South American Politics thread - Page 4
Forum Index > General Forum |
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
GreenHorizons
United States22398 Posts
On April 10 2019 06:18 JimmiC wrote: I think in a normal country the legality of his claim for leadership would be discussed in congress and then likely off to the courts to be sorted out. I also would guess that a independent 3rd party would investigate the elections to see if there was political interference. But alas with a dictator nothing "normal" happens. That is a interesting theory. I do subscribe to it because I don't believe the US is the root of all the problem in the world. I think the root cause of this is Maduro and his friends and family robbing the country blind and not even doing the basic maintenance required because the greed is so great that not stealing as much and keeping things working isn't a priority. Maybe? But in most countries coordinating with a hostile foreign power and having them threaten military force if your demands for the presidency aren't accepted is a death sentence (life imprisonment, etc...). I also don't think the US is the root of all the problems of the world. I am curious just how much you think Maduro is stealing and you've mentioned billionaires in country, so I'm curious who you think are some of his friends? | ||
Velr
Switzerland10566 Posts
Fuck ideological bullshit. | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22398 Posts
On April 10 2019 07:34 Velr wrote: Dude... its not about how much he is stealing, its about how many people starve. Fuck ideological bullshit. As I mentioned the starving thing doesn't hold up to scrutiny. It's probably not about how many people are "starving" or "free and fair elections" either anyway, else we wouldn't be helping our bombs be dropped on unquestionably starving children in a different country while supporting the theocratic monarchy that's stealing more than Maduro could ever dream of to pay for what we don't do for free to help. Not sure what "fuck ideological bullshit" means in this context though. | ||
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
GreenHorizons
United States22398 Posts
On April 10 2019 07:45 JimmiC wrote: How many months or years have to pass with no dropping of bombs and military intervention for you to stop talking like it has happened or will happen but rather that it is a possibility and not a reality. We are 2 weeks away from the 4 month mark. To be clear the threat has been on the table since Chavez was president and has manifested in attempts at assassinations, coups, and so on. + Show Spoiler + I was also referencing Yemen and our ally Saudi Arabia with the present tense bombing if that's what you were talking about? | ||
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
GreenHorizons
United States22398 Posts
On April 10 2019 09:18 JimmiC wrote: Yes that did happen to Chavez. It doesnt mean it will happen here. Invasion doesn't have to happen at all for my point to remain true. | ||
Archeon
3250 Posts
I agree that it's hard to get a good read on the situation. It's no secret that the USA's foreign politics has a special interest in socialist SA countries as well as countries with high amounts of oil, so Venezuela is definitely on the plate even if the situation isn't disastrous. But whether or not the situation is disastrous decides how justified the involvement and possibly a military action are. | ||
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
GreenHorizons
United States22398 Posts
On April 10 2019 22:34 JimmiC wrote: I'm starting to think it doesn't matter what happens, to you your point will remain true. Well sorta yeah. My point was about something that's already happened. I can repeat it if we've lost track? | ||
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
Archeon
3250 Posts
But you cite some sources I do trust, i.e. first hand experience and red cross (screw the UN). The situation is quickly escalating into a second Syria, makes me wonder if we are back in the cold war tbh. | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22398 Posts
On April 10 2019 22:55 JimmiC wrote: No thanks I think we have had enough repeating of your point. And I think the discussion for now has run its course. No need taking it any further until something else changes. Have a good one. To be fair, you seem to disagree with a point about a fact of history. That working with a hostile foreign power and threatening force to remove the president/leader is typically a capital crime (or imprisonment for more civilized countries). Hopefully that clears up why what happens going forward is irrelevant to that point. On April 10 2019 22:57 Archeon wrote: I haven't really researched the situation enough to have a founded opinion tbh. Most sources I've heard talk about the topic are main stream media who had too many scandals in recent times for me to trust them anymore. As mentioned above there are a lot of political alignments of the people who want Maduro gone, which also taints their credibility. But you cite some sources I do trust, i.e. first hand experience and red cross (not the UN). The situation is quickly escalating into a second Syria, makes me wonder if we are back in the cold war tbh. I advise looking for Black academics and activists in South America. Recently had a group of grad students from Brazil visit a group I'm part of. They tend to have the most informed perspectives on the region and situation. When you talk to marginalized people in SoAm you get a wildly different perspective than what you find in corporate media, especially western corporate media or affluent emigrants that skew whiter. Greyzoneproject is one of the better western sources imo. | ||
Nebuchad
Switzerland11791 Posts
On April 10 2019 22:23 JimmiC wrote: Which is why I wish he would seek out some actual refugees and talk to them like I have. It would be a pretty elaborate propaganda plan to send them to my small city and have 16 people in a 4 person house and have them cry about family stuck back home. It wont be hard to find them considering 3 million have left. It would also be pretty elaborate to have 4 refugee camps out side of venezuela and have 100s of thousands pick to live there insteadof their homes. The ones who were nurses and other professionals in venezuela that are now prostitutes in columbia or brazil just to get by. You have to also get the redcross and the UN to be involved in the lie. Guaido isnt dead because that is the "red line" for military intervention. However his chief of staff was kidnapped and he "cant run for office for 15 years". 5 opposition leaders before him have ended up jailed tourtured killed or in exile. Only thing keeping him alive is how public and global Guaido is. Talking to GH about Venezuela is as frustrating as talking to a bery intelligent Trump supporter about climate change. You cant understand why you can't agree on the basic facts untill you realize you are getting those facts from completely different sources. One of the good things that GH does is that he allows positions to be defined more clearly. Cause when we talked about Venezuela in general some time ago, you sympathized with my position (and Jock's) that when there are conflicting narratives and the media is more or less complicit in one, it's very hard to tell what's really happening, and therefore it's hard to take a side or to figure out what the facts even are. But here we can see that one position is perceived as climate change and the other is perceived as climate change denial, which is a very different approach. Given your general attitude on Venezuela I have no doubt this new approach is closer to your actual position. | ||
Archeon
3250 Posts
Also he's clearly frustrated and hence his wording might have been a bit more extreme than normally. Cut him some slack (Not that I disagree that finding the truth isn't easy here, especially not for people without access to first hand sources.) | ||
Nebuchad
Switzerland11791 Posts
On April 10 2019 23:28 Archeon wrote: I don't think it's entirely fair to hold someone responsible for changing his position from "some time ago", I'd argue it's a good thing when people are able to. JimmyC isn't a politician running on those issues. To boot most of the articles linked in this threat are from him and he talked first hand to people affected, it'd be weird if he wasn't more sure of his opinion. Also he's clearly frustrated and hence his wording might have been a bit more extreme than normally. Cut him some slack (Not that I disagree that finding the truth isn't easy here, especially not for people without access to first hand sources.) I don't think he has changed his opinion. His posting on Venezuela has been pretty consistent from the start, I just don't think he was quite honest with us (or himself) at that particular time. But, like, the main point is, there's clarity here. It's good when things are clearer, and that's one of the effects GH has on discourse, we get to the heart of things. GH is putting a lot more trust in the other side of the narrative than I do, or at least he's projecting more trust in the other side of the narrative than I am willing to, but that also means he gets more of a reaction. | ||
Archeon
3250 Posts
Also imo his comparison was a lot less vicious than you make it out to be, comparing two acts doesn't mean that you compare the objects of said actions, you compare an aspect of the act. If I say that searching for truth is like looking for a needle in a haystack i'm not comparing truth to haystacks. I read it as "GH is stubborn and I'm frustrated". I don't think "clarity" as in people getting frustrated and move to an extreme corner of a discussion is necessarily a good thing btw. It stalls discussions and makes it hard to look for a solution. We can choose to look for a compromise or define clear cut positions we remain on that don't develop the discussion. "We vs them" is what tears our societies apart atm and it really is anything but helpful. Ofc I am not arrogant enough to believe that we'll find a solution to a global conflict in an online forum and even if it did it wouldn't matter, but that should still be the goal of a discussion, right? | ||
| ||