USA attacked 70 countries since its birth 1776.

[Rasengan]

When did Guatemala move to South America? What was the revenue of the United Fruit Company just so we know the magnitude of this "theft"?

(Besides, the landowners had nothing to do with stopping this "reform", right?)

In my head Okay, Guatemala is located in Central America, but you can't deny the Americans weren't involved. Their revenue was $65 million dollars. Its a good example of American intervention based upon lobbying from American corporations. In regards to the landowners, they did have issues with this reform but if you have foreign support then it has the potential to topple any regime.

 

[VCheng]

In my head Okay, Guatemala is located in Central America, but you can't deny the Americans weren't involved. Their revenue was $65 million dollars. Its a good example of American intervention based upon lobbying from American corporations. In regards to the landowners, they did have issues with this reform but if you have foreign support then it has the potential to topple any regime.

LOL. So some landowners changed their government for trying to take over their land and the villain is USA? For 65 million dollars?

 

[gambit]

Oh, really, who has conducted more wars than any other state in the last 243 years. Much of the mess in the Middle East involves the British or the American's.

Your argument was 'good' and 'damage'. Care to consider advances in STEM, something like the Internet you are using to make your ridiculous argument?

Guatemala 1954 is a good example. The CIA toppled President Jacobo Arbenz. He attempted a series of land reforms that threatened the holdings of United Fruit Company.

You cannot steal wealth. Wealth is an estimate. You can steal the tangible stuff that have an estimated wealth. Nevertheless, what you brought on is old news. Once a people have control of their own country, gradually over time, the charge that foreigners are the cause of the country's poverty and/or mismanagement diminishes.

 

[Rasengan]

LOL. So some landowners changed their government for trying to take over their land and the villain is USA? For 65 million dollars?

The magnitude is irrelevant but the end result is significant $65 million may seem small, but this is 1954 and the United Fruit Company lobbied in Washington for its interests. Just like how other American corporations have benefited in the Middle East. The US is the villain, it was supplying weapons to those in opposition to Jacobo Arbenz. Like I said before, America can enjoy its dominance but the clock is ticking and all empires have an expiry date

Your argument was 'good' and 'damage'. Care to consider advances in STEM, something like the Internet you are using to make your ridiculous argument?


You cannot steal wealth. Wealth is an estimate. You can steal the tangible stuff that have an estimated wealth. Nevertheless, what you brought on is old news. Once a people have control of their own country, gradually over time, the charge that foreigners are the cause of the country's poverty and/or mismanagement diminishes.

You should have read my post in context I was referring to America interfering in other people's business. Hence, why I said they have done more damage than good. But if we are referring to the advancement of science and e-commerce in general then clearly America comes out top and I wouldn't dispute that. You wanted an example so I gave you one

 

[VCheng]

The magnitude is irrelevant but the end result is significant $65 million may seem small, but this is 1954 and the United Fruit Company lobbied in Washington for its interests. Just like how other American corporations have benefited in the Middle East. The US is the villain, it was supplying weapons to those in opposition to Jacobo Arbenz. Like I said before, America can enjoy its dominance but the clock is ticking and all empires have an expiry date

Nope. The fault for that revolution and change of government lies squarely with the good people of Guatemala.

 

[Rasengan]

Nope. The fault for that revolution and change of government lies squarely with the good people of Guatemala.

How did you come to that conclusion? Did the good people of Guatemala tell you? Are you denying America's involvement?

 

[VCheng]

How did you come to that conclusion? Did the good people of Guatemala tell you? Are you denying America's involvement?

No, the facts speak for themselves. The government tried to implement reforms against the will of its own people and was removed by them as a result. They may have sought outside help, but the primary motivation for change of government came from within the country.

 

[Rasengan]

No, the facts speak for themselves. The government tried to implement reforms against the will of its own people and was removed by them as a result. They may have sought outside help, but the primary motivation for change of government came from within the country.

How can they have removed the Govt without weapons? I'm sure the good people of Guatemala didn't sing to change the Govt Jacobo Arbenz would have continued been the President if America didn't intervene. We can't revise history These land reforms benefited the majority. Look at the record of the US State Department on this issue. The person America backed Carlos Castillo Armas didn't even last three years. So we know what the people thought of him and his handlers.

 

[VCheng]

These land reforms benefited the majority.

Says who? What about the landowners? If the majority of the population supported the reforms, they could never have toppled the government. Look at what happened in Venezuela recently as an example.

 

[Rasengan]

Says who? What about the landowners? If the majority of the population supported the reforms, they could never have toppled the government. Look at what happened in Venezuela recently as an example.

The population of Guatemala was 3 million in 1954 of which this policy at the onset benefited half a million people. This percentage would have increased if the policy was given more time. It's not rocket science to understand that when you redistribute land from the rich to the poor on an equal footing then people benefit. It has happened in China during the early 50s until Mao was foolish enough for introducing the Great Leap Forward.

The landowners were in a minority. You can always topple a regime even if it has popular support. Venezuela is supported by Russia and China. Furthermore, the American's didn't supply the opposition weapons, but in Guatemala it did. This is a key distinction

 

[VCheng]

The population of Guatemala was 3 million in 1954 of which this policy at the onset benefited half a million people. This percentage would have increased if the policy was given more time. It's not rocket science to understand that when you redistribute land from the rich to the poor on an equal footing then people benefit. It has happened in China during the early 50s until Mao was foolish enough for introducing the Great Leap Forward.

The landowners were in a minority. You can always topple a regime even if it has popular support. Venezuela is supported by Russia and China. Furthermore, the American's didn't supply the opposition weapons, but in Guatemala it did. This is a key distinction

The fact remains that the impetus for changing governments comes from within a country. Outside powers cannot change that basic fact. Look at Turkey as another example. The coup against Erdogan failed. Similarly, Iran is another example. Try as outside powers might, the Islamic Revolution stays in power with the support of the majority of the people.

 

[gambit]

I was referring to America interfering in other people's business.

Right...Like meddling in other people's business is something unique to the US and Americans.

Hmmm...Let us see what China did to Singapore back in the Cold War, shall we...???

Chapter 37

Deng Xiaoping's China

The Malaysians must be suspicious of Deng. There were underlying suspicions and animosity between Malay Muslims and Chinese in Malaysia, and between Indonesians and their ethnic Chinese. Because China was exporting revolution to Southeast Asia, my Asean neighbors wanted Singapore to rally with them, not against the Soviet Union, but against China.

Asean governments regarded radio broadcasts from China appealing directly to their ethnic Chinese as dangerous subversion. Deng listened silently. He had never seen it this light: China, a big foreign power, going over the governments of the region to subvert their citizens. I said it was most unlikely that Asean countries would respond positively to his proposal for a united front against the Soviet Union and Vietnam and suggested that we discuss on how to resolve this problem. Then I paused.

Deng's expression and body language registered consternation. He knew that I had spoken the truth. Abruptly, he asked, "What do you want me to do?" I was astonished. I had never met a communist leader who was prepared to depart from his brief when confronted with reality, much less ask what I wanted him to do. I had expected him to brush my points aside as Premier Hua Guofeng had done in Beijing in 1976 when I pressed him over the inconsistency of China's supporting the Malayan Communist Party to foment revolution in Singapore, not Malaya. Hua had answered with bluster, "I do not know the details, but whenever communists fight, they will win." Not Deng. He realized that he had to face up to this problem if Vietnam was to be isolated. I hesitated to tell this seasoned, weather-beaten revolutionary what he should do, but since he had asked me, I said, "Stop such radio broadcasts; stop such appeals. It will be better for the ethnic Chinese in Asean if China does not underline their kinship and call upon their ethnic sympathy. The suspicion of the indigenous peoples will always be there, whether or not China emphasizes these blood ties. But if China appeals to these blood ties so blatantly, it must increase their suspicions, China must stop radio broadcasts from south China by the Malayan and Indonesian Communist Parties.

Soviet tanks rolling in and Kremlin thugs taking over are what exactly in your mind?

 

[Respect4Respect01]

Every nation, including USA, Iran and North Korea, are equally free to pursue their respective national interests as best as they can. Where is the hypocrisy in this statement?

so now you are saying USA shouldn't interfere with Iran and North Korea's nuclear programs?

Pakistani state does not want Iran to have nuclear weapons. they cannot tell it to Iran in public
they have USA and United Nations to do the dirty work for them

lol this is funny, i am delighted to hear that Pakistan can dictate and use USA for their dirty work.

North Korea and Iran are on Earth, no?

Membership in the UN is VOLUNTARY. No one forces anyone to join. But if you CHOSE to join, then like it or not, there are rules, written and unwritten, you must abide. I have in the past called for the US to withdraw from the UN. In the same vein, no one can force NKR and Iran to remain in the UN. You can call the UN 'useless' all you want, but the fact it exists and continues to be supported, including by US, means what it says have weight. The world so far tolerate the current nuclear weapons states conditions and no more. Deal with it.

they would not have any negative impact if they really did choose to give up UN Membership because currently they're not receiving any benefits from this useless organization. USA makes the largest contribution to their fund and then uses this organization to bully or invade other nations, for example legality of Iraq war is often debated and former UN secretary general once admitted invasion of Iraq was an illegal act.

 

[VCheng]

so now you are saying USA shouldn't interfere with Iran and North Korea's nuclear programs?

Nope. USA is free to pursue its own national interests as best as it can, just as any other country.

 

[Rasengan]

Right...Like meddling in other people's business is something unique to the US and Americans.

Hmmm...Let us see what China did to Singapore back in the Cold War, shall we...???

Gambit, when did I say no other country didn't interfere in the businesses of other states But there is no comparison to America, it's number one in this field and has caused the most harm from its policies.