In any case, you're moving the goalposts. "But the USSR...!" isn't a good refutation of "the US wasn't about bringing heavenly freedom and democracy to the world".
Students detained, tortured and disappeared by dictatorships trained and abetted by the US. Pregnant mothers raped, electrocuted, and their babies illegally relocated to strangers. Democratically elected governments taken down by force. In some case, even US citizens caught in the crossfire and murdered. "But the USSR...!". Right, I guess nobody told them it was for their own good!
"Fighting against Communism" is not a good reason to torture and murder civilians, or to topple elected governments.
No. When you or your loved ones are tortured and murdered, it's not better if done in the name of the interests of the US.
There's nothing magical about the US that torture in the name of their interests is somehow "better", and I'm sorry -- and horrified -- that you think there is.
Meanwhile, the US backed Colombia is doing fine, is democratic, has seen considerable improvements in most regards, and has doubled the size of its economy in ~15 years (inflation adjusted). Colombia looks like it has a very bright future.
The US also maintains near-guaranteed border security for Latin American nations. It's why there are no giant wars between Latin American nations, with rampant annexations, et al. They all know the US would intervene and whichever side the US was on, that side would likely win, so nobody wants to risk it. The US has also guaranteed the lack of foreign power conquering via the Monroe Doctrine, for more than a century, which is a rather sensitive concern given the history of Latin America.
The US has been a superpower for ~75 years now and has not attempted to use that extreme power imbalance to annex swaths of Latin America. It easily could do so. What other superpowers throughout history have ever behaved that way?
Only for Venezuelans. It was none of the US business.
> Meanwhile, the US backed Colombia is doing fine
For debatable values of "doing fine".
> The US also maintains near-guaranteed border security for Latin American nations
Not really.
> The US has been a superpower for ~75 years now and has not attempted to use that extreme power imbalance to annex swaths of Latin America.
It hasn't used overt military power (except in limited cases, like their own CIA-backed agents going rogue on them). It has meddled in Latin America democracies to often terrible results. In many cases, it has abetted bloodshed.
"For debatable values of "doing fine"." It's doing better politically, and economically than most countries in Latin America. Almost any value that you evaluate it by, its doing fine compared to most countries in the Americas.