YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsNicaragua


April 16, 1985
After reading your editorial on Nicaragua this Easter Sunday, I got down on my knees and thanked God that we don't have a President who thinks like your editorial writers. If we did, we would probably be facing Russian tanks and missiles from across the Rio Grande. FREDERICK D. MULLEN Upland
May 14, 1985
I concur with your editorial on Nicaragua. It is cowardly for the richest and most powerful nation on earth to bully a poverty-stricken country of 2.8 million peasants into submission. R. E. DILLBERG Temple City
March 30, 1986
By defeating Reagan's request for contra funds, House Democrats add credence to what their critics say. That is, House Democrats manage either to ignore or explain away the very brutal atrocities being committed at this moment upon the people of Nicaragua by the Sandinistas. Another word is needed to describe the behavior of House Democrats especially when it relates to the Philippines and Nicaragua. That word is two-faced. Tyrannical governments of the right (the Philippines under Ferdinand Marcos)
October 24, 1988
What a refreshing change to read an article about Nicaragua on the front page that is articulate, well-researched and, best of all, free of superficial labeling of the Sandinistas and what they stand for. As a U.S. citizen, who has lived in Nicaragua for 1 1/2 years, it is nice to return to Los Angeles and read an article that really is so informative and unbiased. Depicting the Sandinistas and the Nicaraguan people as real people, who make mistakes sometimes as all real people do, but admit their mistakes and try to make changes for the better; and showing them as they truly are--humanists interested in the welfare of the majority of the people in Nicaragua--are crucial in the fight to change the unjust, inhumane, unlawful foreign policy that the United States government is following in Nicaragua.
July 2, 1986
Thanks to The Times for "Nicaragua: Words, Words" (Opinion, June 22), scoring the Administration's use of the "word Wurlitzer" instead of the facts in its campaign for congressional and popular support for its contra war against the Sandinista government of Nicaragua. The editorial's concurrent appearance with the "brief" for contra aid, written by Assistant Secretary of State Elliott Abrams, makes it especially appropriate. In his brief, Abrams uses the propagandist's favorite tool: Assert that one's own actions stem from only pure motives and that one's chosen enemy acts from purely evil motives; repeat these assertions until they assume the mantle of truth.
September 14, 1987
Kissinger's article reinforces my belief that those who interpret history and current events do so for their own benefit. In the case of Nicaragua, the master juggler has once again made murky what to many people is crystal clear, and holds himself up as the expert to whom we should turn for guidance. The fact of the matter is that Nicaragua is choosing its own destiny. Some of us worry about that; apparently many otheres don't seem the least bit threatened by it. I would venture to say that by far the largest majority of the 50,000 or so U.S. citizens who have visited Nicaragua since 1979 would agree that that country represents no threat to the security of the United States.
June 24, 1987
How can Bosco Matamoros speak of "civil war" in Nicaragua, when after all these years the contras hold no territory inside Nicaragua, but instead must operate from bases across the border (having driven Honduran farmers from their land)? And for how many years can you call these contra attacks "civil war," when they are sustained by U.S. arms, training, and intelligence? This is a war of aggression by the United States against a small country that has audaciously chosen not to be dominated by a powerful neighbor to the north.
Los Angeles Times Articles