The real story on the USA's treatment of Cuba.

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
There is alot of speculation who will be Castro's successor, but we honestly dont know. Why do we assume it will be someone who will be good for the people? Kinda foolish IMHO. OK so we lift embargo. Aid and money now goes to a different corrupt leader. Who the fuck does THAT help? We certainly cant FORCE governments to pass aid on to it's people. Lifting the embargo is the worst idea ever. The people will NOT get aid.

so we punish the people for the actions of one?

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: blackangst1
There is alot of speculation who will be Castro's successor, but we honestly dont know. Why do we assume it will be someone who will be good for the people? Kinda foolish IMHO. OK so we lift embargo. Aid and money now goes to a different corrupt leader. Who the fuck does THAT help? We certainly cant FORCE governments to pass aid on to it's people. Lifting the embargo is the worst idea ever. The people will NOT get aid.

I say we finally do the liberation right. A liberated Cuba is a lot more important to me than a liberated Iraq or Iran.

The Cuban people are a lively, passionate people with a zest for life, wonderful music and dance, and great food and drinks. I'd much rather see them freed from oppression than a bunch of dirka dirka's a world away.

Dear God yes, I love Cuban food, music and the chicas....mmmm

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: blackangst1
There is alot of speculation who will be Castro's successor, but we honestly dont know. Why do we assume it will be someone who will be good for the people? Kinda foolish IMHO. OK so we lift embargo. Aid and money now goes to a different corrupt leader. Who the fuck does THAT help? We certainly cant FORCE governments to pass aid on to it's people. Lifting the embargo is the worst idea ever. The people will NOT get aid.

so we punish the people for the actions of one?

So tell us then how, under the current regime, we help the people? Tell us.

WE are not punishing the people. Their government is. Are you foolish to think we can acutally make a difference? Please. Not doing anything != punishment.

But please tell us how we could reallistically help the people there.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: blackangst1
There is alot of speculation who will be Castro's successor, but we honestly dont know. Why do we assume it will be someone who will be good for the people? Kinda foolish IMHO. OK so we lift embargo. Aid and money now goes to a different corrupt leader. Who the fuck does THAT help? We certainly cant FORCE governments to pass aid on to it's people. Lifting the embargo is the worst idea ever. The people will NOT get aid.

so we punish the people for the actions of one?

So tell us then how, under the current regime, we help the people? Tell us.

WE are not punishing the people. Their government is. Are you foolish to think we can acutally make a difference? Please. Not doing anything != punishment.

But please tell us how we could reallistically help the people there.

Simple, we end the embargo with certain stipulations. We wait til Castro dies. Have the people choose their next leader instead of the military.

Hell the Cold War lasted for 50 years and Russia had nukes. The embargo on Cuba is going on 45 years now.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: blackangst1
There is alot of speculation who will be Castro's successor, but we honestly dont know. Why do we assume it will be someone who will be good for the people? Kinda foolish IMHO. OK so we lift embargo. Aid and money now goes to a different corrupt leader. Who the fuck does THAT help? We certainly cant FORCE governments to pass aid on to it's people. Lifting the embargo is the worst idea ever. The people will NOT get aid.

so we punish the people for the actions of one?

So tell us then how, under the current regime, we help the people? Tell us.

WE are not punishing the people. Their government is. Are you foolish to think we can acutally make a difference? Please. Not doing anything != punishment.

But please tell us how we could reallistically help the people there.

Simple, we end the embargo with certain stipulations. We wait til Castro dies. Have the people choose their next leader instead of the military.

Youre out of youre mind.

We lift the embargo and start sending aid. How the fuck do you guarantee it actually gets to the people? Because we demand it? Riiiight. The government will hoard it. Again, we cant FORCE aid to the people.

Your comment "have the people choose their next leader". How do you propose that minus a full blown invasion? Diplomatically? Riiiight. If another dictator steps in, there isnt shit we can do about it.

How about a realistic plan instead all this feel good stuff? Tell us how we, the USA, can helpt he people.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: blackangst1
There is alot of speculation who will be Castro's successor, but we honestly dont know. Why do we assume it will be someone who will be good for the people? Kinda foolish IMHO. OK so we lift embargo. Aid and money now goes to a different corrupt leader. Who the fuck does THAT help? We certainly cant FORCE governments to pass aid on to it's people. Lifting the embargo is the worst idea ever. The people will NOT get aid.

so we punish the people for the actions of one?

So tell us then how, under the current regime, we help the people? Tell us.

WE are not punishing the people. Their government is. Are you foolish to think we can acutally make a difference? Please. Not doing anything != punishment.

But please tell us how we could reallistically help the people there.

Simple, we end the embargo with certain stipulations. We wait til Castro dies. Have the people choose their next leader instead of the military.

Youre out of youre mind.

We lift the embargo and start sending aid. How the fuck do you guarantee it actually gets to the people? Because we demand it? Riiiight. The government will hoard it. Again, we cant FORCE aid to the people.

Your comment "have the people choose their next leader". How do you propose that minus a full blown invasion? Diplomatically? Riiiight. If another dictator steps in, there isnt shit we can do about it.

How about a realistic plan instead all this feel good stuff? Tell us how we, the USA, can helpt he people.

The stipulations would be that they hold free elections.

From wiki:
"he embargo actually helps Castro more than it hurts him by giving him a scapegoat he can use to blame for all of Cuba's problems. American business leaders and free marketers in particular argue that, as long as the embargo continues, non-U.S. foreign businesses in Cuba do not have to compete with U.S. businesses and thus will have a head start when and if the embargo is ended. They openly call for an end to the embargo"

The people are now living in poverty and get their sustenance from Castro, while his regime points the finger across the ocean. If we eliminate this and people see the prosperity that a free market brings then yes there will be a revolution or change in government. By keeping the embargo we are only empowering Castro's regime.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: blackangst1
There is alot of speculation who will be Castro's successor, but we honestly dont know. Why do we assume it will be someone who will be good for the people? Kinda foolish IMHO. OK so we lift embargo. Aid and money now goes to a different corrupt leader. Who the fuck does THAT help? We certainly cant FORCE governments to pass aid on to it's people. Lifting the embargo is the worst idea ever. The people will NOT get aid.

so we punish the people for the actions of one?

So tell us then how, under the current regime, we help the people? Tell us.

WE are not punishing the people. Their government is. Are you foolish to think we can acutally make a difference? Please. Not doing anything != punishment.

But please tell us how we could reallistically help the people there.

Simple, we end the embargo with certain stipulations. We wait til Castro dies. Have the people choose their next leader instead of the military.

Youre out of youre mind.

We lift the embargo and start sending aid. How the fuck do you guarantee it actually gets to the people? Because we demand it? Riiiight. The government will hoard it. Again, we cant FORCE aid to the people.

Your comment "have the people choose their next leader". How do you propose that minus a full blown invasion? Diplomatically? Riiiight. If another dictator steps in, there isnt shit we can do about it.

How about a realistic plan instead all this feel good stuff? Tell us how we, the USA, can helpt he people.

The stipulations would be that they hold free elections.

From wiki:
"he embargo actually helps Castro more than it hurts him by giving him a scapegoat he can use to blame for all of Cuba's problems. American business leaders and free marketers in particular argue that, as long as the embargo continues, non-U.S. foreign businesses in Cuba do not have to compete with U.S. businesses and thus will have a head start when and if the embargo is ended. They openly call for an end to the embargo"

The people are now living in poverty and get their sustenance from Castro, while his regime points the finger across the ocean. If we eliminate this and people see the prosperity that a free market brings then yes there will be a revolution or change in government. By keeping the embargo we are only empowering Castro's regime.

So if Castro or the successor says "Oh sure of course we'll help our people!" We actually think they will? ROFL Man you guys are naive. They havent helped their people ever. What makes you think they will now? Because they promise?

So naive.

 

[Vic]

I think the message to the OP (and others here) should be that as corrupt, chaotic, and bumbling that our democracy frequently is, it is still infinitely better than ANY dictatorship.

 

[ElFenix]

cuba gets exactly as much trade as castro desires. i'll agree that the embargo hurts the average cuban, but only because it allows castro to scapegoat all of his own failures.

 

[philipuso]

I think the message to the OP (and others here) should be that as corrupt, chaotic, and bumbling that our democracy frequently is, it is still infinitely better than ANY dictatorship.

Where does power lay in the USA??? Private interests or the people??? Who owns the majority of production?? An elite few or masses of people?? Are those elite few concerned with your welfare or concerned with their own welfare in maximizing profits?? Are you happy working your whole life with no say in the planning of your own work??? Is that democracy to you???

What would happen if a party came to 98% power in the House and Senate and had the White House??? The party then started changing policy to benefit the masses of citizens through new social policies??? Do you think the private interests would stick around or move all their capital production to a foreign country where they have political control???

There's nothing wrong with a country experimenting and trying new ways of running an economy. The question is why the USA is so fearful and becomes so aggressive towards a country that should try thinking outside the box by attempting something new for it's people. It's obvious they don't want any country to succeed with their own economic strategy thats goes an independent way of American wishes.

 

[philipuso]

By the way what is your definition of Communism?? Have you been misled by American propaganda to think the Soviet Union was a communist state??

American Propaganda misleading you about communism.

Subsection of "Understanding Power" by Noam Chomsky.

Well, there are really two points that ought to be made. First of all, the So­viet Union was basically a capitalist system. The first thing that Lenin and Trotsky did when they took power in October 1917, remember, was to de­stroy all of the forms of socialist initiative that had developed in Russia since the start of the Russian Revolution in February 1917 [the Russian Tsar was overthrown by popular revolution in February 1917; Lenin's Bolshevik Party took over eight months later in a military coup]. Just now I was talk­ing about workers and communities participating in decision-making-the first thing the Bolsheviks did was to destroy that, totally. They destroyed the factory councils, they undermined the soviets [elected local governing bod­ies], they eliminated the Constituent Assembly [democratically elected par­liament initially dominated by a rival socialist group, which was to govern Russia but was dispersed by Bolshevik troops in January 1918]. In fact, they dismantled every form of popular organization in Russia and set up a com­mand economy with wages and profits, on sort of a centralized state­-capitalist model. 3 So on the one hand, the example you're referring to is just the extreme opposite of what I was talking about, not the same.

 

[philipuso]

How do you delete the 2nd of an accidental double post?? All i can do is edit the 2nd post.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: philipuso

I think the message to the OP (and others here) should be that as corrupt, chaotic, and bumbling that our democracy frequently is, it is still infinitely better than ANY dictatorship.

Where does power lay in the USA??? Private interests or the people???

private interests are the people.

Who owns the majority of production?? An elite few or masses of people?? Are those elite few concerned with your welfare or concerned with their own welfare in maximizing profits?? Are you happy working your whole life with no say in the planning of your own work??? Is that democracy to you???

take a risk, start your own business. if you don't want to work for the man you have to be the man.

What would happen if a party came to 98% power in the House and Senate and had the White House??? The party then started changing policy to benefit the masses of citizens through new social policies??? Do you think the private interests would stick around or move all their capital production to a foreign country where they have political control???

so did the changing policy actually help the masses when it scared all the entrepreneurs and capital away?

There's nothing wrong with a country experimenting and trying new ways of running an economy. The question is why the USA is so fearful and becomes so aggressive towards a country that should try thinking outside the box by attempting something new for it's people. It's obvious they don't want any country to succeed with their own economic strategy thats goes an independent way of American wishes.

we really don't care how cuba was run, it was the fact they were cozying up to the soviets and stealing american property that the US was concerned about. if they want to run their country into the ground then we'll let them (and we have).

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: philipuso

I think the message to the OP (and others here) should be that as corrupt, chaotic, and bumbling that our democracy frequently is, it is still infinitely better than ANY dictatorship.

Where does power lay in the USA??? Private interests or the people??? Who owns the majority of production?? An elite few or masses of people?? Are those elite few concerned with your welfare or concerned with their own welfare in maximizing profits?? Are you happy working your whole life with no say in the planning of your own work??? Is that democracy to you???

What would happen if a party came to 98% power in the House and Senate and had the White House??? The party then started changing policy to benefit the masses of citizens through new social policies??? Do you think the private interests would stick around or move all their capital production to a foreign country where they have political control???

There's nothing wrong with a country experimenting and trying new ways of running an economy. The question is why the USA is so fearful and becomes so aggressive towards a country that should try thinking outside the box by attempting something new for it's people. It's obvious they don't want any country to succeed with their own economic strategy thats goes an independent way of American wishes.

Castro has never been "thinking outside the box." He is a dictator. His methods as such are centuries old. The Cuban people have less than no say with planning their life or their government. His economic plan is to buy off the people as necessary to maintain power.

The USA was "fearful" of Cuba, and imposed this embargo, because its human-rights violating murderous dictator openly allied himself with a former large and powerful country that just happened to have some 10,000 high-yield nuclear warheads pointed directly at us.
The embargo is just a lingering vestige of that time, which (as already discussed in this thread) is nowadays kept mostly in place by the ~2 million political refugees from Cuba living in the US.

Quit being a brainwashed tool. Seriously. Capitalism and democracy has its flaws, no doubt of that, but their combination is INFINITELY better than any communism. And the reason for that is because, despite its lofty goals and good intentions, communism ALWAYS fails, with or without any external economic sanctions. Don't believe that? Fine. Name ONE communist government in all of history that did not both fail economically and result in a tyrannical murdering dictatorship. Just one.

Then you can get to me with your idiotic Chomsky conspiracy theories about how boohoo terrible it is that there is still economic inequality in our democracy while you're simultaneously praising the political/economic system of a country that has had the same leader for 49 years.

 

[philipuso]

we really don't care how cuba was run, it was the fact they were cozying up to the soviets and stealing american property that the US was concerned about. if they want to run their country into the ground then we'll let them (and we have).

Did you read my original post:

In January 1959, Cuba had a popular nationalist revolution. We now know from declassified U.S. government documents that the formal deci­sion to overthrow Castro was made by the American government in March
1960-that's very important, because at that point there were no Russians around, and Castro was in fact considered anti-Communist by the U.S. [Castro did not align with the Soviet Union until May 1961, after the U.S. had severed diplomatic relations with Cuba in January and had sponsored an invasion attempt in April.] 29 So the reason for deciding to overthrow the Castro government can't have had anything to do with Cuba being a Rus­sian outpost in the Cold War-Cuba was just taking an independent path, which has always been unacceptable to powerful interests in the United States.

Feel free to verify the history. You can also buy the book "Understanding Power" and use the footnotes in the text. Their linked to a webpage called:
Footnotes of Understanding Power

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: blackangst1
There is alot of speculation who will be Castro's successor, but we honestly dont know. Why do we assume it will be someone who will be good for the people? Kinda foolish IMHO. OK so we lift embargo. Aid and money now goes to a different corrupt leader. Who the fuck does THAT help? We certainly cant FORCE governments to pass aid on to it's people. Lifting the embargo is the worst idea ever. The people will NOT get aid.

so we punish the people for the actions of one?

So tell us then how, under the current regime, we help the people? Tell us.

WE are not punishing the people. Their government is. Are you foolish to think we can acutally make a difference? Please. Not doing anything != punishment.

But please tell us how we could reallistically help the people there.

Simple, we end the embargo with certain stipulations. We wait til Castro dies. Have the people choose their next leader instead of the military.

Youre out of youre mind.

We lift the embargo and start sending aid. How the fuck do you guarantee it actually gets to the people? Because we demand it? Riiiight. The government will hoard it. Again, we cant FORCE aid to the people.

Your comment "have the people choose their next leader". How do you propose that minus a full blown invasion? Diplomatically? Riiiight. If another dictator steps in, there isnt shit we can do about it.

How about a realistic plan instead all this feel good stuff? Tell us how we, the USA, can helpt he people.

The stipulations would be that they hold free elections.

From wiki:
"he embargo actually helps Castro more than it hurts him by giving him a scapegoat he can use to blame for all of Cuba's problems. American business leaders and free marketers in particular argue that, as long as the embargo continues, non-U.S. foreign businesses in Cuba do not have to compete with U.S. businesses and thus will have a head start when and if the embargo is ended. They openly call for an end to the embargo"

The people are now living in poverty and get their sustenance from Castro, while his regime points the finger across the ocean. If we eliminate this and people see the prosperity that a free market brings then yes there will be a revolution or change in government. By keeping the embargo we are only empowering Castro's regime.

So if Castro or the successor says "Oh sure of course we'll help our people!" We actually think they will? ROFL Man you guys are naive. They havent helped their people ever. What makes you think they will now? Because they promise?

So naive.

So you propose to keep a trade embargo with Cuba until the end of time? It was done because they partnered with Russia....the Cold War is over dude, walk outside and take a good whiff of air and leave your paranoia back in the 20th century.

 

[philipuso]

It was done because they partnered with Russia....the Cold War is over dude, walk outside and take a good whiff of air and leave your paranoia back in the 20th century.

I think your wrong. If you look at my post above, the US started hostilities against Cuba before the Soviet Union had any relations with Cuba. This would explain why there is an embargo on Cuba to this day when the Soviets are totally out of the picture. The real reason for the embargo on Cuba is that they choose to go an independent course of US interests and the US is afraid other Latin America countries will follow because they all hate the US for the past actions inflicted on them.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: philipuso

we really don't care how cuba was run, it was the fact they were cozying up to the soviets and stealing american property that the US was concerned about. if they want to run their country into the ground then we'll let them (and we have).

Did you read my original post:

In January 1959, Cuba had a popular nationalist revolution. We now know from declassified U.S. government documents that the formal deci­sion to overthrow Castro was made by the American government in March
1960-that's very important, because at that point there were no Russians around, and Castro was in fact considered anti-Communist by the U.S. [Castro did not align with the Soviet Union until May 1961, after the U.S. had severed diplomatic relations with Cuba in January and had sponsored an invasion attempt in April.] 29 So the reason for deciding to overthrow the Castro government can't have had anything to do with Cuba being a Rus­sian outpost in the Cold War-Cuba was just taking an independent path, which has always been unacceptable to powerful interests in the United States.

Feel free to verify the history. You can also buy the book "Understanding Power" and use the footnotes in the text. Their linked to a webpage called:
Footnotes of Understanding Power

he was cozying up with the soviets before he officially announced it. and the embargo didn't become wide ranging until 1962, after castro's official announcement.

also, castro had already started stealing US property before the the bay of pigs was authorized.

i'm not going to line chomsky's pockets.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: philipuso

we really don't care how cuba was run, it was the fact they were cozying up to the soviets and stealing american property that the US was concerned about. if they want to run their country into the ground then we'll let them (and we have).

Did you read my original post:

In January 1959, Cuba had a popular nationalist revolution. We now know from declassified U.S. government documents that the formal deci­sion to overthrow Castro was made by the American government in March
1960-that's very important, because at that point there were no Russians around, and Castro was in fact considered anti-Communist by the U.S. [Castro did not align with the Soviet Union until May 1961, after the U.S. had severed diplomatic relations with Cuba in January and had sponsored an invasion attempt in April.] 29 So the reason for deciding to overthrow the Castro government can't have had anything to do with Cuba being a Rus­sian outpost in the Cold War-Cuba was just taking an independent path, which has always been unacceptable to powerful interests in the United States.

Feel free to verify the history. You can also buy the book "Understanding Power" and use the footnotes in the text. Their linked to a webpage called:
Footnotes of Understanding Power

How about you verify the history?
Castro had already stolen more than $25 billion in American property and murdered THOUSANDS of suspected political opponents between Jan '59 and March '60.
And... not coincidentally, Castro became communist after the embargo was put in place, not before.

That last is the thing you commie-sympathizing useful idiots never seem to grasp. Castro doesn't believe in your communist utopia and never has. It's just been the most useful system available for a dictator like him to remain a dictator.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: philipuso

It was done because they partnered with Russia....the Cold War is over dude, walk outside and take a good whiff of air and leave your paranoia back in the 20th century.

I think your wrong. If you look at my post above, the US started hostilities against Cuba before the Soviet Union had any relations with Cuba. This would explain why there is an embargo on Cuba to this day when the Soviets are totally out of the picture. The real reason for the embargo on Cuba is that they choose to go an independent course of US interests and the US is afraid other Latin America countries will follow because they all hate the US for the past actions inflicted on them.

I trust your source as much as I trust a random homeless guy to hold my wallet.


So you are saying no Russians existed in 1960?

 

[philipuso]

and the embargo didn't become wide ranging until 1962, after castro's official announcement.

Are you saying the US doesn't do any planning and decision making and then document or record those decisions before the actions take place in the real world??

Would that pre-action decision making count as hostile relations to you?? Especially if Cuban intelligence picked it up and was aware of it??

Was the US hostile to iraq at the time President Bush made the decision to go to war or when the troops actually physically invaded the country months or years later??

 

[philipuso]

So you are saying no Russians existed in 1960?

No, I'm saying Cuba & Soviet relations did not exist until US hostilities made them exist. If a superpower were to threaten your existence shortly after you gained power, what would you do??? Sit back and watch, or ally with that super power's biggest rival in order to defend your existence.

Also is the Soviet Union a communist state?? I don't think so my brainwashed friend.
Subsection of "Understanding Power"

Well, there are really two points that ought to be made. First of all, the So­viet Union was basically a capitalist system. The first thing that Lenin and Trotsky did when they took power in October 1917, remember, was to de­stroy all of the forms of socialist initiative that had developed in Russia since the start of the Russian Revolution in February 1917 [the Russian Tsar was overthrown by popular revolution in February 1917; Lenin's Bolshevik Party took over eight months later in a military coup]. Just now I was talk­ing about workers and communities participating in decision-making-the first thing the Bolsheviks did was to destroy that, totally. They destroyed the factory councils, they undermined the soviets [elected local governing bod­ies], they eliminated the Constituent Assembly [democratically elected par­liament initially dominated by a rival socialist group, which was to govern Russia but was dispersed by Bolshevik troops in January 1918]. In fact, they dismantled every form of popular organization in Russia and set up a com­mand economy with wages and profits, on sort of a centralized state­-capitalist model. 3 So on the one hand, the example you're referring to is just the extreme opposite of what I was talking about, not the same.

Why your brainwashed:
Man responsible for misleading Americans about communism.

 

[Vic]

So you're saying that we're brainwashed because we think that democracy is a better system than dictatorship?

:roll:

 

[philipuso]

So you're saying that we're brainwashed because we think that democracy is a better system than dictatorship?

Some would define democracy partially as:

This equality and freedom would be achieved through the abolition of authoritarian institutions and private property[2], in order that direct control of the means of production and resources will be gained by the working class and society as a whole

wikipedia- Libertarian_socialism
Or simply the workers class having control of the nations production and resources rather than a very small group of people.

If a country wants to pursue that idea, it should be left alone by the United States and not threatened.

Currently Venezuela likes the idea above and is attempting to implement it but is threatened by the USA.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: philipuso

So you're saying that we're brainwashed because we think that democracy is a better system than dictatorship?

Some would define democracy partially as:

This equality and freedom would be achieved through the abolition of authoritarian institutions and private property[2], in order that direct control of the means of production and resources will be gained by the working class and society as a whole

wikipedia- Libertarian_socialism
Or simply the workers class having control of the nations production and resources rather than a very small group of people.

If a country wants to pursue that idea, it should be left alone by the United States and not threatened.

Castro has NEVER had any intention of pursuing that ideal. Why is this simple fact so hard for you to grasp? He is instead the long-lived ongoing representation of the ultimate in authoritarianism: a dictator.

BTW, I eagerly await your response to my challenge. Please name one -- just one -- attempt at communism that has succeeded in they way you describe a communism should be.
Oh, and don't say it hasn't been attempted either. They tried getting rid of money and all private economy in Cambodia in the 70s. It only took 3 years for that attempt to kill off some 25% of their population, roughly half of those from starvation and disease, and the other half from execution and genocide. The US didn't intervene, so you can't use that as an excuse (it was Vietnam that put a stop to the Khmer Rouge).