Tony Hollick wrote:

>Christine Petersen <[log in to unmask]> asked:
>
>> What evidence is there to show or not to show that the
>> Khmer Rouge would have come to power anyway if there had been no US
>> involvement?
>
>    'Cambodia Year Zero' by Francois Ponchaud, for starters.
>
Actually Chomsky praised this book as "serious and worth reading" in a
review in the Nation, and Ponchaud returned the favor in the preface to
the first American edition of the book, commending NC's "responsible
attitude and precision of thought" in reviewing the history of the Pol
Pot period. CYZ also seems to have produced a tangled web of subsequent
misquotation among those dedicated to justifying ex post facto the U.S.'s
own genocidal role in the slaughter that preceded Pol Pot's rise.
Interested parties can read about this in NC's extensive writings on the
subject. I will note that no evidence from the book is offered to
buttress Hollick's citation of it.

The rest of Mr. Hollick's response is a rather bold non sequitur.
"Actually existing socialism" is always and everywhere evil, therefore
the Khmer Rouge would have gained power with or without prior U.S.
destruction of the country? Please explain the logic behind this.

Best,

Tresy