Pinochet death 'saddens' Thatcher

[Carcass]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6167351.stm

Former Prime Minister Baroness Thatcher is "greatly saddened" by the death of Augusto Pinochet, said a spokesman.

Makes my wanna puke! I'd like to know how sad she is for the 3000 dissapeared, for the ones who suffered electric shock torture and thrown from helicopters. Fucked up old hag! I'm more saddened by the fact that this criminal wasn't sentenced for any of his crimes.

[Stealth]

It's the iron lady we are talking about... It doesn't surprise me; her comments go hand in hand with her mentality.

[miditek]

It's the iron lady we are talking about... It doesn't surprise me; her comments go hand in hand with her mentality.

I think that senility has finally set in for 'ol Marge.

[NeonVomit]

I expected nothing less from her.

What confuses me though is the people in Chile itself who seemed to revere Pinochet... anyone from there care to enlighten us?

[Stealth]

SOME people in Chile revered Pinochet. There were newspaper coverages showing both those who revered Pinochet and those who were more than happy to see him dead. But let's be careful not to generalize what we see on TV or read in newspapers. Don't forget that Pinochet's coup d'etat got rid of the democratically elected socialist president Allende. The current Chilean president, again elected by the people, is the socialist Michelle Bachelet (I think she was the first woman to be elected president in South America) so it would be far from the truth to hold that half of Chile was sad to see Pinochet die.

[browneyedgirl]

I expected nothing less from her.

What confuses me though is the people in Chile itself who seemed to revere Pinochet... anyone from there care to enlighten us?

Well, no matter how evil, or megalomaniac the leader, there are always going to be people who see only what they want to in the person. For instance, I'm sure there were many citizens who thought Hitler was a good leader, or Saddam, or Cousceaseau, or Stalin, etc.etc. Its that simple.

As for Thatcher, well, maybe she was just trying to be kind. Although maybe she should have just remained silent in this case.

@Carcass, "old hag" is a gender biased insult like "bitch" and "dog" are---as a person who has unjustly received that insult from a couple of ignorant people of this forum I just thought I'd say that. But, I agree with the rest of your post, though.

[Stealth]

Cousceaseau

Did you mean Ceausescu?

Sorry, I'm not trying to be rude, but Cousceaseau sounds very funny.

[browneyedgirl]

Cousceaseau

Did you mean Ceausescu?

Sorry, I'm not trying to be rude, but Cousceaseau sounds very funny.

I know! I NEVER could spell that mans name. Any way its spelled, he was an asshole to his country--at least thats what I've read&heard.

[stratohawk]

how disrespectful of Margarete Thatcher. Only because Chile supported the Brits in the Falkland War she absolutely ignores that Pinochet tortured and killed thousands of innocents.

[Carcass]

I expected nothing less from her.

What confuses me though is the people in Chile itself who seemed to revere Pinochet... anyone from there care to enlighten us?

It's the same in Spain and their dictator Franco. Up to recently they had an equestrian statue of him in front of the military academy in Madrid. Well, they have a statue of the conquistador Pizarro too...

[Carcass]

how disrespectful of Margarete Thatcher. Only because Chile supported the Brits in the Falkland War she absolutely ignores that Pinochet tortured and killed thousands of innocents.

I'm no expert on military history, but wasn't that one of the most useless wars in history? I mean there are only few thousand people living on those small islands. Argentine did some provocative things during the occupation, like changing the official language to Spanish and changing the direction of the traffic. But that's no reason to start a war, is it? Hundreds of men died for nothing.

[Carcass]

Well, no matter how evil, or megalomaniac the leader, there are always going to be people who see only what they want to in the person. For instance, I'm sure there were many citizens who thought Hitler was a good leader, or Saddam, or Cousceaseau, or Stalin, etc.etc. Its that simple.

True. It's almost admirable how good these people are at ignoring facts. The funniest thing on earth are Russian neo-nazis!

As for Thatcher, well, maybe she was just trying to be kind. Although maybe she should have just remained silent in this case.

Sure, she was trying to be kind, Pinochet had at least one daughter.

@Carcass, "old hag" is a gender biased insult like "bitch" and "dog" are---as a person who has unjustly received that insult from a couple of ignorant people of this forum I just thought I'd say that. But, I agree with the rest of your post, though.

Didn't know "dog" is a gender biased insult. Her own comment was not very sensitive either, towards the victims I mean. So I hope I'm excused.

[Shurik]

True. It's almost admirable how good these people are at ignoring facts. The funniest thing on earth are Russian neo-nazis!

When Stalin died, people in USSR were sure it's the end of the world, and many were killed in funeral procession (not sure about the exact number, but it was hundreds).
Russian neo-nazis is indeed funny, those people forgot for some reason that according to Hitler's racial theories, they were bound for slavery and extermination ...

[Stealth]

how disrespectful of Margarete Thatcher. Only because Chile supported the Brits in the Falkland War she absolutely ignores that Pinochet tortured and killed thousands of innocents.

I'm no expert on military history, but wasn't that one of the most useless wars in history? I mean there are only few thousand people living on those small islands. Argentine did some provocative things during the occupation, like changing the official language to Spanish and changing the direction of the traffic. But that's no reason to start a war, is it? Hundreds of men died for nothing.

War was certainly not the best option, and you have to understand that at that time, Argentina had a military government led by General Galtieri. Galtieri was losing power in Argentina, so he sought to flex his muscle. Regardless of this, I do believe that the Malvinas (Falklands) rightfully belong to Argentina, but you have to know what happened there since the 1500's.

[NeonVomit]

how disrespectful of Margarete Thatcher. Only because Chile supported the Brits in the Falkland War she absolutely ignores that Pinochet tortured and killed thousands of innocents.

I'm no expert on military history, but wasn't that one of the most useless wars in history? I mean there are only few thousand people living on those small islands. Argentine did some provocative things during the occupation, like changing the official language to Spanish and changing the direction of the traffic. But that's no reason to start a war, is it? Hundreds of men died for nothing.

I think it was more the fact that it was a blatant invasion of UK territory, plain and simple. What was expected of the government by its people when islands which are under the rule of Britain are invaded? Could they do nothing?

Pointless war, yes, but then again most are. This one had a clear cause.

Whether or not the islands rightfully belong to Argentina (personally I believe they do) or not was irrelevant, that was simply no way to go about getting them back.

[Carcass]

I think it was more the fact that it was a blatant invasion of UK territory, plain and simple. What was expected of the government by its people when islands which are under the rule of Britain are invaded? Could they do nothing?

I understand what the situation was like and how the world works on these issues. It's no surprise to me that UK invaded...

Pointless war, yes, but then again most are. This one had a clear cause.

...but despite the cause being clear, it was also extremely petty. Sheer madness, if you ask me. Even shipping the entire population back to UK would've been a far better solution. Human life can be unbelievably cheap.

Was the war really worth it? You live in England, what does people there think?

[Carcass]

War was certainly not the best option, and you have to understand that at that time, Argentina had a military government led by General Galtieri. Galtieri was losing power in Argentina, so he sought to flex his muscle. Regardless of this, I do believe that the Malvinas (Falklands) rightfully belong to Argentina, but you have to know what happened there since the 1500's.

I know this. Maggie had to flex her muscle too, her popularity was fading. Invoking patriotism in citizens was very good PR for her at the time.

[NeonVomit]

I think it was more the fact that it was a blatant invasion of UK territory, plain and simple. What was expected of the government by its people when islands which are under the rule of Britain are invaded? Could they do nothing?

I understand what the situation was like and how the world works on these issues. It's no surprise to me that UK invaded...

Pointless war, yes, but then again most are. This one had a clear cause.

...but despite the cause being clear, it was also extremely petty. Sheer madness, if you ask me. Even shipping the entire population back to UK would've been a far better solution. Human life can be unbelievably cheap.

Was the war really worth it? You live in England, what does people there think?

Since I'm not actually a UK citizen I can have a bit more of an impartial look at it. People here see it as a 'they invaded our territory, we got it back, fair and square' deal. It's very simple and clear-cut to them, that violations of Britain's territorial integrity will not be tolerated, and it sent a clear message out to everyone else who may have considered it.

Quite a few people do however wonder why there was so much fuss over a bunch of rocks in the middle of the ocean, though.

[Lobo_]

Actually Chile is kind of divided between two ideologies. About half or a bit less than half of the people support, in some way, the importance of Pinochet in overthrowing Allende's (supposed) communist type of government. Many of them don't support the tortures and people killed and dissapeared, but they do enjoy that an economic liberalism was instituted. They also believed that a possible war between Chile and Perú could start in any moment. This is because in that period Perú also had a miliray dictator ruling us whose name was Juan Velasco Alvarado. He started to make huge agricultural reforms that were not well planned and enden just as bad as it was before. Pinochet also believed that there was a historical dispute over territory lost by Perú in the pacific war between 1879-1881. That is not it, Chile always had territory disputed not only with Perú, but also with Bolivia and Argentina. So many people thought that Pinochet was the great defender of the Nation. There was never a war, just speculations of war, but even in 1973 Chile had a great defensive militar system, Pinochet could have been a hero as Comander of the Army if war ignited. So to sume things, people who support him nowadays believe him to be the father of modern Chilean economic and defender of the Nation against agresive countries like Perú, Bolivia and Argentina.

Then we have the other half, I would say more than half, who hate Pinochet and everything he stands for. I must say that these people have socialists hearts and many of them had their relatives dissapeared and torutured. Many guys of my age (mid 20's) are grandsons or sons of dissapeared people.
So, If you only watched people mourning the death of Pinochet, then your local news program sucks. There were thousands of people celebrating his death in many places of Chile, specially around Allende's statue. You cannot imagine how many people really hate Pinochet and everything he stands for and I can only say that I would hate him as well if I were Chilean. Why?
Well, for the most obvious part, he didn't respect human life, for him it was a matter of cost paying to maintain power. Then, he is not the flagship of economic liberalism. At the beggining of his dictatorship he prefered to keep the economic system that already existed and that was not liberal, ins the 70's all o f the world would have a lot of central planning form the state, because the influence of Keynes was stills strong (thought starting to show some problems, specially after the oil crisis in 73). It was only because chile had a group of students form Universidad Catolica, who went as part of an exchange program to Chicago University that they learned all the importance of new Chicago Liberal Economic School started by Von Hayek and continued by Milton Friedman. When this students came back they where recluted by the economic advisor of Pinochet who insisted tremendously to make the change to a more liberal economic Style. Pinochet didn't want that for 2 years because It is far better for a dictator to have total control of thing, and liberalising the economy was not a plan we had form the beggining. This means he only wanteded to keep power... he is also a traitor, because It was Salvador Allende who pointed him as General Commander of the Army, and his way of thanking him was overthrowing his democratic governmet.
He also betrayed Argentina in the Malvinas's war by serving as inteligence guide and territory support for Thatcher's army after saying that he would not take part of it. Englad is obvious stronger than Argentina, but with the help of fellow countried like Peru and chile not helping england, they could have had a chance (let me remind you that Perú in the 70s aquired powerfull military technology from USSR that was lend to Argentina).
Finally in the past years many bank accounts form Pinochet have been discovered with millions of dollars and even gold funds. This is not his money, is money he took from the treasures of Chile.

[nepi]

True. It's almost admirable how good these people are at ignoring facts. The funniest thing on earth are Russian neo-nazis!

When Stalin died, people in USSR were sure it's the end of the world, and many were killed in funeral procession (not sure about the exact number, but it was hundreds).
Russian neo-nazis is indeed funny, those people forgot for some reason that according to Hitler's racial theories, they were bound for slavery and extermination ...

It was the same in Russia when Stalin died. He has tortured so many people, punished so many innocent men (and women) and when he died, nearly the entire country cried for him!
2006 was a parade of remembering the 2nd world war (50 years passed" or something else) and there where people who really wanted that Volgograd will change again back to Stalingrad!!! Have you ever thought about what would be when it would be happened in Germany with a similar action?

Stalin has killed less by gun and more by catching the nutrition from the farmers who hasn't something to eat. It was horrible, I have just seen a 45min-documentary about it!

When I amble through the internet, I see he has also done things against human rights and led kill people without crying a tear, also he said "I don't wish anyone the dead"....
For me it's a sign of cowardice

[Carcass]

Actually Chile is kind of divided between two ideologies. About half or a bit less than half of the people support, in some way, the importance of Pinochet in overthrowing Allende's (supposed) communist type of government. Many of them don't support the tortures and people killed and dissapeared, but they do enjoy that an economic liberalism was instituted. They also believed that a possible war between Chile and Perú could start in any moment. This is because in that period Perú also had a miliray dictator ruling us whose name was Juan Velasco Alvarado. He started to make huge agricultural reforms that were not well planned and enden just as bad as it was before. Pinochet also believed that there was a historical dispute over territory lost by Perú in the pacific war between 1879-1881. That is not it, Chile always had territory disputed not only with Perú, but also with Bolivia and Argentina. So many people thought that Pinochet was the great defender of the Nation. There was never a war, just speculations of war, but even in 1973 Chile had a great defensive militar system, Pinochet could have been a hero as Comander of the Army if war ignited. So to sume things, people who support him nowadays believe him to be the father of modern Chilean economic and defender of the Nation against agresive countries like Perú, Bolivia and Argentina.

Then we have the other half, I would say more than half, who hate Pinochet and everything he stands for. I must say that these people have socialists hearts and many of them had their relatives dissapeared and torutured. Many guys of my age (mid 20's) are grandsons or sons of dissapeared people.
So, If you only watched people mourning the death of Pinochet, then your local news program sucks. There were thousands of people celebrating his death in many places of Chile, specially around Allende's statue. You cannot imagine how many people really hate Pinochet and everything he stands for and I can only say that I would hate him as well if I were Chilean. Why?
Well, for the most obvious part, he didn't respect human life, for him it was a matter of cost paying to maintain power. Then, he is not the flagship of economic liberalism. At the beggining of his dictatorship he prefered to keep the economic system that already existed and that was not liberal, ins the 70's all o f the world would have a lot of central planning form the state, because the influence of Keynes was stills strong (thought starting to show some problems, specially after the oil crisis in 73). It was only because chile had a group of students form Universidad Catolica, who went as part of an exchange program to Chicago University that they learned all the importance of new Chicago Liberal Economic School started by Von Hayek and continued by Milton Friedman. When this students came back they where recluted by the economic advisor of Pinochet who insisted tremendously to make the change to a more liberal economic Style. Pinochet didn't want that for 2 years because It is far better for a dictator to have total control of thing, and liberalising the economy was not a plan we had form the beggining. This means he only wanteded to keep power... he is also a traitor, because It was Salvador Allende who pointed him as General Commander of the Army, and his way of thanking him was overthrowing his democratic governmet.
He also betrayed Argentina in the Malvinas's war by serving as inteligence guide and territory support for Thatcher's army after saying that he would not take part of it. Englad is obvious stronger than Argentina, but with the help of fellow countried like Peru and chile not helping england, they could have had a chance (let me remind you that Perú in the 70s aquired powerfull military technology from USSR that was lend to Argentina).
Finally in the past years many bank accounts form Pinochet have been discovered with millions of dollars and even gold funds. This is not his money, is money he took from the treasures of Chile.

Who the hell are you?

Stick around. I have a feeling you have a lot to add to many topics. I'm too tired to comment your post right now (and later when I'm not tired, I'm too busy, haha). Off to bed with me...

[Carcass]

2006 was a parade of remembering the 2nd world war (50 years passed" or something else) and there where people who really wanted that Volgograd will change again back to Stalingrad!!! Have you ever thought about what would be when it would be happened in Germany with a similar action?

As a Finn, it was pretty strange to watch that parade on TV. It's funny how wearing a CCCP or Lenin t-shirt is OK, maybe even trendy, but having a swastika on your sleeve is like the most evil thing to do, in Germany even illegal I've understood (which is ridiculous, I give you that Miditek).

According to some estimations, Stalin was worse than Hitler, in terms of human lives wasted.

[Stratolily]

I'm really surprised about all the info you have about what happend here

Well, all I'm gonna say is that as a chilean and watcher of the last days I have to say that's right, in these days the division here is more clear than ever. The people who love Pinochet said goodbye to him with all the militar honors and as he were a savior. Thousands of people waited for hour to stand in front of him only one second and touch his coffin. And the people who hates him went out to the streets to celebreat his death. And some people unfortunately destroyed a lot of stuff in the streets, cause always there's people who take advantage of these situations.
In my personal case, I've always been against him (despite of my parents, specially my dad, they adore him, and also I wanna say I'm not a comunist or socialist, cause I don't believe those things are posible, they're just an ilusion), but it was so schocking to see him in his couffin, and seeing his little grandchildren crying for him. Everything is so confusing these days. My attitude was like being respectful about his death. I know a lot of you are gonna say "but he didn't respect the lives of thounsands of people". Well, what I think about that is we have to be the big persons here, by not doing the same. And as I'm growing older, I think I've made up my mind in a lot of things. Well, all I know now is he is dead and maybe some things are going to change soon. And I really hope so, cause I think we all are so tired about "I love Pinochet, I hate Pinochet!..." It's enough already...We'll see what happens...

[miditek]

True. It's almost admirable how good these people are at ignoring facts. The funniest thing on earth are Russian neo-nazis!

When Stalin died, people in USSR were sure it's the end of the world, and many were killed in funeral procession (not sure about the exact number, but it was hundreds).
Russian neo-nazis is indeed funny, those people forgot for some reason that according to Hitler's racial theories, they were bound for slavery and extermination ...

Can't figure that one out for the life of me. Russian Neo-Nazis- is it possible that the schools failed to teach these kids that unprovoked Hitlerite aggression killed over 20 million of their own people?

[Stealth]

Pinochet also believed that there was a historical dispute over territory lost by Perú in the pacific war between 1879-1881. That is not it, Chile always had territory disputed not only with Perú, but also with Bolivia and Argentina.

You are certainly right about this. This is not a comment about Chileans in general, but it's true that Chile has not had the best relations with neighbouring countries for territorial reasons. Peru had trouble with Chile; Argentina had trouble with Chile; and Bolivia... well, did you ever wonder why Bolivia does not have access to the Pacific Ocean?

He also betrayed Argentina in the Malvinas's war by serving as intelligence guide and territory support for Thatcher's army after saying that he would not take part of it. Englad is obvious stronger than Argentina, but with the help of fellow countries like Peru and Chile not helping England, they could have had a chance (let me remind you that Perú in the 70s aquired powerfull military technology from USSR that was lend to Argentina).

That's also true. Chile helped Thatcher and Peru was one of the few countries that supported Argentina unconditionally. In fact, the Peruvian government gave some Exocet missiles to Argentina (with two of these missiles, Argentina sank two British ships, including the largest ship in the British fleet). Peru was getting these Exocets from France to later give them to the Argentine government, but president Mitterrand did not want Peru to help Argentina, so he stopped selling Exocets to Peru. Since it was obviously advantageous for many countries to ally themselves with the most powerful of the two nations, I think only Italy and Scotland somewhat supported Argentina (however, I'm not saying I supported the war myself. Again, I do think that the islands belong to Argentina for historical reasons, but I don't agree with the war and with the ideas of the military government at that time). Still, it is true that, according to many people, Argentina got the best out of the war. This is the reason: For us, defeat in the Malvinas' war meant the downfall of the military government and the return of democracy, while the British had to keep Thatcher in power.

[NeonVomit]

True. It's almost admirable how good these people are at ignoring facts. The funniest thing on earth are Russian neo-nazis!

When Stalin died, people in USSR were sure it's the end of the world, and many were killed in funeral procession (not sure about the exact number, but it was hundreds).
Russian neo-nazis is indeed funny, those people forgot for some reason that according to Hitler's racial theories, they were bound for slavery and extermination ...

Can't figure that one out for the life of me. Russian Neo-Nazis- is it possible that the schools failed to teach these kids that unprovoked Hitlerite aggression killed over 20 million of their own people?

That's probably precisely the cause - most of these idiots will rebel against anything they're taught, and act like Nazis because they think it's cool to be different and it will shock society.

I doubt many of them are true believers in Nazism.

[miditek]

True. It's almost admirable how good these people are at ignoring facts. The funniest thing on earth are Russian neo-nazis!

When Stalin died, people in USSR were sure it's the end of the world, and many were killed in funeral procession (not sure about the exact number, but it was hundreds).
Russian neo-nazis is indeed funny, those people forgot for some reason that according to Hitler's racial theories, they were bound for slavery and extermination ...

Can't figure that one out for the life of me. Russian Neo-Nazis- is it possible that the schools failed to teach these kids that unprovoked Hitlerite aggression killed over 20 million of their own people?

That's probably precisely the cause - most of these idiots will rebel against anything they're taught, and act like Nazis because they think it's cool to be different and it will shock society.

I doubt many of them are true believers in Nazism.

For real, I guess that schoolteachers have forgotten to tell the skinheads that one of the primary racial tenets of National Socialism is that all Slavs are Untermenschen (sub-human), which of course, is a completely ridiculous notion.

Getting back to Pinochet, I feel that he was basically a butcher of his political opponents, and I'm not sure why Thatcher would shed a tear for him- Falklands War support notwithstanding. The United States also supported the UK during this war, at least in the political sense. Thatcher also eulogized President Reagan at his funeral.

I don't know if it's just me, but I felt a lot safer when Reagan and Thatcher were in power.

[Carcass]

For real, I guess that schoolteachers have forgotten to tell the skinheads that one of the primary racial tenets of National Socialism is that all Slavs are Untermenschen (sub-human), which of course, is a completely ridiculous notion.

I guess they pretty much know what Nazism was about. The memory of WW2 and The Great Patriotic War is still a fresh memory and something many Russians take great pride in. I believe Russian skinheads are just very good at ignoring facts.

The thing is, like NeonVomit said, that they are not really true believers. In reality skinheads and Neo-Nazis haven't got that much common with a "true 1940s-Nazi". These tattoed bums and junkies would've probably winded up in a concentration camp.

[browneyedgirl]

Yes, these Neo-Nazis don't realize it, but if Hitler had ruled the world, he sure would not allowed them to live based on his way of thinking. Same goes for most people who are hung up on others intelligence, background, race, etc. The judgers would not have been allowed to exist!
I don't think people realize how much of a fanatic Hitler was in regard to stuff like that! Probably only 10% of us would be deemed worthy to live under his expectations! Even the people these days who arrogantly declare,"I hate stupidity&mediocrity in any form." Would have been put to death.
Thats why it is so dangerous to judge others----and probably why God Almighty(with the help of the armies of the rest of the world) did not allow Hitler to win!

[miditek]

Actually Chile is kind of divided between two ideologies. About half or a bit less than half of the people support, in some way, the importance of Pinochet in overthrowing Allende's (supposed) communist type of government. Many of them don't support the tortures and people killed and dissapeared, but they do enjoy that an economic liberalism was instituted. They also believed that a possible war between Chile and Perú could start in any moment. This is because in that period Perú also had a miliray dictator ruling us whose name was Juan Velasco Alvarado. He started to make huge agricultural reforms that were not well planned and enden just as bad as it was before. Pinochet also believed that there was a historical dispute over territory lost by Perú in the pacific war between 1879-1881. That is not it, Chile always had territory disputed not only with Perú, but also with Bolivia and Argentina. So many people thought that Pinochet was the great defender of the Nation. There was never a war, just speculations of war, but even in 1973 Chile had a great defensive militar system, Pinochet could have been a hero as Comander of the Army if war ignited. So to sume things, people who support him nowadays believe him to be the father of modern Chilean economic and defender of the Nation against agresive countries like Perú, Bolivia and Argentina.

Then we have the other half, I would say more than half, who hate Pinochet and everything he stands for. I must say that these people have socialists hearts and many of them had their relatives dissapeared and torutured. Many guys of my age (mid 20's) are grandsons or sons of dissapeared people.
So, If you only watched people mourning the death of Pinochet, then your local news program sucks. There were thousands of people celebrating his death in many places of Chile, specially around Allende's statue. You cannot imagine how many people really hate Pinochet and everything he stands for and I can only say that I would hate him as well if I were Chilean. Why?
Well, for the most obvious part, he didn't respect human life, for him it was a matter of cost paying to maintain power. Then, he is not the flagship of economic liberalism. At the beggining of his dictatorship he prefered to keep the economic system that already existed and that was not liberal, ins the 70's all o f the world would have a lot of central planning form the state, because the influence of Keynes was stills strong (thought starting to show some problems, specially after the oil crisis in 73). It was only because chile had a group of students form Universidad Catolica, who went as part of an exchange program to Chicago University that they learned all the importance of new Chicago Liberal Economic School started by Von Hayek and continued by Milton Friedman. When this students came back they where recluted by the economic advisor of Pinochet who insisted tremendously to make the change to a more liberal economic Style. Pinochet didn't want that for 2 years because It is far better for a dictator to have total control of thing, and liberalising the economy was not a plan we had form the beggining. This means he only wanteded to keep power... he is also a traitor, because It was Salvador Allende who pointed him as General Commander of the Army, and his way of thanking him was overthrowing his democratic governmet.
He also betrayed Argentina in the Malvinas's war by serving as inteligence guide and territory support for Thatcher's army after saying that he would not take part of it. Englad is obvious stronger than Argentina, but with the help of fellow countried like Peru and chile not helping england, they could have had a chance (let me remind you that Perú in the 70s aquired powerfull military technology from USSR that was lend to Argentina).
Finally in the past years many bank accounts form Pinochet have been discovered with millions of dollars and even gold funds. This is not his money, is money he took from the treasures of Chile.

A very good essay on this, Lobo. I am extremely impressed with your knowledge of the historical and political implications of this thread.