- This topic has 1 reply, 10 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Is anyone worried about the potential fallout of Daniel Ortega returning to power in neighboring Nicaragua? Seems to me it could spook investors in Central America.
I’m assuming that most Americans would be deeply disturbed if the Nicaraguans or Argentinians were investing tens of millions of dollars to fund political parties in the USA to defeat GW Bush so, in the spirit of ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy,’ I would hope that instead of ‘intervening’ as they have done on so many previous and disastrous occasions in Central & Latin American politics that perhaps US politicians might allow the people in Nicaragua to make their own decisions without interference for once.
Do you feel that an Ortega victory in Nicaragua could impact Costa Rica?
Scott Oliver – Founder
WeLoveCostaRica.comRe American intervention: First, our intervention in Nicaragua in the 1980’s did bring about an end to the wretched Sandinista rule and a birth of democracy, at least until this coming Sunday.
Second, Hugo Chavez is massively intervening on behalf of Ortega with both funds for the campaign and promises to the Nicaraguan people of discounted oil if they vote Ortega in. I believe the US should be more active(probably covertly) in at least countering Chavez’ interference. If Ortega governs as I believe he will, Nicaraguans will be even poorer for it. That can’t be good for neighboring Costa Rica.Re the impact:I would think it depends on how it gets played in the media, at least in the short run. I read the other day that the Sandinistas confiscated over 200,000 properties during their rule. Ortega is now promising the business community he has changed, but I just can’t believe it. I just wonder if investors will hear about Nicaragua and decide Central America in general is just too unstable. But I don’t really know, that’s why I posted the question.
Which US ‘intervention’ in Nicaragua are you referring to? You like to mention what happened with the Sandinistas but don’t mention ‘why’ the Sandinistas were so palatable to the Nicaraguan people to begin with…
Maybe it’s because the Sandinistas inherited a country that had been totally pillaged by it’s previous President Anastasio Somoza who had been installed by the USA.
When Somoza was overthrown by the Sandinistas, he fled to the US where he admitted to being worth $100 million although a US intelligence report claimed he was worth $900 million not bad considering two thirds of the population earned less than $300 per year.
Now that’s a democracy you would feel more comfortable with is it?
Wasn’t it in Nicaragua where several members of the Reagan Administration helped sell arms to Iran, an avowed enemy, and then used the proceeds to fund the Contras?
Wasn’t it in Nicaragua where members of the U.S. State Department “who provided support for the Contras were involved in drug trafficking…?” Where “elements of the Contras themselves knowingly received financial and material assistance from drug traffickers.” And where “large quantities of the drug entering the United States for consumption.”
“For the better part of a decade, a San Francisco Bay Area drug ring sold tons of cocaine to the Crips and Bloods street gangs of Los Angeles and funneled millions in drug profits to a Latin American guerrilla army (the Contras) run by the US Central Intelligence Agency.” There’s “democracy” for you&
But who appointed you and the USA as the world’s judge when it comes to elections in other countries? Even when many of those elections had been free and fair? More fair and with a far greater turnout than the two most recent, some say “stolen” Presidential elections in the USA?
Why do you feel that you and your government have the right to interfere in other people’s affairs (overtly or covertly) when you would never tolerate other people interfering in your affairs?
The vast majority of US ‘interventions’ have resulted in horrifically “wretched” conditions where hundreds of thousands of people were killed – take a look at Chile, Iran, Guatemala, Syria, Indonesia, British Guiana, Ecuador, Brazil, Dominican Republic, Cuba, Uruguay, Bolivia, Grenada, Morocco, Panama, Bulgaria, El Salvador and Haiti.
And when you speak of a “birth of democracy,” as you can see from Iraq, sometimes our concept of “democracy” simply does not work and hopefully you’re smart enough to recognize that others do not want an American type of “democracy,” and they have every right to make their own decisions about what sort of “democracy” they would like
And if Hugo Chavez is “intervening on behalf of Ortega with both funds for the campaign and promises to the Nicaraguan people of discounted oil if they vote Ortega in.” Doesn’t that sound like that would be good for the Nicaraguan people? Surely the USA should be happy about something being good for the people?
Once again, you insinuate that it’s OK for the US to intervene but it’s not OK for Chavez to intervene with a country that shares a lot more with Venezuela culturally than the USA does.
Like your nuclear weapons, it’s OK for you and your “friends” (like Pakistan which is a nuclear armed Muslim military dictatorship) to play with them but nobody else can have them. And what happens when Musharraf is replaced by a harder line Islamic regime as many experts expect? Will they hand over their nuclear bombs to you, the ones that the US allowed them to develop? Oustide of the NPT? Do you think?
The actions of the US have started yet another arms race, this one more deadly than ever. “The threat of nuclear strikes is now greater than during the Cold War.”
“According to the experts the Bush administration’s ‘war on terror’ has resulted in more global terror and more turmoil in the nations it was intended to rescue from terror. So the war’s latest byproduct, a nuclear arms race among ‘rogue nations,’ should surprise no one.”
You can sleep tight tonight knowing that people like you and our “god fearing” nation – the USA – has made this world a far, far more dangerous place that it should be.
I’m really not interested in fisking your Chomsky-wannabee screed. I have better things to do than correct the information you obtained from a bunch of wacko websites. It was entertaining, however. Also, unfortunately, it wasn’t really what I was looking for as an answer to my question.
Give Fidel my best!
You’re dropping it now because you know you can’t correct it because it is 100% factual.
Or are you saying, contrary to historical fact, that the US did not help bring Somoza to power?
Most Ticos know more facts (not glorious patriotic LIES) about American history that most of the Americans I know.
Sorry, there’s plenty to dispute in what you wrote but this just isn’t a forum for nutcase political theories.
David, Bradbard had me until he started listing “Rolling Stone” Magazine as a source. That was really funny to me. There is some middle ground for you two to meet but like you said it is not worth the trouble. You cannot take on Castro,Chavez, Jimmy Carter and Brad. I do share your concerns about the elections. Whoever chavez supports would make me support that persons opponent. Its that simple. You would think there would be more press on this situation. The dangerous thing about Chavez is he can teach Ortega how to steal the election and then Carter can fly in and “certify it” like he did in Venezuala. Chavez needs to take care of his own poor before he can help poor people from other countries. Thats vote buying plain and simple. I do not want Chavez above me and below me with countries with no military in between. Do you?
The Rolling Stone article was written by Robert F. Kennedy Jr, where is article appears is unimportant -it has appeared in hundreds of publications – it is what he says in the ‘Was the 2004 Election Stolen?’article is important.
“it is what he says in the ‘Was the 2004 Election Stolen?’article is important. “
Heh. Nutty, demonstrably false, and like many of your arguments so far, irrelevant to the question I posted. I believe this site is called “We Love Costa Rica,” not “We Hate George Bush and the United States.”
The problem with this argument is that at its core it is a religious argument. During the cold war the US was against the “Godless communists”. It did not matter if the communist side was fighting against an evil dictator, they were the Godless communists and thus the enemy of everything right and good.
This is also why people in the US (including congress) do not understand that the Moslems think the US is fighting a holy war against them. The US CLAIMS not to engage in holy wars but the Moslems know the war against the communists was a holy war so why not a holy war against them? One follows the other. The logic or facts may be incorrect but there is no logic in a religious argument.
So like other religious arguments there cannot be a logical solution or meeting of the minds. YOU are wrong, I am RIGHT (and vise versa) and it will never change.
As to Nicaragua. Hopefully folks have become enlightened over the years and will not repeat mistakes of the past. All one can do is wait and see.
This posted in the worng place and reposted here by Moderator
Posted Nov 01,2006 11:24 AM jreilly
Thank you Bradbard for your honest and truthful information.
You can’t change people that are stuck in a morass of lies and patriotic deceptions. Their unwillingness to see anything other than the false US propaganda will be their undoing in the long run as ostriches with their heads’ in the sand always feel safe and secure.
Nice try though.Edited on Nov 01, 2006 11:30
Whatever historical/political view people subscribe to, the fact is that Nicaragua has been a struggling “nation” since its inception. They warred heartily among themselves, Somoza swung the pendulum one way, Ortega the other. Now they’re dangling somewhere in the middle. The fallout in Costa Rica from all this chaos comes in many forms.
1. A couple invasion attempts by Nicaragua into Costa Rica, each beaten back by civilian peasants. Countries with severe internal problems often seek military glory across their borders in an attempt to unify their people by “identifying” an external enemy (sounds familiar). They finally gave up, and gifted the Central Plaza monument in downtown San Jose. I still think its ugly…
2. The US using the country as a (illegal) staging ground for the Contras, and attempts by the Reagan administration to militarize Costa Rica so they could fight against the Sandinistas on our behalf. Fortunately they didn’t get that far.
3. Massive migration from Nicaragua to Costa Rica to the point where Nicas make up 25% to 30% of the population, creating all sorts of social pressures.
In spite of this huge absorption of immigrants, as well as several periods of financial assistance from Costa Rica to their government, Nicaragua continues to take a hard line against Costa Rica. They jealously defend their (highly) disputed border, they inhibit traffic along the San Juan River, and they threaten Costa Rica whenever there’s a perceived backlash against all their immigrants.
I would say that Nicaraguan foreign policy as it relates to Costa Rica has always seemed belligerent. Costa Ricans think they’re just envious.
In spite of it all, Costa Rica seems to keep chugging along, shrugging their collective head at their politics, rhetoric and internal writhing.
I think Ortega has changed, at least a bit. If the Nicaraguan people choose to elect him, than that’s their right.
Regarding Chavez, called a “dictator” by his retractors even though he was democratically elected, what’s the big deal? He can rattle his economic sword as much as he wants, it’s still a pretty small sword. The more the US vilifies him, the more credit he gets. Why bother? He’ll dig his own grave all by himself, just like George W. is doing.
And Costa Rica keeps chugging along, ducking so they don’t get hit by all the fecal matter flying back and forth above their heads.
GringoTico,
I don’t agree with everything you said, especially in regards to Chavez, but thanks for the thoughtful response. Do you think an Ortega victory will hamper investment in Central America, and Costa Rica in particular?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
