Talk:Hugo Banzer

Comment
There's a contradiction between this page and the corresponding one in Spanish. Here it is claimed that Banzer called for elections due to US pressure to return to democracy, while the page in Spanish claims that it was internal pressure, arising from a feminist group's hunger strike, that led Banzer to call for elections ("Fue derrocado en 1978, luego de una larga huelga de hambre de mujeres que dirigían y participaban en organizaciones sociales, que lo presionaron a llamar a elecciones"). The second one is the reason we learn at school in Bolivia, and it is also more consistent with the fact that this dictatorship was part of US' plan Condor, in which US government fabricated several coups d'état in South America and supported their antidemocratic governments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seta412 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

I think there is something wrong here.... I arrived in Bolivia in 1981 and he was the president then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.103.122.156 (talk) 13:49, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I visitted Bolivia for business in 1988 and 1989. I had business at General Banzer's house. Following dinner that night his nephew Ramon and I talked apart from my Bolivian representative and General Banzer. Later I was told he was the silent partner co-president with Pas. General Banzaer claimed to control four ministries, including the oil and gas ministry. Clearly he had considerable power, because he later arrnaged for the departure of another cabinet minister. Based on my experience I think the description is not entirely accurate. Wingriderdc (talk) 03:14, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Feb 2009 Neutrality Tag
There is a Neutrality tag since Feb 2009, yet there is no discussion of it in the talk page. I am not sure how can the tag be added with the goal of improving the article where the specific items that are disputed are not mentioned. I'd suggest to remove the tag since the tag reduces the credibility of the whole article while lacks a route to fix it and details what is and what isn't disputed. Wikihonduras (talk) 07:50, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:34, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

There is a non-neutral and unverifiable claim, with no source, where it says "but nonetheless did his best to rule in a conciliatory and non-arbitrary manner". I am removing this sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.38.204.40 (talk) 14:45, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hugo Banzer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080521195948/http://www.aportescriticos.com.ar/es/chroniques.php?id_cv=1 to http://www.aportescriticos.com.ar/es/chroniques.php?id_cv=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:10, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Ambiguous Pronoun
The Dictatorship, 1971–1978  section has these two consecutive sentences: ''His murder was part of Operation Condor. Interestingly, he received the political support of…[the MNR].'' The trouble is that the "His" and the "He" don't refer to the same person. The "His murder…" refers to the previous president, Juan José Torres, but the "he received…" apparently refers to Banzer, which would be consistent with the MNR article). But the way it reads, it sounds like they're both referring to Torres. For clarity, I'm changing it to say "Banzer received…" (If I'm wrong here, please correct it.) —MiguelMunoz (talk) 23:48, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Unclear sentence in section "As Civilian Political Leader"
After telling us of the "coup of July 17, 1980 which installed a reactionary (and cocaine-tainted) dictatorship led by General Luis García Meza," we find this sentence:

''With the military's reputation badly damaged by the excesses of the 1980-82 dictatorship, it was decided to accept the 1980 election results and reconvene the Congress elected that year. That body duly elected Siles as president.''

Huh? It was decided by who? It also only implies that two years have past, before accepting the results of the 2-year-old election. This sentence needs rewriting.