Augusto Pinochet Dead

[gick]

Chile's Gen Pinochet dies at 91

Chile's former military leader Augusto Pinochet has died, the Santiago hospital treating him after an earlier heart attack has announced.
The hospital said the condition of the 91-year-old general had suddenly worsened, AP news agency said.

Gen Pinochet was in power from 1973-90, during which time more than 3,000 people were killed or "disappeared".

He was accused of dozens of human rights violations but had never faced trial because of poor health.

"He died surrounded by his family," the hospital's Dr Juan Ignacio Vergara told reporters.

He said more details would be made available later, Reuters news agency reported.

Gen Pinochet suffered a heart attack a week ago. He underwent medical procedures and received the last rites from a Catholic priest.

But in the days afterwards his condition had been thought to be improving.

The BBC's Daniel Schweimler in Buenos Aires said about 150 Gen Pinochet supporters had been keeping a vigil outside his hospital since he was taken ill.

"I believe they will be joined now by other supporters as news of his death spreads," our correspondent said.

"There has been no immediate reaction from his opponents as yet, but I'm sure they feel very cheated that they have not been able to bring him to court to face the various charges being made against him."

Earlier in November, Gen Pinochet was placed under house arrest over the abduction of two people in 1973.

The charges related to the Caravan of Death - a military operation to remove opponents of his rule.

Our correspondent said that despite his human rights record, many Chileans loved him and said he saved the country from Marxism.

But even many loyal supporters abandoned him after it became clear in 2004 that he had stolen about $27m in secret offshore bank accounts that were under investigation at the time of his death, our correspondent says.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6167237.stm


Good ****ing riddance. Hopefully he's in hell at this very moment being anally raped by Stalin.

 

[Solaris]

Burn in hell.
Edit: ****ing Thatcher has said she's greatly saddened by his death, ****ing bitch.

 

[repiV]

What's the difference between being saddened by Pinochet's death and worshipping murderous oppressive leftists as you do?

 

[zleppelin]

Burn in hell.
Edit: ****ing Thatcher has said she's greatly saddened by his death, ****ing bitch.

how do you know hell exists?

 

[gick]

I meant it as a figure of speech. But if there was a hell, he'd be in it.

 

[Narcolepsy]

Which Thatcher?

how do you know hell exists?

deep

 

[Tollbooth Willie]

So......Shall I break out the champagne?

 

[gick]

So......Shall I break out the champagne?

If you dislike mass-murdering military dictators, then yes.

 

[Tollbooth Willie]

Great then. Rest in pieces, bitch. Let's drink!

 

[Bob_Marley]

Which Thatcher?

Maggie, I should imagine.

Anyway, sad to see an ally who helped us kick the Argies off our terretory in '82, but at the same time glad to know he wont be making any more human rights abuses.

 

[hungryduck]

another bad leader falls...........

 

[Solaris]

Maggie, I should imagine.

Anyway, sad to see an ally who helped us kick the Argies off our terretory in '82, but at the same time glad to know he wont be making any more human rights abuses.

What do you mean kicked them off?
We went in guns blazing, massacred thousands, didn't bother with looking for diplomatic ends. Pinochet was a murdering bastard who tortured thousands of political prisoners to death.

I hope Marget Thatcher follows him.

 

[Polaris]

What do you mean kicked them off?
We went in guns blazing, massacred thousands, didn't bother with looking for diplomatic ends. Pinochet was a murdering bastard who tortured thousands of political prisoners to death.

Just like Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc.
Pinochet was bloody dictator and I don't like him but he probably saved Chile from communistic revolution.

 

[Solaris]

Just like Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc.
Pinochet was bloody dictator and I don't like him but he probably saved Chile from communistic revolution.

Lennin didn't kill thousands of political prisoners just for speaking out.

 

[Bob_Marley]

What do you mean kicked them off?
We went in guns blazing, massacred thousands, didn't bother with looking for diplomatic ends. Pinochet was a murdering bastard who tortured thousands of political prisoners to death.

I hope Marget Thatcher follows him.

Did the Argies try diplomatic solutions? No. So we sent in our troops and got our terretory back.

And British troops massacured no one in the Falklands campagin. All the fighting was completly legal under international law and its not like they went in with a "take no prisoners" policy.

 

[repiV]

What do you mean kicked them off?
We went in guns blazing, massacred thousands, didn't bother with looking for diplomatic ends. Pinochet was a murdering bastard who tortured thousands of political prisoners to death.

I hope Marget Thatcher follows him.

If by "massacred thousands", you mean utterly annihilated the enemy forces despite being outnumbered five to one due to our vastly superior military, welcome to the real ****ing world.
The only unfair fight is the one you lose.

Lennin didn't kill thousands of political prisoners just for speaking out.

No, instead he killed millions by depriving them of food.
Although if he did kill thousands of political prisoners just for speaking out, I'm sure you'd find a way to justify it.

 

[Que-Ever]

Never heard of him.

 

[Solaris]

No, instead he killed millions by depriving them of food.

???
No he didn't.

 

[repiV]

???
No he didn't.

Yes, he did.

Also, please address the rest of my post instead of just ignoring the parts you find yourself unable to respond to. I'd particularly like to know why it was cool for the Argentinian military junta to invade and occupy our sovereign territory with no provocation (an act of war), but it wasn't cool for us to retaliate.
****, you must be the biggest moral hypocrite I've ever encountered. All it comes down to with you is everything the West does is bad, and everything everyone else does is good. Grow up.

 

[Solaris]

Yes, he did.

http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/bcaplan/museum/his1g.htm
You make it sound like he intentionally starved people to death, when in reality, immediately after the revolution, Countries from all sides invaded the country causing economic chaos which resulted in famine. That's not Lenins fault.

Also, please address the rest of my post instead of just ignoring the parts you find yourself unable to respond to. I'd particularly like to know why it was cool for the Argentinian military junta to invade and occupy our sovereign territory with no provocation (an act of war), but it wasn't cool for us to retaliate.
****, you must be the biggest moral hypocrite I've ever encountered. All it comes down to with you is everything the West does is bad, and everything everyone else does is good.

A few rocks a couple of thousand miles away is not worth lives.

 

[repiV]

[/URL]
You make it sound like he intentionally starved people to death, when in reality, immediately after the revolution, Countries from all sides invaded the country causing economic chaos which resulted in famine. That's not Lenins fault.

Moreover, since seed grain was often taken, many peasants were unable to grow surplus crops even if they wished. When the perverse incentives of price controls and expropriation were mixed with a drought, the result was one of the great disasters of the century: the Russian famine of 1921. Official Soviet reports admitted that fully 30 million Soviet citizens were in danger of death by starvation. The White forces shared little of the blame: as Pipes notes, the Civil War was essentially over by the beginning of 1920, but Lenin continued his harsh exploitation of the peasantry for yet another year. Moreover, the areas under White control had actually built up a food surplus. The horrific famine of 1921 was thus much less severe in 1920, because after the reconquest of the Ukraine and other White territories, the Reds shipped the Whites' grain captured grain north to Petrograd, Moscow, and other cities with less hunger but more political clout. Low estimates on the deaths from this famine are about 3 million; high estimates go up to 10 million - which would probably have been much higher if not for foreign relief efforts which Lenin had the good sense to permit. For perspective, the last severe famine in Russia hit in 1891-92, and cost about 400,000 lives.

Yuh-huh, none of this is true then. It's all American propaganda.

A few rocks a couple of thousand miles away is not worth lives.

I'm quite aware you're a spineless surrender monkey, you don't need to reiterate the fact. Now answer the question.

 

[Solaris]

Your source is propaganda.

It's not okay for them to invade. But it wasn't worth such massive and immediate military intervention by Thatcher.

 

[repiV]

Your source is propaganda.

Yes, a published university paper is propaganda. Because you think it's wrong.

It's not okay for them to invade. But it wasn't worth such massive and immediate military intervention by Thatcher.

You're backtracking. Before, you were expressing disgust that we "went in guns blazing" and "massacred thousands". Not even a word about the illegal occupation of the islands.
Hell, let's just let everyone steal our territory. And leave our overseas citizens to suffer under an unwanted foreign and totalitarian regime because "it's not worth lives".
You're just a plain and simple hypocrite. Your outrage is entirely selective. Hell, you didn't even mention the 255 British servicemen who died in that war, or the vast majority of the rest who suffer psychological trauma to this day. You make me sick sometimes.

 

[repiV]

Incidentally, there's a memorial in the Falklands that I saw on a documentary some time ago. It's by the locals. It says words to the effect of "thank you for selflessly giving your lives to save us" and has a British flag next to it. Unfortunately, I can't find it on the internet. Which is a shame, as you need to see it. It might make you understand a little bit about sacrifice, respect and gratitude.

 

[The Monkey]

Your source is propaganda.

Well, here's a copy of an order signed by Lenin, telling his troops to kill civilan farmers. Is that "propaganda" too?

(English translation)

 

[Solaris]

Well, here's a copy of an order signed by Lenin, telling his troops to kill civilan farmers. Is that "propaganda" too?

(English translation)

It's from a book.

There's so much ant-communist bullshit floating around, I won't believe it.
I'm investigating it further through the internet.

I understand the danger the emerging petis bourgeoisie were to the revolution, but executing farmers? I must investigate this further.

 

[repiV]

Well, here's a copy of an order signed by Lenin, telling his troops to kill civilan farmers. Is that "propaganda" too?

(English translation)

No - it will now become a necessary action that was taken by an honourable and just man in order to preserve the Union. You just watch. You're talking to the the same person that said Hugo Chavez did the right thing by silencing dissenting voices in order to protect the poor. The same person that harps on about the illegality of the Iraq war and says that the terrorists fighting in Iraq are noble chariots of justice protecting their homeland, and then condemns Britain for reclaiming their stolen territory from Argentina. Bloody hypocritical idiot. I think he should just go to Cuba and have done with. They'd love to have him.

 

[gick]

No - it will now become a necessary action that was taken by an honourable and just man in order to preserve the Union. You just watch. You're talking to the the same person that said Hugo Chavez did the right thing by silencing dissenting voices in order to protect the poor. The same person that harps on about the illegality of the Iraq war and says that the terrorists fighting in Iraq are noble chariots of justice protecting their homeland, and then condemns Britain for reclaiming their stolen territory from Argentina. Bloody hypocritical idiot. I think he should just go to Cuba and have done with. They'd love to have him.

Chillax. Give him a few years and im sure he'll grow out of the doublethink.

 

[repiV]

Chillax. Give him a few years and im sure he'll grow out of the doublethink.

Yeah I know...at heart he's a decent guy, but at times he just really pisses me off with his mind-bendingly hypocritical, disrespectful comments.
It's like he makes a special effort to twist anything and everything into a negative portrayal of his own country, and excuse any crime from the Middle East or left-wing nations.
I don't recall any outrage from him at the Palestinians indiscriminately firing rockets into Isreali population centres during the Lebanon conflict.
If only he could use his conviction for a purpose that isn't ****ing stupid.

 

[Solaris]

No - it will now become a necessary action that was taken by an honourable and just man in order to preserve the Union. You just watch. You're talking to the the same person that said Hugo Chavez did the right thing by silencing dissenting voices in order to protect the poor.

By that, if you mean corporate media then your correct.

The same person that harps on about the illegality of the Iraq war and says that the terrorists fighting in Iraq are noble chariots of justice protecting their homeland

A lot are.

, and then condemns Britain for reclaiming their stolen territory from Argentina.

Oh yes, our rock. I'm not at all patriotic so why would I care about a rock in the ocean somewhere?

 

[Beerdude26]

Well, here's a copy of an order signed by Lenin, telling his troops to kill civilan farmers. Is that "propaganda" too?

(English translation)

This one's true. No propaganda here.

 

[Solaris]

This one's true. No propaganda here.

I don't believe it. At least not in that context there.

 

[repiV]

By that, if you mean corporate media then your correct.

So you don't believe in freedom of speech at all. You only believe in it when it suits you and you believe you have the right to choose who deserves free speech.
You do not deserve the privilege of living in a free (at least until Blair got into power and idiots kept voting for him) and prosperous nation until you start to show a little more respect for the fundamental values that make it one of the best countries in the world to live in. You're just acting like a spoilt little brat, except instead of disrespecting your mother you're direspecting your nation and everyone who calls it home, and everyone who has fought and died and suffered for it.

A lot are.

Got any proof or reason for that, or is it just more bullshit to massage your revolutionary fantasies?

Oh yes, our rock. I'm not at all patriotic so why would I care about a rock in the ocean somewhere?

I thought you were outraged by illegal invasions. Why do you care about Iraq? That's just a rock in the desert somewhere. And there are a ****load more Iraqis who want us there than Falkland islanders who wanted the Argentinians there (that would be what was once nearly all Iraqis, perhaps now about half due to incompetent military leadership, compared to zero Falkland islanders).
But no...as usual, you twist the facts to support your prejudices, rather than making up your mind based on the facts. Britain and the US are always wrong. Muslims and commies are always right.

 

[kirovman]

I don't believe it.

HABEEB IT.

 

[Solaris]

So you don't believe in freedom of speech at all. You only believe in it when it suits you and you believe you have the right to choose who deserves free speech.
You do not deserve the privilege of living in a free (at least until Blair got into power and idiots kept voting for him) and prosperous nation until you start to show a little more respect for the fundamental values that make it one of the best countries in the world to live in.p

How can the people make an informed vote when the only media is run by rightwing companies with a very biased agenda.

Got any proof or reason for that, or is it just more bullshit to massage your revolutionary fantasies?

If someone invaded england and started raping our civilians, and someone went out and shot an occupier. I'd call that man a hero.

(that would be what was once nearly all Iraqis, perhaps now about half due to incompetent military leadership,).

You roll a die like lemonking too? Or do you have a source for that?

 

[repiV]

How can the people make an informed vote when the only media is run by rightwing companies with a very biased agenda.

Solaris, meet the free market. The free market, meet Solaris.

If someone invaded england and started raping our civilians, and someone went out and shot an occupier. I'd call that man a hero.

Oh yes, because all American and British soldiers are evil evil monsters who rape civilians for breakfast, torture them for lunch and then murder them for dinner. What a stupid analogy.
I swear, self-touted "intellectuals" are the most gullible and unhinged people on the planet. You vastly overestimate yourself.

You roll a die like lemonking too? Or do you have a source for that?

How about you start citing sources yourself, since I asked first.

 

[Solaris]

Solaris, meet the free market. The free market, meet Solaris.

I don't believe in a free market.

Oh yes, because all American and British soldiers are evil evil monsters who rape civilians for breakfast, torture them for lunch and then murder them for dinner. What a stupid analogy.
I swear, self-touted "intellectuals" are the most gullible and unhinged people on the planet. You vastly overestimate yourself.

Most soldiers are not raping murdering bastards, however, by taking part in the occupation in Iraq, they are helping to support the occupation.

How about you start citing sources yourself, since I asked first.

For what? 73% Agree with Solaris!???

Now get some source for that bullshit "Most Iraqis wanted us there".

 

[repiV]

I don't believe in a free market.

And as such, you don't deserve the privilege of British citizenship. Please pack your bags and move to Latin America.

Most soldiers are not raping murdering bastards, however, by taking part in the occupation in Iraq, they are helping to support the occupation.

What are you trying to prove? It's clear you harbour deep-rooted prejudices against the military and jizz over your copy of Hezollah magazine. Stop sidestepping the issue of your childish, two-dimensional point of view.

For what? 73% Agree with Solaris!???

No, for many of the murdering terrorist scumbags in Iraq are heroes fighting for the liberation of their country.

Now get some source for that bullshit "Most Iraqis wanted us there".

Yeah, the market research department went around taking surveys. How about you prove that they didn't, since you seem so hellbent on proving that people wouldn't want to be freed from the clutches of a murderous dictator.

For now however, how's this?

Oh, the inhuman killing machines!

 

[Solaris]

I'm not going to get out the Prisoner Torture photos.

Yeah, the market research department went around taking surveys. How about you prove that they didn't, since you seem so hellbent on proving that people wouldn't want to be freed from the clutches of a murderous dictator.

Erm, burden of proof logical fallacy?

Prove it, and I'll never say a bad word about the occupation of Iraq again.

 

[repiV]

I'm not going to get out the Prisoner Torture photos.


Erm, burden of proof logical fallacy?

Prove it, and I'll never say a bad word about the occupation of Iraq again.

Views on Iraq

It's an article from 2004. Notable is that most Iraqis believed their lives were better after the invasion, back before the terrorist factions had a chance to **** everything up.

Also, Looking back, more Iraqis think the invasion was right than wrong, although 41% felt that the invasion "humiliated Iraq".