This is a widely believed myth. People such as Christopher Hitchens have inferred that America was behind the coup simply because it was so well executed, which is insulting to the Chileans. The CIA didn't know who Pinochet was until after he took control of Chile. There is no evidence that the CIA had any hand in it.
The CIA did toy with the idea of backing Generals Viaux and Valenzuela before Allende was inaugurated in 1970. While they did provide three sub machine guns and tear gas grenades to Valenzuela, they didn't know what they were for and the weapons weren't even used for the kidnapping attempt of General Schneider that turned into an assassination. After Schneider's death, the CIA withdrew to an intelligence gathering only posture. It was so hands off that they weren't even aware of the possibility of the failed El Tancazo coup in June 1973 nor the successful September coup by Pinochet.
Your judgement is laughable.
You even admit the CIA supplied guns to the assassins.
That clearly shows they were complicit.
They also provided money and urged the killers to get on with it,
we have the diplomatic cables now.
Get real you clown!
Even that gives more credit to the CIA than they deserve. Three years after Person A successfully acquires Object 1, Person P takes it from Person A without any involvement from Persons B and C, while Person D had never even heard of Person P.
CIA documents show unwavering support for Viaux's co-conspirator, Camilo Valenzuela, and also show a $50,000 payment to the kidnap team Viaux had hired. Documents written at the time of the assault on Schneider describe it as part of the "Valenzuela group coup plan."[6] On October 15, 1970 Kissinger allegedly told U.S. President Richard Nixon that he had "turned off" plans to support Viaux, explaining that "Nothing could be worse than an abortive coup."[10] The CIA claimed that no such "stand-down" order was ever received.[11]
The U.S. government claims it did not intend for Schneider to be murdered, only kidnapped.
That does not refute what I said. That is entirely opportunism. They didn't install anyone.
There was already an election going on. They preferred one over the other. They then stacked the deck.
Installing someone means offering up their own client in an election or removing the already in place one.
You really need to understand that difference. The outcome may look the same to you, but it's an entirely different beast.
It's like claiming Biden was installed because the votes were rigged. Biden wasn't installed. He was already in the runnings. They would have stacked the deck in favour of any other candidate they preferred. Which is why we saw the huge push and then sudden candidate flip.
How does failing at a coup in 1970 make the CIA complicit in Pinochet's successfull takeover in 1973? Why are you so hung up on wanting the CIA to appear competent and based?
The CIA did not have any hand in Pinochet, see my other reply for the very short version. For an in-depth look at this topic, read the book Hostile Intent by Kristian Gustafson, which goes through all the US involvement in Chile from 1964-1974
RIP Chile indeed. Those anti-government protesters were nothing more than looters and arsonists - just look at all the people they killed when they were burning down grocery stores.
He also gave an extended shout out to Chilean women, a key voting bloc
After the world votes itself into 100 years of darkness, whatever restoration that comes after needs to blare from every media platform that will exist, that it was women that did it
I hope it works for them. This is the essence of democracy , when you try a bunch of parties and they fail to deliver try something new specially if it gets CIA seething.
Evo Morales left Bolivia as shit as he got it anyway.
You can vote your way into communism but you won't be voting it out.
They will begging for another Pinochet in the next year.
Chille probably didn't vote their way into it. The CIA doesn't know how to do military coups, but they are great at fortifying elections.
I think they did pretty well with Pinochet and his junta friends.
This is a widely believed myth. People such as Christopher Hitchens have inferred that America was behind the coup simply because it was so well executed, which is insulting to the Chileans. The CIA didn't know who Pinochet was until after he took control of Chile. There is no evidence that the CIA had any hand in it.
The CIA did toy with the idea of backing Generals Viaux and Valenzuela before Allende was inaugurated in 1970. While they did provide three sub machine guns and tear gas grenades to Valenzuela, they didn't know what they were for and the weapons weren't even used for the kidnapping attempt of General Schneider that turned into an assassination. After Schneider's death, the CIA withdrew to an intelligence gathering only posture. It was so hands off that they weren't even aware of the possibility of the failed El Tancazo coup in June 1973 nor the successful September coup by Pinochet.
Your judgement is laughable. You even admit the CIA supplied guns to the assassins. That clearly shows they were complicit. They also provided money and urged the killers to get on with it, we have the diplomatic cables now. Get real you clown!
Person A and Person B are fighting over Object 1.
Person C asks person D for a gun, but doesn't say why. Person C gives the gun to their favoured participant.
Person B was not installed or made the victor by Person D. Did they make it easier? Yes.
There's a difference. The CIA saw an opportunity and took it, but that does not mean they installed Pinochet.
Even that gives more credit to the CIA than they deserve. Three years after Person A successfully acquires Object 1, Person P takes it from Person A without any involvement from Persons B and C, while Person D had never even heard of Person P.
You are a lying shithead!
That does not refute what I said. That is entirely opportunism. They didn't install anyone.
There was already an election going on. They preferred one over the other. They then stacked the deck.
Installing someone means offering up their own client in an election or removing the already in place one.
You really need to understand that difference. The outcome may look the same to you, but it's an entirely different beast.
It's like claiming Biden was installed because the votes were rigged. Biden wasn't installed. He was already in the runnings. They would have stacked the deck in favour of any other candidate they preferred. Which is why we saw the huge push and then sudden candidate flip.
How does failing at a coup in 1970 make the CIA complicit in Pinochet's successfull takeover in 1973? Why are you so hung up on wanting the CIA to appear competent and based?
True, but the CIA is very different now from how they were then.
The CIA did not have any hand in Pinochet, see my other reply for the very short version. For an in-depth look at this topic, read the book Hostile Intent by Kristian Gustafson, which goes through all the US involvement in Chile from 1964-1974
Back when they were against Communists until they became Communists.
Over and over. They forget in less than 2 generations
Oh God, it'll be even less competent at feeding people than communists normally are.
Being one of the hungry is a social construct. Just get your food from the grocery store, that's where food comes from!
Gustave Le Bon wrote about these Latin tards and their love of socialism in the 1800s. They literally haven't learned a thing in a thousand years.
Venezuelans are having a laugh right now tho
jajajajajajaja
RIP Chile indeed. Those anti-government protesters were nothing more than looters and arsonists - just look at all the people they killed when they were burning down grocery stores.
Wait, are we still taking about Chile?
After the world votes itself into 100 years of darkness, whatever restoration that comes after needs to blare from every media platform that will exist, that it was women that did it
illegitimate
🚁🚁🚁🚁🚁🚁🚁🚁🚁
I hope it works for them. This is the essence of democracy , when you try a bunch of parties and they fail to deliver try something new specially if it gets CIA seething.
Evo Morales left Bolivia as shit as he got it anyway.
How original...
Mein Kek!
Good bye to the most civilized country in Latin America, hello to Veneuzela III .
You just had to give women rights and let them vote.
Now your country, your people, your culture is going to get assraped into the mud. Enjoy the ride I guess.
Someone text Celine Dion. ♪It's all coming back to me now♪