save him from the harsh judgment of history. He dies not only decrepit and politically abandoned in a Santiago hospital but also discredited and reviled. His very name alone has come to rightfully symbolize and encapsulate all of the horrors and fears associated with brutal, dictatorial regimes.

And we put him there...

[Pres Zount]

I'm sure he lived the remainder of his life in reasonable comfort. Knowing that he got away with murder(s).

[Ali]

You can thank the Nixon Administration for Pinochet. The US backed coup of 1973 planted the seed for anti-americanism and is a great example of why the US should stop forcing their hand in other country's affairs.

here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/chile/story/0,,1038615,00.html)Thank Thatcher, too.

[mikizee]

Thank Thatcher, too.

yeah no shit, i read that Thatcher was 'deeply saddened' at his death, WTF?

[Loppfessor]

Thank God I read this thread....for a minute I thought Balki Bartokomous (http://people.ucsc.edu/~dramadon/Balki.jpg)was dead!

[sam i am]

But Pinochet's demise doesn't save him from the harsh judgment of history. He dies not only decrepit and politically abandoned in a Santiago hospital but also discredited and reviled. His very name alone has come to rightfully symbolize and encapsulate all of the horrors and fears associated with brutal, dictatorial regimes.

And we put him there...

Yeah....I often think of Pinochet on a par with Mussolini, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, the Khmer Rouge, etc.

He was SO MUCH like them :rolleyes:

[synch]

Thank God I read this thread....for a minute I thought Balki Bartokomous (http://people.ucsc.edu/~dramadon/Balki.jpg)was dead!
Hahaha.

Close enough!

[D_Raay]

Yeah....I often think of Pinochet on a par with Mussolini, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, the Khmer Rouge, etc.

He was SO MUCH like them :rolleyes:
Didn't realize I DID equate him with these other people. I simply stated the obvious.

[sam i am]

Didn't realize I DID equate him with these other people. I simply stated the obvious.

Actually, you did :

His very name alone has come to rightfully symbolize and encapsulate all of the horrors and fears associated with brutal, dictatorial regimes.

Sorry, dude, but all I did was put the names to what you stated.

[Echewta]

Poor Gepetto :(

[Funkaloyd]

You wouldn't describe Pinochet as a "brutal dictator", Sam?

[sam i am]

You wouldn't describe Pinochet as a "brutal dictator", Sam?

Not even close to the same league as the aforementioned "brutal dictators."

Pinochet, in the greater scheme of history, is a footnote. Not only for the fact that his crimes were far less than other much more "renowned" dictators, but also because he was the dictator of a piss-poor South American nation on the periphery of greater historical trends, unlike the epicenters of most historical trends : i.e., Asia, Europe, and North America.

Poor South America, Africa, and Australia.

[Funkaloyd]

Not even close to the same league as the aforementioned "brutal dictators."You have a penchant for missing the point.

[Schmeltz]

It's so strange to consider how fate works out. Here we have Saddam Hussein (whom I assume sam would consider another tin-pot tyrant on the fringes of history, in spite of all the horror and pain he perpetuated against his own people) being sentenced to hang in no less than thirty days, while Augusto Pinochet dies in peace, of old age, surrounded by family, friends, and supporters.

Both vicious, barbaric dictators who commited unspeakable crimes against their own citizens in the name of nothing more than empty, worthless ideology. Both installed and directly supported by the United States. And one's a footnote to history who doesn't deserve prosecution because of his apparent distance from Washington, and one's worth the sacrifice of three thousand American troops and God knows how many innocent Iraqis just for the sake of regime change.

Thanks, sam. More than ever I can appreciate why I should be thankful not to think like you do.

[monkey]

Not even close to the same league as the aforementioned "brutal dictators."

Pinochet, in the greater scheme of history, is a footnote. Not only for the fact that his crimes were far less than other much more "renowned" dictators, but also because he was the dictator of a piss-poor South American nation on the periphery of greater historical trends, unlike the epicenters of most historical trends : i.e., Asia, Europe, and North America.

Poor South America, Africa, and Australia.

this is bullshit. as a chilean, i take offense. as a human being, i take offense. any fucking asshole who kills and tortures people who simply dont agree with him should be decreed in history as brutal dictator. like saddam. like hitler. like bush. regardless of where it happens.

im not a fan on pissin on dead people, but fuck it, i was GLAD when this fucker died. i grew up only knowing fear of government.

[EN[i]GMA]

Not even close to the same league as the aforementioned "brutal dictators."

Perhaps in terms of body count, no, but I think that entirely misses the point.

It's really of little consequence just how many people he personally had killed, a few thousand or a few million. Either way it's a crime beyond comprehension, and either way a much greater effect, the subjugation of a people, is caused.

Do you think, morally, Pinochet was 'better' than them? Do you think he would have had serious qualms about escalating the body count? "I'll kill 5,000 people, but 10,000, no way, I'm not Hitler!"

I guess, to you, that's a really salient moral point. It isn't.


Pinochet, in the greater scheme of history, is a footnote.

Except to the people he killed, brutalized, and terrorized.

To you and me, he's unimportant, yes. But what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?


Not only for the fact that his crimes were far less than other much more "renowned" dictators, but also because he was the dictator of a piss-poor South American nation on the periphery of greater historical trends, unlike the epicenters of most historical trends : i.e., Asia, Europe, and North America.

Yeah, nations like Laos rank WAY up there on the National Pecking Order.

What do you even MEAN by this? How was he on the periphery of history? Can you not realize the significance of a military junta overthrowing a popularly elected leftist government during the Cold War? Do the geo-politcal ramifications not leap off the page?

It's a ridiculous point.


Poor South America, Africa, and Australia.

Yes, poor South America, Africa, and Australia.

First sensible thing you've said.

[EN[i]GMA]

this is bullshit. as a chilean, i take offense. as a human being, i take offense. any fucking asshole who kills and tortures people who simply dont agree with him should be decreed in history as brutal dictator. like saddam. like hitler. like bush. regardless of where it happens.

im not a fan on pissin on dead people, but fuck it, i was GLAD when this fucker died. i grew up only knowing fear of government.

It's OK, he was only a 'footnote of history.'

This in no way trivializes anything, it's just a simple fact, right sam?

[sam i am]

Wow.

I really didn't expect to engender such vociferous outrage over a (realtively) minor plot point in history.

First of all, I stated above, and will continue to state, that Pinochet deserves to rot in hell.

Secondly, my point was to detract some from the overwroughtness of this idiot's death and the celebratory way in which he's compared to much greater evils.

Third, by lionizing and canonizing his death (maginifying it way beyond it's relevance) all one does is elevate him when he DESERVES to be relegated to the ash-heap of history.

Finally, the fact that some of you have no sense of humor when it comes to gallows-humor is disconcerting and reveals much more about your characters than it does about mine. Even H.W. could joke at Ford's funeral earlier about being mocked by Saturday Night Live (watch it if you have the chance when he mentions Chevy Chase and Dana Carvey - it's hilarious). Criminy, even Franco came in for ridicule and public humiliation when he died (see, again, early Saturday Night Live when Chevy Chase would open the news segment with : "Hi, I'm Chevy Chase and you're not....in the news today, Franco is STILL dead." - classic).

Lighten up, oh ye Beastie Boys message boardistas....

[Schmeltz]

by lionizing and canonizing his death (maginifying it way beyond it's relevance) all one does is elevate him when he DESERVES to be relegated to the ash-heap of history.


Again, you've missed the point. I don't see anybody here canonizing Pinochet; there is no way you could stretch any of the statements made in this thread into support for the man or his deeds. What people have a problem with is the fact that in minimizing Pinochet's position in history, in seeking to diminish him and his crimes to a footnote, you are doing a powerful disservice to the people who suffered and died due to his policies. More than that which was done by the failure of the international community to prosecute and punish him for his actions. It would be a far greater mistake to forget about Pinochet than to remember him and, in the process, seek to learn how we can avoid producing others of his ilk.

It's also ridiculous to claim that any region, especially an entire continent and especially in the 20th century, is ever on the periphery of broad historical trends, but that's another matter for another time, I guess.


the fact that some of you have no sense of humor when it comes to gallows-humor


Sorry, was the spirit of your comments in this thread intended to be amusing? You got a lot to learn about punchlines then.

[D_Raay]

It's that exact attitude sam that has us in the position we are in now.

[sam i am]

What a shame.

I guess y'all would rather bask in the gloominess of reminiscing on a footnote rather than focusing on the true evil of the world :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMA7Fta3Ycg













Lighten up!:p

[Schmeltz]

How many times do we have to go over this? People come here to discuss events and offer their perspectives on them, not for links to funny movies or websites about kittens. If your only contribution to the discussion is "let's not think about it," then stay out.

[sam i am]

How many times do we have to go over this? People come here to discuss events and offer their perspectives on them, not for links to funny movies or websites about kittens. If your only contribution to the discussion is "let's not think about it," then stay out.

I'm allowed, just as you are, to post my opinions and put links up that illustrate my point.

Sometimes, just as you, I post to amuse myself or a select few.

If you don't appreciate it or want to participate, just ignore my posts.

[Schmeltz]

Seems to me like you're the one ignoring everybody else's posts, not the other way around.

[EN[i]GMA]

Wow.

I really didn't expect to engender such vociferous outrage over a (realtively) minor plot point in history.

I wasn't 'outraged', I was just pointing out that you made in ignorant comment.


First of all, I stated above, and will continue to state, that Pinochet deserves to rot in hell.

No arguments with that sentiment.


Secondly, my point was to detract some from the overwroughtness of this idiot's death and the celebratory way in which he's compared to much greater evils.

None's comparing him in a celebratory manner, though many are in a somber manner.

You seem to be able to find levity where there is none. It's not 'gallows humor' when you're the only one in on an unfunny non-joke.


Third, by lionizing and canonizing his death (maginifying it way beyond it's relevance) all one does is elevate him when he DESERVES to be relegated to the ash-heap of history.

I don't even get this.

Are you saying that because he wasn't a Hitler, we should just forget about him? Wouldn't that just further elevate Hitler, admittedly a much worse dictator? Should we talk solely about Hitler and Stalin, and ignore Pol Pot, Tito, and Pinochet? What the hell would that accomplish/

You just aren't making sense; you're talking, but you aren't saying anything.


Finally, the fact that some of you have no sense of humor when it comes to gallows-humor is disconcerting and reveals much more about your characters than it does about mine.

It may show that some have more conscience than others, perhaps. But even that I doubt. Again, it's not as if you made some joke that we just took seriously: you just made an idiotic comment and got shit for it.


Even H.W. could joke at Ford's funeral earlier about being mocked by Saturday Night Live (watch it if you have the chance when he mentions Chevy Chase and Dana Carvey - it's hilarious). Criminy, even Franco came in for ridicule and public humiliation when he died (see, again, early Saturday Night Live when Chevy Chase would open the news segment with : "Hi, I'm Chevy Chase and you're not....in the news today, Franco is STILL dead." - classic).

Lighten up, oh ye Beastie Boys message boardistas....

What are you even talking about?