1.    What were U.S. economic and political interests in Chile at the time of Allende's election in 1970?  How and why would a self-proclaimed Marxist like Allende threaten these interests?

2.    What are the various forms of intervention illustrated in this case?  Should we think differently about different forms, either in practical or ethical terms?  Why or why not?

3.     What did "responsibility" mean?  In what sense was the United States responsible and why?  Did past intervention justify present or future intervention?

4.     Under what circumstances, if any, might the United States be justified--in practical or ethical terms--in intervening in a foreign country like Chile?

5.    Is it worth separating covertness from intervention?  Is intervening openly better in policy terms or more acceptable in ethical terms?