Comments by "Valen Ron" (@valenrn8657) on "Democracy Now!" channel.

  1. 9
  2. 8
  3. 4
  4. 3
  5. 2
  6. 2
  7. 2
  8. 2
  9. 2
  10. 2
  11. 2
  12. 2
  13. 1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25.  @rongoldman7520  The Chile example, USSR has supported its Cuban proxy that in turn supported Marxist Salvador Allende. You're a hypocrite. Marxist Salvador Allende clashed with the right-wing parties that controlled Congress and with the judiciary. On 11 September 1973, the military moved to oust Allende in a coup d'état. Marxist Salvador Allende's presidential branch effectively declared war on the judiciary and right-wing majority-governed Congress branches. During the 1970 Chilean presidential election, both the United States and the Soviet Union poured money into this election through their intelligence agencies and other sources. 💰KGB money was more precisely targeted. Allende made a personal request for Soviet money through his personal contact, KGB officer Svyatoslav Kuznetsov, who urgently came to Chile from Mexico City to help Allende. The original allocation of money for these elections through the KGB was $400,000, and an additional personal subsidy of $50,000 directly to Allende.[8] It is believed that help from KGB was a decisive factor, because Allende won by a narrow margin of 39,000 votes of a total of the 3 million cast. After the elections, the KGB director Yuri Andropov obtained permission for additional money and other resources from the Central Committee of the CPSU to ensure Allende victory in Congress. In his request on 24 October, he stated that KGB "will carry out measures designed to promote the consolidation of Allende's victory and his election to the post of President of the country".[8] In your argument's summary, the USSR-supported regime change intervention is okay while the US intervention is bad. Your argument is hypocritical.
    1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41.  @SergioLeon-e2e  The Chile example, USSR has supported its Cuban proxy that in turn supported Marxist Salvador Allende. You're a hypocrite. Marxist Salvador Allende clashed with the right-wing parties that controlled Congress and with the judiciary. On 11 September 1973, the military moved to oust Allende in a coup d'état. Marxist Salvador Allende's presidential branch effectively declared war on the judiciary and right-wing majority-governed Congress branches. During the 1970 Chilean presidential election, both the United States and the Soviet Union poured money into this election through their intelligence agencies and other sources. 💰KGB money was more precisely targeted. Allende made a personal request for Soviet money through his personal contact, KGB officer Svyatoslav Kuznetsov, who urgently came to Chile from Mexico City to help Allende. The original allocation of money for these elections through the KGB was $400,000, and an additional personal subsidy of $50,000 directly to Allende.[8] It is believed that help from KGB was a decisive factor, because Allende won by a narrow margin of 39,000 votes of a total of the 3 million cast. After the elections, the KGB director Yuri Andropov obtained permission for additional money and other resources from the Central Committee of the CPSU to ensure Allende victory in Congress. In his request on 24 October, he stated that KGB "will carry out measures designed to promote the consolidation of Allende's victory and his election to the post of President of the country".[8] In your argument's summary, the USSR-supported regime change intervention is okay while the US intervention is bad. Your argument is hypocritical.
    1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1