- Messages
- 648
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 26
All the points you have raised lack merit and are provably false. The major flaw in your argument is that you keep on projecting the problems of the countries you mentioned to the Philippines and assuming that just because those countries turned communist the Philippines would inevitably have fallen also into communism, and installing a pro-American dictator was the only way to prevent such a thing from happening, while ignoring the fact that the Philippines never had the same severity of threat of communist takeover as those countries faced nor was it anywhere close to the same political situation those countries were into.
To begin with, it was the local rebels through the support of the Chinese and Soviets that liberated Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos from French imperialism. The U.S. failed to help drive the Colonial French out of those countries so they turned to the Chinese and Soviets for help, and since China and the Soviet Union were communist, those three countries followed suit. Was the Philippines in a similar situation as those countries? Far from it. And ever wondered why Thailand didn't become communist unlike its neighbouring countries in Indochina? Because it was never colonized by France thus never had the same circumstances that would have led it to communism. On the other hand, the Soviet Union was in close proximity to Korea and Japan, and it actually occupied the two countries. The Philippines is an island nation that was 3,400 miles away from Soviet invasion so the same scenario wasn't at all realistic.
Ninoy Aquino was never established to have been a communist (that was a made up accusation by Marcos regime in order to persecute and arrest his political opponents) and the likelihood of him being the next president would not have resulted to a communist takeover, a coup or anything you imagine. He did help the communist but that was only because he had a common cause with them in fighting Marcos' dictatorship and that doesn't mean he was a communist for which he confessed that he was not. An excerpt of Ninoy's undelivered speech before he was assassinated:
"I was sentenced to die for allegedly being the leading communist leader. I am not a communist, never was and never will be."
All incidents Marcos used to justify the declaration of martial law were fabricated by him. The communist 'threat' was highly exaggerated. Communism was NEVER a serious threat in the Philippines during his time, unlike it was in other countries. A lot of the bombings in the run up to martial law were traced to the members of the armed forces, not to the rebels (except for only one incident). There was no civil unrest in many other parts of the country except Metro Manila. Even the ambush of Juan Ponce Enrile was staged (Enrile even admitted to it) and used as one of the grounds to declare martial law. There was ABSOLUTELY no need to declare martial law. The whole thing was planned by Marcos even before he became president and could have been avoided if he never came into power.
To begin with, it was the local rebels through the support of the Chinese and Soviets that liberated Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos from French imperialism. The U.S. failed to help drive the Colonial French out of those countries so they turned to the Chinese and Soviets for help, and since China and the Soviet Union were communist, those three countries followed suit. Was the Philippines in a similar situation as those countries? Far from it. And ever wondered why Thailand didn't become communist unlike its neighbouring countries in Indochina? Because it was never colonized by France thus never had the same circumstances that would have led it to communism. On the other hand, the Soviet Union was in close proximity to Korea and Japan, and it actually occupied the two countries. The Philippines is an island nation that was 3,400 miles away from Soviet invasion so the same scenario wasn't at all realistic.
Ninoy Aquino was never established to have been a communist (that was a made up accusation by Marcos regime in order to persecute and arrest his political opponents) and the likelihood of him being the next president would not have resulted to a communist takeover, a coup or anything you imagine. He did help the communist but that was only because he had a common cause with them in fighting Marcos' dictatorship and that doesn't mean he was a communist for which he confessed that he was not. An excerpt of Ninoy's undelivered speech before he was assassinated:
"I was sentenced to die for allegedly being the leading communist leader. I am not a communist, never was and never will be."
All incidents Marcos used to justify the declaration of martial law were fabricated by him. The communist 'threat' was highly exaggerated. Communism was NEVER a serious threat in the Philippines during his time, unlike it was in other countries. A lot of the bombings in the run up to martial law were traced to the members of the armed forces, not to the rebels (except for only one incident). There was no civil unrest in many other parts of the country except Metro Manila. Even the ambush of Juan Ponce Enrile was staged (Enrile even admitted to it) and used as one of the grounds to declare martial law. There was ABSOLUTELY no need to declare martial law. The whole thing was planned by Marcos even before he became president and could have been avoided if he never came into power.