Bossnass

I'm in the process of writing a term paper for a history course I'm taking. I'm trying to address issues arising during Nicaraguan history from 1979-1990ish.

Things seem to be developing pretty one sided. I'm coming across almost entirely biased, which I would like to avoid. For example, in a rough summary:

Sandinista revolutionaries had entierly altruistic intentions and Nicaragua had potential to become a true Marxist success story untill they were met with the Contras, a product Reagan's overpowering and heavy handed Cold war foriegn policy.

I'm somewhat struggling to put together a coherent thesis and to narrow down the issues. I could use some direction as to what you all think are the most relavent topics. A discussion/debate would help me better understand and identify what I want to focus upon. I'm sure someone out there has opinions.

Scipio

Hmm, finding something that offers an alternate storyline. That certainly sounds like a fine thesis to me though, unless you just want to be different. Naturally, you'd want to raise the alternate view, so you might need sources for that.

Then again, I know very little about the time or place. Sorry I can't be of much help.

__________________
"Erections lasting more than 4 hours, though rare, require immediate medical attention."

hammer4all

I warn that some of the content in following links may surprise you; Nicaragua just so happens to be one of the clearest open and shut cases of American imperialism. Consider yourself warned.

Here is some info:

http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/sam/sam-2-03.html

http://www.democracynow.org/article....e=thread&tid=5

Excellent talk (with a little about Nicaragua) here: http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/98/
Transcript here: http://www.counterpunch.org/chomskyterror.html

More sources:

http://tinyurl.com/2nvnf

http://tinyurl.com/3emym

http://tinyurl.com/23to4

Bossnass

Thanks for the links.

I personally put little faith in Chomsky. He is dramatic and overstates his posistions. If he went about presenting the same ideas in a more acedemic manner, he would hold much greater sway. Either way, his posistion is a more extended version of what I already have, which doesn't do much for balance.

Any idea where I can get a source on actual figures of the Soviet support the Sandinistas? Any of the board members out there that support modern day US policy have a defense for Reagan?

Jizz-Fritter

Chomsky is useful if you want to find sources. He is very meticulous in this matter.

If you're looking for sources that will say that Reagan isn't responsible, then you will be hard pressed. Nicaragua went to the World Court, the the US was found guilty, and order us to stop and to pay reparations. Instead of doing those things, we double the supply flights for the Contras. It was quite rediculous.

The media in the US was pro-Contra, but that usually involved silence, so you're still out of luck with the exception of the attention to the World Court ruling.