1 edit
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterWell, as a Dallas citizin you certainly know what happened at Dealy Plaza, don't you ? Now you know one of the reasons why it happened ... and it wasn't the Soviets removing a weak opponent, I garantee you that.
He's right, you know. As I recall, that's the way it was reported in Pravda
The fact is, US imperialism has been going on since before President Bush was even born.Um, no. US imperialsm started for real just a few decades ago when the US decoupled the dollar from the gold benchmark. I believe it was in the 70's.
Foreign governments had demanded their US dollar reserves be converted back into gold and the US defaulted on the payment because they didn't have enough gold in reserve.
If by "imperialsm" you mean "intervening in the political power structure of other nations" than ok ya, they've been doing that since the 50's.
3 edits
Originally posted by uzlessWhy is Chavez a dangerous political clown ? Not because he wants to improve his people's situation, but because he is provoking the US in every way you can think of. He is doing everything to displease, provoke and anger the US. The question is why and whether this is a sensible policy to reach his goals ? If he wants to implement policies to improve the situation of the poor masses in his country and throughout South America, he should not seek cooperation with countries like Cuba and, of all places, Iran. Instead he should try and seek support from moderate influential European countries who have a good relationship with the US.
already did in the general forum...didn't seem right to repeat
Bush the Devil or something like that...ah hell with it...here's a copy/paste...............
American media for the most part has made Chavez out to be crazy and unstable, a dictator interested in only himself and personal glory.
While Chavez no doubt needs polishing from a diplomatic of an Economic Hitman"
Give the man a chance and don't listen to the god dam TV!
It seems Chavez is more interested in fighting and challenging the US than in improving his people's conditions. Thát's why he is a dangerous political clown. In the end he will factually betray his people because in his policies and actions he is more motivated by , by the way understandable, resentment and bitterness toward the US, then by compassion for his people. In the end the people, of whom he wants to improve the conditions under which they have to live, will pay the price for his irrational foreign policies.
Originally posted by ivanhoeI disagree, he attacks the US because having a foreign enemy distracts people from their own problems and it also gets him domestic votes through populism.
Why is Chavez a dangerous political clown ? Not because he wants to improve his people's situation, but because he is provoking the US in every way you can think of. He is doing everything to displease, provoke and anger the US. The question is why and whether this is a sensible policy to reach his goals ? If he wants to implement policies to improve ...[text shortened]... of whom he wants to improve the conditions under which they have to live, will pay the price.
Originally posted by PalynkaThis is not in contradiction with what I stated. This aspect you are mentioning is also a part of his political success. He is not only a dangerous political clown for the reasons I stated above, he's also a populist demagogue of a grandeur which can only be matched by his friend President Ahmadinejad of Iran.
I disagree, he attacks the US because having a foreign enemy distracts people from their own problems and it also gets him domestic votes through populism.
Originally posted by uzlessBefore you vomit up your next post, perhaps you should do some research.
Um, no. US imperialsm started for real just a few decades ago when the US decoupled the dollar from the gold benchmark. I believe it was in the 70's.
Foreign governments had demanded their US dollar reserves be converted back into gold and the US defaulted on the payment because they didn't have enough gold in reserve.
If by "imperialsm" you mean "int ...[text shortened]... al power structure of other nations" than ok ya, they've been doing that since the 50's.
In any case, here is a quick list of imperialistic acts in other countries:
Chile 1891 - Armed forces clash with nationalist rebels, helping the regime of the time (who were pro-US interests)
Nicuragua 1894 - Armed forces occupy the Bluefields region, for the next 20 or so years the US sends military forces little by little into the region. Then in 1912 we occupy the country for about 10 years.
1916-1924 - occupation of Dominican Republic
1898 - Seizure of Puerto Rico from Spain, still occupying
1914-1934 - Occupation of Haiti
1917-1933 - Occupation of Cuba (until commander Ché kicked our asses)
This doesn't even include all of the times the US has sent troops to foreign countries pre-1900's to protect its own interests (which I have no real idea of the number either).
Obviously, imperialism is a part of our culture and to say that it started in the 70's is ignoring and OBVIOUS historical context for the practice. How's that for "Um, no?"
Originally posted by no1marauderI did read it, yesterday in fact 🙂
Perhaps if you read Chavez's speech at the UN, your opinion that he only talks about Bush might change:
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1555
I think he was right on about the UN. It doesn't change the fact that he needs to jump off the "I hate Bush" bandwagon before I'll respect him. In my opinion he is only trying to gain support, unfortunately doing it in the most mindnumbingly annoying way possible.
Originally posted by DraxusImperialism is not part of our "culture"; it is a policy chosen by the ruling power elites for quite some time, though. In fact, imperialism and aggressive meddling in other countries' affairs is contrary to the ideas of our Framers who established the political philosophy of this country; see esp. George Washington's Farewell Address.
Before you vomit up your next post, perhaps you should do some research.
In any case, here is a quick list of imperialistic acts in other countries:
Chile 1891 - Armed forces clash with nationalist rebels, helping the regime of the time (who were pro-US interests)
Nicuragua 1894 - Armed forces occupy the Bluefields region, for the next 20 or so years ...[text shortened]... 0's is ignoring and OBVIOUS historical context for the practice. How's that for "Um, no?"
Originally posted by DraxusI see no little or no mention of Bush and a lot of discussion of US policies past and present in the speech. You're simply being obstinate to deny there is more to the man than simply an "I hate Bush" mentality, though that is justifiable seeing how US officials spoke sympathically concerning an attempted military coup against Chavez's elected government.
I did read it, yesterday in fact 🙂
I think he was right on about the UN. It doesn't change the fact that he needs to jump off the "I hate Bush" bandwagon before I'll respect him. In my opinion he is only trying to gain support, unfortunately doing it in the most mindnumbingly annoying way possible.
1 edit
Originally posted by no1maraudermarauder: "Imperialism is not part of our "culture"; it is a policy chosen by the ruling power elites for quite some time, though.
Imperialism is not part of our "culture"; it is a policy chosen by the ruling power elites for quite some time, though. In fact, imperialism and aggressive meddling in other countries' affairs is contrary to the ideas of our Framers who established the political philosophy of this country; see esp. George Washington's Farewell Address.
😀 🙄 😵 😀 ROTFLMSO .... "quite some time" ..... 😀 😵 🙄 😀
Originally posted by ivanhoe"while in reality it was the Soviet-Union getting what it wanted by threatening to place nuclear missiles on Cuba."
The Cuban crises is always being portrayed by the Western Main Stream Media as a victory for Kennedy and the US while in reality it was the Soviet-Union getting what it wanted by threatening to place nuclear missiles on Cuba. The US decided to give in to the Soviet demands and decided to remove the nuclear missiles in Turkey and promised not to invade Cuba. ...[text shortened]... US victory to the public.
Taking these history courses do pay off, marauder. My compliments.
Sorry, Ivanhoe, you're incorrect there. The missiles were already on Cuba.
General Curtis Lemay wanted preventitive strikes on Cuba, knowing full well, that the lives of millions of people would be lost, Cubans, Americans and Russians. Very Dr Strangelove-esque in its lunacy.
D
Originally posted by ivanhoeYou do realise that inflation in Venezuela is way down, at record levels, literacy numbers are going through the roof, he has social programs to educate both children and adults, medical care is being given to ALL people. He is a beacon of hope for all Latin American countries, that they can do better if they reduce their dependency on the extremely exploitative u.s.
It seems Chavez is more interested in fighting and challenging the US than in improving his people's conditions. Thát's why he is a dangerous political clown.
I've repeated this a few times, but I feel its worth repeating again... I was on the Bolivian border in 2003 when the then president, El Gringo, killed scores of his own people when they protested against his actions, which were more pro-us (and pro him), than pro Boliviano; stealing of gas, poisoning of coca plantations, etc. It was a "great" personal experience of how the u.s. work in Latin America.
D