Talk:Guatemalan Civil War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


"Supported by" needs to be sourced[edit]

@Milexpert101: I am seeing a lot of sourcing problems in the info-box, where information should be impeccable. Soviet support was not sourced at all, and a quick search of the literature yielded nothing, so I deleted that. Cuba and Nicaragua are sourced to a declassified intelligence brief, clearly a compromised primary source. If quality secondary sources can be found, this primary source can be kept as backup. Otherwise they need to be removed from the box entirely. Mexico is listed as a logistics supporter of the Guatemalan army without a source, however the same intelligence brief says that they are a suspected supporter of the rebels: either way, Mexico's role is also unsourced. Iran's role is unsourced. Guccisamsclubs (talk) 02:12, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

also, dates of the support should be provided. It is unlikely that the rebels got any support from Nicaragua in the early 1980's (if they got any real support at all). Cuban support is also unspecified in the article, aside from the rebel leaders escaping to Havana in the 60's and undergoing "training", whatever that means.Guccisamsclubs (talk) 02:19, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

@TheTimesAreAChanging: Times, can you please chill for a second so we can have a normal conversation.

"Meanwhile,
in early 1983, Guatemalan armed forces cap
tured a hidden cache of twenty-four U. S.
made M-16 rifles, twelve of which were con
firmed as having originally been shipped from
the United" [edit: States to South Vietnam]" (Source ... NONE)

That's the only evidence I can see regarding Guatemala, and those rusty rifles could have easily come though Nicaragua (i.e. intended for Nicaraguagua) without any Soviet orders to [edit: route them to Guatemala ] . World Affairs is no less of a biased source than William Blum on the US. They'll see everything as Soviet conspiracy, just as Blum in inclined to see most things as a CIA-StateDep conspiracy. If Blum said that some US-supplied rifles went from US client X to US ally Y and finally ended up in country Z (according to some shit he heard from Communist rebels, unsourced), and concluded from that the US had its hands dirty in country Z, would you allow that shit to in the infobox? Guccisamsclubs (talk) 00:15, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

All the weapons for communist guerrillas in Central America went through Nicaragua. If you really think Cuba and Nicaragua needed hundreds of tanks, thousands of military advisers, and ten times as much military aid from the USSR as the U.S. was providing to the rest of Latin America combined for purely defensive purposes, however, I have some prime real estate I'd like to sell you in the Pacific Ocean. In any case, you selectively edited the quote: "twelve of which were confirmed as having originally been shipped from the United States to Vietnam." Gee, I wonder how they ended up in Guatemala?TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 00:28, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Can you give a source on the disparity in military aid? I got your logic from the start but I found it a little wanting: I don't think you'd accept a "gee wiz" argument if it was applied to supposed US covert operations, nor would you accept weak sourcing. How did the weapons get from Thailand to the non-communist rebels to the Khmer Rouge, gee? It fact you'd only take it on officially official admission, since even Weiner's memo was not enough for you as I recall. Imagine we found such a memo from the Soviet government?
As for reasons for aid to Cuba... It could have been to get the weapons to Ethiopia or Angola or Nicaragua, not necessarily Guatemala. Could also have been the fact that Cuba was under constant threat of invasion (when not under actual invasion) from the the mightiest superpower in world history, one that was following the Monroe Doctrine.
Hope you sort of see my point—we need better sources. BTW I did not selectively edit the quote—it was just a mistake and I knew about the Vietnam angle.Guccisamsclubs (talk) 00:44, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
@Vanamonde93: for possible additional comments. I don't think the sourcing for Soviet support is adequate.Guccisamsclubs (talk) 15:11, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
As I told you at the time, Winer retracted his claim, making it a rather odd piece of evidence to hang your hat on. To reiterate, it is impossible to support an insurgency—whether the Khmer People's National Liberation Front or the Free Syrian Army—without some of the assistance inevitably falling into the hands of other militant groups—such as the Khmer Rouge or al Qaeda. I have no doubt there was "some leakage." However, I have argued that the evidence for a conspiracy in which the U.S. intentionally supported the Khmer Rouge or al Qaeda is lacking, and that such theories are by no means universally or even widely accepted in mainstream sources, though I have little interest in re-litigating the matter. Finally, yours is not an apples-to-apples comparison: No-one has ever denied that the U.S. supported rebels in Cambodia, whereas you have claimed that nothing short of an official Soviet admission is sufficiently reliable to source Soviet involvement in Central America. All that said, I do not care much about this dispute; regardless of how it is decided, I will still strongly suspect that this article is a POV-wasteland filled with highly dubious statistics, for the reasons outlined above.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 16:10, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
@TheTimesAreAChanging:I am not going to argue about US policy in Cambodia here, or anywhere else in the near future. The example was an illustration, and I don't think you've read it correctly. The point is not that the US' allegedly intentional military (!) support for the Khmer Rouge is analogous to Soviet "involvement in Central America"(sic). (which you might be overselling-see earlier request for citation). The point is that it is precisely analogous to alleged direct Soviet support for the Guatemalan rebels. If anything, the highly circumstantial evidence for the former is in fact stronger and more notable. Guccisamsclubs (talk) 17:11, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
In fact, why not add Vietnam while we're at it? After all that's where the carton of rifles allegedly came from, and the curious balance of the info-box would have us believe that it was a major factor in the war. Guccisamsclubs (talk) 16:50, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
deleted the weakly sourced info from the info box. if anyone cares to reinstate it they should find better sources. An allegation about the old rifles from the Guatemalan Army (paraphrased in World Affairs, apparently no footnote) is so trifling that it barely deserves mention in the body. It is grossly inadequate for the info box. BTW, the Spanish article Times cites appears to be a giant pov-pushing coatrack about the Cold War (possibly controlled by a group of right-wing editors for whom the conflict cuts very close to the bone). If any cares to have the USSR and Vietnam reinstated they should find better sources and be prepared to summarize the concrete evidence in the body of the article.Guccisamsclubs (talk) 16:34, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Guatemalan Civil War. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:02, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Guatemalan Civil War. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:52, 18 September 2017 (UTC)