Ellipsis
7 Nov 2006, 04:05 AM
Currently I am writing a response of sorts and was wondering if you guys would point out arguments or other things. This is for my social 30 class. It will be updated every few minutes....Heres what I have so far:(semi-final version)
?The Legacy of the U.S. Involvement in Latin America has left much to be desired?
“The Legacy of the U.S. Involvement in Latin America has left much to be desired”
Throughout the 20th century the presence of the US in Central America has left this region with a legacy of war and civil unrest. Here, much like the colonial presence of the imperial powers in Africa and even in north America has left the native (aboriginal or ethnic majority prior to the meddling) in extreme poverty and desolation. In Central America this has been seen many times from Russian and American involvement in Cuba, to the American funding of the atrocious government in El Salvador. What was this funding for? Of course to stop the growth of a leftist government, which it feared, not because the abuse it could commit. But because of the policies of sharing and equal distribution. Quite honestly, if 2nd graders where like this we would have shootings daily in elementary schools. Although the issues are slightly more complex, the people running the programs and making the decisions have educations slightly higher then 2nd grade or at least I would guess. Today at a time when the American government (individuals are only guilty of apathy) is proclaiming the fight for democracy, one can look back and see the past as a grim reminder (thats what the history books are for, or are they just meant to be looked on by high school students who like everyone else it would seem have better things to do with their time).
Nicaragua, a country which bridges the main South and North American continents was a key to the domination of Central America. As was a single family, the Somoza's ruled with American support
. They greatly profited from this support, having control over half the arable land and owning most of the transport industry. Why? The reason was of course to retain the dominance of the Panama channel( under American control) as the only cost affective way of quickly passing into the pacific from the Atlantic. This family was later overthrown at the cost of more then 3000 lives just in one week. The new government set up was just as undemocratic but was also had left wing traits. Automatically, the Reagan administration initiated funding into the Contras, an anti-revolutionary group. Yet, at the same time the Soviet Union funded the Sandinista revolution. Thus, the Soviet union and the united states used Nicaragua as a battlefield, its people as their own soldiers. Both sides committed atrocities, with money from the American/Soviet tax payer.
All this was just the tip of the ice burg as they do say. For the funding of extremist movements in Latin America was nothing compared to the billions spent on weapons which could kill millions. This was done of course was all done with the dollars of ordinary people, are we not as guilty as those who supported these politics in Central America?
It is easy for the common man to complain about losing twenty bucks on a piece of junk, it is almost impossible to complain about spending two hundred on the killing of innocent men, women and children.
?The Legacy of the U.S. Involvement in Latin America has left much to be desired?
“The Legacy of the U.S. Involvement in Latin America has left much to be desired”
Throughout the 20th century the presence of the US in Central America has left this region with a legacy of war and civil unrest. Here, much like the colonial presence of the imperial powers in Africa and even in north America has left the native (aboriginal or ethnic majority prior to the meddling) in extreme poverty and desolation. In Central America this has been seen many times from Russian and American involvement in Cuba, to the American funding of the atrocious government in El Salvador. What was this funding for? Of course to stop the growth of a leftist government, which it feared, not because the abuse it could commit. But because of the policies of sharing and equal distribution. Quite honestly, if 2nd graders where like this we would have shootings daily in elementary schools. Although the issues are slightly more complex, the people running the programs and making the decisions have educations slightly higher then 2nd grade or at least I would guess. Today at a time when the American government (individuals are only guilty of apathy) is proclaiming the fight for democracy, one can look back and see the past as a grim reminder (thats what the history books are for, or are they just meant to be looked on by high school students who like everyone else it would seem have better things to do with their time).
Nicaragua, a country which bridges the main South and North American continents was a key to the domination of Central America. As was a single family, the Somoza's ruled with American support
. They greatly profited from this support, having control over half the arable land and owning most of the transport industry. Why? The reason was of course to retain the dominance of the Panama channel( under American control) as the only cost affective way of quickly passing into the pacific from the Atlantic. This family was later overthrown at the cost of more then 3000 lives just in one week. The new government set up was just as undemocratic but was also had left wing traits. Automatically, the Reagan administration initiated funding into the Contras, an anti-revolutionary group. Yet, at the same time the Soviet Union funded the Sandinista revolution. Thus, the Soviet union and the united states used Nicaragua as a battlefield, its people as their own soldiers. Both sides committed atrocities, with money from the American/Soviet tax payer.
All this was just the tip of the ice burg as they do say. For the funding of extremist movements in Latin America was nothing compared to the billions spent on weapons which could kill millions. This was done of course was all done with the dollars of ordinary people, are we not as guilty as those who supported these politics in Central America?
It is easy for the common man to complain about losing twenty bucks on a piece of junk, it is almost impossible to complain about spending two hundred on the killing of innocent men, women and children.