View Full Version : Third World United States Gets Aid
Tachikaze
11-23-2005, 16:02
I gotta check this guy Chavez out very carefully. So, far, I love what he says and does.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/22/venezuela.us.fuel.ap/index.html
Devastatin Dave
11-23-2005, 16:21
Wow, what a great guy, you should consider moving down there since this country is so horrible.
master of the puppets
11-23-2005, 16:28
hmmm, he is a fine tactician. thats what he want dave support, i'm not saying hes selfish but do not belive that he will gain from this. where all other kindness is lost the one who ismost bountifull in it draws followers like a candle in the dark, he has filled a compassionate void and hopefully others will follow. in the end he and all who follow him will most likely profit but i must say that he is a good person and i will support him, at least more than our own copmpanies.
Strike For The South
11-23-2005, 17:33
you nuaghty lil hippie~;) but honestly talk about political brillance
yesdachi
11-23-2005, 17:39
I’m not a fan of his but I’ll give him credit for digging on Bush. Although I am not sure why he wants to increase the tension between us?!?!~:confused:
QwertyMIDX
11-23-2005, 17:43
Because he's a smart politican and he realizes that attacking the US is a good way to keep his leftist supports in line.
Grey_Fox
11-23-2005, 18:01
A foreign government is doing more for Americans than their own governent. A brilliant move.
Oh yeah, LMAO
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y68/KotR_GreyFox/116.gif
https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y68/KotR_GreyFox/pwn3d.gif
He's wily. I'll give him that.
Humanitarian aid.... that's one of the best one liners this years. Thanks for shaming us. We need it now and then.
hmmm, he is a fine tactician. thats what he want dave support, i'm not saying hes selfish but do not belive that he will gain from this. where all other kindness is lost the one who ismost bountifull in it draws followers like a candle in the dark, he has filled a compassionate void and hopefully others will follow. in the end he and all who follow him will most likely profit but i must say that he is a good person and i will support him, at least more than our own copmpanies.
~:rolleyes:
Gosh, such love for South America's wackiest megalomaniac. I think you and Tachikaze and JAG should get together and write a letter to Chavez asking if he would legally adopt you guys. Once you've been inducted into the Chavez clan be sure to put me on your holiday mailing list. Be sure to convince Papa Hugo shell out the cash for one of those greeting cards that sport a family photo of everyone in front of the Christmas tree. I'm thinking matching red cashmere sweaters with Che's image embroidered on the chest. Tres chic.
I wish this was the 1930s because I'd love to see how you guys respond to the political shenanigans of Adolph and Josef.
Devastatin Dave
11-23-2005, 18:31
~:rolleyes:
Gosh, such love for South America's wackiest megalomaniac. I think you and Tachikaze and JAG should get together and write a letter to Chavez asking if he would legally adopt you guys. Once you've been inducted into the Chavez clan be sure to put me on your holiday mailing list. Be sure to convince Papa Hugo shell out the cash for one of those greeting cards that sport a family photo of everyone in front of the Christmas tree. I'm thinking matching red cashmere sweaters with Che's image embroidered on the chest. Tres chic.
I wish this was the 1930s because I'd love to see how you guys respond to the political shenanigans of Adolph and Josef.
~:cheers:
Grey_Fox
11-23-2005, 18:37
Chavez is as evil as Stalin and Hitler? https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y68/KotR_GreyFox/94.gif
What makes him this evil as the twin spawn of Satan? https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y68/KotR_GreyFox/01.gif
Strike For The South
11-23-2005, 18:39
he is a commie and all commies are inherntly bad becuase america is always right~;p
Chavez is as evil as Stalin and Hitler? https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y68/KotR_GreyFox/94.gif
What makes him this evil as the twin spawn of Satan? https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y68/KotR_GreyFox/01.gif
Where in my post did I say that? Chavez is like Hitler, Stalin and his bosom buddy Castro in that he is a dictator. These men all share a common bond in that they all went to great lengths to alleviate the common man of the burden of participating in legitimate, free elections and having access to a free press.
Viva la revolucion!
Red Harvest
11-23-2005, 19:00
I’m not a fan of his but I’ll give him credit for digging on Bush. Although I am not sure why he wants to increase the tension between us?!?!~:confused:
Externalization. Typical method for strongmen and totalitarians. If you can keep the focus on some external problem, your people will be less inclined to focus on *your* problems at home. Bush does it too and succeeded for awhile, but Chavez is better at it. Chavez understands something that Bush does not: as we say in chess, "it is the threat that counts." When you actually carry out the threat in the form of an attack you risk failure. If you fail, you are weaker for it. So maintaining a threat can be more effective, and certainly maintain favorable tension longer. Knowing when and how to act is the difference between a master and a patzer.
Grey_Fox
11-23-2005, 19:03
He was put into power by the people, and during the coup d'etat he was brought back by the people. I may also point out that it was the media that were a part of the coup attempt and as such are guilty of treason, however it appears that none of them have been shot.
Here's a crazy thought: just because Pat Robinson and Bush say Chavez is evil does not make it true.
~:rolleyes:
Gosh, such love for South America's wackiest megalomaniac. I think you and Tachikaze and JAG should get together and write a letter to Chavez asking if he would legally adopt you guys. Once you've been inducted into the Chavez clan be sure to put me on your holiday mailing list. Be sure to convince Papa Hugo shell out the cash for one of those greeting cards that sport a family photo of everyone in front of the Christmas tree. I'm thinking matching red cashmere sweaters with Che's image embroidered on the chest. Tres chic.
I wish this was the 1930s because I'd love to see how you guys respond to the political shenanigans of Adolph and Josef.
Stamp your feet and throw your toys around some more - it's funny to watch ~:joker:
I would rather live under Chavez than the US puppets that were the darlings of the US in the 80s - Noriega, Pinochet, etc...
how come only american says he is a dictator... when i talk to europeans, right and left, they say he is elected by the people. I dont know myself. ~:confused:
anyway, Good going Chavez!... good to see someone is doing something nice to the people theese days. :bow:
Meneldil
11-23-2005, 20:39
That's indeed weird. As far as I know, he has been elected by the people, just as G. Bush was the first time (= in a not really legitimate way).
Then, as far as I know too, the upper class and media, who weren't really happy, tried to manifest and to kick him out of there.
Now, I may be totally wrong, but I really don't see how he's a crazy dictator (except the fact the US dictators decided so)
Kaiser of Arabia
11-23-2005, 21:09
Hah!
Well, Massechusetts isn't exactly first world you know. Their tax brackets are lower than swedens!
</socailism></sarcasm>
Red Harvest
11-23-2005, 21:15
how come only american says he is a dictator... when i talk to europeans, right and left, they say he is elected by the people. I dont know myself. ~:confused:
anyway, Good going Chavez!... good to see someone is doing something nice to the people theese days. :bow:
I wouldn't call him a dictator and I'm not sure that is what others are calling him. He is a strongman/authoritarian type though. Being elected doesn't really change his *style.*
Milosevic was elected by the people as well. And then there is Mugabe. Chavez shares a characteristic with them in that he seeks to push the interests of a majority socio/political group against minority socio/political group in an extreme fashion.
Hah!
Well, Massechusetts isn't exactly first world you know. Their tax brackets are lower than swedens!
</socailism></sarcasm>
huh?
Meneldil
11-23-2005, 23:25
Milosevic was elected by the people as well. And then there is Mugabe. Chavez shares a characteristic with them in that he seeks to push the interests of a majority socio/political group against minority socio/political group in an extreme fashion.
While in other latino-american countries, presidents usually push the interests of a minority (the wealthy and fat ones) against the majority (the poors). This Chavez is indeed a bad guy ~D
Yet, you're correct on the elected stuff. The fact he got elected doesn't mean he's not an authoritarian leader.
As for the guy himself and his style, as far as my knowledge goes, he seems to be a pretty good politician, and he's apparently bothering about what is happening to the lowest classes in his country. I'm not going to say I'm a fan of Chavez, in case we somehow discover he deported all his opponents to 'gulagos', killed 2 millions people and screwed up his country's economy, but he sure looks to be better than all the formerly supported by the US latino dictator wannabes.
I'm not going to say I'm a fan of Chavez, in case we somehow discover he deported all his opponents to 'gulagos', killed 2 millions people and screwed up his country's economy, but he sure looks to be better than all the formerly supported by the US latino dictator wannabes.
Kind of like the French supported one in Mexico during the 1800's ~:eek:
Edit: To remove the part of the quote that I was not responding to.
Kaiser of Arabia
11-23-2005, 23:53
how come only american says he is a dictator... when i talk to europeans, right and left, they say he is elected by the people. I dont know myself. ~:confused:
So was Hitler.
Ironside
11-24-2005, 00:12
So was Hitler.
Not really. He came to power by a political attemt to gain from his populism. Unforturtionably he played with other rules. Hitler never won a election IIRC (not the election in 1933 atleast, did they have elections afterwards?).
Cahvez has been elected and re-elected several times in quite fair elections (focus on the elections, the propaganda from both sides there has been quite noticable).
Alexander the Pretty Good
11-24-2005, 00:39
Huh. I thought that Adolf was elected in '35...
Alexander the Pretty Good
11-24-2005, 00:43
Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler) to the rescue.
He was made chancellor/president in August 1934 by "90% of the electorate."
He had been appointed to chancellor previously in '33.
Soulforged
11-24-2005, 00:44
Chavez is simply a demagogue, but then again what politician in the history of human kind wasn't. At least he's taking actions and not sitting in a Marfil Tower. Though he's, I must admit, the result of a long chain of what we call here "caudillismo", it has always existed, and will exist as long as we're labeled third world.
Red Harvest
11-24-2005, 02:00
While in other latino-american countries, presidents usually push the interests of a minority (the wealthy and fat ones) against the majority (the poors). This Chavez is indeed a bad guy ~D
And to a degree that is a good thing, as I've said before. However, taking it to the extent that he has, and embracing the revolutionary militant trappings he sends out a message that is no better than if it was coming from an elected fascist. He prefers associations with rogue countries. When your hero is someone like Castro who has kept his country perpetually stuck where it was four decades ago, that isn't much of a role model.
And before people blame the U.S., they might want to consider how screwed up European colonialism created the mess that is Central and South America, Africa, the Mid East, South East Asia, and Indonesia.
Tribesman
11-24-2005, 03:37
~D ~D ~D Chavez gets some nice publicity and America tells Spain they cannot sell him ships and planes while at the same time complains that Venezuela is not patroling its borders enough . Who is the lunatic dictator again .
These men all share a common bond in that they all went to great lengths to alleviate the common man of the burden of participating in legitimate, free elections and having access to a free press.
You are just upset that loads of your tax dollars went to the "free" press who plotted a coup and lost , then called elections and recalls and still lost ,you just don't like being associated with losers~D ~D ~D
Hey your government is even trying to stop broadcasts from Venezuela to other countries , so who is it that doesn't like access to a free press~;)
When your hero is someone like Castro who has kept his country perpetually stuck where it was four decades ago, that isn't much of a role model.
Its amaing how stuck a country can get when it is blockaded , under embargo and has a superpower wrecking its economy isn't it .~:rolleyes:
Not to mention the foriegn backed terrorists who are trying to overthrow the regime by any means available, you know nice little things like Al-Qaida do , blowing up hotels and airliners sort of thing .
master of the puppets
11-24-2005, 03:55
~:rolleyes:
Gosh, such love for South America's wackiest megalomaniac. I think you and Tachikaze and JAG should get together and write a letter to Chavez asking if he would legally adopt you guys. Once you've been inducted into the Chavez clan be sure to put me on your holiday mailing list. Be sure to convince Papa Hugo shell out the cash for one of those greeting cards that sport a family photo of everyone in front of the Christmas tree. I'm thinking matching red cashmere sweaters with Che's image embroidered on the chest. Tres chic.
I wish this was the 1930s because I'd love to see how you guys respond to the political shenanigans of Adolph and Josef.
lol, you get me wrong my friend, i knew not of his former exploits or his megalomaniac status, all i knew of was from the article where i got the impression he was merely attempting to gain support. i applaud his tact most and if he is as bad as you say then i must leave it atr tact alone.
just thought i'd clear that up.
Seamus Fermanagh
11-24-2005, 04:58
That's indeed weird. As far as I know, he has been elected by the people, just as G. Bush was the first time (= in a not really legitimate way).
Then, as far as I know too, the upper class and media, who weren't really happy, tried to manifest and to kick him out of there.
Now, I may be totally wrong, but I really don't see how he's a crazy dictator (except the fact the US dictators decided so)
George W. Bush won the 2000 election in the electoral college, though he was behind Gore in total popular votes. But that's the system we use and both men knew the way the game was played. Bush got lucky and 1,000's of lefites thought Gore was being too conservative so they voted for Nader and got themselves George Bush as a reward. Feel free to criticize the system (you would not be the first) but the election was correct.
Chavez has got his finger on the pulse of his electorate. He is catering to their short term (and some long term) needs, he has created an active and visible government presence in the poorest communitites that is directly attributable to him, he has made the USA in particular and neo-liberalism in general the bogeymen to rail against, and he is trying to fund the whole shebang using the oil revenues. There are signs that his efforts may have some long-term troubles (capital flight, loss of private sector jobs, etc.), so it remains to be seen if he can put Ven's future in order.
So far he is following the dictator model: Get elected as a demagoging populist, address the immediate emotional and physical needs of the mass of the population, identify and verbally target an external enemy to vent anger away from your own government, and begin to re-cast the institutional infrastructure to preserve and enhance your own power base. To be fair, non-dictators try some of this too, one of the few key tests is how power is transitioned to a new leader (or if).
Red Harvest
11-24-2005, 07:43
George W. Bush won the 2000 election in the electoral college, though he was behind Gore in total popular votes. But that's the system we use and both men knew the way the game was played. Bush got lucky and 1,000's of lefites thought Gore was being too conservative so they voted for Nader and got themselves George Bush as a reward. Feel free to criticize the system (you would not be the first) but the election was correct.
Well I looked through the county votes in Florida and worked through the math myself years ago. Only the ballot error problem gave Dubya a "technical" win in Florida. He clearly lost the true popular vote in Florida--the number of ballots cast in error was huge. It was pretty easy to see if you looked at the number of votes for cast for Buchanan and how out of proportion it was to the other ballot types.
Was the will of the people done in the 2000 presidential election? Hell, no. Dubya managed a win in the electoral college thanks to a string of technicalities. He was extremely lucky, and our nation was not.
Tachikaze
11-24-2005, 07:55
I looked up "dictator" in my American Heritage Dictionary, and I didn't see the word "evil" anywhere in the definitions.
I don't think democratic republic is the only valid form of government. Different forms of governments are needed for different nations, depending on their cultures, types of economies, and political/economic situations. For instance, a nation in longterm crisis needs a strong centralized government, at least temporarily. Even US president FDR knew this in the late '30s.
So far, the critics of Chavez who have posted here have just said he is evil, a communist, a dictator, crazy, and a megalomaniac. No one has offered any verifiable substantive reason why I should dislike him.
The stunt he pulled in the linked CNN article reminded me of the comment by a southern African (Zimbabwe, I believe) official, who said that his country would send election observers to the US. This was following the 2000 election of Gore.
My country is an embarrassment. I am saying that now because it has the excess wealth to have an excellent system that takes care of its population and has an enviable society. As it is, Japan has a much flatter economic curve, with less poor; a proportionately larger, healthier middle class; and less people with obscene personal wealth. It has far better services and far less crime. I know this from personal experience. If you want to see what can be done in a modern civilized society with industrial wealth, go pay a visit.
The US has a much higher GNP and many, many more natural resources. Why is it so far behind?
I'm not going to Venezula to support Chavez (or maybe even Japan). I'm going to stay right here and fight for the society we could have.
Gawain of Orkeny
11-24-2005, 08:02
Well, Massechusetts isn't exactly first world you know. Their tax brackets are lower than swedens!
So hes helping a fellow socialist state. No big surprise.~D
Meneldil
11-24-2005, 12:19
Once again, I'm not excusing him, but starting to blame him just for the fact he's socialist or he doesn't like the US is quite silly. He might be yet another incompetent dictator a la Castro, but so far, I think it's way too early to have an objective opinion about his achievements. After all, some authoritarian leaders already achieved to turn third world countries into modern states, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. Furthermore, I kinda have a positive feeling toward him, just cause he stopped a coup led by right wing conservative, and doesn't lay down before Bush.
George W. Bush won the 2000 election in the electoral college, though he was behind Gore in total popular votes.
Which means he has little legitimacy. IMO at least. As I don't live in the US, I shouldn't be bothered, but since every (usually stupid) decision of your president has an impact on the rest of the world, that's quite annoying.
And before people blame the U.S., they might want to consider how screwed up European colonialism created the mess that is Central and South America, Africa, the Mid East, South East Asia, and Indonesia.
Are you saying Pinochet and all his friends weren't supported by the US ? If no, then I won't blame america.
Furthermore, I also blame Europe (and especially France and UK) for some of the crap happening today in Africa. If it was up to me, I'd stop to support all these silly, bloddy and incompetent african dictators.
I like Chavez. He may be a dirty rotten SOB, but anyone who successfully thumbs their nose at the ultimate authority gets a beer on me.
It's the same reason I "like" Castro. He's a bonehead to be sure, but a guy who's broke as the day is long, with no power and fewer friends, on a tiny island only miles from the US, who can piss off nine consecutive US presidents who can't seem to do a damn thing about him; it's just priceless.
There's nothing better in the world than watching the "ultimate authority", be it the principle in high school or the president of the USA, stomp their feet and go completely red faced wankers because they just can't stop that guy from thumbing his nose at them.
Fight the machine!
Adrian II
11-24-2005, 13:29
Furthermore, I also blame Europe (and especially France and UK) for some of the crap happening today in Africa. If it was up to me, I'd stop to support all these silly, bloddy and incompetent african dictators.Why don't you stop their support to your politicians: Giscard, Mitterrand, Chirac, Pasqua... ~;p
Red Harvest
11-24-2005, 18:13
Are you saying Pinochet and all his friends weren't supported by the US ? If no, then I won't blame america.
No, but I have noticed a European "amnesia" that seems to forget that European actions created the gameboard and starting positions that we are still trying to work out. It will take centuries to sort it all out, and mistakes have been and will be committed along the way. But let's not forget who created the mess.
One could argue that the U.S. has done a far better job on this side of the pond than Europe has done on theirs. Afterall, how many World Wars have emanated from this side? How often is a full multi-national military intervention required in Central/South America?
Meneldil
11-24-2005, 18:46
Why don't you stop their support to your politicians: Giscard, Mitterrand, Chirac, Pasqua...
Heh, I wish I could.
No, but I have noticed a European "amnesia" that seems to forget that European actions created the gameboard and starting positions that we are still trying to work out. It will take centuries to sort it all out, and mistakes have been and will be committed along the way. But let's not forget who created the mess.
Oh yeah, sure, let's blame everything on Europe. I'm sure the French are even more responsible than the others, mainly because they're french ~:rolleyes:
I may reassure you, there's no amnesia about the things we did in the past. How could we forget something we keep being (rightfully) blamed for by certain minorities. We're not Japan, or Russia, or China, thanks. Colonisation is, with Napoleon, one of the most studied topic of french History. I passed 3 competitive exams last years, and the topics were, each time, the effects of colonisation. And guess what, we were not asked to excuse colonisation.
One could argue that the U.S. has done a far better job on this side of the pond than Europe has done on theirs. Afterall, how many World Wars have emanated from this side? How often is a full multi-national military intervention required in Central/South America?
That's your point of view. I'm personnally thinking the US are doing just as bad, if not worse, than the former colonial powers.
I could aswell blame the screwed up decolonisation on the US and USSR, since UK and France were politely urged to leave their former colonies, or they would have their ass kicked, either militarily or economicaly, and argue that things would have turned out a lot better if we were given time. That would be intellectually dishonest, just as claiming that every crap happening on earth atm is Europe's fault, while the US are just doing their best to save everyone.
IMO, todays situation in the 3rd world has been caused by both decolonisation and the cold war.
Apparently, the difference between the average european and the average american is that the second one is for some reason unable to criticise his country, and prefer to blame Europe/Islam/Hippies/Chavez/Socialists.
Oh, and don't the American Konservatives consider the Cold War as the 3rd WW, and the War on Terrorism as the 4th one ? That would make 2 WW for Europe and 2 for the US ~;)
Beelzebub
11-24-2005, 19:11
This is a stunt but I think most normal people will not be very impressed by it since it's so blatent, except for the type who are all about LOL CHAAVEZ SPANKED BUSH.
Anyways if Chavez wants to give state oil to the USA, go ahead, I'm sure the people living like subhumans in the spawling slums of Caracas don't need the money anyways. They'll probably just be gunned down by the police soon so they won't be picking through garbage too much longer. You guys who want to move to Venezuala, go ahead, just be careful not to say anything bad about Chavez or you'll soon find yourself with a 4 yr prison term. I wonder if you guys would think Mugabe is doing a good job in Zimbabwe too if he sent food to the USA?
And seriously guys, I really think cuba would be doing fine if it weren't for the USA. Everyone knows socialism works so well and causes such great economic growth!! Just look at the USSR, the greatest and most prosperous nation in the world!
Red Harvest
11-24-2005, 19:16
Oh yeah, sure, let's blame everything on Europe. I'm sure the French are even more responsible than the others, mainly because they're french ~:rolleyes:
I may reassure you, there's no amnesia about the things we did in the past.
Seems to be when you come into these debates. Pinochet history is as out of date now as much of the post WWII decolonization. Yet that is where you went with this. Rather hypocritical to emphasize one and ignore the other, that is what I'm calling you on.
That's your point of view. I'm personnally thinking the US are doing just as bad, if not worse, than the former colonial powers.
I could aswell blame the screwed up decolonisation on the US and USSR, since UK and France were politely urged to leave their former colonies, or they would have their ass kicked, either militarily or economicaly, and argue that things would have turned out a lot better if we were given time. That would be intellectually dishonest, just as claiming that every crap happening on earth atm is Europe's fault, while the US are just doing their best to save everyone.
IMO, todays situation in the 3rd world has been caused by both decolonisation and the cold war.
Well, the US isn't running the show and doesn't have colonies, so your analogy fell apart in the first sentence. ~:rolleyes: Some of the problems have been caused by the Cold War, but where did that come from? Answer: Europe's inability to deal with its own problems. The "given time" argument is the same one used by the South to support slavery and secession.
I don't claim that every problem on Earth is Europe's fault. It would be nice if certain Europeans could understand the same about the U.S. :duel:
Apparently, the difference between the average european and the average american is that the second one is for some reason unable to criticise his country, and prefer to blame Europe/Islam/Hippies/Chavez/Socialists.
Judging by your own response in this thread, that clearly isn't true. As you said you want to blame things not on colonisation, but "decolonisation and the cold war." Bravo, you sound just like a certain segment of the U.S. blaming racial issues in the U.S. on emancipation.
Oh, and don't the American Konservatives consider the Cold War as the 3rd WW, and the War on Terrorism as the 4th one ? That would make 2 WW for Europe and 2 for the US ~;) Nope, you are just spinning based on the views of the far right.
solypsist
11-24-2005, 20:07
i read this twice, and at no point did you dispute the facts of the article or the tone - which means sarcasm was your only recourse. ~:handball:
~:rolleyes:
Gosh, such love for South America's wackiest megalomaniac. I think you and Tachikaze and JAG should get together and write a letter to Chavez asking if he would legally adopt you guys. Once you've been inducted into the Chavez clan be sure to put me on your holiday mailing list. Be sure to convince Papa Hugo shell out the cash for one of those greeting cards that sport a family photo of everyone in front of the Christmas tree. I'm thinking matching red cashmere sweaters with Che's image embroidered on the chest. Tres chic.
I wish this was the 1930s because I'd love to see how you guys respond to the political shenanigans of Adolph and Josef.
Adrian II
11-24-2005, 20:10
~:rolleyes:
Gosh, such love for South America's wackiest megalomaniac. I think you and Tachikaze and JAG should get together and write a letter to Chavez asking if he would legally adopt you guys. Once you've been inducted into the Chavez clan be sure to put me on your holiday mailing list. Be sure to convince Papa Hugo shell out the cash for one of those greeting cards that sport a family photo of everyone in front of the Christmas tree. I'm thinking matching red cashmere sweaters with Che's image embroidered on the chest. Tres chic.
I wish this was the 1930s because I'd love to see how you guys respond to the political shenanigans of Adolph and Josef.Wow, this is a prime example of a bad post. It opens on an invective without any further explanation or justification. Right after that it turns into a personal rant against Tachikaze and other members, and it ends on that eternal characteristic of the really bad post: comparing the opposition to Hitler.
Take comfort, Spino. Your posts can only get better after this. :bow:
Ironside
11-24-2005, 21:45
Well, the US isn't running the show and doesn't have colonies, so your analogy fell apart in the first sentence.
Nope, US used puppet states. ~;p
One could argue that the U.S. has done a far better job on this side of the pond than Europe has done on theirs. Afterall, how many World Wars have emanated from this side? How often is a full multi-national military intervention required in Central/South America?
Mostly becausse it's hard to start something big with broken economy, and what seems to have broken the economy of South-America was side-effects of WW1, so not much time to stir up trouble.
And how many times have the US deployed troops, supported coups and supported terrorists in Latin-America?
Care to agree that some involments by a few larger states on both sides of the pond has left quite a few countries in a big mess? And skip this "your countrymen did much worse than ours there and there"?
Soulforged
11-25-2005, 00:45
Mostly becausse it's hard to start something big with broken economy, and what seems to have broken the economy of South-America was side-effects of WW1, so not much time to stir up trouble.That could be argued, there were many factors, but I asure you the World Wars were not one of them, at least not that important.
And how many times have the US deployed troops, supported coups and supported terrorists in Latin-America?Oh but they're responsable at least they exterpited the "cancer" again. ~;)
Once again, I'm not excusing him, but starting to blame him just for the fact he's socialist or he doesn't like the US is quite silly. He might be yet another incompetent dictator a la Castro, but so far, I think it's way too early to have an objective opinion about his achievements.I think you could call Castro many things, but incompetent is not one of them, he knows how to dictate. ~;)
Red Harvest
11-25-2005, 01:56
Care to agree that some involments by a few larger states on both sides of the pond has left quite a few countries in a big mess? And skip this "your countrymen did much worse than ours there and there"?
You finally figured out where I was going with it. Congratulations.
Red Harvest
11-25-2005, 01:57
Nope, US used puppet states. ~;p
Which hardly applies ot the last few decades... ~:rolleyes:
Ironside
11-25-2005, 09:11
That could be argued, there were many factors, but I asure you the World Wars were not one of them, at least not that important.
Well it was only WW1 (not WW2) and the massive drop of trade that caused major economical damage. But you're right that it was more factors too.
But the future of South-America looked much brighter 1900, than 1920.
Which hardly applies ot the last few decades... ~:rolleyes:
Correct, but the only "decolonisation" that has happened recently was the fall of SU.
And before people blame the U.S., they might want to consider how screwed up European colonialism created the mess that is Central and South America, Africa, the Mid East, South East Asia, and Indonesia.
Why did you then throw in this from the beginning then?
Red Harvest
11-25-2005, 19:09
Why did you then throw in this from the beginning then?
To point out how assinine it was to blame everything in Central/South America on the U.S. I guess you still don't get it and are still in blame the U.S. mode. ~:rolleyes:
Ironside
11-25-2005, 22:29
To point out how assinine it was to blame everything in Central/South America on the U.S. I guess you still don't get it and are still in blame the U.S. mode. ~:rolleyes:
Que? When have I ever stated something about the US on South-America?
Most of the messing done by the US was already in unstable countries in Latin-America without the South-America part of it (what is it called, Middle- America).
And no, all the mess in Latin-America isn't created by the US, not even most of it. Happy now? ~;p
Knee-jerk pre-emptive strikes is an exellent way to bring the discussion down to that level BTW.
Red Harvest
11-26-2005, 00:42
Que? When have I ever stated something about the US on South-America?
Most of the messing done by the US was already in unstable countries in Latin-America without the South-America part of it (what is it called, Middle- America).
And no, all the mess in Latin-America isn't created by the US, not even most of it. Happy now? ~;p
Knee-jerk pre-emptive strikes is an exellent way to bring the discussion down to that level BTW.
Perhaps if YOU HAD PAID ATTENTION EARLIER IN THE THREAD you would understand where it came from, BTW. ~:rolleyes: Thanks for bringing down the discussion level.
Proletariat
11-26-2005, 01:05
Apparently, the difference between the average european and the average american is that the second one is for some reason unable to criticise his country, and prefer to blame Europe/Islam/Hippies/Chavez/Socialists.
Why is Red the 'average' American? Because you disagree with him he must be the 'average' American? This thread was started by an American. Can't you hide your typically Franco-cheuvanistic anti-Americanism a little better?
Oh, and don't the American Konservatives consider the Cold War as the 3rd WW, and the War on Terrorism as the 4th one ? That would make 2 WW for Europe and 2 for the US ~;)
No, Americans don't call them this. It's more common with folks building strawmen who simultaneously feign intellectual honesty. Furthermore, the only similarity with these incidents is your country's usefulness in 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Tribesman
11-26-2005, 01:17
This damn lunatic must be stopped , not only is he planning an oil pipeline so he can increase exports to china by 15% he has also done a deal with the evil Iranians for tractors , tractors can spread fertilizer , some fertilizers are chemical compounds , chemical warfare uses chemicals , terrorists use fertilizer to make bombs , he is now linked to a terrorist state and communist China and is spreading chemical warfare and terrorism , invade now he is an imminent threat we cannot wait for the mushrooms cloud over Washington .
Sorry I had a bit of a neo-con moment there~;)
Kaiser of Arabia
11-26-2005, 04:11
Well I looked through the county votes in Florida and worked through the math myself years ago. Only the ballot error problem gave Dubya a "technical" win in Florida. He clearly lost the true popular vote in Florida--the number of ballots cast in error was huge. It was pretty easy to see if you looked at the number of votes for cast for Buchanan and how out of proportion it was to the other ballot types.
Was the will of the people done in the 2000 presidential election? Hell, no. Dubya managed a win in the electoral college thanks to a string of technicalities. He was extremely lucky, and our nation was not.
Brings up an interesting point.
IF YOU ARE TOO !(&$#(@&$&(*@#&*(@&#(&^(*^*(^%*^#^%r@(#!(*!&&#^*!&#(*!@(#()(^&@!(&#ING STUPID TO FILL OUT A BALLOT
do you deserve to vote?
Kaiser of Arabia
11-26-2005, 04:13
No, Americans don't call them this. It's more common with folks building strawmen who simultaneously feign intellectual honesty. Furthermore, the only similarity with these incidents is your country's usefulness in 1, 2, 3, and 4.
You trying to kill me? My aeorta just burst from the blood pressure brought about by laughter ~:cheers:
Soulforged
11-26-2005, 04:52
Well it was only WW1 (not WW2) and the massive drop of trade that caused major economical damage. But you're right that it was more factors too.
But the future of South-America looked much brighter 1900, than 1920. Yes it was an exponetial downfall (or maybe never a rise), except for a short period from time to time.
Red Harvest
11-26-2005, 07:07
Brings up an interesting point.
IF YOU ARE TOO !(&$#(@&$&(*@#&*(@&#(&^(*^*(^%*^#^%r@(#!(*!&&#^*!&#(*!@(#()(^&@!(&#ING STUPID TO FILL OUT A BALLOT
do you deserve to vote?
Have you actually looked at the ballot? It was screwed up. I read through things and take my time, some people do not.
It was an accident of demographics as to who got the ballots and how it was arranged. I'll rip on people for being idiots with little mercy, but this could have happened to any group. It wasn't some evil plan to screw up their votes. It just happened due to poor ballot design, and inadequate staffing/training for handling "spoiled" ballots. Why the commissioners in the precincts affected used that ballot design is beyond me. It sucked.
However, it is rather fitting and ironic that Dubya's election was an accident of voter error. :duel:
Ironside
11-26-2005, 10:18
Perhaps if YOU HAD PAID ATTENTION EARLIER IN THE THREAD you would understand where it came from, BTW. ~:rolleyes: Thanks for bringing down the discussion level.
While I can find a lot of complaining about some more or less US supported dictators, I don't find the blaming on US as the trouble creator in Latin-America.
Soulforged
11-26-2005, 21:24
While I can find a lot of complaining about some more or less US supported dictators, I don't find the blaming on US as the trouble creator in Latin-America.
No it was the US plus the URSS, trying to prey for political resources and comercial advantage during the Cold War, as well for military strategic advanteges and spreding of ideology. It was made by powerful nations in history over and over, a way to reasure your domination.
Ironside
11-27-2005, 10:15
No it was the US plus the URSS, trying to prey for political resources and comercial advantage during the Cold War, as well for military strategic advanteges and spreding of ideology. It was made by powerful nations in history over and over, a way to reasure your domination.
Well, actually much (most?) of the messing in Latin-America by the US was done before WW2, so no Cold War there.
Tribesman
11-27-2005, 12:10
Well, the US isn't running the show and doesn't have colonies
Well apart from the 37 states it added to the original 13 , plus its territories and possesions that it has aquired through many different means .~;)
Pinochet history is as out of date now
Thats strange , I could have sworn he was in the news this week , something to do with a court case he is appearing in , maybe the news is a bit behind the times eh~;)
Soulforged
11-28-2005, 00:06
Well, actually much (most?) of the messing in Latin-America by the US was done before WW2, so no Cold War there.
It was during the dictatorship fest in South America and Central America. Right after the beggining of the Cold War, some countries first others later. Here there was 70000 desapeared, though that's the work of the regime of course not USA.
Pinochet history is as out of date now
Thats strange , I could have sworn he was in the news this week , something to do with a court case he is appearing in , maybe the news is a bit behind the times ehPinochet history couldn't be more hot. Justice is trying to make it's way through the old man right now, after years of lies and corruption. So yes the history is right in the middle really.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.