Perhaps for the sake of continuity, they should bury him in an unmarked grave in the middle of nowhere.

... but unfortunately the leaders of rich nations are a lot less vulnerable to prosecution than the leaders of poor ones. The absolute worst that is ever going to happen to "the decider" and his cronies is that they leave office in disgrace, spend a few years in obscurity, and then come back to make a(nother) fortune on the right-wing speaking and book circuit. I'd love to see them as fugitives, hounded by an angry world until their flabby bodies finally give out from the strain, but I can't actually believe it's going to happen.

I travel to Chile frequently, and I have to say that Pinochet is well-loved despite his actions. I have never yet met a Chilean who believes that his dictatorship was a bad thing for the country. Like all good fascists, he got the trains running on time and turned Chile into the most wealthy and most advanced country south of the Rio Grande. I find it fascinating that Chileans shrug off the deaths of co-workers or family members at the hands of police. They say that poverty kills too, and Pinochet made Chile a first-world nation. For them, it was simply worth the cost. His legacy in his home country will be different than you imagine. The recent indictments will do little to change the myth of Pinochet and his "Chicago Boys" putting a TV in every living room and a car in every garage. When I get cynical, I think about how far people will go to attain or preserve prosperity. Human rights are a distant second.

Maybe I'll eat a big meal that day and take a big shit on it, too. Good riddance, you butcherous comemierda motherfucker!

G.W. Bush et al. seem to have all of Pinochet's barbarism without any possible redeeming virtue. e.g. The economy here was better before W.Bush, and it will be better after he leaves.

Pinochet did things we might expect a South American dictator to do, and he hurt his own country. Bush and company have surprised us with their breath-taking ruthless audacity, and they have injured the whole world.

Let's get after Bush and Cheney and their pals. Expose them, prosecute them, lock them up.

"I travel to Chile frequently, and I have to say that Pinochet is well-loved despite his actions. I have never yet met a Chilean who believes that his dictatorship was a bad thing for the country"

If you travel frequently to Chile and never met a Chilean who believes that the dicatorship was a bad thing, then I will simply say that you had not met that many different kind of people. After all, I live in Chile and I had not met that many chileans that love the general, or too many polls that show a great love for the general (yep, there are people for whom Pinochet was loved, and they use as nickname for him 'tata' (granpa)).

These are the countries in south, central American who have had both leftwing and rightwing military dictatorships and the periods they were in power. This does not include various civil wars, insurgencies etc that occured during so called democratically elected government periods. Nor does it include the Mexican civil war or the nearly one million Mexicans who died in la Guerra Christera (1910-21).

Argentina 1976-83

Chile 1973-90

Uruguay 1973-85

Paraguay 1954-89

Bolivia 1951-56, 70-82

Ecuador 1972-79

Peru 1968-80

Columbia 1957-74

Venezuela 1920-47, 49-80, 92-present

Panama 1968-89

Guatemala 1950-85

Honduras 1932-82

El Salvador 1950-90

Nicaragua 1936-79

Cuba 1959-present

While Pinochet was a bad guy, it seems a little bit self serving to pick on only him.

Pinochet and his fellow dictators received training and support from the US for maintaining capitalist interests. Sound familiar?

Let's not overlook this fact.

For those who say they travel to Chile and that Pinochet is loved there, I understand where you are coming from. It does not surprise me. I am certainl that you visit with the wealthy elite in Chile and doubtlessly they do love Pinochet or most of them anyway. However, I also do not doubt that if you travelled to the less wealthy areas where the majority of the people live you would find that he is despised. Whats more it was long ago revealed that he stole millions and hid it in American banks. He was not only a murderer but a corrupt thief too. If there is a hell he is certainly burning there right now.

Then another strange posting discribes Venezuala as a dictatership. Could this be the same Venezuala which just had yet another free and fair election? If Venezuala is a dictatership then what are we with our Diebold run fiascos.

Thank you for a timely opinion on what a horrible son of a bitch this asshole really was. If only we could try Kissinger in his place. If it weren't for the US there would never have been a Pinochet and that is the worst of it.

Rot in hell you worthless murderous piece of crap.

But death and suffering to this government that used its power to put a known corrupt murderer into power when it could have supported a socialist even if he was wrong. He wasn't a murderer. But we are.

I am looking at the BBC Evening News, and they are interviewing Chileans who still love the Dear Old Fingernail-Puller.

We may face this problem here in The Homeland. Will people still love George W. "Waterboard" Bush, even after we document his cruelty?

We are in the Post-Campassion Era. We have sunk to Banana Republic level. The 2008 election is our last chance.

Do some of you people have any sense of perspective? This is one of those times where I just roll my eyes and laugh at how I can be so liberal with regards actual liberties like free speech, gay marriage, etc. and yet have so little in common with Leftists and their cult of victimhood (e.g. no free speech when insulting Islam).

Camp X-Ray, Abu Gharib, etc. whatever their legal status compares in no way to the brutal murders carried in Chile during Pinochet's reign. Have we summarily executed or maimed the prisoners? Being stripped and threatened with dogs but ultimately left physically unharmed (the worst thing I've heard of) isn't the same as being shot in the head openly by state authorities.

Of course this general reach for comparison is typical of people who obsess over Israel and yet are completely ignorant of the civil war in Sudan which has raged on and off for just as long and claimed millions rather than thousands of lives.

I guess the Leftist who only like their Muslims as innocent, helpless victims can't process situations with Muslims as the aggressors. Hence you don't read about Islamic insurgencies in places like Thailand at Salon, NPR or the NYT.

It just appalls me that "liberal" is used be conservatives to describe some of you people who have no common-sense or genuine compassion, just a blind hatred of Bush and an ability to aggrandize his actions to demonic proportions at every turn. He's a bad president not a brutal dictator. Get a grip on reality.