Story Comments
Posted by: Natureboy 5 months, 3 weeks ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
-
-
-
0%
jcmcamis5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's the vein in which the information is presented. Infamous? Only in the eyes of SOAW. I personally know officers and NCOs that worked there. All standup troops. The problem is that selective reporting paints a picture out of context. That's like saying all U.S. soldiers are bad because a few of the hundreds of thousands that deployed there violated the rules of engagement or committed crimes. I would argue that a percentage of all social groups, to include those that have been trained at Fort Benning, would turn out bad given there circumstances. Chances are they would have turned out bad anyway. So even though the generals in question may have studied there, doesn't make SOA infamous or controversial, except in the eyes of the SOAW, and you apparently.
Reply-
100%
djn3nunez35 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes, I think infamous in Latin America.
Reply
The SOA was founded in Panama in 1946 as a U.S. army training school for Latin American military personnel.
It trained Latin American soldiers in counterinsurgency techniques, before and during the years of the U.S. "national security doctrine." Many SOA graduates ended up involved in human rights violations throughout the hemisphere, in Mexico, Central America and South America.
In 1984, then president of Panama Jorge Illueca kicked the SOA out of his country, and it was moved to the army base at Fort Benning, Georgia.
In response to the controversy and protests by human rights activists, the SOA was officially "closed" in December 2000. But it reopened a month later as WHINSEC - in the same installations, with the same staff carrying out the same work.
The United Nations Truth Commission in El Salvador found that 19 of the 26 Salvadoran soldiers and officers implicated in the murders of the Jesuit priests were SOA alumni.
The 64,000 Latin American soldiers who have trained at the SOA also included three of the five Salvadoran troops who raped and killed the three U.S. nuns and a Catholic lay worker in 1980 and two of the three cited in the March 1980 assassination of Catholic Archbishop Oscar Romero, who was shot by a sniper while conducting mass.
A total of 48 of the 69 Salvadoran officers cited by the U.N. Truth Commission for human rights violations had been trained at the SOA.
http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/1858/...-
0%
jcmcamis5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Let me ask you a question. Have you lived in Central or South America? Have you served in the U.S. Armed Forces? Do you have any connection at all with the U.S. military training program? Do you personally know anyone who has worked at the school? If not, everything you are presenting is hearsay. I can answer every question I asked with a yes. I served in El Salvador. I served in Guatemala. I served in Panama. I've traveled in 16 of 20 Latin American countries since 1983. I worked in the military's Security Assistance Program for half of my 24 year career in the Army before I retired. Oh by the way, did I mention that I have friends and family in several of those countries today. Do you honestly believe that you can preach to me about what happened, what's happening, or what could happen there?
Reply
What I attempted to do was to put the author's comments in context. You do understand what that means, do you not? You refuse to acknowledge any wrong-doing by anyone not affiliated with the school in the region. Even when I presented a by-name example. Have you ever seen or met Villalobos? I have. The United Nations Truth Commission was a travesty of justice and a completely biased report by people who are apparently just like you. Atrocities committed by people like Villalobos are perfectly acceptable because "the end justifies the means." But when someone you oppose does the same thing, look out. They are the most villainous and vile creatures on earth. Specifically, I have family in El Salvador still. During their civil war they were apolitical, caught between both sides. Both sides were equally bad, but that's not what the report says. So please don't throw it at me like a club.
My last point is this. Do you honestly believe that in countries where they have no former students of SOA, that there are not atrocities being committed? If you don't put it in context for the reader to decide, it's dishonest at best.-
100%
djn3nunez35 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Do you honestly believe that you can preach to me about what happened, what's happening, or what could happen there?
Reply
Do you honestly believe I was preaching. You still have yet to counter any of the facts presented in the article. All you have done is to put your perspectifve on the piece.
You refuse to acknowledge any wrong-doing by anyone not affiliated with the school in the region.
Um the artilce I linked to was mostly about wrongdoing by those who had attended the school, not the wrongdoing by others. But as a matter of fact the article does indicate just that. 2 of the 5 Salvadoran troops who raped and killed the three U.S. nuns and a Catholic lay worker in 1980 did not go the the school. And that 7 of the 26 Salvadoran soldiers and officers implicated in the murders of the Jesuit priests were not SOA alumni. Nice strawman argument though.
Atrocities committed by people like Villalobos are perfectly acceptable because "the end justifies the means."
Do you honestly believe that in countries where they have no former students of SOA, that there are not atrocities being committed?
More of that strawman stuff.
Yet with all your self promotion and trying to put the facts presented in the article into a context that fits your world view, you have not sucessfully contradicted any of those facts have you?-
Neutral
jcmcamis5 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What is a strawman to one, is perspective to another LOL. I said the article was inflammatory. It is. I said it wasn't complete. It isn’t. I never condoned the behavior. I don’t. What else would you have me say?
Reply
This discussion started because Wolfie stated the author was spinning the issue. In my view, like him, he was correct. Which is why I said, "which facts." It was sarcasm, because depending on which facts you present, the story has a different spin.
The author states, "Key leaders of Honduras military coup trained in U.S." The problem with the statement is that it wasn't a military coup. . The military, being directed to conduct a police action by their congress and supreme court, had a hostile element removed from "their" government. That hostile element, namely the former president, was defying a unanimous court and congress. Just because someone is elected, doesn't mean that they are above the law. In addition, at no time was the military ever in charge. Their government chose an interim president from the same political party as the former.
Next, the author states, " ... school based at Fort Benning, Georgia infamous for producing graduates linked to torture, death squads and other human rights abuses." The problem with that statement is what I've already stated. It's not the school that's infamous, it's the officer's and NCO's that went home and committed atrocities that are infamous. Using your logic, Cuba and Russia would be infamous for training communist insurgents in military skills for operations in Central and South America. Those countries aren't, but there are some people in them that are.
Then, the author says, "Leftist President Manuel Zelaya was kidnapped and transported to Costa Rica this morning after a growing controversy over a vote concerning term limits." Zelaya wasn't kidnapped, he was arrested, and the controversy only existed in Zelaya's mind. The Honduran government was united and resolute in its position and decision.
The author states, "Over the last week, Zelaya clashed with and eventually dismissed General Romeo Vasquez -- who is now reportedly in charge of the armed forces that abducted the Honduran president." Two high-ranking general's did in fact resign in protest of Zelaya's activities, but they were reinstated by the Honduran government after Zelaya was arrested.
We've already covered the "infamous" stuff, so I'll stop there. Some of the "facts" that the author presented were true, and some were not. But more egregious was that the author, though he presented some "facts," was not "correct."
I stand by my world view, which is obviously in clear contrast with your own. You can either continue to accept the spin, or you can choose to consider the perspective of someone who has "been there, and done that." The choice has always been yours.
Have a great 4th of July, our Nation's Independence Day!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
loading ...
People Who Liked This Comment (2)
djn3nunez3
dissentPeople Who Didn't Like This Comment (0)
No one voted this comment negatively.
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.