EPTSouth American Politics thread - Page 7
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23295 Posts
On April 13 2019 23:00 JimmiC wrote: The last sentence was intended to indicate I was joking about Putin pilling the strings. But it shows another reason why Russia will be happy to support Maduro and prolong the sanctions. My apologies if the joking part was not clear. I just didn't think it was funny. I don't think anyone is under the impression Putin is acting out of anything but self interest and the interest of his people (to the degree he cares about them). It just so happens in this case that opposing the US puts Putin on the right side of this particular issue. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23295 Posts
On April 14 2019 00:12 JimmiC wrote: Perhaps they are not opposing the US but rather appreciating the sanctions and trying to keep them in place as long as possible. While the Evil US try's to enact a leadership trade with the weapon of food aid and medical aid. And the good guy Russians send military support and the good guy cuban send 10,000 experienced secret police. That's when we have to turn to the available information to see what is likely, what makes sense, and so forth. Among those that study this stuff it's well known that Russia's relationship with Venezuela predates Maduro altogether, let alone this most recent attempt at regime change, or even moreso the oil sanctions. So when we measure your idea against the available information (a fraction of which I've demonstrated) it immediately falls apart as a rational explanation. If your point is to suggest my position functions in the same way yours does (or these two more recent posts) it would behoove you to make such a demonstration of why my position isn't more supported by the available information or doesn't stand up to scrutiny as a more rational explanation than the one you're providing. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23295 Posts
On April 14 2019 00:45 JimmiC wrote: As does yours about the food aid being full of weapons and assassins since Maduro has his troops blocking where they are trying to bring it in. But yet you keep spewing it. So here we are. I didn't suggest the food aid was full of weapons and assassins. I said the concern is legitimate because the very US official orchestrating it had done that specific thing before in a remarkably similar situation. Then I pointed out I'm not alone. In fact the belief that the US was acting poorly and not in the interest of humanitarian aid was shared by the people actually providing the humanitarian aid, as well as pretty much everyone involved other than those more focused on regime change than any humanitarian efforts. Reporters on the ground (despite the mostly uncorrected propaganda spread in the west) even said that it looked to be a plan intended to fail specifically so folks could make the "look how he's starving his people" political argument you have been. Now that is my opinion, but it's also the opinion of the humanitarian workers you want to help the Venezuelans. You can believe you know better than them, the scholars, the administrators of the global programs, and so on. The issue you run into, that separates our opinions, is the supporting information | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23295 Posts
On April 14 2019 01:05 JimmiC wrote: No it is the impression of SOME humanitarian workers and SOME reporters. As the vast majority of reporters and humanitarian workers do not support that theory and have been working hard to get aid in. In Maduro's best Trump impression he has gone from we have no refugees and no one is starving (in fact in the past you have agreed with this lie that in fact people there are fine and well fed) to we will accept more aid and now the red cross is finally tripling that aid. Not because now it is more needed but because finally Maduro is allowing it. And not shooting people who are trying to get it like he was in the past. If you were to not let your preconceived "facts" that Maduro is good because he is a socialist and the US is evil as is all capitalism. And didn't let confirmation bias drive your decision making and rather looked at Maduro for what he is based on his actions I think you would have a difference of opinion. This is also why you dodged a lot of my questions from last night. And that is OK, and it is great that he is allowing it, because people starving over protecting his power is disgusting and you should agree that it is. But it is sad that you don't realize that the theories I was throwing out have the same chance of being right as your theory's. As much as you think you know you don't. And I am very happy with how the international community is reacting and trying to overthrow him internally by offering food from the opposition, taking away Maduro and his cronies money and foreign bank accounts, and no military intervention there by not giving Maduro a reason for all his cruelty. The longer this goes and the longer the international community just offers support (lets remember this is not just the US its over 50 countries) the harder it will for him and people like you to pretend something else is going on. I cited the Red Cross, UN, and an Atlantic report all confirming that the overwhelming opinion among humanitarian workers is that the stunt you argued in favor of wasn't in the spirit of what humanitarian aid is supposed to be. That it was just that, a stunt. Else they wouldn't have tried to use a bridge that was never in service (despite western media lies about Maduro closing it), or set their own aid on fire and doctored footage for western media, politicians, and those who believed them, to spread with the lie it was Maduro. I'm not sure which humanitarian workers you're referencing said supported your position? Can you quote when I said Maduro was good? You keep saying things like I'm sure there's an invasion coming, or "Maduro is good" and I keep correcting it. I don't want to keep doing that. So please quote where I said those things or stop saying I said them. As for the countries involved, considering the conversations with the US preceding Guaido swearing himself in as president, the delayed/muted joining of only some European countries, as well as the push for discussions rather than expectation Maduro step down by several countries, and many other factors I've explained previously I think it's safe to say without the US pressuring them, the most popular (50 out of 190+ isn't that many) position would be a return to discussions and continued aid through the channels through which its been flowing for a while. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23295 Posts
On April 14 2019 01:38 JimmiC wrote: As I mentioned. Of course it is a stunt. It is the kindest possible way to try to overthrow a authoritarian dictator. I also asked you for better ways than aid to try to do this? Basically they are successfully showing that Madruo cares about himself, his wealth and control not his peoples. Because he is willing to kill them over his rival feeding them. I'm not arguing that it was not done out of the goodness of their hearts. But it was real aid, food and medicine. And I have asked you repeatedly for a better way to do it. You have any? Wouldn't it be better if SK did this to NK? Or do you think that all sanctions should be stopped on NK and just let them be? I'm making a point about there still being a difference between something that's purely political theater (the stunt you support) and getting aid to people who need it. I'm also making a point about how stunts like that threaten legitimate aid, as was said by the humanitarian workers trying to help the Venezuelan people for the sake of it rather than some political or economic outcome. That point was bolstered by the UN the Red Cross and many others. When I asked who supported your position you simply said "of course it's a stunt"? The popular opinion shared here by myself and others, as well as the UN, the Former PM of Spain (was helping lead talks before Guaido backed out with US support), and a list that could go on is to back off the declaration that Guaido is president, resume talks, continue aid through existing channels, and work towards a diplomatic and political solution. There is less agreement on to what degree or whether at all sanctions should continue. SK and NK would already be one country were it not for the US, but that's another topic for another thread. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23295 Posts
On April 14 2019 01:59 JimmiC wrote: It was not purely political theater it was both political theater and trying to get it to people who needed. People were willing to die to try to get to it. I'm pretty sure that proves without a shadow of a doubt. The Redcross saying that it shouldn't be about politics at all is a reasonable point. Not according to the people on the ground I cited who watched it happen and those providing the aid to the people of Venezuela. As opposed to those using aid for political stunts and accidentally setting it on fire, despite really wanting it to get across a bridge that was never open. The media lying about the bridge and who burnt the aid in this stunt is consistent with the reports on the ground that this appeared to be intended to fail. This and the several other citations and arguments I made are from which I draw my conclusions that this was theater and that the "trying to get it to people who needed it" is a false narrative inconsistent with the available information. It is however consistent with the rhetoric of the Trump administration and Marco Rubio, who have notoriously lied about the situation already. If one's concern is for the people of Venezuela the best position isn't that of the Trump administration and those following his lead, it is of the humanitarians calling for a return to talks, not on Guaido's/US conditions period imo. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23295 Posts
On April 14 2019 02:21 JimmiC wrote: Yes, Maduro needs to be willing to enter into genuine talks. We agree and hopefully when he does it happens. Maybe him accepting aid is the first step. The same way you think Russia is bad but is right on this way I feel about US involvement. It is nice for them to be on the right side for a change. I really wish we did agree but the fact of the matter is the country is under Maduro's control. So Guaido and the US aren't in the position to make demands of the talks, lest they continue to exacerbate the suffering of the Venezuelan people, in hopes of revolt. You keep appealing to this idea that Guaido and Trump want legitimate elections in Venezuela. Does Trump meeting with an open fascist that campaigned in part on imprisoning and exiling his political opposition, banning books, and so forth, about how to accomplish this regime change next door to this fascist (along with US FP history and the fact that this is Trump backing Guaido) make you think that perhaps the western nations that hesitantly support this (and are increasingly supportive of talks rather than continuing the path we're on) aren't actually interested in democratic reform? That perhaps it's a smokescreen for something else and that your optimism, much like countless other US FP misadventures is being exploited? Or rather that it's becoming increasingly more likely than the alternative that this is actually a genuine internal call for Venezuelans to convince their fellow countrymen to revolt by way of starving themselves into desperation? | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23295 Posts
On April 14 2019 02:52 JimmiC wrote: I don't say that Trump does, you do. I do say that Guaido does. You THINK (but treat as a fact) that Guaido is a US agent, I think (but don't treat as a fact) that Guaido wants to overthrow their dictator and got support from everywhere that he can. Yes perhaps the US has other intentions, in fact they almost certainly do. But it is my hope that Guaido or whoever wins the next fair elections does the best for the Venezuelan people. We already without a shadow of doubt know that Maduro won't. So the risk seems not that great. The people in Venezuela were starving before even the oil sanctions there was months of articles on the hyper inflation and the millions leaving to try to survive. Including some women become prostitutes in other countries just to survive. I get your coming into this late. But the US did not create the shit situation that is in Venezuela that is all Maduro mismanaging the TRILLIONS of dollars Venezuela brought in during the good times. And if they hadn't fired everyone that knew what they were doing and maintained all their rigs they would have still been bringing in billions and if they fed their people none of this would be happening. I didn't say that you said cited Trump (you aren't citing anyone to support your position), but he's one of few notable people repeating the rhetoric you are. Does Guaido working with Trump and Bolsonaro (at least 1 open fascist) not make you think perhaps his (I'll work with anyone and do anything to restore claim power and restore democracy) is probably more about the claiming power part than the restoring democracy part? That your optimism that a fair election would even happen under Guaido (or being more likely than under Maduro) is mostly predicated on a somewhat inflated perception of how terrible Maduro is rather than any sort of comprehensive understanding of the actual situation on the ground and the political forces at play beyond Maduro and Guaido? The chance for a peaceful and complete transition passed. It's over. Done. Now the US is openly trying to starve out the Venezuelan people and bribe them with trucks of food (a pittance in the grand scheme) across the border literally trying to trigger a chaotic revolt and power vacuum that can be filled with Guaido, which however you see him, has no authority or support without the US's proclamation (that others signed onto, sorta) that Guaido is in charge of Venezuela. Maduro isn't going to let the guy conspiring with the US to remove him be a part of a "fair election" and that's a perfectly reasonable position. Expecting that position to be conceded is as good as rejecting talks altogether. On April 14 2019 03:05 JimmiC wrote: I+ Show Spoiler + mean these great socialists some how ended up with ultra rich spoiled kids flaunting their wealth on Instagram it is no wonder why public opinion has gone against Maduro and why as more time passes it is becoming clear that there is a good chance the Venezuelans will over throw him without military intervention. Hopefully we can get the 10-15k cubans out, and the 100's of Russains military. It is odd to me that GH is so against foreign intervention but ok with this massive foreign intervention. Here's a bit of silly story about these kids living like the Kardasians. Talk about stupid when your people are starving to spend the kind of money they are but spoiled brats don't know better I've posted my favorite post. ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/8QAjXQ4.jpg) https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/02/05/01/9398030-6667889-Rosines_jumped_on_a_plane_to_Paris_within_hours_of_posting_a_pic-m-42_1549331696580.jpg (if you don't like the source feel free to google it there is tons of stories, I just liked the photo's that the kids posted themselves. Hard to call that American propoganda.) I honestly couldn't make sense of that post. I should just mention there are plenty of rich capitalists in Venezuela and living abroad, sometimes you talk about it like Maduro is a socialist dictator who banned capitalists from getting rich? | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23295 Posts
On April 14 2019 03:24 JimmiC wrote: Does Russia working with Facists Like in Syria and Maduro make you think that maybe it is more about claiming power than anything? I think the US has vested interest in getting the Russian influence out of Venezuela and that is why they support Maduro's opposition. Once you come to the conclusion that is clear based on the mountains of evidence that Maduro is not a socialist everything I'm saying will make a lot more sense. Here is a quick run down. First he nationalized only about 30% of the companies all run by people who didn't support him. He used that money to fund him and his cronies lifestyle not better the county or the people. He didn't nationalize any of the companies that did support him and allowed those people to continue to get rich. Proof of this is everywhere. The people are poor Maduro and his cronies are living like rock stars. I honestly don't understand how you can look into this with any sort of sensibility and not think that the guy who employees 1000's of secret police, arrests and tortures people over disagreeing with him on twitter, lives ultra rich while his people starve, steal so much he didn't maintain what was making him the money or even the basic things that allow his people to have power and water, refusing aid. Buddying up with Iran, Russia, China, so on. I mean it is pretty obvious you just need to get past this "maduro is a socialist being held down by the evil US and that is what is stopping him from setting up a socialist paradise." The reality is you are drinking obvious propaganda Kool-aid and what has stopped Maduro from setting up a socialist country is Maduro, he is not interested in that he is interested in enriching himself. I'm concerned about what operating understanding you're using for socialist and that it's causing you to keep basing so much of your argument on "once you come to the conclusion...Maduro is not a socialist". But that's really more than I can handle discussing in this manner. You seem to still, despite my best efforts, be under the unseverable belief that my position is predicated or dependent on Maduro being a socialist, or simply that the US has a long and documented history of horrific atrocities that Maduro couldn't match on his worst day. I don't know what more at this point I can do to disabuse you of these fallacious interpretations of my positions and can just hope that people take into consideration the strength of our arguments based on their presentation and supporting information. | ||
| ||
