Please adjust your attitude, TheTimesAreAChanging. Firstly you use the word "garbage" in in an edit summary; you accuse me of using a "fabricated" quote (an accusation supplied with no evidence whatsoever, the quote despite my having supplied multiple RS including a Yale professor); you inaccurately state the nature of the libel case against Pilger (none of the material I added had anything to do with the libel case); I eliminated all reliance on Pilger (though there was absolutely no need to have done); and having met all complaints, you simply proceed to hack out 2k of material. 

 Would you care to explain your, what from my position, are completed unjustified deletions? What you need to explain is why you have absolutely no problem whatsoever with having "China 'armed and trained' the Khmer Rouge during the civil war and continued to aid them years afterward" in the article, but any mention of Western support and policy is immediately and aggressively deleted. Note that is too late to go back now and deleted the Chinese material, since you have already demonstrated that you have no problem with it being there. 

 I expect decent answers to all these questions, as these ought to have been straightforward additions, particularly in light of your demonstrated contentedness with regard to the mention of Chinese policy.