EPTVenezuela political situation/humanitarian Crisis
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5079 Posts
When you can do whatever you want and no one can stop you... you don't do good things. Simply never works out well. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22857 Posts
Anti-Maduro coalition grew from secret talks | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22857 Posts
On January 29 2019 11:50 JimmiC wrote: Yes there has been various talks about how to remove Maduro since he moved his country away from democracy and into a humanitarian crisis. I'm glad that they went with a possibly legal way (depending on your take on those elections), rather than a military coup or a invasion. Both of which Trump at one time or another said was on the table. I think it would be pretty standard for a guy to find out who would support him before he made such a bold move. I'm sure he quietly tried to ask around Venezuela as much as he could with out being arrested, tortured or murdered. It is not like trying to over throw or even question Maduro is a safe thing to do. https://www.local10.com/espanol/noticias/venezuela/activist-falls-to-his-death-from-police-agency-building-in-venezuela I know you care about this situation, but it would behoove you to familiarize yourself with how regime change is enacted. It would make it much harder for you to maintain the belief that this time, as opposed to every other time, there are not western assets in Venezuela, Columbia, Brazil, and most of South and Latin America. But they call them clandestine operations for a reason IMO the west shouldn't be talking about how to remove bad leaders, and if they insist they must, they should start with their friends. Last I heard Saudi Arabia's election wasn't very legit and they can be pretty oppressive with both their political opposition and other marginalized groups. The only reason this is even considered in Venezuela's case is because the west doesn't think Venezuela can defend themselves from western aggression (Bolton coincidentally let a note pad indicating we are already mobilizing military assets in the thousands get photographed by press). The coup is illegal regardless of the elections, that would only have the potential to make it "right" maybe and the invasion was always the hope for the Military industrial complex. As it's not strange for someone plotting a coup to seek out his supporters, it's also not uncommon for the target of the coup to have them imprisoned or much worse. I don't think Trump would take kindly to someone plotting to declare themselves president and traveling to the countries that were telling them they would back them with military force if needed. A lot of people die in US police custody and I've been told that's not indicative of any sort of political agenda. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5079 Posts
It wasn't the US that put barely literate but ideologically solid peasants in charge of "co-ops" to run large factories (although of course the real management power was placed in the hands of military officers). It wasn't the US that hollowed out the financial and human capital of the state oil company through breathtaking corruption. And it wasn't the US that took tens of billions of dollars in loans from Moscow and Beijing that were allegedly supposed to prevent the state oil company from collapsing but instead were embezzled to the top circle of the Chavista oligarchy. That was all the Bolivarian socialists with their incredible concern for the plight of the poor. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22857 Posts
On January 29 2019 12:57 JimmiC wrote: My position is not the US's nor do I think the US controls the world. I also would be very supportive of a person who had some claim to SA leadership and claimed to be ready to hold fair elections, instate a constitution and a functiong fair court system. Would you not? Just because you cant make it better everywhere doesnt mean you shouldnt make it better somewhere. I would want to know a lot more about him than "has some vague claim to power" before I was willing to risk plunging shit into chaos. Before you ask, however shitty the situation in Venezuela is it would just take some food, stopping the intentional sabotaging, economic relief, and a peaceful (without a coup first) attempt at political resolution between Maduro and his opposition. This is sort of complicated if you're not really into the nitty gritty of all this but a lot of the corruption in Venezuela are essentially hangovers from when it was run by corrupted military officials. Basically people Maduro had/has to buy-off in order to prevent them siding with whoever would let them continue stealing unimpeded. One of the popular scams by the military is stealing and selling the food. They aren't really pro-Maduro, Pro-this other US tool, or anyone else. They are just corrupt assholes that have military units ready to to turn against anyone that stops their racket of exploiting desperate poor people. Without going into like 4 books worth of bullshit the long and short of it is that Maduro would actually be happy to get rid of tons of corruption (not being able to feed people isn't helping his popularity) but the corrupt military is the only stable constant. The military took some time to stand strongly behind Maduro because they were negotiating terms for the aftermath. The reason they've sided with Maduro is probably in no small part because they think Trump will back down and that if they turned on Maduro (siding with the US) instead they would get fucked (because of all the info about coordinating this with the US, Canada, etc). If the military didn't think this coup would totally fuck them they would turn on Maduro in a second. It's three factions (if you imagine the worst of Maduro) fighting to exploit the marginalized of Venezuela. The reason the coup hasn't already succeeded is because the people of Venezuela believe Maduro is the least bad option, not because he's so repressive. If Maduro is to be removed it CANT be by anyone the US wants. Like not just in the superficial way, but the replacement has to be opposed to the US because while the opposition to Maduro is wide, the "pro-US" faction is one of the smallest. They aren't even very popular among the neoliberal section of society. The reason why we're entering the third decade of US interference is because they don't want to replace Maduro because he's corrupt or harming people, they want to remove him because they are no longer getting their share. If it was about the people we'd dump a couple billion of food and economic aid into it and call it day. It's about who replaces Maduro and there simply isn't a functioning coalition with the US being part of it. The US is like the racist friend that broke your dining room table, spilled your grandmas ashes on the floor, then raped and killed your entire family while making you watch, burning the house down with you inside and then dragging you to safety so you could live forever disabled and scarred and has now come back offering to sell you a really great build your own wheelchair website he wants you to invest in. Then the coup guy basically invited them to the BBQ and your like, "well I do really want to get rid of Maduro, but I don't think I trust anyone who would bring the guy that did this to me with them..." But for those that did well under the previous trash government but things got worse for them under Chavez/Maduro (or they left) it's easier to be like "hey the US isn't so bad". | ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5079 Posts
Maduro has never shown one inkling that he is interested in the least in ending any corruption whatsoever. Neither did Hugo Chavez. This it's really the corrupt military excuse might have a bit of truth if it was the early 2000s. It is 2019. Chavez did a bang-up job of housecleaning after 2002. There are no major military factions not controlled by socialist-appointed officers. There is no group of high-ranking officers that Maduro has to tread lightly with. Any excuse to shift blame off the socialists - understandable, as socialists are no more immune to self-interest than anyone else - will fortunately fail. Venezuela will be no different. Venezuela has ruined socialism in Latin America for a generation and there is nothing socialists can do about it. Since the capitalists in the region are generally just as corrupt, it will make a comeback. So don't worry about that GH. No matter how many flee, no matter how many die, no matter how many get a boot in the face, no matter how much life deteriorates into barbaric squalor, socialism always makes a comeback some way or another. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22857 Posts
The reason I said "without going into like 4 books worth of shit" is because the argument is constructed due to a general familiarity with having studied multiple regime changes throughout history somewhat extensively and many at a more superficial level. When you do you see some constants. Some things are different and unique to each one, but some things are always there. The CIA is one of them. There's only so much I'm willing to do to bring people up to speed on Venezuela, US imperialism, European colonialism, South and Latin American history, regime change strategies and tactics, and so on. That's not a slight or anything but there is a lot of space between what I'm familiar with and what you'll accept without citation and I'm just not willing to do that work. As warranted and even necessary as that might be to stave off war in Latin America, I just don't have it in me to do it here too. Sorry comrades in Venezuela. I'll leave you your space to do as you wish with and keep my opinions elsewhere. | ||
|
MightyBeast
117 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22857 Posts
On January 30 2019 00:21 JimmiC wrote: Guaido is still willing to give amnesty to Maduro and the military. I think this is important because one of the reasons Maduro might not be willing to step down is he won't want to answer for his crimes. It may suck for the people, but if it helps enact the change I would think it is worth it. I would hope any deal though would not allow the people to keep the proceeds of their crimes, because we are talking about Billions upon Billions that have been embezzled from the people. https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/29/americas/venezuela-juan-guaido-intl/index.html The point above about the corruption in the military I agree with, but the source of that corruption is the power that was given to it from Chavez and Maduro. This is also why the top brass in the Military still support him. Who wouldn't want to go from being a member of the military and then be given presidency of an oil company? This is a pretty dynamite article and worth a read. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-47036129 The military surely has some honorable members but the point I was trying to make is kind of demonstrated here. The only reason Maduro can resist US attempts to remove him is because of the military. If they don't give the military the opportunity to exploit the situation for profit then as soon as the US asks them to turn on the leader they take the deal. Venezuela's military leaders aren't US generals indoctrinated with nationalism and loyal to a fault (not that our top brass isn't very well compensated too), most of them came up when the military ran shit officially. Their power isn't democratically derived, it's from the people loyal to them individually and would kill someone for them. So if your military leaders are essentially a bunch of fascists, you can't just tell them to be loyal for a fraction of what they made when they were in power or someone with a sweeter deal can come along and bribe them to turn on you. By putting them in charge of something like distributing food you neutralize them somewhat. It means if they steal too much the people suffer and they know the military controls the food so rather than blame you they blame the military keeping them from uniting against you. It's obviously a lot more complicated than that but I just wanted to clear up what I was talking about there. You can argue there should have been more purges of associates found to be corrupt but those are dangerous and invite coups as well if the people don't support them. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22857 Posts
On January 30 2019 01:02 JimmiC wrote: According to everything I read Chavez who knew most the military leaders personally got rid of everyone who was a fascist and kept all those that were left leaning. It is getting to the point where you are getting near the horseshoe look of the political spectrum or the clock where super far left and right are almost the same. I don't think any system that relies on keeping people loyal through encouraging corruption is a good one. And I think in the end it hurts the poor people the most. The leadership needs to root out corruption and put in place, than keep in place those checks and balances. Yes it is hard and takes time but it should be the goal. It appears that all your arguments sort of end up with "but the US is worse". I'm not looking to argue that. I'm looking to what do the people of Venezuela want and what ends up making it best for the most people. Right now to be that is clearly Guaido and I think that is becoming clear to most people. I didn't mean it was good to keep corrupt people around in order to maintain the system. I just meant there wasn't going to be a coup without military support so you have to keep them happy. Chavez was able to do that by putting the people presumably (because he did have a purge of sorts) that were loyal to him and the cause in charge (rather than keep the power for himself or leave it in the hands of the clearly corrupt people in charge before the coup/revolution or leave them in the same position despite making his ascension possible). Maduro inherited all the generals and such that were either too powerful, too effective (at their job as a general not the civilian stuff), too connected to a segment of the population, etc... to get rid of and the good ones. It's not easy to get rid of actually powerful people, but opposition figures that have no real support? Yeah those you can jail, or whatever. To give a bit of an example think about Trump, there are people he has the power and legal right to fire but can't because they do shit he can't, influence people he cant, etc... The guy he put up for AG was a staunch critic of his. The point I'm trying to get at is that you seem to have a perception of regime changes that doesn't seem informed by familiarity with the many other ones. One big part of that is ridding a government of corruption while also avoiding triggering a coup by the corrupt people you're removing joining forces with the US. I wasn't there so I can't say for sure how much better or worse either of them could have done about that (I wager you can't either with any authority), but I do know the US, Brazilian, and Saudi government are FULL of corruption so it can't possibly be that easy to get rid of and none of those countries have the US military and intelligence agencies threatening to replace them by force if they fuck it up. . Right now to be that is clearly Guaido and I think that is becoming clear to most people. What? The corruption wouldn't get any better and you have to know that. What non-corrupt leader does Trump like? His 3of3 tweet was the only one that wasn't totally crap imo. To wit, this sounds pretty bad John Bolton and Trump telling the american people right out in the open we're looking to take control of much of Venezuela's oil. aka "privatization" because it will be good for the people. We wouldn't believe them if they were talking about the US why would we assume they'd be better to the people of Venezuela? I feel like it's pretty clear now the US backed the coup is for corporate interests not humanitarian ones and if they have to choose they will pick corporate interests. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
| ||
