Your thoughts about Chile's Pinochet, 40 years after the coup.

[Camlon]

No..The U.S sold off part of its copper holdings...to depress the major export of chile..Again you have no evidence for your argument...

So why did the prices drop under Pinochet too. Surely, if Chile was that important that they would sacrifice everything just to hurt Allende, then why would they keep depressing the prices?

Again, Chile was a country with 10 million people. US do not have one tits toward Chile. US do not base their economical actions on how it will impact Chile. Chile is not important enough for that. Sorry, your "hero" Allende is not that important for the US.

It is time for you to wake up and stop using the copper conspiracy as an excuse to legitimize Allende.

 

[jag2594]

Helping a coup cost a lot less than crashing the world demand for copper.


Now you are making up stories. He never said he wanted to make the "chilean economy scream". He said they want to stop Allende from taking power.

That US did not like the Allende government is common knowledge. However, you are claiming there was a copper consipracy, where US would flood the copper market to destroy the Allende government, but all the evidence are against you.
1. Chile is a small country with 10 million people, its not that important that they want to crash the global copper market.
2. Prices dropped under Pinochet too. If the price drop happen just to get Pinochet in power, then why didn't increase afterwards
3. US production of copper did not massively increase and the world demand stayed high.

Your copper conspiracy is just an excuse, because you know that without it, then the economical problems under Allende was the fault of Allende.

Woops here it is

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/ch26-01.htm

The note from Richard Helms

1) Not to the American Business leaders of ITT Kenecott copper company( thanks for insulting my heritage)

2)THe price drop because the U.S was selling some of their copper...In the early 1980's there was alot of economic problems in chile....As I lived in Austria I met a lot of people from chile that were couldn't find jobs. Thats when I realized that when chile decided to Fixed exchange-rate their currency with the dollar. I hope you know what happen it the 80's

3)The U.S didn't sell all of its copper...

Um no...Nixon want to destroy the economy its in the note...

Copper conspiracy...*laughs*

3)

 

[Camlon]

And btw, these are the copper prices. The drop under Pinochet was much larger than the drop under Allende

The drop was mostly just a return back to normal after a boom.

 

[jag2594]

So why did the prices drop under Pinochet too. Surely, if Chile was that important that they would sacrifice everything just to hurt Allende, then why would they keep depressing the prices?

Again, Chile was a country with 10 million people. US do not have one tits toward Chile. US do not base their economical actions on how it will impact Chile. Chile is not important enough for that. Sorry, your "hero" Allende is not that important for the US.

It is time for you to wake up and stop using the copper conspiracy as an excuse to legitimize Allende.

In the early 1980's there was alot of economic problems in chile....As I lived in Austria I met a lot of people from chile that couldn't find jobs. Thats when I found out that when chile decided to adapt to a Fixed exchange-rate their currency with the dollar. I hope you know what happen it the 80's

 

[jag2594]

And btw, these are the copper prices. The drop under Pinochet was much larger than the drop under Allende

The drop was mostly just a return back to normal after a boom.

In the early 1980's there was alot of economic problems in chile....As I lived in Austria I met a lot of people from chile that were their because they couldn't find jobs. Thats when I realized when chile decided to Fixed exchange-rate their currency with the dollar. I hope you know what happen it the 80's.

 

[Camlon]

Woops here it is

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/ch26-01.htm

Its not even possible to read what is says.

1) Not to the American Business leaders of ITT Kenecott copper company( thanks for insulting my heritage)

2)THe price drop because the U.S was selling some of their copper...In the early 1980's there was alot of economic problems in chile....As I lived in Austria I met a lot of people from chile that were couldn't find jobs. Thats when I realized that when chile decided to Fixed exchange-rate their currency with the dollar. I hope you know what happen it the 80's

3)The U.S didn't sell all of its copper...

Um no...Nixon want to destroy the economy its in the note...

So because US sold a little bit of their copper, then Chile crashed. Man, Allende is more pathetic than I thought.

And as shown in the diagram above, the price drop is not even significant, and was larger under Pinochet. If US was so interested in replacing Allende with Pinochet, then why would they keep depressing the prices.

 

[Camlon]

In the early 1980's there was alot of economic problems in chile....As I lived in Austria I met a lot of people from chile that were their because they couldn't find jobs. Thats when I realized when chile decided to Fixed exchange-rate their currency with the dollar. I hope you know what happen it the 80's.

It doesn't matter how the situation was in the 80s. The point is your copper conspiracy is debunked. If US flooded the market with copper to hurt Allende, then prices should have increased, not dropped under Pinochet.

When you stop using the copper conspiracy as an excuse to legitimize Allende failures, then we can keep talking about which alternative is better. But the conspiracy theories need to be dealt with first.

 

[jag2594]

Its not even possible to read what is says.



So because US sold a little bit of their copper, then Chile crashed. Man, Allende is more pathetic than I thought.

And as shown in the diagram above, the price drop is not even significant, and was larger under Pinochet. If US was so interested in replacing Allende with Pinochet, then why would they keep depressing the prices.

Dude you really don't understand....

Nixon did it because he wanted the people to turn against Allende. which they didn't....ok so you are a denier....Its in the note....

you need to read

Nixon, Kissinger, and Allende: U.S. Involvement in the 1973 Coup in Chile - Lubna Z. Qureshi - Google Books

 

[jag2594]

It doesn't matter how the situation was in the 80s. The point is your copper conspiracy is debunked. If US flooded the market with copper to hurt Allende, then prices should have increased, not dropped under Pinochet.

When you stop using the copper conspiracy as an excuse to legitimize Allende failures, then we can keep talking about which alternative is better. But the conspiracy theories need to be dealt with first.

Actually it does...Do you know what Fixed exchange-rate means?

Just because Pinochet economics were bad doesn't mean that allende problems were for the same reason...Nixon intervened to stop the spread of socialism....

http://books.google.com/books?id=al...g&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAg#v=snippet&q=copper &f=false

 

[Camlon]

Dude you really don't understand....

Nixon did it because he wanted the people to turn against Allende. which they didn't....ok so you are a denier....Its in the note....

you need to read

Nixon, Kissinger, and Allende: U.S. Involvement in the 1973 Coup in Chile - Lubna Z. Qureshi - Google Books

Still, no argument of substance. As I said before
1. Chile is a small country with 10 million people, its not that important that they want to crash the global copper market.
2. Prices dropped under Pinochet too. If the price drop happen just to get Pinochet in power, then why didn't increase afterwards
3. US production of copper did not massively increase and the world demand stayed high.

 

[jag2594]

Still, no argument of substance. As I said before
1. Chile is a small country with 10 million people, its not that important that they want to crash the global copper market.
2. Prices dropped under Pinochet too. If the price drop happen just to get Pinochet in power, then why didn't increase afterwards
3. US production of copper did not massively increase and the world demand stayed high.

Do you know what Fixed exchange-rate means?

Nixon, Kissinger, and Allende: U.S. Involvement in the 1973 Coup in Chile - Lubna Z. Qureshi - Google Books

 

[Camlon]

Actually it does...Do you know what Fixed exchange-rate means?

So because Pinochet fixed the exchange rate, then it makes sense for US to flood the market to hurt Allende so they can replace him with Pinochet?

As I said before
1. Chile is a small country with 10 million people, its not that important that they want to crash the global copper market.
2. Prices dropped under Pinochet too. If the price drop happen just to get Pinochet in power, then why didn't the price increase afterwards
3. US production of copper did not massively increase and the world demand stayed high.
4. The price drop was not even significant

It is time for you to give up your crackpot copper conspiracy theory and join the reality. All the evidence are against you, just give it up and use more sensible arguments to argue for Allende.

 

[jag2594]

So because Pinochet fixed the exchange rate, then it makes sense for US to flood the market to hurt Allende so they can replace him with Pinochet? As I said before
1. Chile is a small country with 10 million people, its not that important that they want to crash the global copper market.
2. Prices dropped under Pinochet too. If the price drop happen just to get Pinochet in power, then why didn't the price increase afterwards
3. US production of copper did not massively increase and the world demand stayed high.

It is time to give up your crackpot copper conspiracy theory and join the reality. All the evidence are against you, just give it up and use more sensible arguments to argue for Allende.

Nixon did not want socialism to spread, thats why the cia funded the coup in 1973


http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/nsaebb8i.htm


http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/docs/doc18.pdf

 

[Camlon]

Nixon did not want socialism to spread, thats why the cia funded the coup in 1973

Already answered. Supporting a coup is a lot less expensive than crashing the global copper market.

As I said before
1. Chile is a small country with 10 million people, its not that important that they want to crash the global copper market.
2. Prices dropped under Pinochet too. If the price drop happen just to get Pinochet in power, then why didn't the price increase afterwards
3. US production of copper did not massively increase and the world demand stayed high.
4. The price drop was not even significant

It is time for you to give up your crackpot copper conspiracy theory and join the reality. All the evidence are against you, just give it up and use more sensible arguments to argue for Allende.

 

[jag2594]

Already answered. Supporting a coup is a lot less expensive than crashing the global copper market.

It is time for you to give up your crackpot copper conspiracy theory and join the reality. All the evidence are against you, just give it up and use more sensible arguments to argue for Allende.

~~ I:CON'O~iC"LI,.Y,, CHi~£ is rt~ lJ-4£. DEST" St<iP.t· EYEfll fr• ,. ...._$ •siBi#•3f~; 11'181' •11 1 lN t!A..AI) R£.SE't~(&# 1"·Q~C J;IEFI CAPl T~ TK.1.H Tl-IE. V~• ~Tl.~Tt Nil N~XT" 'I'E:A.~ n·.Wl,L.l.' 8£ T~£· '£·CCifH) I..A~DEST COPP£R PROD-UCe:R l'N T~E. 1110AI..I)~ iURiP.A$'$! t4Ci·
.
tO COMPA~ir£~• TH(RE; l < l l l l BE ~0
1~£ SOVl£1 . ~NtON~ YMA~Ks·
T~E £~~R~S- ~HV(iT~~N,
.
~ ~F-11'-£"• $ Plt~.M£ C'JST0t1E:~.!t A.RE ~ESj-e:R~ ~URDPE' ~~() .J~AH t .
~1~~·
,; us~ AS· JH 1~£ CA$~ OF C~&A~ l~[~t ~t~CA#Tl~ls~-N~T~ONS
·
: ~A.~J(;.
~~~PlLY BE AEAD~ TO PiC~ UP 8~SE~£Nf" B~RG~iNS ON (~~PER· AN ALL£NO£ ~£GrME WlL~ AL~C SAVE ·A-LA~QE ~UTf"lCW OF HA.RO: CUR,;:EHCtE"&- jH P~OFlTS, .l.t10~llU.TICith
( i C E N S E P " ' I I ~EH T s A . l ' t D t t t o \ y · E ' V £ N : 0 L ' F " A U - . ; 1 O N - " T H E · . TH'~ E ' E • O I J A R 'n:~s
OF·. elL~l~~ DOlL~RS il O~~s TO A.lO~ T~l: POJ~1" u 'f';IJ.T H N££:0 NOt. F...1:-li:! ..,,N'I" .F.: F~~ toME 11P1E•
i~ cwlL[ !S ~£A~lY A~ iSLA~D· lls l~~EE. ~tiG~eo~s- H~vr ,~,,ICJENT P~~BL£~$ TO [$CH£W AMY P~ts~URts; CN T~I$ COU'NTR'Y •
•' J• T~[R~ 1S ~0 CDU~TRY ON E~Rl~- ~~AT :~SO ~A~. FRO~ fHE ' tW'O &I.JPt~..powEiis .;.N' REo c~1111...,. tT ts. NOl Pol.~~o ~o~
is· U ' P'iEXH;:O• '
nI I r. Stu'l.. l T KI L.L. ~C1 R£.Q.IJIRE- AN'I' i'llo.SS..f ~;.COt!MnHr-~r E~OM i..l'f't'¢Jo.!E:' ~Ji£ .S.O'I~E1 11~ION 'II'a.~ t1cVE•~HW CaunOn
10~EXPAND rts·5-.-..SE• lT.Kl'ED Nor·JUSK )o!U!,:Io(-$OClt;• J~ ~OT ~~O~H(R CU~AW DR~IK Dr ~OSCQW1~~£SQ~~CE9• WlLt. · 'T.Ak.E Y£ARS . e.EF'ORt;: THE 0£.4,0 .. 111'(1 Gl·n·· OF';" TI-H: · "N£~ wrL~· c~U~H t~e £co~OM~ oF 1~t cou~r~v.
CHf~E
IT' SW'~T£H
i~· JT lS L.•~ENIA~~~ f~£· US THAJ WJL~- HAVE: fO M~YE , .-..SI:tE'.A • TC~o.fiROw 'II'!:" ' 'SH.iLL.: R~POfl!f 01'4 'THE "t1E~~IJ.RtS · lirE i~t· 1AKI~G lO PREPA~£ ~OR T~£· N£~ t~A•
r,. CA.BE%A4' COFtAi:ON ,t.NO c•J:JHE:S ... ~E:Atl41 ~t:~-R1"
T""; KOIUl'Y'
... ...
.. ..; .
c~o~
~[ADERSHlP DEPt~6s uPoN, 1r ~ - ~~rusE ~PA~~s~4 .IINb ·G'IJTS•
•
CONr 'OENll J. j.
n.E tHE.,. cou..,.,.£o ull<o111 c:f<ACl·V.RA......•·:cH~ti'£R,•
DECLASSIFIED
Ofq rU:IUCIL1t.' :
AND· T~E·£~•l" ~AN~•·
c01-lOtl:c.·SWE't t


http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/docs/doc18.pdf

 

[Camlon]

~~ I:CON'O~iC"LI,.Y,, CHi~£ is rt~ lJ-4£. DEST" St<iP.t· EYEfll fr• ,. ...._$ •siBi#•3f~; 11'181' •11 1 lN t!A..AI) R£.SE't~(&# 1"·Q~C J;IEFI CAPl T~ TK.1.H Tl-IE. V~• ~Tl.~Tt Nil N~XT" 'I'E:A.~ n·.Wl,L.l.' 8£ T~£· '£·CCifH) I..A~DEST COPP£R PROD-UCe:R l'N T~E. 1110AI..I)~ iURiP.A$'$! t4Ci·
.
tO COMPA~ir£~• TH(RE; l < l l l l BE ~0
1~£ SOVl£1 . ~NtON~ YMA~Ks·
T~E £~~R~S- ~HV(iT~~N,
.
~ ~F-11'-£"• $ Plt~.M£ C'JST0t1E:~.!t A.RE ~ESj-e:R~ ~URDPE' ~~() .J~AH t .
~1~~·
,; us~ AS· JH 1~£ CA$~ OF C~&A~ l~[~t ~t~CA#Tl~ls~-N~T~ONS
·
: ~A.~J(;.
~~~PlLY BE AEAD~ TO PiC~ UP 8~SE~£Nf" B~RG~iNS ON (~~PER· AN ALL£NO£ ~£GrME WlL~ AL~C SAVE ·A-LA~QE ~UTf"lCW OF HA.RO: CUR,;:EHCtE"&- jH P~OFlTS, .l.t10~llU.TICith
( i C E N S E P " ' I I ~EH T s A . l ' t D t t t o \ y · E ' V £ N : 0 L ' F " A U - . ; 1 O N - " T H E · . TH'~ E ' E • O I J A R 'n:~s
OF·. elL~l~~ DOlL~RS il O~~s TO A.lO~ T~l: POJ~1" u 'f';IJ.T H N££:0 NOt. F...1:-li:! ..,,N'I" .F.: F~~ toME 11P1E•
i~ cwlL[ !S ~£A~lY A~ iSLA~D· lls l~~EE. ~tiG~eo~s- H~vr ,~,,ICJENT P~~BL£~$ TO [$CH£W AMY P~ts~URts; CN T~I$ COU'NTR'Y •
•' J• T~[R~ 1S ~0 CDU~TRY ON E~Rl~- ~~AT :~SO ~A~. FRO~ fHE ' tW'O &I.JPt~..powEiis .;.N' REo c~1111...,. tT ts. NOl Pol.~~o ~o~
is· U ' P'iEXH;:O• '
nI I r. Stu'l.. l T KI L.L. ~C1 R£.Q.IJIRE- AN'I' i'llo.SS..f ~;.COt!MnHr-~r E~OM i..l'f't'¢Jo.!E:' ~Ji£ .S.O'I~E1 11~ION 'II'a.~ t1cVE•~HW CaunOn
10~EXPAND rts·5-.-..SE• lT.Kl'ED Nor·JUSK )o!U!,:Io(-$OClt;• J~ ~OT ~~O~H(R CU~AW DR~IK Dr ~OSCQW1~~£SQ~~CE9• WlLt. · 'T.Ak.E Y£ARS . e.EF'ORt;: THE 0£.4,0 .. 111'(1 Gl·n·· OF';" TI-H: · "N£~ wrL~· c~U~H t~e £co~OM~ oF 1~t cou~r~v.
CHf~E
IT' SW'~T£H
i~· JT lS L.•~ENIA~~~ f~£· US THAJ WJL~- HAVE: fO M~YE , .-..SI:tE'.A • TC~o.fiROw 'II'!:" ' 'SH.iLL.: R~POfl!f 01'4 'THE "t1E~~IJ.RtS · lirE i~t· 1AKI~G lO PREPA~£ ~OR T~£· N£~ t~A•
r,. CA.BE%A4' COFtAi:ON ,t.NO c•J:JHE:S ... ~E:Atl41 ~t:~-R1"
T""; KOIUl'Y'
... ...
.. ..; .
c~o~
~[ADERSHlP DEPt~6s uPoN, 1r ~ - ~~rusE ~PA~~s~4 .IINb ·G'IJTS•
•
CONr 'OENll J. j.
n.E tHE.,. cou..,.,.£o ull<o111 c:f<ACl·V.RA......•·:cH~ti'£R,•
DECLASSIFIED
Ofq rU:IUCIL1t.' :
AND· T~E·£~•l" ~AN~•·
c01-lOtl:c.·SWE't t


http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/docs/doc18.pdf

Lol, this makes just as much sense as your copper conspiracy theory.

PS: I did go through your link, I found nothing that supports your copper conspiracy theory.

 

[jag2594]

Lol, this makes just as much sense as your copper conspiracy theory.

Though Chile nationalized American holdings in the copper industry in 1971 without making a satisfactory arrangement for compensation--pushing the U.S. government-funded Overseas Private Investment Corporation to the brink of bankruptcy--the notorious Hickenlooper Amendment (requiring a suspension of aid to any country that expropriates U.S. property without payment) was never invoked.

FrontPage Magazine - Kissinger and Chile

 

[Camlon]

Though Chile nationalized American holdings in the copper industry in 1971 without making a satisfactory arrangement for compensation--pushing the U.S. government-funded Overseas Private Investment Corporation to the brink of bankruptcy--the notorious Hickenlooper Amendment (requiring a suspension of aid to any country that expropriates U.S. property without payment) was never invoked.

FrontPage Magazine - Kissinger and Chile

So US did not even implement the Hickenlooper Amendment, but they were willing to sacrifice their own copper towns to hurt Chile. Your argument makes even less sense now.

And you still haven't explained this
1. Chile is a small country with 10 million people, its not that important that they want to crash the global copper market.
2. Prices dropped under Pinochet too. If the price drop happen just to get Pinochet in power, then why didn't the price increase afterwards
3. US production of copper did not massively increase and the world demand stayed high.
4. The price drop was not even significant

 

[jag2594]

So US did not even implement the Hickenlooper Amendment, but they were willing to sacrifice their own copper towns to hurt Chile. Your argument makes even less sense now.

And you still haven't explained this
1. Chile is a small country with 10 million people, its not that important that they want to crash the global copper market.
2. Prices dropped under Pinochet too. If the price drop happen just to get Pinochet in power, then why didn't the price increase afterwards
3. US production of copper did not massively increase and the world demand stayed high.
4. The price drop was not even significant

In Connally's view, the United States had to regain control of Chile's copper. Connally wrote to Nixon " “it is in our interest to facilitate the development of the mineral resources of Chile. That country is practically unique in the resources it has under soil".

Like the other members of the Nixon administration, Connally feared the example that Allende would set for the rest of the world, noting America's growing reliance on imported minerals.22

john connally chile copper it is our interest - Google Search


"Rather than accepting that decision, Kennecott pressured European countries not to purchase Chilean copper"

Nixon, Kissinger, and Allende: U.S. Involvement in the 1973 Coup in Chile - Lubna Z. Qureshi - Google Books

There is more evidence.. I will be happily to show you...

 

[Camlon]

In Connally's view, the United States had to regain control of Chile's copper. Connally wrote to Nixon " “it is in our interest to facilitate the development of the mineral resources of Chile. That country is practically unique in the resources it has under soil".

Like the other members of the Nixon administration, Connally feared the example that Allende would set for the rest of the world, noting America's growing reliance on imported minerals.22

john connally chile copper it is our interest - Google Search




There is more evidence.. I will be happily to show you...

Your evidence is still the same dumb book. Linking to a book is not evidence.

So now the argument for your copper conspiracy theory is they wanted their copper factories back. How many times do I have to repeat. Chile is not that important. US economical policy in the 70s did not revolve around Chile. US was a lot more concerned about the copper mines in the US. Crashing the copper prices will damage US copper mines.

And you do realize Pinochet kept the copper mines nationalized. That makes zero sense if your conspiracy theory is true.

Since the copper prices dropped and he did not give back the copper mines. Did US punish Pinochet too?

"Rather than accepting that decision, Kennecott pressured European countries not to purchase Chilean copper"

Nixon, Kissinger, and Allende: U.S. Involvement in the 1973 Coup in Chile - Lubna Z. Qureshi - Google Books

There was no proper boycott of Chile. And what do you expect when you seize foreign companies. You expect them to buy the products from the factories you just seized.

But Chile had no problems selling their copper.

 

[jag2594]

Your evidence is still the same dumb book. Linking to a book is not evidence.

So now the argument for your copper conspiracy theory is they wanted their copper factories back. How many times do I have to repeat. Chile is not that important. US economical policy in the 70s did not revolve around Chile. US was a lot more concerned about the copper mines in the US. Crashing the copper prices will damage US copper mines.

And you do realize Pinochet kept the copper mines nationalized. That makes zero sense if your conspiracy theory is true.



There was no boycott of Chile. And your source is that book again.

Um the book is very center and only tells the facts....Not everyone can write a book.

If you cannot dispute the evidence then its clear....Nixon and the corporate elite tried to destroy the economy of chile...


You make no points or back up your statements... I gave you my evidence, I don't need to hear your rhetoric. Back up your statements !

Oh and lets go back again to look at the department of the state telegram you didn't bother to see...

Economically, chile is in the best shape every. It has $500,000,000 in hard reserves more per capita then the U.S. Starting next year it will be the second largest copper producer in the world, surpassing the Soviet Union.

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/docs/doc18.pdf

Your a bust.....

 

[Camlon]

Um the book is very center and only tells the facts....Not everyone can write a book.

If you cannot dispute the evidence then its clear....Nixon and the corporate elite tried to destroy the economy of chile...


You make no points or back up your statements... I gave you my evidence, I don't need to hear your rhetoric. Back up your statements !

Oh and lets go back again to look at the department of the state telegram you didn't bother to see...

Economically, chile is in the best shape every. It has $500,000,000 in hard reserves more per capita then the U.S. Starting next year it will be the second largest copper producer in the world, surpassing the Soviet Union.

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/docs/doc18.pdf

Your a bust.....

Again, no arguments of substance. Yes, everyone can a write a book, even Glenn Beck has written one and sold a lot better than the book you are referring to. No, books are not evidence, and only a dumb person would believe everything they read in a book.

And how does pointing out that Chile was doing well before Allende support your case. That just makes Allende failures even worse. Surely a country that is doing so well can handle a small price drop without getting hyperinflation.

What evidence? Every single argument you have given for your crackpot conspiracy theory has been utterly debunked. That is why you never follow up your arguments, you post an argument, I debunk it and you post another one. Sometimes you repeat a debunked argument, and I remind I have already answered it.

Attempt: Nixon did not want socialism to spread, hence he punished Allende by flooding the market
Answer: Then why did the prices drop even more under Pinnochet

Attempt: Some text you couldn't even post correctly
Answer: There is nothing in that text which indicates US had any interest in flooding the market.

Attempt: Copper is too important for the US, so they had to stop Chile
Answer: US produced a lot of copper too. If copper production is that important for the US, then they don't want the copper market to crash.

And you still haven't explained this
1. Chile is a small country with 10 million people, its not that important that they want to crash the global copper market.
2. Prices dropped under Pinochet too. If the price drop happen just to get Pinochet in power, then why didn't the price increase afterwards
3. US production of copper did not massively increase and the world demand stayed high.
4. The price drop was not even significant

It is time for you to give up your crackpot copper conspiracy theory and join the reality. All the evidence are against you, just give it up and use more sensible arguments to argue for Allende.

If you cannot dispute the evidence then its clear....Nixon and the corporate elite tried to destroy the economy of chile...

Now you sound like a radical socialist. When you post things like this, why should anyone who is not a radical socialist believe anything you say.

 

[jag2594]

Again, no arguments of substance. How does pointing out that Chile was doing well before Allende support your case. That just makes Allende failures even worse. Surely a country that is doing so well can handle a small price drop without getting hyperinflation.

What evidence? Every single argument you have given for your crackpot conspiracy theory has been utterly debunked.

Attempt: Nixon did not want socialism to spread, hence he punished Allende by flooding the market
Answer: Then why did the prices drop even more under Pinnochet

Attempt: Some text you couldn't even post correctly
Answer: There is nothing in that text which indicates US had any interest in flooding the market.

Attempt: Copper is too important for the US, so they had to stop Chile
Answer: US produced a lot of copper too. If copper production is that important for the US, then they don't want the copper market to crash.

And you still haven't explained this
1. Chile is a small country with 10 million people, its not that important that they want to crash the global copper market.
2. Prices dropped under Pinochet too. If the price drop happen just to get Pinochet in power, then why didn't the price increase afterwards
3. US production of copper did not massively increase and the world demand stayed high.
4. The price drop was not even significant

It is time for you to give up your crackpot copper conspiracy theory and join the reality. All the evidence are against you, just give it up and use more sensible arguments to argue for Allende.

You never debunked the evidence because you never posted any evidence...The food owners would not sell food to make it look like a famine

Nixon, Kissinger, and Allende: U.S. Involvement in the 1973 Coup in Chile - Lubna Z. Qureshi - Google Books

1A) Fix-exchange rate(Pinochet pro-corporations reforms didn't work)

2A) denier, I gave you evidence from the book. You don't have any evidence to back up your claim. NOT MY FAULT

3A)Economically, chile is in the best shape every. It has $500,000,000 in hard reserves more per capita then the U.S. Starting next year it will be the second largest copper producer in the world, surpassing the Soviet Union.

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/docs/doc18.pdf



1) same as A3

2) same as A!

3)And other countries cannot produce Copper as well

4)The right-wing in chile tried to spread a famine by not producing food.

Nixon, Kissinger, and Allende: U.S. Involvement in the 1973 Coup in Chile - Lubna Z. Qureshi - Google Books


Na man...Keep believing in your precise america.... You live in a authoritative country...LOL

 

[Camlon]

1A) Fix-exchange rate(Pinochet pro-corporations reforms didn't work)

2A) denier, I gave you evidence from the book. You don't have any evidence to back up your claim. NOT MY FAULT

3A)Economically, chile is in the best shape every. It has $500,000,000 in hard reserves more per capita then the U.S. Starting next year it will be the second largest copper producer in the world, surpassing the Soviet Union.

1. So because Chile fixed their rate, then they were able to massively decrease the world copper prices? What are you smoking?

2. That wasn't even from your book, so fail. I have posted evidence, but I am not posting unrelated evidence like you do. Posting a comment saying Chile was doing is not well before Allende is not evidence that US crashed the copper market.

3. Nice try. That has zero relevancy to what I said.

And how does pointing out that Chile was doing well before Allende support your case. That just makes Allende failures even worse. Surely a country that is doing so well can handle a small price drop without getting hyperinflation.

1) same as A3

2) same as A!

3)And other countries cannot produce Copper as well

4)The right-wing in chile tried to spread a famine by not producing food.

1. Many countries have one big export sector. That won't mean US economic policy will revolve around that country.
2. Oh... right the fixed exchange rate conspiracy theory. Chile fixing the exchange rate somehow crashed the global copper market
3. That is not a relevant answer. And other countries are producing copper.
4. How is Pinochet promoting famine related to "The price drop of copper was not even significant under Allende".

Again, I see no arguments of substance. Two of my points you couldn't even answer. One of them you tried to claim Chile fixing their currency somehow lead to a collapse in world prices. Of course you didn't explain why.

Just give it up. I know you probably believed in the copper conspiracy for a long time, but the world is not that black and white. US is not the devil, and Allende is not Jesus.

Na man...Keep believing in your precise america.... You live in a authoritative country...LOL

And I suggest you to move to Venezuela where you belong, because Chile is to the right of America. With the kind of opinions you have, you must really hate what Chile is today.

And remember according to your copper conspiracy theory, then US is so powerful they can destroy the Chilean economy under a perfect socialist preisdent, by just selling some of their copper reserves. That's pretty pathetic.

 

[Camlon]

Here is an interesting article about Chile

-- -- -- excerpt from "Who killed Latin democracy" -- -- --

The harsh truth is that without Salvador Allende there would have been no Pinochet. The former was elected in 1970 with a bare plurality - slightly more than a third of the popular vote. Only Chile's firm tradition of recognizing the winner in its first-past-the-post electoral system assured his inauguration. Even so, to win the votes of Christian Democrats in Congress, he was forced to agree to a Statute of Democratic Guarantees that obliged him to recognize such liberties as freedom of the press and unfettered access to the electronic media.

Allende was a likeable man -- but remarkably ignorant, fatuous and weak. He thought of himself as both a democrat and a Marxist, and professed to see no particular contradiction between the two. Unfortunately, within his own government coalition (four parties, two of them formally Marxist), the lines were far more sharply drawn. Ironically, the Communists were the moderates of the piece, since they were carrying water for Moscow, which had other fish to fry in more central theatres of political conflict. (The great concern of the Soviets in Chile -- apart from not wanting to pay for another Cuba -- was not to scare off Christian Democrats and Socialists in Western Europe who might be toying with similar coalitions in the future). Allende's Socialists -- a somewhat sui generis party made up of social democrats, anarchists and Trotskyites -- were far closer ideologically to Fidel Castro's Cuba, which, by the way, maintained a remarkably outsized diplomatic and military mission in Santiago, and also the principal source of illegal weaponry that poured into Chile during these years. Intoxicated by their own rhetoric and ideology, and also deluded by the apparent proximity of total power, the Socialists and their allies on the farthest left (the so-called MIR) were impatient to move to a final confrontation with the "bourgeoisie".

During 1972 and 1973 they actively took the initiative, seizing factories and farms, far exceeding the government's own program of reform and forcing the president to recognize their audacious strokes as faits accomplis. Unfortunately, the nationalized sector of the economy lost money so quickly that the only way to pay its workers was to print unbacked currency in massive quantities; the result was a hyperinflation hitherto unknown to Chile -- 600% in 1973. In the countryside, improvised expropriations -- some of the farms rather smaller than those marked for division by the existing agrarian reform law -- polarized opinion, produced a mini-civil war and greatly dislocated the provision of food to Chile's cities. The result was drastic shortages and a flourishing black market.

Meanwhile, the pell-mell expropriations of factories and the intentional bankrupting of large enterprises had another consequence, one not entirely unwelcome to the Allende government -- independent newspapers and radio stations lost a principal source of financing (advertising). Indeed, it is an inconvenient but incontrovertible fact that Chile would have had no independent press at all in the last days of the regime were it not for clandestine financing by the hated CIA.

Economic chaos and political polarization propelled Chile's middle class, many of whose members had voted for Allende in 1970, toward the right. The result was a new political coalition between Christian Democrats and Conservatives that obtained 56% in the March, 1973, parliamentary by-elections -- a decisive vote against the government but short of the two-thirds needed to impeach Allende. What the new congress could do, however, was to declare the regime "outside the law", which it surely was. At the same time, many members of the opposition were knocking on the doors of the barracks, virtually imploring the military to break the political stalemate.

As it happens, I was in Chile in August, 1973, which is to say, about 30 days before Allende's fall. A coup of some sort was almost universally expected, though no one was quite certain what form it would take or in what direction it would move. For his part, President Allende, from the very beginning, had assiduously courted the high command. He had invited several generals into his cabinet during 1972 and again in 1973. He even managed to seduce politically General Carlos Prats, the commander-in-chief of the army. A "left wing" military government was by no means unimaginable; one already existed in near-by Peru (with economic policies which were remarkably similar to those of Allende), another in Bolivia. Across the Andes in Argentina General Juan Peron was about to return to power with leftist support.

What many of us failed to see was that General Prats was increasingly isolated from his own officers, who shared the concerns and anger of the middle class. A little more than a week before the coup, he was forced to retire, replaced by his chief of staff, General Augusto Pinochet. On the day of the coup, the new army commander was a personality virtually unknown to all but a handful of Chileans. Small wonder that no one saw what was coming. Most Christian Democrats imagined that after a brief interlude, new elections would be called in which Allende's predecessor, Eduardo Frei Montalva, the former president, would be the inevitable victor. Instead, all politics came to an end, and many politicians, labour leaders, and intellectuals ended up in prison or exile. More than a thousand ended up in graves whose precise location remains to be revealed. Even General Prats, Pinochet's closest professional friend, failed to take the full measure of his successor. Permitted to emigrate to Argentina, he and his wife were murdered there a year after the coup, apparently on orders from Pinochet himself.