Harry's Place

Six: the U.S. supports democracy in Bolivia:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/09/23/bolivia.morales/index.html

Seven: the U.S. supports democracy in Saudi Arabia:

http://www.slate.com/id/2103239/entry/2103433/

Eight: the U.S. supports democracy in Lebanon:

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/08/21/060821fa_fact

Nine: the U.S. supports democracy in Uzbekistan:

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2005/01/islam_karimov_a/

Ten: the U.S. supports democracy in Venezuela:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/apr/21/usa.venezuela

***

Should I tag this the Right?

I think you should retitle your article, who is more democratic: Che Guevara? or George W. Bush?

You can celebrate the good bits, overthrow of Batista, ridding Cuba of US imperialism, the literacy campaigns and still recognize that the regime has gone well beyond its sell by date.

You can celebrate the good bits, overthrow of Batista, ridding Cuba of US imperialism, the literacy campaigns and still recognize that the regime has gone well beyond its sell by date.

gray, I don’t think I could be that selective in my celebrating– especially when it’s called a “Chelebration” in honor of the murderous Stalinist Guevara.

Che, of course, was a gangster.

Which is why he is celebrated. Middle and upper class know-nothings want to be like him. To take the reins of power. To kill whoever they don’t like. To rule the world as they see fit. Its all so glorious, this ‘revolution’.

The sad thing is, there have been few ‘glorious’ revolutions in the history of the world. The last important ideological one was the American Revolution, and that only succeeded because of the wisdom of a group of revolutionaries to -end- the fucking thing after Britain was defeated, instead of keeping the ‘revolutionary’ spirit alive or some other bullshit.

Unending ‘revolution’ is a code word for fascism and totalitarianism. Always has been, always will be.

“The last important ideological one was the American Revolution.”

Is that the native Americans said as they were being cleansed?

Imagine if I said the Nazi Revolution was the last important ideological revolution. Nutter

Is that the native Americans said as they were being cleansed?

Imagine if I said the Nazi Revolution was the last important ideological revolution. Nutter

I’m not sure exactly where you learned your historical facts from, though I could wager a guess. However, let me set things straight: The American Revolution was not the cause or the impetus toward the destruction of the native population.

Native Americans had been warred upon (or had made war upon Europeans) since Columbus landed on Hispaniola. Last I checked, USA-Americans were not the only peoples to have engaged in such despicable acts, and in terms of outright genocide, they were not the worst. That honor goes to the Spanish.

Also forgotten/little commented upon by “some” is the indisputable fact of constant internecine warfare among the various North American/Central American Indian tribes–to include many activities that some people today would label as genocidal. (lets try 10,000 sacrificed alive in one day during the reign of the Azetcs, for example) To say that these activities far, far, pre-dated the introduction of Europeans to the Western Hemisphere would be an understatement.

“What’s really funny is people actually believed this baloney. The U.N. is an organization of governments that naturally serves the interests of governments. It can be no other thing.”

nonono!!!!!

I remember my intro to US history book (at Northwestern). One of the first pages said “native warfare led to few casualties” and the next page said “because of the massive gender imbalance due to warfarer, polygamy happened

Blah,

actualy, one important cause of the war was Britain had blocked westward territorial expansion in order to ally itself with the native nations.

And let’s remember who actually won the American war of Independence – that’s right, the French. Figure that one out.

Also, wasn’t the Carnation Revolution a good revolution (especially the bit with the rejection of the Maoists?). What about the Velvet Revolution?

It is really shocking to see British trade unions leading celebrations for a country where trade unions are banned.

Zin is still MIA?

who is more democratic: Che Guevara? or George W. Bush

Unfortunately, George W. Bush.

Nice try Dave. Che helped bring about a dictatorship in Cuba, helped rule it for a while, then went to spread dictatorship to other countries. He supported dictatorships across the world. Did he ever support any democracy anywhere?

Compare this to the contrived list of failing produced by Matt.

Sad efforts by both of you. Care to try again?

Sorry Dave misread that.

Andy Newman is clearly one dumb and credulous cunt-like Castro in North Korea, you might believe the Cuban government line that it is a socialist paradise and that Varadero (for example) is just a normal Cuban town, not a Disneyland for tourists, until you see the gangs of beggars and prostitutes in Havana, the poor living conditions, imprisoned dissidents…does he really, sincerely believe that Castro’s Cuba is a fantastic place for most of its citizens?

Imagine if I said the Nazi Revolution was the last important ideological revolution. Nutter

To equate the appropriation of Indian lands – not something I would do, commonplace in a different time etc. etc. – with the expanse of Lebensraum try to imagine Himmler calling his children Pocahontas or Tecumseh, or Anatevka being a village name in even the old European American settlements.

Where indeed is Zin?

I have alterted Comrade Proyect.

Good. I like him, real sort-of-chap-I’d-like-dating-my-sister.

Che was the doctrinaire thug of the revolution and his input made it far more bloody than was necessary to gain power.

A far more worthy hero of the revolution is Camilo Cienfuegos

As a complete aside, the Che Guevara celebration poster above advertises an outfit called the “Movimentos Sound System”. As far as I know, movement in Spanish is “movimiento”. So your wannabee Che groupies pick a cool, Spanish revolutionary sounding name but can’t even be bothered to check a dictionary. Utter, utter, posing, ignorant, misguided cunts!

I had that Shane Gevara in the back of my cab…

Also forgotten/little commented upon by “some” is the indisputable fact of constant internecine warfare among the various North American/Central American Indian tribes–to include many activities that some people today would label as genocidal.

The Comanche acquired their territory in Texas by seizing it from the Apache and were carrying out murderous raids on American settlers before they had even encroached on their land. I wonder if Shit Guevara would have treated Quanah Parker as well as the Americans did after he had surrendered.

I find my way half way between Andy Newman’s post and Gene’s.

I’m all for greater democracy in Cuba, but also recognise achievements and change. I want future change controlled by the Cuban people – not at the behest of the Washington, the IMF, World Bank, and I want achievements secured and built upon by the Cuban people.

What to do? I would love it if it was possible to carry out a reliable opinion poll probing the views of folk in Cuba on these matters.

“A far more worthy hero of the revolution is Camilo Cienfuegos”

Widely thought to have been murdered by Castro, of course (in Cuba, at least).

It was Cienfuegos who gave Guevara the iconic beret, as you may or may not know. Before that Guevara had been known for wearing a stetson. The two swapped headgear one night as a gesture of fraternal solidaity. Touching.

I would love it if it was possible to carry out a reliable opinion poll probing the views of folk in Cuba on these matters.

There is such a thing Benji, it is called an election.

“What to do? I would love it if it was possible to carry out a reliable opinion poll probing the views of folk in Cuba on these matters.”

“I’m a stranger with a clipboard. Lord knows who sent me. Do you support the regime, or should I just tear up your ration card right here and now?

Benjamin,

The Cuban people have no democratic voice-your “greater democracy” implies they already have some. I agree that ideally Cubans should sort things out for themselves but what with living in a dictatorship and all, this is a bit of a tall order.

Most likely things will (only) begin to change once the Chuckle Brothers have snuffed it…

Yes, Mesquito, that’s why its rather difficult to carry out a reliable opinion poll.

Barad,

I am not sure of the exact arrangements in Cuba. I guess it rather depends on whether you see the glass half empty or half full. For example, since the fall of Mao, in China, that country has been experimenting in very limited and contained democracy, and there have been other changes. Far from satisfactory, but things don’t remain the same.

Ironically, I regard China as more repressive than Cuba, with a worse human rights record, and the US is pretty friendly with it, healthy trade relations etc. So the sanctions on Cuba are clearly a nonsense.

Anyway, as the FBU is involved, this celebration is clearly incendiary.

The U.S. government and human rights groups estimate that 150,000 to 200,000 people are now being held in the North’s prison camps.

Did you know that the US dropped 2 million tons of bombs on Kampuchea and Laos? That’s more than the total dropped by all Allied powers in WWII.

One of the pilots who went on napalm bombing missions was one John S. McCain.

Should the whole Cuban revolution be judged by a state visit to North Korea? Should all of America be judged by American atrocities in Vietnam, even if 47% of the electorate supported one of the unrepentant perpetrators?

I mean, if I were you I wouldn’t try self-righteousness. It usually backfires.

So the story is that one group of totally corrupt murdering gangsters replaced another group of totally corrupt murdering gangsters?

Rather depressing is it not?

“Should the whole Cuban revolution be judged by a state visit to North Korea?”

You think that’s the only thing that has gone wrong with the Cuban revolution?

Should the whole Cuban revolution be judged by a state visit to North Korea?

There’s also the slight matter of 50 years of maintaining a totalitarian one-party State in Cuba, with some of the longest serving political prisoners in the world and extra-judicial killings of people who were simply trying to flee the Communist paradise.

Should all of America be judged by American atrocities in Vietnam, even if 47% of the electorate supported one of the unrepentant perpetrators?

Comparing what America did to its enemies in a war to what Cuba does to its own people in peacetime? In any case, American atrocities in Indochina were on a far smaller scale to those committed by the Communists that the US sadly failed to stop.

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM

The U.S. government and human rights groups estimate that 150,000 to 200,000 people are now being held in the North’s prison camps.

Did you know that the US dropped 2 million tons of bombs on Kampuchea and Laos? That’s more than the total dropped by all Allied powers in WWII.

Did you know that the Khmer government of Kampuchea forced millions of its best and brightest to work to death in labor camps, resulting in the decimation of the nation’s population? That’s more than the total number of civilians killed by car bombings in Iraq!

Benjamin,

“Ironically, I regard China as more repressive than Cuba, with a worse human rights record, and the US is pretty friendly with it, healthy trade relations etc. So the sanctions on Cuba are clearly a nonsense.”

I agree on both counts actually. However your earlier point was that change in Cuba should only ideally come from Cubans (as we have heard about Iraq under SH) and my point was that change was unlikely or impossible under the current Cuban dictatorship (as it was in Iraq pre-war).

The Hasbara Buster:

Whatever the merits or demerits of the bombing campaign in Laos and Cambodia, it would help their credibility if it’s critics got their facts straight. John McCain flew for the Navy from Naval aircraft carriers who were only tasked against N. Vietnam. McCain never flew a single mission over Laos or Cambodia. Secondly, napalm is used primarily against troops in the field in close air support–so civilian casualties from it’s use are rare. And in any event the sort of bombing McCain did was high altitude dive-bombing using HE (high explosive) bombs and rockets against “hard” targets like power-plants, steel mills, etc.
Bone up on your military history and knowledge of military tactics and operations before you toss around off the wall statements in attempts to make a political point, ok? There are other ways to make the same point without laying yourself open to the charge of abject ignorance.

PS to the Hasbara Buster:

To further nail down a point perhaps prthaps not made clear, let me say that I do not know of a SINGLE MISSION that John McCain flew in combat that involved the use of Napalm (not that it makes any moral difference to me–I just want to be crystal clear in setting the factual record straight)

OT, but related: “Mugabe declares, ‘There is No Cholera’” in Zimbabwe at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/12/12/world/main4664874.shtml?tag=topHome;topStories

Coming up: Stalin declares there is no famine in the Ukraine!

I hate the word Revolution, mostly because I am a realist and not an idealist. They rarely do change human nature, that said I do love the rightwing queasiness with the gringo independence, they would love to go back in time and call it something else, That revolution was genocidal as already pointed out.

Flanksteak: apparently everything you take issue with is “genocidal.” Change ur rant, it’s very tedious and boring (not to mention stupid and ahistorical).

virgil:

You would be well-advised to read Michael Walzer’s Just and Unjust Wars. The book describes how pro-Vietcong villages were first bombed after their inhabitants were evacuated; then they were bombed after a warning was given that the villagers should leave; and finally they were bombed with no warning at all. That amounts to the mass killing of civilians, whether it’s with Napalm or not.

McCain never flew a single mission over Laos or Cambodia.

Could you please provide a link to McCain’s war record.

And in any event the sort of bombing McCain did was high altitude dive-bombing using HE (high explosive) bombs and rockets against “hard” targets like power-plants, steel mills, etc.

In other words, he bombed civilian targets. QED.

There are other ways to make the same point without laying yourself open to the charge of abject ignorance.

Our readers might note that you hold on to cherry-picked details that don’t fundamentally change the picture. Just like Holocaust deniers who point out that soap was not made from Jews, that Wagner was never played in concentration camps or that Auschwitz survivors have on occasion given contradictory testimony.

US soldiers have testified to having randomly killed civilians, including women and children, dumped prisoners from helicopters, mutilated dead bodies, etc. See, for instance, here.

Comparing what America did to its enemies in a war to what Cuba does to its own people in peacetime?

Well, you know, there’s this thing called human rights, and you’ve got to respect them everywhere, not just at home. The Cubans killed dissidents who wanted to flee communism, and the Americans killed civilian villagers who wanted to live under communism. The equivalency is perfect.

So let infant mortality rate decide. And it turns out that despite the huge difference in natural resources and GDP, the US lags behind Cuba in the number of children who die before their first year of life. The fact that a poor country is able to provide quality health care to all its inhabitants is certainly a reason to celebrate.

Questions of morality and letigimacy aside, it seems to me that the current sad state of affairs in Cuba is certainly reflective of the utter stupidity of it’s leadership. Communist China, equally if not far more repressive has managed to cunningly reap the rewards of capitalism without the democracy bit, yet Cuba has not managed the same trick. And why, except for stupidity, has it not? After all, only the US maintains sanctions against it; the rest of the world is free to trade as they please, and would be as eager to do so as they are with China if only Fidel et al were only smart enough to figure it out.

Fizzin soda says that:

“In any case, American atrocities in Indochina were on a far smaller scale to those committed by the Communists that the US sadly failed to stop”

Sorry Fizzin Soda, that link is to Rudolph Rummel who is not a serious scholar of genocides or the Vietnam war.

The genocide scholar Tomislav Dulic at the “Uppsala Programme for Holocaust and Genocide Studies” has made a detailed analysis of Rummel’s methods and concluded that it is;

“largely based on hearsay and unscholarly claims frequently made by highly biased authors.”

The analysis used Yugoslavia as a test case, but according to Dulic the same is true for other parts of Rummel’s works.

http://jpr.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/41/1/85

Edwin Moise a scholar of the Vietnam has looked at Rummmel’s work on the the vietnam war and concluded that it was “*really* inept scholarship.”

“One of the things that most tend to inflate his totals are cases where a single episode of killing GETS COUNTED TWICE, OR MORE THAN TWICE.”

http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=h-diplo&month=0004&week=d&msg=eZtr/fUhkFYlalYABhU4RQ&user=&pw=

http://www.clemson.edu/caah/history/facultypages/EdMoise/atroc.html.

It is true that some of the things the NLF and the North vietnamese did was quite horrible, but the things the US and their South Vietnamese allied did was many times worse.

The fact that a poor country is able to provide quality health care to all its inhabitants is certainly a reason to celebrate.

What a joke.

The analysis used Yugoslavia as a test case, but according to Dulic the same is true for other parts of Rummel’s works.

Silly liars like you always shoot themselves in the foot. Without going into any discussions about figures, let’s just consider the claim you make above. What does Dulic actually say in the article you linked to, which is supposed to back it up?

“Although the article concentrates on communist terror in former Yugoslavia, the results may have wider implications for Rummel’s research if he uses similar sources in other case studies.”

So where is it that Dulic says that he has shown Rummel to be wrong with regard to Vietnam or “other parts of Rummel’s works”?

The answer is: Dulic doesn’t say so. You just couldn’t help exaggerating, ironically in a post condemning exaggeration. Why do morons like you even bother?

“Flanksteak: apparently everything you take issue with is “genocidal.” ”

Yes I take issue with genocide, in particular nuclear genocide.

“It is true that some of the things the NLF and the North vietnamese did was quite horrible, but the things the US and their South Vietnamese allied did was many times worse.”

You would be saying the same thing about South Korea if North Korea had won. Also its funny how you brought up Cambodia before but now seem to have made it disappear from your analysis.

I have never claimed that Dulic written anything specificaly about vietnam, the post I wrote was not specificaly about vietnam, but about Rummel’s reliability as a scholar. I am sorry if my post was not clear about that point.

The first part of the post is about Dulics critisism of Rummel’s METHODOLOGY wich is the same for his entire work, Dulics point is that if Rummel’s methodology is wrong none of his other research is reliable.

Quoting from the actual article;

“One problem lies in the erroneous assumption that There are additional reasons why Rummel’s method may lead to systematic overestimation of the mid-estimates. One problem lies in the erroneous assumption that overestimations tend to be ‘taken out’ by underestimations inherent in the error range principle”

And later in the same chapter;

“In other words to reach a plausible figure by using Rummel’s method, we would have to rely on many underestimations to ‘take out’ single overestimations to ‘take out’ single overestimations. In the case of the Holocaust, that would mean ‘narrowing down’ single unscholary overestimations by relying on underestimations by several Holocaust deniers.”

The second part of the post is specificaly about vietnam, but by another scholar (moise), I thought that was clear from my post.

I am sorry if my first post was unclear, I wanted to make it as short as posible even thought it would need to be a lot longer.

Mr Danger says;

“Also its funny how you brought up Cambodia before but now seem to have made it disappear from your analysis.”

I have never mention Cambodia in my posts I think you are confusing me with “virgil xenophon”

The reason I never mention Cambodia, is that it is irrelevant to the question, my post was about the reliability of Rummel as a scholar not about the Vietnam war.

The first part of the post is about Dulics critisism of Rummel’s METHODOLOGY wich is the same for his entire work

You have not proven this and Dulic does not prove this. Another lie from you.

Dulics point is that if Rummel’s methodology is wrong none of his other research is reliable..

Dulic says something quite different — quoting from the article: “the results may have wider implications for Rummel’s research if he uses similar sources in other case studies”

You are utterly incapable of treating this material honestly. Go away.

I told you that Philosophy Football had a funny thing for the Castro dictatorship!!

This kind of silliness gives the Left, and equally importantly Islington, a bad name (looking at where the party is being held)!

I can’t remember Thompson’s Solicitors and the unions organising a party in a groovy Islington bar to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the NHS. And the NHS is a better advert for socialism than Che and the Castro regime. But it gets ignored because it’s not so photogenic and its catchphrases are not so groovy (the best they could do for a poster would be a picture of Nye Bevan meeting some patients and then the promise ‘Free care at the point of delivery’)

*too much groove. Preview box please!!

T-H-B@ 4:11pm

Where to begin.(sigh) So many straw men. First, I made no attempt (although would be glad to do so) to opine about the morality of the Vietnam war itself. Secondly, no I can’t provide a link to McCain’s war record at this time, but I challenge you to prove me wrong. Anyone with even a nodding acquaintance of the history of the war knows that Naval carrier-based aviation flew almost 90+% of their missions against N. Vietnam with the rest in S. Vietnam in I-Corps only. None were flown in Laos nor Cambodia from Naval carriers as logistics alone precluded this. QED

As for steel plants, etc., being civilian targets? The enemies war-making capacity has always been considered fair game–unless, that is, you consider practically every strategic bombing mission flown by the Allies in every theater of the war in WWII to constitute war crimes. Do you?

As for atrocities, I will opine that such things have occurred in
every war in history on an individual level, and Vietnam was no exception-although the story in the NYT article you link to is full of serious errors and and distortions in the opinion of someone who was there during that time period in I-Corps (the northern part of S. Vietnam in which Quang Nam and Quang-Ngai are located) of which the article speaks. Firstly, Ouang Nam and Quang-Ngai are not part of the “Central Highlands” od S. Vietnam–that area was located in II Corps immediately to the South. Operation Tiger mentioned in the articles covered both southern I-Corps and northern II-Corps for the record.. (Additionally left out is the fact that a third province was involved in Operation Tiger, Thua Thien, which sits between Quang-Ngai to it’s south and Quang Nam, which contains the regional capital, DaNang, above it to the north) as I spent time as a Forward Air controller (FAC) in that region during that time period I was fairly familiar with Air-Ground operations and intelligence. The ONLY “free-fire” zones of which the article speaks were in the uninhabited (except for VC/NVA) mountainous/jungle regions. All other “free-fire” zones of which journalists so often mis-speak in and around populated areas were in actuality designated as “Specified Strike Zones” (SSZs)
that required the approval of a FAC (Me) before aerial bombing was allowed. And this permission was granted only after the target was cleared by contacting the I-Corps Direct Air Support Center (I-DASC; a joint USAF/VNAF operation) which was co-located with the I-Corps Tactical Operations Center (I-TOC; a joint MACV [US ARMY ADVISORS]/ARVN operation)as to whether the village in question was on the list of “bad guys.” As we were querying our Vietnamese counterparts via this process–the very one’s who should know–and getting their permission, it could hardly be said that we were cavalier about the matter. This procedure went so far as having the ARVN in the TOC call down the land-lines to query the District Chief (political) as to the advisability of an airstrike on the village in question, i.e., in his baliwick. Did District Chiefs sometimes abuse the system to use airstrikes to eliminate political opponents and their supporters via this process? (e.g., rival Village Chiefs resisting in payment of taxes, etc.) Ans: Undoubtedly yes, but we tried our utmost to use “Kentucky Windage” in these matters to account for known rivalries.

As to atrocities perpetrated by ground ops let me say this: First, to whatever extent they did happen, none were EVER officially sanctioned by “higher authorities.” Did some commanders run a “loose-ship” and turn a blind eye to many things in striving for a high body count upon which their promotion (as Col Hackworth and others have pointed out) depended? Unfortunately yes, and it is a black mark on the Army’s honor and jugement that it instituted a “body-count” as an index of operational success, and then let it become perverted in the way it was. (But I would say also that in this matter the Army seemingly cannot win–in Iraq it has been criticized for the opposite reason by the media for FAILING to provide body counts–something the Army has eschewed EXACTLY in order not to repeat the Vietnam experience)

As to the sources cited in the NYT article I would say many are either highly suspect or have been totally discredited. I haven’t read Walzers book (although I’ve heard some
good things about it.) But if he levels the charge of “mass killings” of civiulians (or is that YOUR characterization?) I would seriously take issue with him. Firstly, I can vouch from my own personal experience that not only were civilians NEVER expressly targeted in either North or South Vietnam; but that we were EXTREMELY cautious about targets in civilian areas–often putting our own lives at risk–as in when the N. Vietnamese would put anti-aircraft guns on the top of hospitals in direct defiance of the Geneva Conventions. Thus I absolutely and categorically reject the charge that American forces EVER perpetrating “mass killings of civilians through their exclusively being targeted.

As for Lewy and Schell, both are discredited jokes, although both sit on my bookshelf (know your enemy) and are known rabid anti-American hacks. There isn’t time enough to go into their exaggerations and distortions–some of which have been proven to have been made up out of whole cloth. As for Kerry and the Vietnam Veterans Against the War’s “Winter Soldier” project? Again, a joke now wholly discredited. First, Kerry has re-canted (changed his story) and now claims that he, personally, neither witnessed nor took part in ANY of the examples of “atrocities” he cited before Congress–that NONE of what he described to Congress was from his own personal experience, but was only hearsay. Second, many of those attending the 3-day “Winter Soldier” conference cited in your linked article have been proven to be outright frauds. Some were never in the military at all (poseurs.) Others were, but had never served in Vietnam, a close inspection of their records showed. And some falsely claimed to have been officers when they in fact had been enlisted men. Anything coming out of that “conference” is a shaky reed upon which to build an argument, kind sir.

I think our real argument is twofold: First, you conflate civilians accidently killed as part of normal, officially approved military operations with civilian deaths occurring via unapproved (though genuine) atrocities. This is unacceptable as any kind of discrete or meaningful analysis. Second, to the degree to which you view ANY civilian casualties at all as unacceptable and/or criminal/immoral is absolutely ludicrous. As the late Oriana Fallaci–herself a victim of Allied bombing in WWII–took great pains to point out, such widespread civilian deaths as unfortunately occurred were nonetheless forgiven by the Italians as necessary as the only way that the totalitarian yoke could be broken. And for you to imply that all “civilian villagers” who died “wanted to live under Communism” is as laughable as those who pretended that everyone living in the Soviet Union were just one big lot of patriotic, Communist supporting happy campers. You also seem to be implying that large numbers of civilian deaths are never justified, period. Or am I wrong? Has there ever been a time or a war in which you think they have been?

Dulic’s critique of Rummel’s methodology is bollocks unless you have an a priori reason to believe that certain estimates are biased either upwards or downwards. Rummel’s work has been published in peer reviewed journals.

Anyway, here are estimates, from a wide range of sources, for civilian deaths in the Vietnam War. Note that does not include the killings from the political repression that occurred after the Communist victory in 1975. Were the crimes of the Americans and South Vietnam “many times worse” than those of the Communists? Judge for yourself:

• • Misc. Atrocities:
o Lewy:
 36,725 civilians assassinated by VC/NVA, 1957-72
 2,800 civilians executed and 3,000 missing after Hue was captured by VC/NVA, 1968
 400 civilians massacred by USAns in the area of Son My village, incl. 175-200 in My Lai hamlet, 1968
 Because of the lack of weapons recovered from many bodies, Lewy considers the possibility that up to 222,000 VC KIA may have actually been innocent bystanders. (Or maybe not. Poor evidence either way.)
o Harff & Gurr: 475,000 civilians in NLF areas were victims of repressive politicide, 1965-72
o Young: Hue massacre, 1968:
 Officially: 2,800-5,700
 Len Ackland: 300-400
o Chomsky (1987): 21,000 VC civilian officials assassinated under US/GVN Phoenix project (-in text. Endnote gives estimates ranging 40-48,000.). Lewy considers these to be (mostly) legitimate military targets.
o October 22, 2003 Toledo Blade: Tiger Force (US) committed ongoing atrocities in Quang Nam province, July-Nov 1967. Incomplete records show 81 murders. The unit reported 1000+ enemies killed, but it sounds like a lot of those weren’t legit. From the article details, I’d guess they murdered a few hundred (300±) civilians. [http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20031022/SRTIGERFORCE/110190169]
o Hanson:
 VN civilians k. by indiscriminate American bombing: 50,000
 VN civilians k. by indiscriminate Communist rocketing, artillery and terrorism: 400,000
o Rummel:
 51,000 democides by South Vietnam (1963-75), incl…
 executions: 30,000
 forced relocations: 5,000 dead
 prison deaths: 5,000
 166,000 democides by NVN/VC in SVN:
 Officials assassinated: 17,000
 Civilians assassinated: 49,000
 Refugees killed, 1975: 50,000
 Misc: 50,000
 6,000 democides by USA

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstatx.htm

“You have not proven this and Dulic does not prove this. Another lie from you.”

I am not sure I know what the “Lie” is. Are you saying I have to prove to you that Rummel’s methodology is the same through all his work? If it is not his work would not be much useful at all! or are you saying that Dulic doesn’t criticise Rummel’s methodology?

“Dulic says something quite different – quoting from the article: “the results may have wider implications for Rummel’s research if he uses similar sources in other case studies”"

No you are citing the ABSTRACT I am quoting the ARTICLE.

I have never said that all of Rummel’s work is wrong, quite the contrary a lot of things he says is correct, what is problematic is that Rummel is unreliable (you can’t trust him), he doesn’t have enough knowledge about what he writes (as moise proves) and more importantly he assumes that biased sources will balance each other out, the point of Dulic’s article is that they don’t seem to do that.

Well, letts look at another example one that is easier to check, Chile;

Most figures for number och Chileans killed under the Pinnochet years are at or below 3000 dead, the Rettig Repport that are usualy considered the most reliable source, list 2,279 dead.

http://www.usip.org/library/tc/doc/reports/chile/chile_1993_toc.html

Rummel however list 10,000 dead as the most probably number, that’s more than 3 times as manny as the rettig report!

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB15.1A.GIF

Do you still consider Rummel to be a reliable source?

Hiya Gene and all

Che et al are representatives of the nearly dead ideology of Leninism. Who gives a shit about their anti socialist theories.

These people peddled lies and the so sad thing is idiots bought those lies at face value and peddled them on, deluding still more. Golden anti socialist propaganda for who would want to get rid of capitalism if North Korea or Cuba or… is held up as a new society.

Said it before, will say it again. Soviet Russia et al were never socialist. The Left are deluded Leninist loons. And capitalism is not the good life. Look at your system quacking at its boots right now pro capitalists.

“Dulic’s critique of Rummel’s methodology is bollocks unless you have an a priori reason to believe
that certain estimates are biased either upwards or downwards. ”

His critique is that Rummel doesn’t make any effort to remove biased sources, but just assumes that they will even out each other, Dulic’s article says that they doesn’t seem to do that (at least not in the case he examines).

It does not meen that he always does that, but it makes him unreliable, you can’t trust him.

“Rummel’s work has been published in peer reviewed journals. ”

A lot of nonsense has.

“Anyway, here are estimates, from a wide range of sources, for civilian deaths in the Vietnam War.
Note that does not include the killings from the political repression that occurred after the
Communist victory in 1975. Were the crimes of the Americans and South Vietnam “many times worse”
than those of the Communists? Judge for yourself:”

That link has the same problem as Rummel’s work, it just list a lot of sources without any effort to
weed out unreliable or outdated sources and then he calculates an median.

The tables given by Rummel actually cite the raw numbers from all the sources he has used. If some of these sources were unreliable that would affect his estimates. This does not invalidate his statistical methodology or make Rummel “unreliable”. If you believe any of his sources are untrustworthy you can simply exclude them from your own estimates.

And capitalism is not the good life. Look at your system quacking at its boots right now pro capitalists.

Capitalism is not the good life one damn bit. But it is the only system which has allowed the poor and uneducated the chance through luck and/or hard work to become richer and educated.

Unions, though. That’s the stuff if you want free money. UAW members, some of which have not graduated high school, are making more money than I am. ($28/hour with pension and extraordinary health benefits for a blue-collar autoworker; ~$20/hour without pension and far fewer health benefits for a hard working PhD in Physics teaching at a small private college.)

I would have never known this if it wasn’t for the auto bailout being all over the news. Finally, I feel like a real college revolutionary: Fuck those Rich Unionized Bastards.

I am not sure I know what the “Lie” is. Are you saying I have to prove to you that Rummel’s methodology is the same through all his work?

Yes, that is the lie you told. You not only have to prove that his methodology is the same — you also have to prove that it gives consistently the wrong results, which can only by done by examining it case by case. You haven’t done any of that, and neither has Dulic. Be he at least, minding his academic reputation, is careful not to draw any conclusions further than the limited evidence allows. You being an Commie Internet Fanboy have no such reservations, apparently.

No you are citing the ABSTRACT I am quoting the ARTICLE.

I am quoting the ARTICLE that YOU linked to so as to justify the claim you made in your comment. If the ARTICLE and not the ABSTRACT supported your claim (which I doubt) you should have linked to that instead. As it is, the article you did link to DOES NOT support your claim.

His critique is that Rummel doesn’t make any effort to remove biased sources, but just assumes that they will even out each other

Actually, that is a methodology which is used by any number of historical researchers, and not just Rummel.

Really, there’s far too many basic, “methodological” errors in your comments to take them seriously any more, Bjorn. Perhaps you might remove the beam from thine own before before complaining about the mote in Rummel’s?

Ethan

the Corus workers have discussed taking a pay reduction to save their jobs.

Anyway, your point is a tadge silly. Woolies looks likely to go to the wall with some 30,000 people facing the sack. The troubles in US car production and thus the future of jobs directly or indirectly linked to it is uncertain following the rejection of a 15 million bailout. (Who is wailing for cash here)

Without Unions the workers would be back to the robber baron capitalism of the 1800s.

Not that I say better unions as my goal. I say get rid of the whole capitalist system!

Unions, though. That’s the stuff if you want free money. UAW members, some of which have not graduated high school, are making more money than I am. ($28/hour with pension and extraordinary health benefits for a blue-collar autoworker; ~$20/hour without pension and far fewer health benefits for a hard working PhD in Physics teaching at a small private college.)

I would have never known this if it wasn’t for the auto bailout being all over the news. Finally, I feel like a real college revolutionary: Fuck those Rich Unionized Bastards.

So will it make you feel better if the unionized auto workers’ wages are cut, their health benefits slashed and their pensions eliminated? Seems you’ve got things backwards. Perhaps the problem isn’t that they have “too much” (and which is just a drop in the ocean compared to what the truly rich have) but that the rest (including physics teachers) have too little.

The tables given by Rummel actually cite the raw numbers from all the sources he has used. If some of these sources were unreliable that would affect his estimates.

Exactly!

“This does not invalidate his statistical methodology or make Rummel “unreliable”. If you believe any of his sources are untrustworthy you can simply exclude them from your own estimates.”

In other words, I should do Rummel’s work for him.

The problem with Rummel is that he deliberatly uses biased sources;

“Critics of my work have often pointed out my use of “right wing”
sources, while they ignore those from the “left,” or communists. This
has been a misunderstanding of my methods. I have tried to use
communist, left wing, and right wing sources, to bracket not only the
low and high for the democide, but to also make sure I understood the
several interpretations of events. Of course, I also tried to consult
the major “objective” academic/research sources.”

http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=h-genocide&month=0108&week=b&msg=31qNlQy9sCRe3npNiqO3PQ&user=&pw=

In other words he asumes that biased “right wing” sources will balance biased “left wing sources”.

It is not an error, it is his methodology.

“…You haven’t done any of that, and neither has Dulic. Be he at least, minding his academic reputation, is careful not to draw any conclusions further than the limited evidence allows. ”

I have given you three case examples of Rummel, Yugoslavia, Vietnam and Chile. There are
many other examples I could give you more exanples if you wan’t.

My point is that if he is unreliable about to many cases that meen we can’t trust him to do a good job on other cases, it is like the “boy calling wolf”.

“You being an Commie Internet Fanboy have no such reservations, apparently.”

Name calling! Seriously!

“Iam quoting the ARTICLE that YOU linked to so as to justify the claim you made in your comment.”

I quoted as long as I could, you have to log in to read the actual article (wich unfortunately cost money if you are not at a library).

“Actually, that is a methodology which is used by any number of historical researchers, and not just Rummel.”

The differense with most of these researchers is that Rummel deals almost entirely with secondhand sources (other historians), if he worked mainly with first hand sources like eg. reffuge accounts it would be another matter.

My point is that if he is unreliable about to many cases that meen we can’t trust him to do a good job on other cases, it is like the “boy calling wolf”.

Sure. And maybe the USSR really was a workers’ paradise with every man an Aristotle working to turn the seas into lemonade.

Thus I absolutely and categorically reject the charge that American forces EVER perpetrating “mass killings of civilians through their exclusively being targeted.”

Well this reminds me of President Truman’s remark that Hiroshima contained a military base and thus it was not an attack on civilians.

What you’re saying to me is that if you can don a fig leaf, then you’re not a mass murderer. For instance, if 5 VC’s were hiding in a hamlet of 100 civilians and all 105 got killed, then you did not engage in the mass killing of noncombatants; you just targeted 5 terrrorists and unfortunately collateral damage did occur.

However, there is a principle of proportionality. Viet Nam was a clear disproportionate war. Which leads us to:

I think our real argument is twofold: First, you conflate civilians accidently killed as part of normal, officially approved military operations with civilian deaths occurring via unapproved (though genuine) atrocities.

Even the Nazis knew that they couldn’t set forth their genocidal orders in writing. The nut of the problem is not whether the atrocities were formally approved or not; it’s whether they were tolerated or even encouraged. The body-count doctrine clearly leads to mass killings.

In this sense, Operation Speedy Express, for instance, was a clear case of disproportionate warfare, with 10,899 Vietnamese dead but only 748 weapons captured. As a soldier put it, “Nobody ever gave direct orders to ’shoot civilians’ that I know of, but the results didn’t show any different than if…they had ordered it. The Vietnamese were dead, victims of the body count pressure and nobody cared enough to try to stop it.”

This soldier clarifies that their orders were not to kill civilians, but to kill anyone who ran. Thus, to increase the body count, helicopters would hover over peasants until they got scared and ran; then they killed them.

I’ll be curious, did you learn of any atrocity in your unit?

“Sure. And maybe the USSR really was a workers’ paradise with every man an Aristotle working to turn the seas into lemonade.”

That is certainly not my opinion, there are good historians that has written extensibly on the horrors of USSR. There is absolutly no need to use clowns like Rummel to prove it.

By the way if my reason for writing my post was to defend Stalinism why would I accuse Rummel of EXAGERATING the deaths under Pinochet?

“The problem with Rummel is that he deliberatly uses biased sources;”

He deliberately uses as wide range a range of sources as possible. That doesn’t mean he is seeking to bias his results in one direction or another. I cited a range of sources giving estimates of civilian deaths in Vietnam inflicted by the US military and its Communist adversaries. They do not suggest that the US caused “many times” more deaths than the Communists. In fact, they suggest the opposite. If only refugee testimony were used, the results would be highly biased against the Communists because the vast majority of refugees fled from areas they controlled, both before and after the war.

“Even the Nazis knew that they couldn’t set forth their genocidal orders in writing.”

The Communists in Vietnam and Cambodia killed far more in PEACETIME than the Americans killed during the war which tried to stop them. Direct your accusations of genocide to where they belong.

“He deliberately uses as wide range a range of sources as possible. That doesn’t mean he is seeking to bias his results in one direction or another.”

I have never accused him of that, what I said multiple times is that his assumption that his highly biased sources will balance out each other and he will magicaly end up with a reliable estimate. My point is that he don’t end up with one.

To quote Dulic again;

“In the case of the Holocaust, that would mean ‘narrowing down’ single unscholary overestimations by relying on underestimations by several Holocaust deniers.”

What is even more serious with Rummel as a source is that even if we assume that Rummel’s sources is unpecable (wich they arent) he is reading them wrong because he has very little knowledge about the countrys he resarches, wich is Moises point (even Dulic writes a little about that).

If you think Rummel’s work is a reliable how do you account for his 3 times exagerated Chile bodycount?

So will it make you feel better if the unionized auto workers’ wages are cut, their health benefits slashed and their pensions eliminated? Seems you’ve got things backwards. Perhaps the problem isn’t that they have “too much” (and which is just a drop in the ocean compared to what the truly rich have) but that the rest (including physics teachers) have too little.

Well there are a couple of solutions to this. One is to, of course, take what the rich UAW imperialist industrialists have and spread the wealth around. That would only be fair, of course. They certainly don’t do any more or less work than I do, so why should I be compensated less?

Another is to look at the idea of the modern Union and find exactly how far away from their original purposes they have drifted. The modern UAW doesn’t force companies to provide safe working conditions, OSHA and the threat of legal action does. The UAW, however, does lobby to have the wages and benefits of their membership increased to financially untenable levels for the employers in the long term.

Of course, neither of those two options are really all that attractive to the Left. How dare a white collar worker complain about the “lower middle class” unionized autoworkers? How dare anyone complain about unions being greedy?

I fail to see how capitalism is at fault this time.

“The Communists in Vietnam and Cambodia killed far more in PEACETIME than the Americans killed during the war which tried to stop them.”

You can’t blaim Vietnam for what Cambodia did, or vice versa, they were separate entities, enemies even. The Khemer Rouge wouldn’t even exist if it wasn’t for the Vietnam war.

The vietnamese alone didn’t kill anywere near the number killed during the war, unless you rely on sources like Rummel (but even he had to add the Cambodian deaths).

T-H-B:

So–again I ask you for a second time; do you consider every Allied pilot in every theater of war in WWII whose bombs killed more civilians than soldiers to be a mass murderer? It seems to me your take on this question greatly defines/frames your line of reasoning in how ou view all subsequent armed conflicts–I think. So please enlighten me.

The Khemer Rouge wouldn’t even exist if it wasn’t for the Vietnam war.

You see, it’s the recycling of dumb Commie myths like that which show you up to be a Fanboy, Bjorn. Communists began organising in Cambodia in 1930.

(Extra marks if you try to make an argument that Pol Pot wasn’t a proper communist!)

You see, it’s the recycling of dumb Commie myths like that which show you up to be a Fanboy, Bjorn.

You can’t take critisism without making it personal can you? Have I ever used such language against you?

Communists began organising in Cambodia in 1930.

These weren’t the Khemer Rouge.

(Extra marks if you try to make an argument that Pol Pot wasn’t a proper communist!)

My politicaly right winged professor at the university I went to decades ago claimed they werent.

If you have any solid evidenece that they please tell me, I would love to see his face when I show it to him.

Personaly I doesn’t care if they were or they werent, I’m not a communist. (Knowing what I know of their ideology I doubt very much however that Karl Marx would have aproved of them).

I see you have still ignored my question;

If you think Rummel’s work is a reliable how do you account for his 3 times exagerated Chile bodycount?

Regarding Cuba and the other socialist (read Communist) states and their statistics.

As we found out after the fall of the Soviet Union, no statistic published by the Soviet Union was reliable. They were all propraganda statements and were intended to show the Soviet Union and it’s Communist rulers in the best possible light.

The statistics on the economy were so bad that the new Russian government used the CIA statistics by preference. They were also not totally correct but were better than the Communist statistics.

That is why, in Russia today, the infant death rate is higher than that reported under Communism. The same goes for the statristics on education (literacy), general health, gross national product and so on.

The figures that Cuba reports about general health, medical services, infant mortality and life expectancy have never been verified by any independent source. The literacy figures are particulary suspect since, from day one of the Revolution, it was Castro’s boast that his government was teaching the poor to read.

As to the United States embargo, why is it an embargo by one country has so great an effect. No other country supports the embargo and every other country in the world can trade with Cuba.

So, why is Cuba doing so badly? Consider the sugar situation.

Before Castro, Cuba was a major sugar exporter. In the early days of the Revolution, Castro mobilized the people of Cuba and their “useful idiot” supporters to cut the sugar cane. Cuba is now, after all these years of Communist rule, importing sugar.

The old joke about Communism is correct. Question : What will happen if the Communists take over the Saraha Desert?

Answer : Nothing for fifty years. Then, the Communists will start importing sand!

Well, Longwalker, in a way it’s even worse than you depict. Prior to Castro’s takeover Cuba was consistently one of the leaders in all of both Central and South America in industrial production, GDP per capita, infant mortality, literacy–you name it. And all of this DESPITE the rampant graft and corruption of the Batista regime. And AFAIK those figures have never been disputed and have always been accepted as valid. This fact alone gives the lie to all of the glorious “progress” of the Revolucien. It used to be argued that limitations on personal freedoms under Marxism/Communism were worth it in order to produce economic nirvana–the old “have to break a few eggs to make an omelet,” bit. SOoooo—where’s the omelet?

So–again I ask you for a second time; do you consider every Allied pilot in every theater of war in WWII whose bombs killed more civilians than soldiers to be a mass murderer?

Apples and oranges.

Your question should be: do you consider every Axis pilot in every theater of war in WWII whose bombs killed more civilians than soldiers to be a mass murderer?

And yes, they were mass murderers.

There’s a difference between a side that is fighting an enemy whose evilness reaches almost cosmical levels, and another one that faces no existential threat and fights a war of choice. And I don’t believe for a minute that this difference escapes you.

Regarding Cuba and the other socialist (read Communist) states and their statistics. (…) The statistics on the economy were so bad that the new Russian government used the CIA statistics by preference.

Cuba’s infant mortality rate is lower than the US’s not only according to Cuban statistics, but also according to CIA statistics.

T-H-B

The newly elected Republican Representative from the 2nd Dist, New Orleans, La., the first Vietnamese American to be elected to Congress, who defeated Federally indicted William “Cold Cash” Jefferson(D) had, at his side, his Father at the victory celebration. His Father was wheelchair-bound thanks to the kind ministrations meted out to him by the Vietnamese Communists
during a 9 year “stay” in a “re-education” camp. I relate this by way of saying that the evils of Communism have far historically far exceeded the “cosmic levels of evilness” you attribute to Hitler and the Nazis. Those guys were pikers compared to the Communists. According to the authors of “The Black Book of Communism” and others like Robert Conquest, et al., Communism has killed well over 100 million (mainly of it’s own citizens) in the latter half of the 20th Century. A greater evil on that scale has never been seen on the face of the earth. Next to Communism, Hitler and his henchmen were as of nothing. So, yes, I along with the Father of newly elected Rep. CAO, (if I may take the liberty of guessing his feelings after spending time subject to the tender mercies of the Vietnamese Communists) do indeed believe ourselves to have been opposing an existential threat–Cao and his father directly, and we in America indirectly, “en grosso mondo,” as it were. And while full well realizing Communism is not a monolith, I believe the that the thousand of boat people who risked death by drowning, dehydration or starvation in an attempt to escape the minions
sent by Hanoi to enslave/”re-educate” them bear stark witness to the demonstrable fear these refugees had for an evil regime.
And for this fact I feel efforts by America to aid those Vietnamese who wished to resist this regime were justified.

And, no, I do NOT believe EVERY Axis pilot who killed more civilians than combatants to have been a mass murderer. But to be fair, you raise a good point about the nature of modern technological warfare and the whole concept of preventive/”limited” wars and what constitutes a “Justis Hostis” This is a discussion too long for here now as it is 12:15am Pacific Coast time, so I’ll perhaps make a second detailed, in-depth post 10-12 hrs from now here if you want to check back.

T-H-B

A short addendum to my 8:48 post: To my mind the Only thing that separates the Vietnamese Communists from their Russian and Chinese counterparts in terms of levels of evil/depradation
is the fact that they simply were NOT ABLE to put many of their desires and beliefs into action ONLY because they lacked the CAPABILITY. “That’s the bottom line of all history”, as has been stated elsewhere: CAPABILITY Mao and Stalin simply had it to a greater degree than Uncle Ho, that’s all–otherwise there is not a “dimes worth of difference” between them.

Cuba’s infant mortality rate is lower than the US’s not only according to Cuban statistics, but also according to CIA statistics

The German economy improved quite a bit after Hitler came to power. So?

>>Cuba’s infant mortality rate is lower than the US’s not only >>according to Cuban statistics, but also according to CIA statistics

>>The German economy improved quite a bit after Hitler came to >>power. So?

It’s a good incetive for US to improve there mortality rate, but a bad excuse for suporting the cuban government.

>>>Those guys were pikers compared to the Communists.

You have to consider the fact that the Nazis opperated for a very short time, wheras the Sovietunion existed for more than 70 years.

Almost everyone agrees that if you consider the short timespan, the Nazis were far worse.

What a gaggle of pathetic socialist onanists have gathered here. Praise and apology for dictators, mindless anti-Americanism, fabrication of a false leftist history of the world.

Such weakness.

To the non-bedwetters here, thanks for talking sense.

“The primary reason Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate than the United States is that the United States is a world leader in an odd category — the percentage of infants who die on their birthday. In any given year in the United States anywhere from 30-40 percent of infants die before they are even a day old.

Why? Because the United States also easily has the most intensive system of
emergency intervention to keep low birth weight and premature infants alive in the world. The United States is, for example, one of only a handful countries that keeps detailed statistics on early fetal mortality — the survival rate of infants who are born as early as the 20th week of gestation.

How does this skew the statistics? Because in the United States if an infant is born weighing only 400 grams and not breathing, a doctor will likely spend lot of time and money trying to revive that infant. If the infant does not survive — and the mortality rate for such infants is in excess of 50 percent — that sequence of events will be recorded as a live birth and then a death.

In many countries, however, (including many European countries) such severe medical intervention would not be attempted and, moreover, regardless of whether or not it was, this would be recorded as a fetal death rather than a live birth. That unfortunate infant would never show up in infant mortality statistics.”

http://www.overpopulation.com/articles/2002/cuba-vs-the-united-states-on-infant-mortality/

JESUS CHRIST what a bunch of sniveling wretches post here.

Just not to leave Sherman’s comment unresponded, of course it’s a load of crap. If 30-40% of all American infants were born on their birthday and recorded as live births, America’s infant mortality rate would be at least 30-40%.

Let me help you out, pal. The sentence containing that figure can be rephrased to read:

“In any given year in the United States anywhere from 30-40 percent of infants [that die,] die before they are even a day old.”

For example, distribution of age of infant deaths in US here:

http://ph.state.al.us/chs/HealthStatistics/Graphs/inf%20mort_age_AL00%20US99.pdf

You can see that nationwide, over half of recorded infant deaths occur within the first week of life. About a third of deaths that occur, do so within a day or less of birth (chart for the state of Alabama). The statistics do not vary hugely from state to state.

The above links are the results of very quick searches. They are not ideal, but rather adequate. Quite adequate.

Your ability to see what only you want to see is impressive. You could have checked this out in less than a minute, but you were already satisfied that you had identified a good fit with The Narrative.

What other easily corrected guff are you falling for?