History of US involvement in Latin America

Well you are only particially corrent in making that assumption. Firstly, some of the events were from the time frame you mention, but some of them also were much recently (80's). But even with that stated, would you not agree that significant political involvement and engagements in the past 20-50yrs doesn't alter society? Would you not agree that Watergate, the Cold War or the Vietnam war or SE Asian ongoings had dramatic effects on US society (whether politically, socially, economically)? The answer is of course they have had varying repurcussions. So with that said, why would you possibly say serious actions and ongoings in various nations wouldn't matter because it's a specific time frame ago? The fact is, history shapes the future and if you don't learn and use history as a gage to help move forward, you won't be creating a future that is better. So speaking of any political event of the past has significance because it can be used as a model of either what to do or not to do in the present.

jlew24asu wrote:

FiveB247x wrote:

What exactly is a joke? Everything that has been posted is factual and true. Perhaps you care to live in an illusion where our government didn't actually carry out or participate in these actions, but that would be a false assumption. Rather than simply dismissing these facts, would you rather add content, reasons or details to why you think it is a joke?

jlew24asu wrote:

LOL ok whatever you say. this thread is joke

everything posted is from the 50s, 60s and 70s. what do we hope to accomplish by talking about things that happened decades and generations ago? most of which have little to any relevance today.

jlew24asu wrote:

RW81233 wrote:

Read David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism and you will see that it was us who fucked up Chile's and Argentina's economy b/c we used those countries as testing grounds for a hands off, market based economy, and they imploded because of it...kind of like here. Oh and yes that is America's fault, at least partially.

a free market economy is the way to go. and the only way to know how to run it is the hard way. a lesson even we learn from time to time. you people get so spooked by big bad capitalism. in the end its about freedom and choices. something that is taken away with socialism and communism.

you are wrong the free market economy is about class separation, it's about the rich keeping their's on the backs of the poor, that is all it has ever been about...the sooner you realize this, the sooner you will realize that not all of us are for rote socialism and communism as they, in practice, often do quite the same thing.

something that works...kind of like Scandanavian social capitalism since they all seem to get along just fine without having to blow things up. Of course the fact that 9 out of the 11 countries that have a better standard of living than provided in the United States use socialism or social capitalism never hinders those that argue against it, and for an outdated and failed system of economics in free market capitalism.

It no secret the US and G-8 run the IMF and WB. Secondly, I don't know about you, but I am fully versed and read in the history, ongoings and dealings of these organizations, from your comments, you don't seem to be adding much of fact other than playing the entire "it's not the US's fault" card without adding any substantial data and fact to the conversation There are tons of books, articles and examples of the US's and other rich nations who have underminded economic stability and practices in order to gain strong holds politically over other nations, especially in South America. In the long term, these practices have created financial and political instability which have wrecked the foundations of many nations which have also led to the underminding of democracy and free market capitalism throughout South America.

If you're interested in learning a bit more bout the IMF, WB and G-8, I wrote this not that long ago. You may not agree with my commentary, but I clearly describe what each does in the world.
http://political-illusions.blogspot.com ... cture.html

Also If you want to read a few good books about these topics here's a few off the top of my head:
And the Money Kept Rolling in (And Out)Author: Paul Blustein
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins
Unholy Trinity : The IMF, World Bank and WTO by Richard Peet, Beate Born, Kendra Feher, Matthew Feinstein, Richard Peet

Lastly, debt is not debt are you claim in any manner. In an unstable nation, when you rely on foriegn loans and the government is forced to restructure economic and social polices in order to accomodate receiving these loans, banks, companies and industries in general are in a constant state of flux. It could be something as simple as the value of the local currency changes or something more significant like a massive bank run or massive inflation. These are all major ongoing economic issues related to the IMF, WB and G-8's impact and relations on foreign nations and borrowers. We do not have anything remotely like these problems on a wide-scale, long term level. So to make a very naive and simplistic state like "debt is debt" is simply untrue.

jlew24asu wrote:

FiveB247x wrote:

Ever read anything about the World Bank and International Montetary Funds interactions and dealing with South America? I take it you haven't because some of the biggest financial debacles in the world were at the helms (led by US and other industrial nations of the West), have legitimately created catastrophe's in places like Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia and a few others. These organization are run and mandated by the US government at the highest levels and have led to the long term economic, political and societial debacles many of these nations have faced for about the past 10-20 yrs.

so now the IMF, World Bank, and UN = the US government. thats funny, but anway... you'll have to be more specific if you want to hold any credibility instead of just chest thumping that you've heard of the IMF and World Bank. so you dont like their lending standards? ok, how is that the fault of the US? the opposition south America has towards those banks are merely symbolic because of Chavez.

did you know they are also starting their own World Bank called the Bank of the South? if the US was the almighty powerful, wouldnt we have the power to stop such a move?

FiveB247x wrote:

As for your comment about the US debt, such a comparsion shows your naitivity on the world of economics if you think our debt is anyhow the same as theirs. In fact, if we had the type of debt and cutbacks these nations face regularly, our population would have long ago overthrown the government. That's not a joke either - it's the absolute truth!

debt is debt. and its a problem for them and us.