Is the US Trying to Destabilize the Nicaraguan Government?

Submitted by fyl on 18 July, 2008 - 17:54.
A recent ChinaView article states the FSLN accused the United States on Thursday of funding opposition activities aimed at destabilizing the government. The operative government quote is:
"This money is to be used to destabilize the Nicaraguan government, like it happened in Santa Cruz of Bolivia and in Venezuela in 2002, when they wanted to topple those governments," it said.

I don't know the facts behind the rumors but the acquisition got me looking around a bit. There are lots of rumors about the 2002 coup in Venezuela but does anyone "present a case"? Well, I found an article in Global Research that, while it may not be a smoking gun today, certainly gives the current Nicaraguan government some pretty heavy justification for thinking the US is "at it again".

The president of Venezuela's RCTV, Eladio Larez, is no stranger to the CIA. In fact, Eladio's contact with the agency goes back nearly twenty years. Back in 1989, Larez helped the CIA funnel money through Venezuela to the Nicaraguan opposition as they worked to topple the Sandinista government through massive violence and destabilization. Larez was actually so kind as to set up a fraudulent foundation in Venezuela, called the National Foundation for Democracy, as a front organization to receive money from the CIA and pass it on to fund the operations of a major opposition newspaper in Nicaragua.

The article goes on to talk a lot more about what Larez did "back then" and then talks about how the sequence of events follows to make "the repressive government" into the bad guy.

My personal position? I hope the acquisitions are false for the simple reason that I would like to see Nicaraguans get to decide what they want without "help".

Jarquin, Montealegre and U.S. Democrats? ›
( categories: )

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Answer depends on how the question is put

Submitted by Daddy-YO on 26 August, 2008 - 12:02.

Try: Do a significant number of Nicaraguans feel that their country is being hi-jack into a dictatorship? Is the USA helping them regain democratic control? Who wants the USA help and how many people do they represent?

Nits to pick: what is significant? What is a significant percentage of the population? More than what it took to elect Daniel?

You might also ask: Is a benign dictatorship better than democracy? Does it, or will it always, have the best interests of its people?

And: Who will actually be pulling the strings on a potential dictatorship in Nicaragua?

China News

Submitted by cookshow on 20 July, 2008 - 12:02.

This morning while reading Sunday papers online I spent some time reading the Weekly World News "The World's Only Reliable Newspaper" (according to them), before checking the China News & other recently posted links I was inclined to think the news reported at the Weekly World News may be fictitious or just plain lies, But after reading stories at the recent links provided by Fyl I am inclined to believe that the Weekly World News is indeed "The World's Only Reliable Newspaper", www.weeklyworldnews.

PS: They just found Bigfoot & Aliens will soon be taking over the world (guess Daniel will blame that on the USA too).

oh boy, you americans

Submitted by dirtbag on 19 July, 2008 - 19:05.

Here you go again. Politics. mostly boring He said, She Said History. Apart from the tiring debates and insults, is there enough, interested, expats living in Nicaragua that could or can do anything today or tomorrow about whom gets in Power, becomes the Government of the people? They say, someone said, all politics are local. The more Americans that form a union of sorts will eventually tell the U.S. government (Foreign policy makers) to piss off. Leave us alone, we are doing fine on our oown thanks. Unless of course we are in physical and financial danger. (I wonder how I can get more Scotsmen to Nicaragua.) Maybe I should open a Haggis shop in Estelli selling Black Puddings, fried lorne sausage and spotted dick puddings. Call ourseves "Theres a tilt in your Kilt" political party, have young girls waving pom-poms instead of Billboards, that would be to attract all you Americans of course, God knows what will attract the Nicas to our Party. Any Ideas?

The answer is no. The

Submitted by thunderdial on 19 July, 2008 - 16:16.

The answer is no. The Nicaraguan government (DOS in particular) is perfectly capable of destabilizing itself, without any external help whatsoever.

Hey, I was wondering, when are all those Iran/Venezuela bennies are going to start coming in? Gosh, it sure has been a long time.

Nic gov distabilizing itself

Submitted by Nicabuff on 18 July, 2008 - 19:52.

The Nicaraguan government gives a perception that it is destabilizing itself. Politics has lots to do with perception. There are marches because the people of Nicaragua cannot stand high inflation nor the fact that they are the government cares more about what happens outside of Nicaragua, etc. The the Nic. gives the perception government destabilizes itself by showing chaos with many examples such as not having a stable central bank, sound policies. The US probably has bigger fish to fry unless the Nic. gob is hiding something and there is a reason to get involved.

I see your point

Submitted by cookshow on 18 July, 2008 - 19:32.

All of Nicaragua's problems are a result of the USA. Are you smoking crack? Do you actually believe this stuff? I don't know anything about this Lynux stuff but it must soften the brain, no wonder it is free.

Well Cookshow, you can't

Submitted by evemontiel on 18 July, 2008 - 22:31.

Well Cookshow, you can't blame everything on the USA. I don't think the US has any say in firing everyone that works in the Palacio Nacional to put their friends and family instead. They also have very little to do with the barbaric policies that Ortega and his goons have on Women's health. They have prohibited women from having any kind of abortion weather it be her choice or therapeutic. Thereby, causing hundreds of deaths of innocent women since this policy has gone into effect. Also, the inflation is due to the corruption in the Nicaraguan government. I understand that the US does not have the best foreign policy record (this is truly an understatement) but being NIcaraguan myself you need to place blame where it belongs and right now it is not the US. I hope that we will one day have someone in Nicaragua take the presidency that will give a shit about the country and not just about themselves and their friends and family.

I hope that happen soon

Submitted by Hilda on 19 July, 2008 - 09:51.

I hope that happen soon because my poor country does not deserve this government, the people in Nicaragua are tired of corruption and tyranny, I thinks is time to change that, we have the power to do that.

Unification

Submitted by fyl on 19 July, 2008 - 11:04.

You say "we have the power to do that." I believe you are right. I saw this same kind of "people power" in Costa Rica when I lived there. That said, I have no idea if the unification of the opposition here is the work of an external government (something that certainly has happened here with the 1990 elections being the most blatant example) or the people all over the political spectrum deciding that they want change and can work together for that.

Assuming it is the Nicaraguan people working together to get a better government, it will likely succeed. Personally, I think that will just mean the FSLN making some changes to be more democratic and transparent but we will see.

On the other hand, if it can be shown that something external is behind the apparent unification of the opposition, it would seem Nicaraguans are more likely to unite against getting told, once again, how to run their country. After all, they have done it multiple times before.

Let me get this straight,

Submitted by thunderdial on 19 July, 2008 - 21:03.

Let me get this straight, you want to feed at the trough of the U.S. Treasury, but you don't want to allow them to influence Nicaragua? Do you believe in Unicorns too?

Elections of 1990

Submitted by bluewater on 19 July, 2008 - 15:28.

Fydel, Every organization that observed the elections of 1990 declared them to be free and fair, for those who are interested in the numbers, 54.7% Violetta Chamorro, Daniel Ortega 40.8%, with the remainder divided into splinter parties.

In fact the only statesman like action I have seen Ortega do is the turn over of power to the new President. Quit whining he got beat fair and square. You still are mucking around in the old news of the early 90's seeking out any way to criticize a democratically elected government and Violetta Chamorro, one of the most revered persons in Nicaragua. Having the perspective of time and seeing the errors of Ortega in his recent government one could easily imagine what Nicaragua would be like if they had 16 more years of Marxist-Leninist government under DOS.

Yup, people got to vote

Submitted by fyl on 19 July, 2008 - 16:36.
What international observers do is watch to see if people are allowed to vote and that the votes seem to have been counted correctly. Some even make sure people were allowed to register. No argument—that happened fine. The issue, of course, is what caused UNO to become united. Biran Willson offers one of many accounts in his How the U.S. Purchased the 1990 Nicaragua Elections. His case is presented financially.

If you want a more analytical look, try Leslie Anderson's Elections and Democracy in Central America, part of which can be found in this Envio article.

The US reaction in 1990 was also different from its response in 1984. Instead of dismissing the election, the United States openly supported UNO, providing both political and financial support.

Or, look at what former Contra leader Edgar Chamorro said in Los Angeles Times

Edgar Chamorro, a former Contra leader who later became a critic of U.S. policies in Nicaragua, said Wednesday that the recent elections in that country were neither free nor honest because of the infusion of U.S. dollars and political influence. Chamorro charged that U.S. monetary support for the 14-party National Opposition Union that backed candidate [Violeta Barrios de Chamorro], his distant cousin, probably has been grossly underestimated.

While you may not be aware of how all this happened, many Nicaraguans are. The issue here is not whether an Ortega-based government would be better or worse than an alternative but, rather, Nicaraguans need to get a chance to make their own decisions. Anything less just results in a backlash—something you can see in all so many countries where external influence has helped them "pick democracy".

Edgar Chamorro, Brian Wilson and Leslie Andersen

Submitted by bluewater on 19 July, 2008 - 19:13.

Fydel,You omitted to disclose that Edgar Chamorro gave an affidavit to the Sandinistas in 1984 in support of their litigation against the U.S. in the World Court and that he left the contra movement in a fit of pique because he felt that Adolfo Calero was not of a "sufficiently qualified lineage" to take up the contra leadership mantle. Talk about an oligarch.

You also fail to disclose that S. Brian Willson declared on the opening page of his website www.brianwillson.com that there is an "incredible historic pattern of U.S. arrogance, ethnocentrism, violence, and lawlessness in domestic and global affairs, and the severe danger this poses for Homo Sapiens and mother earth. The interior of the site is even more revealing as he states that the U.S. government is a "plutocracy and an oligarchy". Fydel, I do not believe that you could find a more biased source for your thesis.

Looking at the Andersen piece, a close reading reveals that the fundamental reason the Sandinistas lost in 1990 was the 50,000% to 70,000% inflation, forced military prescription and the general destruction of the economy at the hands of DOS and his advisors.

Once again you are dredging up questionable pundits and misstating academic positions to support the thesis that the United States is a demonic force seeeking to economically enslave the citizens of Latin America.

time and time

Submitted by Pinolero2 on 19 July, 2008 - 20:39.

and time again,and yet again,I am telling you guys. The main reason(For Us Nicaraguans)Daniel lost to Violeta was,because she promised to STOP the SMP/Servicio Militar Patriotico. Thousands of Mothers,Fathers,brothers and sisters wanted to end the bloodshed the SMP caused Regardless of who they were fighting againts and better yet,who financed the Contras. You guys are missing the TRUE cause of DO's Defeat. Don't tell that to fyl or toni solo thou.

FAP

I agree

Submitted by fyl on 19 July, 2008 - 20:58.

And Toni probably would as well. Many people have told me "Nicaraguans were sick of war". But, as much as people wanted an end to war/loss of Nicaraguan life, the opposition was very divided. Had the U.S. not created UNO, the opposition vote would have been scattered. Possibly scattered enough to require a second round but there certainly would not have been a candidate that could have defeated Ortega in the first round.

And, of course, the reason the SMP existed was that the U.S. was paying for a war against Nicaragua. So, once again, Nicaraguans didn't get to decide what they wanted without outside "help".

Your point?

Submitted by fyl on 19 July, 2008 - 19:43.

Again, this thread is not about whether you like the FSLN, Daniel Ortega or whatever. It is about the fact (yes, I mean fact) that the U.S. has a history of screwing around with internal politics in at least Latin America. It is asking the question "is the U.S. doing it again?" where, if the answer is yes, the result will be a lot of pissed off Nicaraguans that, once again, didn't get to make their own decisions.

As for Willson's piece, what's the issue? The page I offered up gives a detailed list of monies that seem to have gone from the U.S. government to UNO. If the list is incorrect, please show where the errors are. If, on the other hand, the list is correct, I think he has every right to make the statement that seems to so offend you.

My Point, It Is Just Not Reliable

Submitted by bluewater on 20 July, 2008 - 10:26.

Take for example the first two alleged payment claims by the CIA totalling 25 million dollars in the Willson piece. The first is a 13 million dollar claim by discredited former Contra, then Sandinista supporter, Edgar Chamorro. We have already reviewed his bias and of course you failed to respond to his affidavit in support of the FSLN in the World Court on 1984. The second claim of 12 million dollars is by guess who? Edgar Chamorro again! In conjunction with the author of "Washington's War on Nicaragua", Holly Sklar. Holly Sklar paints the CIA with a broad brush in her text even accusing COSEP and Enrique Bolanos of being undercover agents for the CIA. Yes, I have read the book and yes the claims are there. Was there U.S. funding of the 1990 elections? Yes there was. Was there Cuban, Libyan and Russian funding of the FSLN in 1990? Yes there was.

Brian Willson is so biased that he simply does not merit attention. He was involved in personal injury litigation against the US at the time he wrote the piece in 1990 as the result of the tragic loss of his legs in a peace rally. Wherein he refused to move from a railroad track bed to protest U.S. imperialism. Is he a man with a grudge?

Not surprisingly. the Anderson piece disappears with details of forced military prescription and hyperinflation of 70,000%. Move on man, all these articles and cites are 18 years old. If you think that the U.S. is screwing with the 2008 municipal elections than put up some real proof.

Happy to address that

Submitted by fyl on 20 July, 2008 - 11:03.
"We have already reviewed [Edgar Chamorro's] bias and of course you failed to respond to his affidavit in support of the FSLN in the World Court on 1984."

Aren't we missing cause and effect here? What makes you think he wasn't a Nicaraguan nationalist that realized what was happening was not in the best interest of Nicaraguan self-determination?

What did Chamorro say in the World Court and why? From Misery in the Name of Freedom Al Burke:

Chamorro's detailed affidavid to the World Court constitutes a basic text on the methods of the CIA and its mercenaries. Among other things, it describes how the CIA recruited and financed the contras; how it set up the political front solely for public relations purposes; the "recruitment" of peasants through terror and kidnapping; the bribing of Costa Rican and Honduran journalists to denounce Sandinistas and praise the CIA-contras; the origins of the infamous "assassination manual", etc., etc.

Does it lack credibility? Apparently the World Court didn't think so but, let's compare it to some direct testimony there by Rev. Jean Loison, a French priest.

I know of a village where all the draft-age men have been abducted [by the CIA-contras]; of an invalid who was killed "for the fun of it"; of women raped; of a body found with its eyes gouged out; of a 15-year-old girl who was forced to become a prostitute at a camp located on the Honduran side of the border. A girl of 16 was murdered, cut into pieces, and her remains scattered about. A truck with postal workers who had volunteered to pick coffee was attacked by mortar fire in an ambush.... They poured gasoline on the truck and set it on fire with the passengers still inside....

Personally, it just seems a bit hard for anyone (without a vested interest) to support the U.S. right to do what it did. But, this seems to be the norm. That isn't just my opinion—this is a quote from Carlos Andreas Perez, President of Venezuela from 1974 to 1979 (and, yes, he did help the FSLN while president).

Why does the United States treat us Latin Americans with such a humiliating lack of respect? ... For decades, the U.S. baffled us with its unconditional support for Central American dictators—so much so that many Latin Americans now suspect the word "democracy". Those dictators created exclusive societies based on systematic injustice—breeding grounds for explosive discontent... Our problems smoulder, then burst into flame, but one thing remains constant: the unbearable paternalism of the Unites States and its apparent distrust of any Latin American with a sense of self-respect.

More than happy to respond

Submitted by bluewater on 20 July, 2008 - 18:18.

You say that Edgar Chamorro Coronel is a Nicaraguan "nationalist" that found his way during the war. The truth is that he has never left the U.S. except for vacations since 1990 to visit his homeland Nicaragua. First teaching full time as a University professor at Bard College at Simons Rock from 1990 to 2003 and then working as a high school teacher at John Dewey Academy at Barrington, Massachusetts until the present day. Yep, just check the website www.jda.org and you will see he is on the faculty. Kind of strange that the "nationalist" stayed all of his adult life working as an educator in the Evil Empire. The truth is that he changed sides like a true opportunist from the safety of the U.S. because Contra leader Adolfo Calero's bloodline was not blue enough. The other reason I discredit Mr. Chamorro is that his entire adult life is a denial of Nicaraguan nationalism and in fact an acceptance of the United States and the quality of life it provides to it's residents and citizens. You can not have it both ways Fydel.

Post Script: In the future if you are citing some one please note the source because you have a bit of a habit of not including the whole story.An example is the Loison and Carlos Andreas Perez quote. How can one respond in a vacuum?

References

Submitted by fyl on 20 July, 2008 - 19:19.

Carlos Andreas Perez quote: New York Times, 14 August 1983

I have the Loison quote in personal notes with no source noted. I believe Loison originally submitted a statement and then was asked to appear to testify. This could have come from the submitted statement.

Related/Similar testimony by Loison can be found in Wikipedia. It also explains what Loison was doing in Nicaragua.

BTW, this Envio article offers a pretty good look at what was presented to the World Court.

As for Chamorro's credibility, I suggested that maybe he was a nationalist. There seem to be lots of people now in the U.S. that claim they are nationalists to their home country—Nicaragua, Cuba and Venezuela being but three examples. But, better yet, offer some facts that dispute what he presented.

The burden of proof

Submitted by bluewater on 20 July, 2008 - 20:09.

You sir bear the burden of proof as you are asserting these claims. Show me from an independent source the alleged 25 million dollar payment made by the CIA for the 1990 elections. Not from those who have an axe to grind such as Sklar, Willson and Chamorro but a serious, accepted source of information.

One final note on Mr. Chamorro, how can one be a nationalist if you voluntarily choose to not live in your nation. I would not be surprised to see that he is a U.S. citizen by now. Even if he is not a citizen it shows the tolerance of the US for protest and dissension. If such an affidavit had been signed against Nicaragua by an expat Nicaraguan resident he would be headed for the border on the next flight.

umm..

Submitted by evemontiel on 19 July, 2008 - 23:39.

I believe that it was a same group of NICARAGUAN dissidents that came to the USA to ask for financial help to overthrow the Sandinistas. I feel like you are undermining my country and its people by saying that the US told us what to do and think. We are capable people that wanted to fight tyranny, NOBODY told us to do so. You would no know this because you were probably not in Nicaragua back in the 80s but my family was and we had to flee to the US because the Sandinistas wanted to take my 12 year old brother from our home and give him a gun to fight in the mountains. I know you will try to bring it back to the US but the fact that they were helping dissidents financially and with weapons does not justify the Sandinista government forcing children into warfare.

I need to write a book

Submitted by fyl on 20 July, 2008 - 06:09.

While the sequence you describe seems accurate, it leaves out a lot of cause and effect. If you haven't read The Country Under My Skin, I highly recommend it. It is available in both Spanish and English. It's a novel but while I spent hundreds, probably thousands of hours in the 1980s trying to understand and deal with the U.S. involvement in Nicaragua, the book filled in a lot of things I didn't understand at the time.

She talks about the three factions of the FSLN and how, while they disagreed on a lot their common enemy was the Somoza dynasty and that they would work together to overthrow it. They did.

Now, I assert (and we will never know if this is what would have happened but it makes a lot of sense) that had the U.S. not put pressure on Nicaragua—no embargo, not supplied and to a great extent created the Contra, not committed acts of sabotage against Nicaragua, well, all the stuff you find here including the CIA Freedom Fighter's Manual that Nicaragua whould have had a rich democracy in the 1980s.

How? Without the new common enemy the three factions of the Sandinistas would have split up (much like we have two today but one has many years of organizational advantage) and formed three different political parties. Nicaraguans would have had a true chance in the 1980s to set the direction of their own country. And no 12 years olds would have been drafted.

Some will say the Sandinistas were savages, killed everyone, ... Well, I have over 600 reports here done by Witness for Peace in the 1980s documenting atocities. There are some about Sandinista atrocities but virtually all are Contra atrocities. This alone indicates that without U.S. promotion and backing of the Contra, there would not have been anything resembling the war you and I know about.

Thus, the reason for me initially posting this article is to warn people that U.S. involvement is not what is needed here. It just becomes an excuse to resist again. And the victims, once again, become the people that chose to stay in Nicaragua.

Agendas

Submitted by GreenGold on 20 July, 2008 - 06:44.

Witness for Peace mainly reported Contra atrocities because that was their agenda, to support the F$LN as the second coming of Fidel (not you Fydel ;~) ), as if that were a good thing?

What always gets me is how the F$LN supporters, fellow-travelers, what have you, never want to mention that Borge and his thugs were meeting in the embassy of the U$$R in Mexico City as early as 1964. Borge almost lived in either the Soviet Embassy or the Cuban Embassy during the 1970s. How does that fit with the US putting pressure on...? Well, it just doesn't so the fellow-travelers ignore it and blame all the problems of the F$LN on the US.

Another important fact ignored by the fellow-travelers is that Lenin Cerda, one of the most dangerous and vile creatures to ever walk the face of the earth, spent most of his energy in the 1970s learning his special gift (torture) at the feet of the STASI in East Germany. Why? Because it was part and parcel of the F$LN plan to imprison and torture the hell out of their enemies. But the STASI, along with Cuban and Soviet influence taught Cerda that the real "fun" was to create an organization that suppressed dissent at the point of a gun, thus the CDS which has morfed into the CPC now...

All of that happened BEFORE the F$LN came to power. Their roots in communism and suppression pre-date the "pressure of the US". Fellow-travelers don't want you to know that. They'd rather believe in Santa Claus and Fantasy Island.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled US-bashing, everything wrong in Nicaragua is the fault of anyone but Danny-boy and his band of thugs..........

Ok

Submitted by fyl on 20 July, 2008 - 08:14.

No argument with your point. But, it doesn't address the "there were three factions that would have likely gone in different directions" issue. Or, if you want to go further back, why did the FSLN exist at all? Or even Sandino?

The answer is, as you would expect, the U.S. First we had the U.S. Marines working to "stabilize" Nicaragua to the price of bananas was not going to go up. You then had a U.S.-created dynasty running the country.

Unlike Osama bin Laden who was trained by the CIA, the Nicaraguan resistance to Somoza couldn't go to the U.S. government for help. During the Cold War you basically had two choices: U.S. influence or Soviet influence.

Today, as the non-aligned movement continues to grow, there is more of a choice. Unfortunately, the U.S. government continues to try to polarize people with statements such as "you are either with us or you are terrorists". This forces peoples to take a side rather than persue their own path.

Anyone who thinks I am a Communist doesn't know anything about me or about Communism. But, it seems I regularly get labeled as a Communist because I don't agree that the U.S. government has the right to decide how everyone should run their government. For me, that position goes back to the Viet Nam war where brave Americans were sent there to burn people's villages to "protect them from Communism"—even though most didn't even have any dealings with their government and didn't know what Communism was.

Even if you think the U.S. government does have the right to dictate what type of government everyone should have, you must notice that it doesn't work. The forced polarization just creates more pressure in the other direction. Just take Augusto Pinochet, the Shaw of Iran, Manuel Noriega, and, of course, an assortment of Somozas.

So, my point continues to be that Nicaraguans, living in Nicaragua, are the ones that need to decide on their government. It's not my country but I happen to like living here. I will respect their decision. But, I will also continue to say that the U.S. government has no business being involved in "helping".

ok....

Submitted by evemontiel on 20 July, 2008 - 09:53.

Can I just throw out there, not that I want to start a conspiracy or anything but I have a 103 year old great aunt that lived in Santa Rosa del Peñon--tiny remote place in the middle of nowhere. Anyway, when my mother and I went to visit her next after the elections she mentioned to us how people came to her door and drove her to a voting booth and gave her $20 US dollars to vote for guess who ORTEGA. So, I am not completely sure if working off the desperation of the people can actually account for them "picking their own government". By the way, FYI you should not be so naive to believe that the three factions was going to lead to democracy because Ortega with the help of the Soviet Union and Cuba was on a power trip that was not going to end because of disagreeing members. I truly believe he would have found a not so kosher way to get rid of them much like the Soviets and Castro did.

Yes, you can

Submitted by fyl on 20 July, 2008 - 10:31.

That happens to be a useful data point. Quite different from generic "US is good, Ortega is bad" statements. More of these—on any side—help all of us reconstruct the sequence of events.

During the Cold War, as I said, there were only "our side" and "their side". Today it is quite different. Also, while I wasn't around pre-Cold War, I expect it was quite different on a global level. Starting in 1823, the U.S. claimed (with the Monroe Doctrine) that the western hemisphere was not for European nations to play in. But, until the time of Theodore Roosevelt, it remained more of a "we take care of you" document.

The "Roosevelt corrolary" turned it into the "fight Communism" document that created this serious polarization. We will certainly never know what 19 July 1979 would have brought us in Nicaragua without an external push but Belli, who isn't and never was a Danielista, seems to seriously think the party split was a sure thing without a new cause to fight.

point of view

Submitted by rholmes on 20 July, 2008 - 07:37.

Yours is interesting. What year would you say the initiation of "pressure of the US" started?

"if you see someone who has lost their smile, give them one of yours"

Amen

Submitted by fyl on 19 July, 2008 - 04:42.

"I hope that we will one day have someone in Nicaragua take the presidency that will give a shit about the country and not just about themselves and their friends and family."

And that is exactly how I feel about the U.S.

Good point..

Submitted by Doug on 18 July, 2008 - 23:04.

both countries have enough internal problems to handle.

Thank you for sticking up for the USA, we're all not as bad as our foreign policy would lead the world to believe. ----------------------------------------------------------

And Cookshow,

try to tone down the 'Blame the USA' stuff.. Okay :)

LMAO -Doug ©

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate

U.S. destabilizing Nicaragua

Submitted by vikingo on 25 August, 2008 - 21:52.

What seems to be lacking in the dicussion of whether or not the US government helped organize the UNO is who was helping the Frente. I hope we helped fund the UNO, at least with all the outside assistence the Sandinistas were getting the opposition needed a balanced playing field. That is not to say the Nicaraguan people did not voice their true intentions at the polls. Witnesses for peace were usefull idiots, they were given selective access to locations and events by Tomas Borge and the incorruptible ministry of the Interior.